Posted on 07/18/2018 12:30:17 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
At first, it was mostly just Chuck Schumer calling for hearings over what happened at the Trump – Putin summit. As Allahpundit noted last night, unless there are a lot of Republicans willing to go along with the idea (including key committee leaders) that’s not likely to happen. But now some additional Democrats are jumping on the dogpile and getting more specific than simply calling for “hearings.” Joe Kennedy and Jeanne Shaheen want to know what was discussed during the private, two-hour conversation between Presidents Trump and Putin. But if neither of the leaders are choosing to divulge that information, how do they plan to get it? By issuing a subpoena for Trump’s interpreter. (Washington Times)
At least two Congressional Democrats want President Trump’s interpreter to testify about his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
So curious are Democrats to learn what was said in Monday’s private meeting between Mr. Trump and Mr. Putin — there were no other officials in the room; only each man’s translator — that Sen. Jeanne Shaheen and Rep. Joe Kennedy III have each made the unusual request.
“I’m calling for a hearing with the U.S. interpreter who was present during President Trump’s meeting with Putin to uncover what they discussed privately. This interpreter can help determine what @POTUS shared/promised Putin on our behalf,” Ms. Shaheen, New Hampshire Democrat, wrote Tuesday on Twitter.
I’m calling for a hearing with the U.S. interpreter who was present during President Trump’s meeting with Putin to uncover what they discussed privately. This interpreter can help determine what @POTUS shared/promised Putin on our behalf.
— Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (@SenatorShaheen) July 17, 2018
This idea should immediately set off some alarm bells for anyone following the story. Keep in mind that we’re not talking about asking the President what he said or even issuing a subpoena for his aides who may have been in on the plans for the meeting. The interpreter is not part of the administration in any fashion. She’s a person who is literally acting as a tool, performing a function which can be (and while crudely, sometimes actually is) done by a computer application. She has no input on what is discussed and is hardly an expert on what may or may not be appropriate in such a negotiation.
To get to the title question, can they do that? I’ve been doing some checking and the short answer seems to be yes. Criminal courts of law have actually been ordering testimony from interpreters increasingly in recent years, but this creates a serious dilemma for the interpreter. Offering such testimony is a violation of one of the profession’s fundamental guidelines, known as the tenet of confidentiality. These situations are of such concern that MasterWord, an industry organization representing language professionals, has issued guidance on how to respond to subpoenas.
The bottom line is that compliance with the law and lawful orders of the courts overrides the professional requirement to adhere to the tenet of confidentiality, but the interpreters put themselves at risk of losing future work. They are advised to let their employers know when a subpoena is received to allow them the opportunity to respond or object if appropriate.
But those are criminal court cases. Refusing to cooperate could be seen as obstruction of justice. What about a congressional subpoena? There’s no formal finding that any law has been broken so the testimony isn’t going to be used for purposes of prosecution. This simply falls under the category of oversight, which is a nicer way of saying that some of the members of Congress are being nosy about what was said during a private conversation. Is the interpreter still bound to comply? A refusal could result in a contempt of Congress charge I suppose, but would they really toss the interpreter in jail for refusing to violate their professional code of conduct?
As mentioned above, this remains hypothetical for now. I don’t know if the GOP majority is going to be in the mood to cross swords with President Trump at that level. It could also be seen as the legislative branch usurping the power of the White House to handle foreign diplomatic relations. But if they do decide to go along with this scheme I certainly wouldn’t want to be that translator. She’s going to be in a very difficult position.
Yeah, that subpoena on the FBI low-T dork really worked well.
And his quite fugly mistress simply gave congress the finger.
Nobody respects congress any more.
Nobody.
Geez Dems, how about its NONE OF YOUR DAMN BUSINESS what they discussed. Do these Dem idiots really believe that President Trump had to beg Russia to hack into the DNC emails..he could have gotten any pimple faced 19 year old American kid to do it for nothing
No need, I was there via a planted bug. Here is part of what was said:
TRUMP: Schumer seems to be light in the loafers which is OK, but we think he’s been diddling kids.
PUTIN: We tried to get an agent to diddle Hillary but no one would touch her. No wonder Bill cheated on her. Who wouldn’t?
Enough!
Thanks SeekAndFind.
Here’s what he told Putin:
“This is my first election. After my second, I will have more flexibility”.
They think if Trump goes they can make Hillary President ,it fits right in with all their Crazy
If Trump tells them anything the progress he made will be undermined and criticized moving us right back where he started. We voted for him. He will tall us in due time.
If obozo could extend Executive Privilege over the misdeeds of erc “my people” holder, President Trump could do the same for someone who is basically a recording device.
Executive privilege.
“The interpreter is not part of the administration in any fashion.”
Yes, she is. She is only being questioned to learn what the President said in private, and what he said in private is privileged.
Anyone can ignore a congressional subpoena. Not a single person it’s been fined or arrested for flipping the finger to Congress. Just wad it up and throw it in the trash.
Isn’t there some sort of interpreter/client privilege?
OTOH, if PDT had ‘promised’ Putin that the talks would be strictly confidential and HE (PDT) would never tell a soul, doesn’t that make the Interpreter ‘fair game’?
One could only imagine that the English Interpreter for PUTIN is being told what to say in public, why doesn’t PDT just do the same...
But the Russian interpreter can figure on retiring in a Gulag while the American Intrepreter had better stay away from the Clintoons and don’t go anywhere near Ft Marcy or other know Clinton ‘hangouts’.
I don’t understand where the idea comes from that the President must disclose his private conversations to Congress.
Would sure be interesting to know exactly what O and his people had to say to Iranians...and tons of others for that matter.
This is insanity on a new level.
This is what happens when you think the swamp is just gonna drain itself.
************************************
Precisely.
WE have to drain the Swamp by first removing from office the Bush League Republicans who are defending the witch hunt and obstructing the MAGA agenda.
How about “None of your damn business. That’s why they call it a private conversation.”
Anyway, it was probably just about golf, grandchildren, yoga, etc. Nothing to see here, move along.
Except that the interpreter, being a State Dept employee, would probably love sticking it to the President.
First the VP has to be in on the dea. Then per the 25th amendment Trump writes Congress a note that he is fit to resume his duties and he does so. If the VP AND Cabinet contest, then it requires a 2/3 vote of both houses for the VP to continue to hold office.
Impeachment is easier.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.