Scumbag Twittler may now have "graduated" to witness tampering

Search

Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2007
Messages
22,991
Tokens
This fat fuck keeps reaching new lows, seemingly every week.
[h=1]Trump Spoke to Witnesses About Matters They Discussed With Special Counsel[/h] By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT and MAGGIE HABERMANMARCH 7, 2018

WASHINGTON — The special counsel in the Russia investigation has learned of two conversations in recent months in which President Trump asked key witnesses about matters they discussed with investigators, according to three people familiar with the encounters.

In one episode, the president told an aide that the White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II, should issue a statement denying a New York Times article in January. The article said Mr. McGahn told investigators that the president once asked him to fire the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III. Mr. McGahn never released a statement and later had to remind the president that he had indeed asked Mr. McGahn to see that Mr. Mueller was dismissed, the people said.

In the other episode, Mr. Trump asked his former chief of staff, Reince Priebus, how his interview had gone with the special counsel’s investigators and whether they had been “nice,” according to two people familiar with the discussion.

The episodes demonstrate that even as the special counsel investigation appears to be intensifying, the president has ignored his lawyers’ advice to avoid doing anything publicly or privately that could create the appearance of interfering with it.

The White House did not respond to several requests for comment. Mr. Priebus and Mr. McGahn declined to comment through their lawyer, William A. Burck.

Legal experts said Mr. Trump’s contact with the men most likely did not rise to the level of witness tampering. But witnesses and lawyers who learned about the conversations viewed them as potentially a problem and shared them with Mr. Mueller.

In investigating Russian election interference, Mr. Mueller is also examining whether the president tried to obstruct the inquiry. The former F.B.I. director James B. Comey said that Mr. Trump asked him for his loyalty and to end the investigation into his first national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn. After firing Mr. Comey, the president said privately that the dismissal had relieved “great pressure” on him. And Mr. Trump also told White House officials after Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from the investigation that he needed someone running the Justice Department who would protect him.

The experts said the meetings with Mr. McGahn and Mr. Priebus would probably sharpen Mr. Mueller’s focus on the president’s interactions with other witnesses. The special counsel has questioned witnesses recently about their interactions with the president since the investigation began. The experts also said the episodes could serve as evidence for Mr. Mueller in an obstruction case.

“It makes it look like you’re cooking a story, and prosecutors are always looking out for it,” said Julie R. O’Sullivan, a law professor at Georgetown University and expert on white-collar criminal investigations.

She added, “It can get at the issue of consciousness of guilt in an obstruction case because if you didn’t do anything wrong, why are you doing that?”

Central figures in investigations are almost always advised by their own lawyers to keep from speaking with witnesses and prosecutors to prevent accusations of witness tampering. The president has not been questioned by Mr. Mueller; Mr. Trump’s lawyers are negotiating terms of a possible interview. Learning even basic details about what other witnesses told investigators could help the president shape his own answers.

Mr. Trump’s interactions with Mr. McGahn unfolded in the days after the Jan. 25 Times article, which said that Mr. McGahn threatened to quit last June after the president asked him to fire the special counsel. After the article was published, the White House staff secretary, Rob Porter, told Mr. McGahn that the president wanted him to release a statement saying that the story was not true, the people said.

Mr. Porter, who resigned last month amid a domestic abuse scandal, told Mr. McGahn the president had suggested he might “get rid of” Mr. McGahn if he chose not to challenge the article, the people briefed on the conversation said.

Mr. McGahn did not publicly deny the article, and the president later confronted him in the Oval Office in front of the White House chief of staff, John F. Kelly, according to the people.

The president said he had never ordered Mr. McGahn to fire the special counsel. Mr. McGahn replied that the president was wrong and that he had in fact asked Mr. McGahn in June to call the deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, to tell him that the special counsel had a series of conflicts that disqualified him for overseeing the investigation and that he had to be dismissed. The president told Mr. McGahn that he did not remember the discussion that way.
Photo
Donald F. McGahn II, the White House counsel, refused the president’s request to deny a New York Times article saying that Mr. Trump ordered him to fire the special counsel. Credit Pete Marovich for The New York Times

Mr. Trump moved on, pointing out that Mr. McGahn had never told him that he was going to resign over the order to fire the special counsel. Mr. McGahn acknowledged that that was true but said that he had told senior White House officials at the time that he was going to quit.

It is not clear how the confrontation was resolved. Mr. McGahn has stayed on as White House counsel, one of the few senior administration officials who has been with the president since the campaign.

Mr. Priebus met with the president in the West Wing in December, according to the people with knowledge of their encounter. Allies of Mr. Priebus, who left the White House in July 2017, have cautioned him to keep his distance. But Mr. Priebus, who is seeking to build a law practice as a Washington power broker who can open doors for clients, has maintained contact and occasionally visited the White House to see Mr. Trump and his own replacement, Mr. Kelly.

Mr. Trump brought up Mr. Priebus’s October interview with the special counsel’s office, the people said, and Mr. Priebus replied that the investigators were courteous and professional. He shared no specifics and did not say what he had told investigators, and the conversation moved on after a few minutes, those briefed on it said. Mr. Kelly was present for that conversation as well, and it was not clear whether he tried to stop the discussion.

It is not illegal for the subject of an investigation to learn what witnesses have told investigators. But that is usually done through lawyers for the people involved because their communications are often shielded from prosecutors because of attorney-client privilege. In organized crime and complex white-collar investigations, prosecutors often ask witnesses whether they have spoken to the person under investigation to determine whether they are coordinating their stories.

Mr. Priebus has had a long and complicated relationship with the president. He was one of the few who publicly defended Mr. Trump after the Times article about his attempt to fire Mr. Mueller, which cited the president’s view that Mr. Mueller had too many conflicts to be the special counsel.

“He expresses concerns with the conflicts, but I never heard the idea or the concept that this person needed to be fired,” Mr. Priebus said last month in an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “I never felt it was relayed to me that way, either. And I would know the difference between a level 10 situation as reported in that story and what was reality. And it just — to me, it wasn’t reality.”
 

Member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
39,461
Tokens
In the other episode, Mr. Trump asked his former chief of staff, Reince Priebus, how his interview had gone with the special counsel’s investigators and whether they had been “nice,” according to two people familiar with the discussion.

Jesus Christ, the POTUS asked Priebus how his interview went and whether they had been "nice" to him. What an outrageous conversation to have with a fellow colleague.
 

Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2007
Messages
22,991
Tokens
In the other episode, Mr. Trump asked his former chief of staff, Reince Priebus, how his interview had gone with the special counsel’s investigators and whether they had been “nice,” according to two people familiar with the discussion.

Jesus Christ, the POTUS asked Priebus how his interview went and whether they had been "nice" to him. What an outrageous conversation to have with a fellow colleague.

Enfucko, you show, once again, that you are a fucking nitwit: Talking to somebody who was interviewed by the feds about the results of said interview, is NEVER a good idea, but it's a particularly bad one when one person, who WAS a witness, is asked about the interview by somebody who is likely to be a witness, namely, Twittler. WITNESSES SHOULD NOT TALK TO OTHER WITNESSES, GOT it???? It's absolutely amazing how stupid you are.
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2006
Messages
37,192
Tokens
Enfucko, you show, once again, that you are a fucking nitwit: Talking to somebody who was interviewed by the feds about the results of said interview, is NEVER a good idea, but it's a particularly bad one when one person, who WAS a witness, is asked about the interview by somebody who is likely to be a witness, namely, Twittler. WITNESSES SHOULD NOT TALK TO OTHER WITNESSES, GOT it???? It's absolutely amazing how stupid you are.
Youre a fucking nutcase....
 

Member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
39,461
Tokens
Enfucko, you show, once again, that you are a fucking nitwit: Talking to somebody who was interviewed by the feds about the results of said interview, is NEVER a good idea, but it's a particularly bad one when one person, who WAS a witness, is asked about the interview by somebody who is likely to be a witness, namely, Twittler. WITNESSES SHOULD NOT TALK TO OTHER WITNESSES, GOT it???? It's absolutely amazing how stupid you are.

Now you're a lawyer?

I was a juror in a court case once and they don't tell you not to talk to each other. They tell you not to talk to each other about the specifics of the case. One guy asking another how the interview had gone and if the interviewers were "nice" is nothing.

Quit looking for stuff that's not there.
 

Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2007
Messages
22,991
Tokens
Now you're a lawyer?

I was a juror in a court case once and they don't tell you not to talk to each other. They tell you not to talk to each other about the specifics of the case. One guy asking another how the interview had gone and if the interviewers were "nice" is nothing.

Quit looking for stuff that's not there.

This isn't between two jurors in a case, you fucking idiot, it's between a witness and another very likely witness who is also the subject of the investigation. And, you just made my prediction come true, namely, that your vow never to address me again was, inevitably, a lie-you're a nosy, lying scumbag, just like some other people around here. No less than 3 legal experrts interviewed said it was totally inappropriate, and, likely obstruction(merely trying is enough for that).
 

Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2007
Messages
22,991
Tokens
Now you're a lawyer?

I was a juror in a court case once and they don't tell you not to talk to each other. They tell you not to talk to each other about the specifics of the case. One guy asking another how the interview had gone and if the interviewers were "nice" is nothing.

Quit looking for stuff that's not there.

I await your sure-to-be-informative reply with RAPT attention, schmuck. Why in the WORLD would Kelly feel compelled to give a warning if Twittler's actions were hunky dory, I wonder? Btw, who do you think revealed that he talked to the witnesses? THEY did, that should've been a hint to you that they weren't comfortable with what he did, but, again, you're a nitwit.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/08/politics/donald-trump-robert-mueller-witnesses/index.html
Kelly has warned Trump to be careful talking to Mueller witnesses


By Jim Acosta, CNN
Updated 4:50 PM ET, Thu March 8, 2018

"There's nothing wrong with talking someone and saying, 'Did they treat you well?' " the official said.

But this official made it clear that the President's conversations about the investigation are making top aides inside the White House uncomfortable and potentially putting Trump himself in a legally precarious position.
The special counsel's investigation is currently one of several probes looking into Russian meddling in the 2016 election and whether Trump campaign associates have any ties with Russians. As part of his probe, Mueller is also investigating any potential obstruction of justice.
Trump has repeatedly denied any collusion.
Trump reportedly asked Priebus if special counsel investigators had been "nice" during his October interview, according to The New York Times, citing two people familiar with the conversation.
Mueller's investigators are aware of two occasions where Trump asked witnesses about conversations they had with investigators, The New York Times reported Wednesday, citing three people familiar with the encounters.
In the other instance, Trump reportedly told an aide that McGahn should put out a statement denying a previous Times report -- in which the paper said McGahn told investigators in December that Trump asked him to fire Mueller.
 

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
22,454
Tokens
:):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)


Idiot thinks asking someone if they were treated well after they testified is "witness tampering"


:):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)


From the stupid article he provided:

Legal experts said Mr. Trump’s contact with the men most likely did not rise to the level of witness tampering.


:):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)
 

Member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
39,461
Tokens
This isn't between two jurors in a case, you fucking idiot, it's between a witness and another very likely witness who is also the subject of the investigation. And, you just made my prediction come true, namely, that your vow never to address me again was, inevitably, a lie-you're a nosy, lying scumbag, just like some other people around here. No less than 3 legal experrts interviewed said it was totally inappropriate, and, likely obstruction(merely trying is enough for that).

Jurors and witnesses are given the same instructions. Don't speak about specifics of the case.
 

Member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
39,461
Tokens
I await your sure-to-be-informative reply with RAPT attention, schmuck. Why in the WORLD would Kelly feel compelled to give a warning if Twittler's actions were hunky dory, I wonder? Btw, who do you think revealed that he talked to the witnesses? THEY did, that should've been a hint to you that they weren't comfortable with what he did, but, again, you're a nitwit.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/08/politics/donald-trump-robert-mueller-witnesses/index.html
Kelly has warned Trump to be careful talking to Mueller witnesses


By Jim Acosta, CNN
Updated 4:50 PM ET, Thu March 8, 2018

"There's nothing wrong with talking someone and saying, 'Did they treat you well?' " the official said.

But this official made it clear that the President's conversations about the investigation are making top aides inside the White House uncomfortable and potentially putting Trump himself in a legally precarious position.
The special counsel's investigation is currently one of several probes looking into Russian meddling in the 2016 election and whether Trump campaign associates have any ties with Russians. As part of his probe, Mueller is also investigating any potential obstruction of justice.
Trump has repeatedly denied any collusion.
Trump reportedly asked Priebus if special counsel investigators had been "nice" during his October interview, according to The New York Times, citing two people familiar with the conversation.
Mueller's investigators are aware of two occasions where Trump asked witnesses about conversations they had with investigators, The New York Times reported Wednesday, citing three people familiar with the encounters.
In the other instance, Trump reportedly told an aide that McGahn should put out a statement denying a previous Times report -- in which the paper said McGahn told investigators in December that Trump asked him to fire Mueller.

You're actually quoting a story from Jim Acosta?
 

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
85,694
Tokens
An example of real witness tampering

Calling a 20 year old intern you're having an affair with and telling her to deny the affair and telling her that if you both tell the same story, nobody will be able to prove otherwise

That's how you get yourself disbarred
 

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory
Handicapper
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
85,694
Tokens
You're actually quoting a story from Jim Acosta?

that's funny, the POS will spin everything he can and convict somebody without a shred of evidence

it's liberal DNA, some sort gene mutation
 

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
22,454
Tokens
Enfucko, you show, once again, that you are a fucking nitwit: Talking to somebody who was interviewed by the feds about the results of said interview, is NEVER a good idea, but it's a particularly bad one when one person, who WAS a witness, is asked about the interview by somebody who is likely to be a witness, namely, Twittler. WITNESSES SHOULD NOT TALK TO OTHER WITNESSES, GOT it???? It's absolutely amazing how stupid you are.

How would you know?
 

Active member
Handicapper
Joined
Jun 18, 2007
Messages
76,511
Tokens
face)(*^%Loser!@#0kth)(&^:bbsmile::bbsmile::bbsmile::bbsmile::bbsmile::bbsmile::bbsmile::bbsmile::kissingbb:kissingbb:kissingbb:kissingbb:kissingbb:kissingbb:kissingbb:kissingbb:kissingbb:carto1710:carto1710:carto1710:carto1710:carto1710:carto1710:carto1710:carto1710:carto1710
 

Active member
Handicapper
Joined
Jun 18, 2007
Messages
76,511
Tokens
He's at night court
 

Never bet against America.
Joined
Jul 3, 2014
Messages
8,398
Tokens
Takes a special kind of stupid to start threads like this.
 

Active member
Handicapper
Joined
Jun 18, 2007
Messages
76,511
Tokens
He just entered the building
 

Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2007
Messages
22,991
Tokens
:):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)


Idiot thinks asking someone if they were treated well after they testified is "witness tampering"


:):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)


From the stupid article he provided:

Legal experts said Mr. Trump’s contact with the men most likely did not rise to the level of witness tampering.


:):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)

First of all, asshole, I said "may" in my thread title, and, news flash, "most likely" does not mean the same as "does NOT,' you fucking moron. Secondly, I guess you "forgot" to read a little farther in the article:

"The experts also said the episodes could serve as evidence for Mr. Mueller in an obstruction case.

“It makes it look like you’re cooking a story, and prosecutors are always looking out for it,” said Julie R. O’Sullivan, a law professor at Georgetown University and expert on white-collar criminal investigations.

She added, “It can get at the issue of consciousness of guilt in an obstruction case because if you didn’t do anything wrong, why are you doing that?”

Fucking moron...
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,106,765
Messages
13,438,754
Members
99,334
Latest member
mu88forum
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com