Cont: Breaking: Mueller Grand Jury charges filed, arrests as soon as Monday pt 2

[acbytesla]

Giuliani says that Trump's legal team has "debriefed all of Mueller's witnesses".

Is this an admission of witness tampering?

Of course not, you think only the prosecution can interview witnesses???

Why would they do that? After all, this isn't an investigation into Trump. It's an investigation into Russian tampering in our elections. Why is Trump and his people acting so guilty? Why can't they just tell the truth and move on?

Why do they keep lying about their contacts with the Russians? Why did Trump write a fallacious statement for his son about the Trump Tower meeting? Every single action by Trump and his people screams guilt.

Talk about panic. 'Let's all get our stories straight.' ' What did you tell Mueller and what did he tell Mueller?' Just meet with Mueller and tell the truth. That's all there is to it. That is, unless your guilty and you know it.

 

[Andy_Ross]

That's an odd choice of words. Were the witnesses returning back from a mission?

Maybe they stole their underwear.

 

[The Greater Fool]

Of course not, you think only the prosecution can interview witnesses???

Which defendant is Trump's team defending?

I'm not aware Trump or his family have been charged with anything... yet.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Which defendant is Trump's team defending?

I'm not aware Trump or his family have been charged with anything... yet.

Well, definitely not Manafort. Not Papadopoulos, Flynn, or Gates.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Of course not, you think only the prosecution can interview witnesses???

Trump hasn't been charged with anything. What the hell's wrong with you?

 

[The Big Dog]

Giuliani says that Trump's legal team has "debriefed all of Mueller's witnesses".

Is this an admission of witness tampering?

Of course not, you think only the prosecution can interview witnesses???

Which defendant is Trump's team defending?

I'm not aware Trump or his family have been charged with anything... yet.

Well, definitely not Manafort. Not Papadopoulos, Flynn, or Gates.

Trump hasn't been charged with anything. What the hell's wrong with you?

Oh man, someone makes a claim.
TBD nukes it from orbit.
Instead of focusing what TBD explained, people throw up red herrings culminating with:
“What the hell’s wrong with you?”

I did not say they were defending anyone, now did I? Of course not.

Tho, the semi-hysterical what the hell is wrong with you? C’est magnafique! Kisses fingers in the French Manner!

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

I did not say they were defending anyone, now did I? Of course not.

If they're not defending anyone, then one what basis and on whose behalf have they "debriefed" the witnesses?

 

[Ziggurat]

If they're not defending anyone, then one what basis and on whose behalf have they "debriefed" the witnesses?

I don't think they need any basis to just talk to people. You may need some legal standing to force a deposition from someone, but that's not the same as "debriefing".

 

[The Big Dog]

If they're not defending anyone, then one what basis and on whose behalf have they "debriefed" the witnesses?

Lets take this step by step: do you agree that "debriefing" witnesses by lawyers is not witness tampering?

Yes or no?

 

[Minoosh]

Lets take this step by step: do you agree that "debriefing" witnesses by lawyers is not witness tampering is not witness tampering?

Yes or no?

That second "is not witness tampering" is throwing me.

 

[The Big Dog]

That second "is not witness tampering" is throwing me.

Sorry, the hot dogs were burning and I got distracted!

 

[quadraginta]

Giuliani says that Trump's legal team has "debriefed all of Mueller's witnesses".

Is this an admission of witness tampering?

I suspect that depends on what being "debriefed" consists of.

It's a rather uncommon usage of the term.

It isn't clear why Trump's legal team would feel the need to "debrief" all of Mueller's witnesses, since they constantly claim vigorously that their client has no involvement with anything Mueller is investigating.

It sort of suggests that they are trying to ascertain whether or not any of these witnesses might have something to say to Mueller that could somehow be inconvenient to their client.

It doesn't necessarily mean any tampering or intimidation of witnesses is being done, but as a general rule I don't think that lawyers go out of their way to just start interrogating witnesses for investigations that their client is uninvolved with.

It is certainly reasonable to question their motives.

 

[PhantomWolf]

Lets take this step by step: do you agree that "debriefing" witnesses by lawyers is not witness tampering?

Yes or no?

Depends on if you think that it's perfectly acceptable for a team of lawyers whom have nothing to do with an investigation to pull witnesses in and debrief them on what they have told the investigators.

For example, if the lawyers representing Micheal Corleone were to pull in and debrief the witnesses from an FBI investigation into discrepancies in the books of the International Longshoremen's Association, might you consider that there might be witness tampering occurring?

 

[The Big Dog]

Depends on if you think that it's perfectly acceptable for a team of lawyers whom have nothing to do with an investigation to pull witnesses in and debrief them on what they have told the investigators.

For example, if the lawyers representing Micheal Corleone were to pull in and debrief the witnesses from an FBI investigation into discrepancies in the books of the International Longshoremen's Association, might you consider that there might be witness tampering occurring?

There is a joint defense agreement in place which Rudy specifically mentioned.

Interesting how many posters in this thread have jumped to wild conclusions without conducting even basic investigation of the facts.

One fella asked “what the hell is wrong with” me.

I guess what is wrong with me is that I actually do some research.

Oh well...

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Never mind, not worth wasting time on.

 

[acbytesla]

There is a joint defense agreement in place which Rudy specifically mentioned.

Interesting how many posters in this thread have jumped to wild conclusions without conducting even basic investigation of the facts.

One fella asked “what the hell is wrong with” me.

I guess what is wrong with me is that I actually do some research.

Oh well...

I really don't understand your point. Why the concern about their testimonies? Unless they are are trying to find out what lies they can tell the investigators and not get caught by them. The sleaze is just oozing from these guys.

 

[plague311]

Oh man, someone makes a claim.
TBD nukes it from orbit.
Instead of focusing what TBD explained, people throw up red herrings culminating with:
“What the hell’s wrong with you?”

I did not say they were defending anyone, now did I? Of course not.

Tho, the semi-hysterical what the hell is wrong with you? C’est magnafique! Kisses fingers in the French Manner!

Man, you've got this Danths law thing down cold. That is just absolutely textbook.

"Nukes it from orbit"....

I love that Trump believes that this is a witch hunt that will produce no evidence of collusion, but also he needs to "debrief" people to bolster his defense. How do people believe anything this clueless tit says?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

It isn't clear why Trump's legal team would feel the need to "debrief" all of Mueller's witnesses, since they constantly claim vigorously that their client has no involvement with anything Mueller is investigating.

It sort of suggests that they are trying to ascertain whether or not any of these witnesses might have something to say to Mueller that could somehow be inconvenient to their client.

It doesn't necessarily mean any tampering or intimidation of witnesses is being done, but as a general rule I don't think that lawyers go out of their way to just start interrogating witnesses for investigations that their client is uninvolved with.

It is certainly reasonable to question their motives.

Yeah, it's definitely possible that what Trump's legal team is doing here is trying to figure out, by any means, what information Mueller's team has been given. They're afraid of something.

 

[PhantomWolf]

There is a joint defense agreement in place which Rudy specifically mentioned.

Joint defense against what? Trump contends that no laws were broken, and as of yet none of them have been charged with anything, so what valid reason do they have to "debrief" witnesses other than that they need to know what people have said so that they can keep their stories straight?

 

[acbytesla]

Yeah, it's definitely possible that what Trump's legal team is doing here is trying to figure out, by any means, what information Mueller's team has been given. They're afraid of something.

Of course they are afraid of something. This is why Flynn lied. This is why Manafort lied. This is why Trump Jr.lied. Sessions even lied about his Russian contacts. What happens if they have proof that Cohen lied about Prague And the Steele dossier is true? There is a long litany of suspicious activity.

What other info does Mueller have? Are there financial records that we haven't heard about?