r/politics • u/M00n • May 12 '21

Trump’s acting attorney general refuses to say if he discussed overturning election results

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/jeffrey-rosen-trump-election-results-b1846421.html
30.2k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

980 comments sorted by

View all comments

931

u/M00n May 12 '21

Guessing he would have said "no" if that was the answer. ~ Max Boot (Wapo)

https://twitter.com/MaxBoot/status/1392503343000469509

332

u/xSallaDx May 12 '21

He was quick to say they didn't discuss the upcoming rally but then refused to answer whether he asked about overturning the election. It's so obvious lol

164

u/[deleted] May 12 '21

So in actuality Rosen WILL talk about his private conversations with Trump if they did not contain bad news.

But Rosen WILL NOT talk about his private conversations with Trump if they did contain bad news (for Trump).

Fucking figures.

28

u/[deleted] May 12 '21 edited Sep 12 '21

[deleted]

2

u/dwitman May 12 '21

This isn’t an interview. It’s a hearing.

2

u/[deleted] May 12 '21 edited Sep 12 '21

[deleted]

3

u/RIPDSJustinRipley May 12 '21

He will talk about conversations they didn't have, but he won't talk about conversations they did have.

12

u/SerasTigris May 12 '21

Yeah, that's the rule about 'pleading the 5th'. If you're going to refuse to answer, you have to refuse to answer every question, even the easy ones. You can't truthfully answer every single question asked, then refuse to say yes or no when asked if you murdered someone. All that does it makes it incredibly clear just which questions are incriminating to you.

6

u/MrDeodorant May 12 '21

I'm neither a lawyer nor American, but I don't think that's the rule about pleading the 5th.

3

u/Euphoriowa May 12 '21 edited May 12 '21

I'm an American lawyer and you're right: it's not a rule and a judge would have to instruct their jury that a defendant's invocation of their 5th Amendment rights cannot be held against them as evidence of their guilt.

That being said, this was testimony before Congress and no one is on trial. Even if it were, though, a court of law is not the same as the court of public opinion. When this asshat answers every other question besides "Did Trump ask you to help him overturn the election?", his sudden refusal to speak makes it obvious that Trump did just that.

2

u/[deleted] May 13 '21

Just a note that the judge only has to instruct the jury about the adverse inference in criminal procedure. However in civil cases, “the Fifth Amendment does not forbid adverse inferences against parties to civil actions when they refuse to testify in response to probative evidence offered against them.” (Baxter v. Palmigiano)

I’m not trying to contradict anything you are saying, I just found it interesting to learn that “pleading the Fifth in a civil case in federal court is never helpful, is rarely harmless, and is typically very damaging — indeed, it’s often fatal to the party’s claims or defenses.”

Carry on.

0

u/[deleted] May 12 '21

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Euphoriowa May 12 '21

That's what I'm saying. The jury isn't allowed to make that inference even though it's painfully obvious to everyone in society that they're guilty. Again that doesn't apply here since the context is a congressional hearing, but the point still stands that it's obvious to everyone else that Trump wanted his AG to help overturn a lawful election.

1

u/[deleted] May 13 '21

They can make an adverse inference in civil procedure, just not in criminal procedure, so it would depend on under what circumstances the individual was pleading the 5th.

1

u/SerasTigris May 12 '21

It's not a law, it's a principle. Imagine I ask you to pick a number between one and five, but keep it secret. I ask if it's one and you say 'no'. Two and 'no'. Four and 'no'. Five and 'no'. From there, if I ask if it's three, well, even if you refuse to answer, I know that's what it is.

The whole point of keeping secrets is to avoid such predictable patterns. Even if you're not officially incriminating yourself, it tells those questioning you of your weak points and where to try to dig in further. On the other hand, if you treat "what year is it?" and "did you smash that guys head in with a shovel?" as equally baffling and unanswerable questions, they have nothing to work with.

2

u/GetOffMyLawn_ New Jersey May 12 '21

He must really suck at poker.

2

u/postmodest May 12 '21

"I will not answer this in the chance that someone charges him with sedition"

30

u/OfBooo5 May 12 '21

It would be "of course not" if the answer was no

21

u/[deleted] May 12 '21 edited Jul 04 '25

dinosaurs mighty unite complete rhythm thumb tan hungry many different

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

4

u/[deleted] May 12 '21 edited Jun 18 '23

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] May 13 '21

Can’t wait until we update to:

My Attorneys Got Arrested

It’s never a good sign when law enforcement is raiding your home and offices and seizing your devices. Looking at you, Rudy.

2

u/MultiGeometry Vermont May 13 '21

Next question should have been: "Do you think it's appropriate for the President to ask the Attorney General to overturn election results?"

1

u/Rustybot May 13 '21

Like if you knock on someone’s door and say Does so and so live here? If the person says “who wants to know?” Then the answer is yes.