1. Trump is incapable of telling the truth. He'll lie to the investigators.

2. The truth would incriminate Trump. He's guilty of so many crimes.

His lawyers know Trump cannot sit for an interview. Think of what that means! Trump's own lawyers know that he'll lie.

he isn't competent enough to be president.

That's my opinion.

When he was busy during the meeting not paying attention but tweeting or looking out the window.

Unless you know your client is a compulsive liar?

But I think they realize Mueller is not going to indict just for perjury.

They got Flynn for lying to investigators. He said one thing one time, one thing another time.

Zwaan, too. For lying.


Perjury is lying, not to investigators but under oath to a court or officer of the court.

If he indicts for lying to an investigator, how much more for lying to the court?

First he didn't indict anyone just for lying to investigators. Flynn, Gates, Papadapoulos and Zwaan all pled guilty. The Manafort and Gates indictments were for conspiracy, money laundering plus lying, and hints of even more crimes not yet revealed. Second, in the case of Flynn and Papadapoulos, they pled guilty to lying about things that ostensibly weren't illegal, yet the only reason you would lie about such things is to cover up something related that actually was illegal, and the pleas were in exchange for cooperation. Again showing he is looking for more than mere perjury. Third, this is not a politically motivated Ken Starr investigation, and they know it. Mueller isn't rolling up the Trump Administration just so he can say at the end, I got nothing, let's throw a Hail Mary and see if I can get him in a perjury trap. Starr's Hail Mary didn't work either. Fourth, just based on publicly available info, there is a lot of damning information on Trump and his family. When you have that much information, plus all we don't know, of course a prosecutor is going to want to talk to the big boss, and they know it.

So what they really must be afraid is that Trump will add lying to investigators or perjury to the already long list of potential crimes, or, blabbermouth that he is, he will provide even more incriminating evidence than he already has by tweet.

Subpoena him to the grand Jury already. Maybe they have so much evidence on him, it doesn't make much difference.

He has a very good brain, you know, and he is, like, a smart person. Trump himself has said so over and over. But maybe he doesn't remember saying it?

One would be immediately recognized by these high-level attorneys and result in any charges based on a "trap" be dismissed. But worse than that, it would be used to impeach the integrity of the investigation. The definition can be looked up.

There is 0 chance of this occurring. And this has nothing to do with Trump's memory.

The term is also used colloquially for situations like Clinton faced when, on under oath for one investigation, he was surprised by a question out of left field on a totally unrelated and irrelevant topic. Monica Lewinski. It was formulated with a clear hope of shocking/forcing him into committing perjury by denying an embarrassing and damaging allegation completely unrelated to that investigation. It worked.

Mueller will not be doing this. We're not interested in embarrassing Trump into denying he had sex outside marriage. We're not interested in trumping up an unrelated perjury case because we don't have a real case to prosecute, which was their problem with Clinton.

And 'Don-John' because he supposedly hates his middle name (also, 'John' is accurate slang for him, as he is used to paying for sex)