Introduction
The question of whether Donald Trump could tell the truth has been a persistent one, especially given his history of making unverified claims. The prospect of Trump taking an oath and testifying before a court of law raises serious concerns about his ability or willingness to provide truthful information. This article explores the likelihood of Trump lying under oath and the implications of such a scenario.
Could Trump Lie Under Oath?
Considering Trump's past conduct, it is highly probable that he would lie under oath if forced to testify. Countless instances have shown that he consistently bends the truth or engages in outright falsehoods without remorse.
For example, during his inauguration on January 20, 2017, Trump faced the same challenge of delivering a truthful speech under oath, yet he failed to do so. This leads one to question if he would be any different in the face of an official oath.
The Certainty of Conviction for Perjury
Given the evidence available, it is virtually guaranteed that Trump would be found guilty of perjury if he were required to testify under oath. A conviction for perjury would be a foregone conclusion due to his past conduct and the overwhelming public and evidence-based scrutiny.
It is said that 'Trump could not go longer than about 30 seconds without lying.' This underscores the recursive nature of his truthfulness, making it extremely unlikely that he could provide a truthful statement under oath.
Trump's Decision to Not Testify
Recent events suggest that Trump will not take the stand, as exemplified by his submission of a letter indicating that he will not testify. This decision is one he has made before, seeking to avoid the scrutiny and potential charges that come with it....
Legal and Ethical Implications
From a legal perspective, prosecuting Trump for perjury would require proper channels to be followed. The guilt would have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and it would need to be a criminal case where a conviction could lead to serious penalties. ACLU President Mark Joseph Stern has insisted that the President’s Attorney’s would need to be in complete agreement to allow this to happen.
The ethical implications of Trump potentially lying under oath raise additional questions. Perjury is defined as the willful telling of an untruth after taking an oath to tell the truth. While Trump often appears to be a liar, his actions do not always constitute perjury because the intent to lie must be present. Delusions are a symptom of mental disorder and do not apply to Trump's actions, which are more indicative of mendacity motivated by self-interest rather than a mental health condition.
Trump has previously demonstrated that he could be a difficult witness, prone to a lack of accuracy and a tendency to ramble. His experience with depositions does not bode well for his performance under oath. In past cases, Trump has offered settlements to avoid having to testify, indicating his preference for non-cooperation. In a criminal matter, the only way prosecutors can ask Trump questions is if his attorney allows him to take the stand, which is unlikely given the risk.
The Future: Civil Depositions and Testifying
As civil cases against Trump continue to move forward, requiring him to submit to depositions, the future is likely to provide even more significant insight into his truthfulness. These proceedings will play a crucial role in determining whether he will face the possibility of perjury allegations in the near future.
The ultimate question remains: Will Trump tell the truth? Given his past conduct and the likelihood of perjury charges, the answer is decidedly no. His reluctance to testify highlights the extent of his aversion to facing legal scrutiny.