Manafort’s Lawyer briefed Trump Attorneys on What He Told Mueller

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: BlackJackal
You really should read the source material you are commenting on prior to commenting, otherwise you may end up looking like you don't know what you are commenting about.

While Mr. Downing’s discussions with the president’s team violated no laws

Ooops too late.

BJ is prone to emotional outburst, as all leftist are, they never read beyond the title and first paragraph, a failing proving to be there downfall and reinforces my view that they never think critically, just too literally.

wait what?
I thought I read he was a never-trumper and not a leftist? If that is accurate the posts have taken on a whole new meaning.
Interesting how few have an issue with the government allegedly attempting to make witnesses fabricate evidence. That is pretty dangerous imo.

originally posted by: mobiusmale
a reply to: Look2theSacredHeart

"...they helped contribute to a deteriorating relationship between lawyers for Mr. Manafort and Mr. Mueller’s prosecutors."

That's rich. Muellers prosecutors have thrown the book at Manafort, and are intending to put him away for life (if they can), unless he "composes" information they can use again Donald Trump. I am sure the relationship with Manafort's lawyers and Mueller were quite cordial before this...not.

Let's see, should we continue to play with the donkeys that want to stomp us, or should we cosy up to the elephant that just might/maybe pardon us if we can provide some good intel for his own battle against the witch hunters? Hmmm...doesn't seem like a really tough choice.

Yeah...I love this line: "...they helped contribute to a deteriorating relationship between lawyers for Mr. Manafort and Mr. Mueller’s prosecutors."

Some might say, armed agents bursting into a guy's home at 3 am., while he and his wife are in bed, might also contribute to a deteriorating relationship.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Some might say, armed agents bursting into a guy's home at 3 am., while he and his wife are in bed, might also contribute to a deteriorating relationship.

Are you referencing the no knock warrant served on charges the fbi had previously declined to prosecute for? Still no charges that indicate any involvement in "russian collusion"?

a reply to: Look2theSacredHeart

No wonder the President has been calling this a "Witch Hunt" with such certainty.

People understand that Donald Trump has always wanted what's best for America, and are willing to sacrifice themselves to help him deliver.

The same (and additional) people have briefed President Trump about the crimes of Obama and Hillary too. "You'd be in jail", was not just a cute quip for the debate.

originally posted by: BlackJackal
a reply to: Look2theSacredHeart

This is called obstruction of justice

No, its not. Since the OP's source saying it isn't illegal isn't good enough for you, here's another:

Trump's legal team has maintained a joint defense agreement with witnesses in Mueller's investigations, including Manafort. However, it is uncommon for those agreements to continue after a witness reaches a plea agreement with prosecutors, The Times reported.

Source

Unusual. Not illegal.

Seems to me that Trump and Manafort beat Mueller at his own dirty game. It'd sure be fun to be a fly on the Oval Office wall today! I'll bet they're enjoying this...

Must suck to be Mueller, eh?

a reply to: shooterbrody

Interesting how few have an issue with the government allegedly attempting to make witnesses fabricate evidence. That is pretty dangerous imo.

I'm with you. I find that to be the most disturbing part of all of this. If Mueller had anything on Trump, we'd know it. He's got nothing, and if Mueller didn't know it from the start, he figured it out at some point. A witch hunt is bad enough... Manufacturing crimes is unconscionable.

But Mueller was dirty long before Trump so no surprise...

originally posted by: BlackJackal
a reply to: Look2theSacredHeart

This is called obstruction of justice. Trump's lawyers are now in hot water themselves if this is true.

Explain this statement.
Everyone will wait.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: shooterbrody

Interesting how few have an issue with the government allegedly attempting to make witnesses fabricate evidence. That is pretty dangerous imo.

I'm with you. I find that to be the most disturbing part of all of this. If Mueller had anything on Trump, we'd know it. He's got nothing, and if Mueller didn't know it from the start, he figured it out at some point. A witch hunt is bad enough... Manufacturing crimes is unconscionable.

But Mueller was dirty long before Trump so no surprise...

With the FISA warrant access they had; they got EVERYTHING. Do people here need to be reminded that brick in your pocket or purse has a camera and a speaker on it that the government can access 24/7? If there were anything to have it would have already been revealed imo.

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: BlackJackal
a reply to: Look2theSacredHeart

This is called obstruction of justice. Trump's lawyers are now in hot water themselves if this is true.

Explain this statement.
Everyone will wait.

Maybe Mueller's team should have asked Manafort's lawyers to sign a Non-disclosure Agreement. We know how much the left value and respect those...

originally posted by: Fools
Got to love the spin on this one. Basically no law was broken but let's just go ahead and pretend one was. What in the hell is wrong with journalists these days? Are they all that mentally simple?

I think the issue is that Manafort was feeding Mueller junk info. Mueller accepted it at face even though he knew it was lies. And then Trump answers the questions in writing going with the same story that Mueller already knows is lies. Won't end up very well for Trump if this is the case.

a reply to: shooterbrody

With the FISA warrant access they had; they got EVERYTHING. 

Exactly. And that doesn't even account for any "mole" planted in Trump's campaign. If Mueller had anything, at most he would have only needed to flesh out crumbs to tie it all together. He hasn't done that because he couldn't do that. Mueller's got nothing.

But he continues to drag the whole nation down with his bogus investigation. This isn't just hurting Trump and his administration... The intelligence agencies and the FBI and the DOJ have all been discredited in a major way. It's hurting all of us.

a reply to: Boadicea

But he continues to drag the whole nation down with his bogus investigation. This isn't just hurting Trump and his administration... The intelligence agencies and the FBI and the DOJ have all been discredited in a major way. It's hurting all of us.

yep
the only ones who will "pay" for this are the elected cheerleaders who continue to grandstand about nothing;
2020 will be very bad for them when this "investigation" is available for public consumption;
there may actually again be a backlash against the patriot act and fisa reform

originally posted by: pheonix358
a reply to: Look2theSacredHeart

If the President had ordered this to be done, he would be prosecuted.

It seems though that a Lawyer of a third party (Manafort) passed on the information. That Lawyer should be charged with something.

As far as the President is concerned, it was information passed to him, (if it was, and no proof of that) and I would imagine, considering the source, he would have known he was being played.

That is what this is, an attempt to play The President, now, watch it backfire!

ETA. Additionally it was not verifiable and The President would not have been able to use it because he would not trust the source and so it was useless information. So many traps set, and not one has caught anything other than those that set them.

P

This is like the most complicated Grisham novel, ever.

I have a question: if DJT pardons Manafort, would that be evidence/probable cause of witness tampering?

originally posted by: sligtlyskeptical

originally posted by: Fools
Got to love the spin on this one. Basically no law was broken but let's just go ahead and pretend one was. What in the hell is wrong with journalists these days? Are they all that mentally simple?

I think the issue is that Manafort was feeding Mueller junk info. Mueller accepted it at face even though he knew it was lies. And then Trump answers the questions in writing going with the same story that Mueller already knows is lies. Won't end up very well for Trump if this is the case.

Why does Trump need to lie? Why would you align your “story” with someone already known as a liar, and under surveillance?

originally posted by: BlackJackal
a reply to: Look2theSacredHeart

This is called obstruction of justice. Trump's lawyers are now in hot water themselves if this is true. They should have reported this attempted sharing of investigation material with the DOJ immediately.

I have no idea if this is true and can be proven, but if so, even if Trump is innocent he just screwed himself royally.

At this point, it's legal, but "irregular," whatever the he'll that's supposed to mean.

If he ends up pardoning Manafort though, would that be a quid pro quo/ witness tampering?

a reply to: shooterbrody

2020 will be very bad for them when this "investigation" is available for public consumption; 
there may actually again be a backlash against the patriot act and fisa reform.

From your keyboard to God's ears...

If/when the public gets the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, we'll figure it out. And we'll see a true revolution by the people and FOR the people. Hopefully more peaceful than not.

Sunshine is the best disinfectant.

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: sligtlyskeptical

originally posted by: Fools
Got to love the spin on this one. Basically no law was broken but let's just go ahead and pretend one was. What in the hell is wrong with journalists these days? Are they all that mentally simple?

I think the issue is that Manafort was feeding Mueller junk info. Mueller accepted it at face even though he knew it was lies. And then Trump answers the questions in writing going with the same story that Mueller already knows is lies. Won't end up very well for Trump if this is the case.

Why does Trump need to lie? Why would you align your “story” with someone already known as a liar, and under surveillance?

Why would someone innocent need to be fed information about an investigation in the first place?

a reply to: Look2theSacredHeart

Why would someone innocent need to be fed information about an investigation in the first place?

How about because we all have the constitutional and natural right to "discovery" of all "evidence" an accuser has against us and the right to answer and defend any such charges?

And how about because the investigator can be dirty (and Mueller is) as dirty can be and use his power in unscrupulous ways that do not serve justice?

Hence the reason our founding fathers demanded complete transparency on the part of government agents and agencies... And why government agents and agencies must document and prove themselves and their actions in EVERYTHING.

Instead everyone is playing games.

If Mueller had anything on Trump, we'd already know it. Its long past time for Mueller to put up or shut up. Give the people the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and we'll figure it out.

a reply to: Look2theSacredHeart

No real proof from any real verified sources I see.

Love it bigly 😁

a reply to: Look2theSacredHeart

Hey, just saw this thread! It seems one piece of Marcy Wheelers story has been corroborated. As I just told the yapping hyenas in the other thread, time will tell if the other, illegal part is true. I think we’ll need Trumps answers to Muellers questions for that.

It’s been known for a while that Trump and Manaforts lawyers have had a communication agreement between themselves to share information. The illegal part comes in if Trump was using that agreement to mislead the Mueller investigation.

I had a late night last night and just woke up, but seeing Trumps rage tweets this morning makes me think the illegal part might very well be true.

Time will tell.