If Trump is indicted by the DOJ, would he testify?

[Nars_Glinley]

He does have a past history of surrounding himself with completely incompetent people

[Steve_MB]

@Aspenglow

You make a deposit at your bank and you think the bank cheated you by not crediting your account properly. In other words, you believe the bank stole your money.

Even if that belief is genuinely held, it is not a defense if you go rob the bank to retrieve what you believe was stolen from you.

For that matter, it still wouldn’t be a defense if the bank actually did take your money and fail to credit your account.

[Aspenglow]

Exactly. A great clarifying point.

[BobLibDem]

He’d be a fool to testify. Which of course means he might. If his lawyers have any sense (not a given if he chooses Rudy) they’d tell him not to do so. If he does testify, he he’ll be eaten alive by the prosecution.

[DesertDog]

@Hamlet

there is no way Trump would testify under oath at his trial.

Now we’re getting into limo-wheel wrestling territory again.

[Son_of_a_Rich]

@Czarcasm

…he have to shut up completely…

I can’t see him doing that.

[Temporary_Name]

@DesertDog

Now we’re getting into limo-wheel wrestling territory again.

I wish that all dopers would refer to this incident as “Lunging with intent to steer”. Is that really too much to ask?

[Peter_Morris]

I don’t think they would say that. I don’t think it’s a legally valid

@Jas09

I think it would very much depend on the specific charge. I doubt that sincerely-held belief that the election was stolen would be the defense. It would be more of “Trump was just making free-speech remarks at the Capital and whatever happened after that was the result of bad actors”.

“It’s all Scott Baio’s fault.”