Death By Tweet: Questions Linger Over Flynn Tweet and the Role of Trump Counsel

Twitter Logo440px-Allegory_of_death;_skeleton,_c.1600_Wellcome_L0014669Below is my column in USA Today on the ethical and practical implications of the controversial tweet sent out by Trump counsel John Dowd. In my view, Dowd should now remove himself from the litigation. Notably, the failure to remove or fail Dowd will likely fuel theories that he is covering for Trump.  If Trump did not know that Flynn had lied to the FBI before speaking with Comey, the Dowd tweet would usually result in a quick and rather angry response to a lawyer compromising his client in this fashion.  However, various media sources are reporting that White House Counsel Don McGahn did inform Trump that Flynn likely misled the FBI in his interview before Trump spoke with Comey.  Whatever the truth of the matter, the Dowd tweet could not be worse in its timing and content.

Here is the column:

Trump personal lawyer John Dowd is facing the worst possible fate of a Beltway barrister. He is about to become a noun, verb and adjective. It is a lonesome position that Robert Bork found himself 30 years ago when blocked for the Supreme Court. Now nominees are often evaluated according to whether they are “Borkable” or likely “to be borked.” A Dowd may soon be the operative term for a legal action that is so self-destructive and stupid as to compromise not only a client but yourself. More specifically, it could be simply the shorthand for “death by tweet.”

Dowd’s predicament arose after Washington was set alight by what may be the single most moronic tweet in the checkered tweet history of the administration. The president sent out a tweet responding former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s plea agreement by saying “I had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the vice president and the FBI. He has pled guilty to those lies. It is a shame because his actions during the transition were lawful. There was nothing to hide!”

The three words “and the FBI” could constitute an admission against interest for the president in the investigation of possible obstruction of justice. Flynn was “fired” on Feb. 13, 2017. That was the day before Trump reportedly asked then FBI Director James Comey to ask him to go easy on Flynn. (Trump has denied that he ever asked Comey to drop the investigation against Flynn.)

With the media in full frenzy, Dowd came forward to fall on a sword. He claimed that the words were his alone and he was “sloppy” in referring to knowledge of lying to the FBI.  However, this week media is reporting that White House Counsel Don McGahn told Trump before Flynn was fired that he believed Flynn had misled the FBI.

It is hard to imagine how Dowd could ethically continue to perform his duties as an attorney after compromising himself and his client so thoroughly.  Dowd is now an obvious potential witness for special counsel Robert Mueller. There is no reason why Mueller should accept his claim that Trump did not approve these words or that the admission did not reflect Trump’s knowledge at the time of the Flynn firing in February.

This was the wrong time and the wrong prosecutor for Dowd to push the envelope of attorney-client privilege. Mueller has already shown a troubling and dismissive view of legal privilege. He was accused of trying unsuccessfully to nail a defense lawyer by taping an attorney-client meeting in Boston when he was U.S. Attorney. More recently, Mueller effectively turned Paul Manafort’s former lawyer, Melissa Laurenza, into a witness against him; he got a court order for her testimony under the “crime-fraud exception.”

Since Mueller is investigating obstruction of justice, Dowd’s testimony would be easier to acquire then Laurenza’s. Moreover, it is not clear what role Dowd was performing as tweet muse. Lawyers are under various ethical limitations in discussing pending cases or investigations or witnesses. It is not clear how a lawyer can issue statements under the name of the client without approval or a clear understanding from the client. This was not a tweet from counsel speaking on behalf of Trump. It was speaking as Trump.

Writing under the name of your client (without his sign-off on the statement) raises a novel but no less troubling concern, particularly when you are attacking a potential witness against your client. Dowd seemed to blur the line of counsel with being a type of public relations flack in authoring tweets under Trump’s name. While it is always dangerous to combine the roles of lawyer and flack, it becomes intolerable when you add the third role as potential witness.

Calling this “sloppy” drafting is like calling the Titanic “incautious navigation.” Dowd seriously undermined the position of Trump by clearing away any serious barrier for Mueller to demand information on his communications with Trump.

Ironically, Trump’s various personal lawyers were brought into the case because White House Counsel McGahn could not refuse to answer questions from Mueller under long-established case law. Private counsel could allow Trump the protections of attorney-client privilege.

The Trump legal team however has been honoring the privilege primarily in the breach and has seemed to invite its own subpoenas. Not long ago, Trump personal lawyer Ty Cobb revealed in a loud conversation with Dowd that McGahn was withholding “acoupledocuments” in the investigation in the White House safe. He made the statement at a restaurant next to a New York Times reporter eating lunch.

Trump personal counsel Jay Sekulow also became a possible witness when he went on the air to insist that the president didn’t sign off on Donald Trump Jr.’s misleading statement on the now infamous meeting in Trump Tower with Russians promising dirt on Hillary Clinton. It turned out that Trump dictated the statement, according to White House sources.

This gives Mueller a target-rich environment in an area that he has shown little hesitation to hunt previously: attorney-client communications.

Dowd has had an accomplished career and has garnered well-deserved praise for his legal abilities. However, he now has no good option. If he issued an incriminating statement under Trump’s name without his approval, he is compromised as counsel. If he lied about Trump not approving the language, he could be disbarred as counsel. In either case, he faces a serious risk of being a witness. In other words, he pulled a Dowd. And no one understands that better than Dowd himself.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributors. Follow him on Twitter: @JonathanTurley.

88 thoughts on “Death By Tweet: Questions Linger Over Flynn Tweet and the Role of Trump Counsel

  1. “There is no reason why Mueller should accept his claim that Trump did not approve these words or that the admission did not reflect Trump’s knowledge at the time of the Flynn firing in February.”

    No offense to Professor Turley, but he implies an amount of competence that does not exist. If there’s a problem with Turley, it is that he doesn’t always appreciate that other people are not as competent as he is.

    The fact that Trump would read the tweet and understand it, and “approve of these words” isn’t clear at all. Our fine Members of Congress sign letters they don’t read. To claim they possessed a certain state of mind when talking to someone else about an issue in those letters is to give them far too much credit.

  2. If Turley posts about “the frivolous assertion of lawyer-client privilege” by Trump Jr., we can
    expect a refrain of “what about…ism” from blog commenters. The busy fans of the denture-challenged Trump will go into a time machine 4 decades past and concoct some fantasy involving the Clintons.

    • Hiya Linda.

      So, “what about” 😀 the reason for Muleear’s investigation in the 1st place, collusion with the Russians? What??? NO evidence?? I am so shocked…So, ‘collusion’ is gone, now it’s obstruction of justice eh? No evidence for the former & I doubt the fascist loving enemies of Mr. T & our Constitutional Republic will find any thing on the latter either.

      Since when cannot a sitting POTUS fire any subordinate appointee, like Comey? The FBI Director is a POTUS appointed office is it not? If so, why all the fuss about firing Comey? Shoulda been done day one anyway.

      “1. Removal Power Generally
      The President has unfettered, exclusive power to remove his appointees without approval from the legislature. This includes both high-ranking officials who act as his “alter ego” and executive officers engaged in other normal duties. Such absolute removal power is a necessary outgrowth of Article II’s grant to the President of general administrative control of those who execute the law.”

      Quote from

      https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/constitutional-law/outline-constitutional-law-law/separation-of-powers-outline-constitutional-law-law/executive-powers-appointment-removal-and-pardon/

      Shucks gal, HRC got beat. Mr. T won. Get over your ‘we lost the election’ angst & let’s move the US forward. Oh. you seem to like what Cloward & Piven wrote in Strategy & Alinsky’s Rules For Radicals much better. Shame that. Freedom & liberty is not at all served by the followers of the fascist movement.

      SamFox

      • “followers of the fascist movement”… and, there it is, the backup argumentation technique to “what about…ism”. Fans of Fox, Hannity, Levine and Limbaugh volley back to the left, whatever criticism is directed at the right wing without even taking the initiative to alter it.

        • Linda, anything you say. I can take you think that Hildabeast is being ‘right winged conspiracied’ then?

          Musta took some real wheeling & dealing to get her to lie about being shot at after getting off the plane. Was a real achievement to get her to lie directly to the families of those she left under protected in Benghazi. How’d they pull that one off? Yeah, it was right wing conspirators who got her to rig the primary against Sanders. Sure it was. So, how did the right wing get her to destroy evidence on her computers? Hammers & BleachBit anyone?

          Yeah, followers of the fascist movement. Who uses black & brown shirt tactics from the time of Mussolini, & Hitler ? Fascist promoting antifa. Who supports the masked thugs as they attack & stifle free speech? The left. Who funds antifa & much of the left? Soros. Know much about that ‘man’?

          Besides all that, if that tweet is the big pile of evidence against Mr. T, they got nothing. If the Russians wanted any one in office, they woulda been after Hillary. She & Billy goat are easy to pay off for favors & the Russians could control her 7 days a week. All they would need to do is wave a stack of money in her face.

          It’s been what, 14 months & this tweet is all they have? If there was any real evidence against Mr. T it would have been leaked & shouted from the mountain tops as soon as it was found. Naw! The real conspiracy is from international bankers & their NWO, the Dimms, the deep state & RICNO-CINO Repub turncoats.

          You love the USA? Not those from both ‘parties’ screwing up the government & Constitution from the inside, but the founding documents & what the USA is supposed to be? The original intent of how govt is supposed to operate, or do you think that we should be torn down & rebuilt as an all controlled state run by big government? Those who are taking US down, you support that?

          Before you get all fired up & holler ‘conspiracy theories’, check out Strategy, by Cloward & Piven. And Rules For Radicals by Saul Alinsky. Also figure out who owns the ‘Federal’ Reserve & how it came to be the central bank in the USA. It was Dimms by the way. Ever read The Creature From Jekyll Island? Ever hear of Agenda 21? The North American Union? I suppose it was conservatives who conned HRC into Uranium One & got the Russians to pay her off via the foundation.

          Just askin & sayin…

          SamFox

      • Sam Fox,..
        – The strongest evidence of ” Russian collusion” I’ve seen at this point involves the DNC/ Elias/ Podesta/ Fusion GPS/ Russian Dossier,Christopher Steele, etc.
        I don’t know what Mueller will ultimately conclude re Trump campaign/ Russian collusion.
        I’m curious to see if he “puts it all out there”, or if he ends up selectively targeting only one campaign’s “collusion”.

    • Linda, here is another “what about…ism” for ya.

      Charles Krauthammer, Oct 11 2017
      An article from the New York Post:

      I do not understand how living in a country with its democracy established over 200 years ago, and now, for the first time in history, suddenly we have one of our former presidents set up a group called “Organizing for Action” (OFA).

      OFA is 30,000+ strong and working to disrupt everything that our current president’s administration is trying to do. This organization goes against our Democracy, and it is an operation that will destroy our way of governing. It goes against our Constitution, our laws, and the processes established over 200 years ago. If it is allowed to proceed then we will be living in chaos very much like third world countries are run. What good is it to have an established government if it is not going to be respected and allowed to follow our laws?

      If you had an army some 30,000 strong and a court system stacked over the decades with judges who would allow you to break the laws, how much damage could you do to a country? We are about to find out in America!

      Our ex-president said he was going to stay involved through community organizing and speak out on the issues and that appears to be one post-administration promise he intends to keep. He has moved many of his administration’s top dogs over to Organizing for Action.

      OFA is behind the strategic and tactical implementation of the resistance to the Trump Administration that we are seeing across America, and politically active courts are providing the leverage for this revolution.

      OFA is dedicated to organizing communities for “progressive” change.. Its issues are gun control, socialist healthcare, abortion, sexual equality, climate change, and of course, immigration reform.

      OFA members were propped up by the ex-president’s message from the shadows: “Organizing is the building block of everything great we have accomplished Organizers around the country are fighting for change in their communities and OFA is one of the groups on the front lines. Commit to this work in 2017 and beyond.”

      OFA’s website says it obtained its “digital” assets from the ex-president’s re-election effort and that he inspired the movement. In short, it is the shadow government organization aimed at resisting and tearing down the Constitutional Republic we know as AMERICA.

      Paul Sperry, writing for the New York Post, says, “The OFA will fight President Donald Trump at every turn of his presidency and the ex-president will command them from a bunker less than two miles from the White House.” Sperry writes that, “The ex-president is setting up a shadow government to sabotage the Trump administration through a network of non-profits led by OFA, which is growing its war chest (more than $40 million) and has some 250 offices nationwide.

      The OFA IRS filings, according to Sperry, indicate that the OFA has 32,525 (and growing) volunteers nationwide. The ex-president and his ‘wife’ will oversee the operation from their home/office in Washington DC.

      Think about how this works. For example: Trump issues an immigration executive order; the OFA signals for protests and statements from pro-immigrant groups; the ACLU lawyers file lawsuits in jurisdictions
      where activist judges obstruct the laws; volunteers are called to protest at airports and Congressional town hall meetings; the leftist media springs to action in support of these activities; the twitter sphere lights up with social media; and violence follows. All of this happens from the ex-president’s signal that he is heartened by the protests.

      If Barack Obama did not do enough to destroy this country in the 8 years he was in office, it appears his future plans are to destroy the foundation on which this country has operated on for the last 241 years.

      If this does not scare you, then we are in worse trouble than you know. [End of article.]

      SamFox

      • Sam Fox,
        How embarrassing for you and commenter, Oily, to find the same falsely attributed writing and to reference it here at this blog.
        The words came from one of those sites dominated by God-fearing folks.

  3. AG Jeff Sessions must appoint Stephen Bannon as Special Prosecutor to investigate conspiracy and “collusion” by the FBI, Mueller, Rosenstein, Yates, Hillary, Obama, Rice, Power, Farkas, et al. to contrive evidence, falsely incriminate a duly elected President, pursue false charges, subvert the U.S. Constitution, overturn a free and fair election and conduct a coup d’etat in America.

      • The same Bannon who ranted against Romney and sons for having avoided the military while, apparently
        Trump deserves praise for the bone spurs that got him out of service and his sons get a pass because they use guns against unsuspecting elephants instead of enemies of the U.S.
        Yes, Bannon is an exemplar of a fair man. (sarcasm)

    • George, not a bad idea. Bannon as SP would blow the leftie proggies through the roof! You think they are insane now…appoint Bannon & watch ’em really fly off the rails & soot through the roof.

      SamFox

      • The hypothetical appointment of Bannon to investigate the “swamp” is merely as preposterous as the appointment of Mueller to investigate phantom “Russia Collusion” by the man who beat Hillary.

          • George/Sam Fox;…
            – Bannon has a master’s degree from Georgetown and an MBA from Harvard.
            If he started law school now, he could probably pass the bar and be good to go by 2020 or 2021.
            From that starting point, he might ( as special prosecutor) wrap up an investigation before the other ( current) ongoing investigations are completed.😃
            So Bannon as special council or special prosecutor is within the range of possibilty.

          • George/Sam Fox;…
            – Bannon has a master’s degree from Georgetown and an MBA from Harvard.
            If he started law school now, he could probably pass the bar and be good to go by 2020 or 2021.
            From that starting point, he might ( as special prosecutor) wrap up an investigation before the other ( current) ongoing investigations are completed.😃
            So Bannon as special council or special prosecutor is within the range of possibilty.

          • Sam Fox;…
            He might yet ( have something).
            – Bannon has a master’s degree from Georgetown and an MBA from Harvard.
            If he started law school now, he could probably pass the bar and be good to go by 2020 or 2021.
            From that starting point, he might ( as special prosecutor) wrap up an investigation before the other ( current) ongoing investigations are completed.😃
            So Bannon as special council or special prosecutor is within the range of possibilty.

            • Sorry for the duplication; WordMess has been faking me out by not posting a comment…..it seems to disappear…..then finding and posting it after I’ve duplicated it.

    • Like most goggle-eyed, unaccomplished trump tea-baggers, you fail to recognize education, qualifications, training, competence and ability. Your wackjob bannon could not be appointed as a prosecutor of anything more consequential than his own bowel movement, because: 1) he doesn’t have a law degree; and 2) he’s not a lawyer. Other than that, he’s as qualified as any of the other breathlessly incompetent slack-jaws that this dumpster-fire administration has employed at one time or another.

      This is to “I’d let my cousin Merle take out my spleen” georgie

  4. The FBI conducting a coup d’etat?

    Peter Strzok was an “agent” for whom?

    “Trey Gowdy pointed out the various problematic things that Agent Peter Strzok had done while overseeing the Clinton and Trump-Russia investigations. Gowdy blasted Strozk’s decision to change the wording of Clinton’s behavior with her private email server from “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless.” “It’s really difficult to say, ‘we’re not gonna prosecute you’ when we use the precise words, so he changed it to extremely careless,” he explained. “There is no difference–the only difference is they didn’t want to use the wording in the statute.” Then Gowdy trashed the idea that Strzok would be responsible for interviewing key witnesses in the Clinton probe. “If he had pro-Clinton or anti-Trump bias, what the hell was he doing interviewing Hillary Clinton?”

    I had no idea that the FBI was a subset of the democrat party.

  5. And the conspiracy to conduct a coup d’etat in America begins to unravel.
    __________________________________________________________

    “Bruce G. Ohr was removed from his position as associate deputy attorney general on Wednesday. Ohr, who worked in close proximity to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, had contacts last year with dossier author Christopher Steele as well as with Glenn Simpson, the co-founder of Fusion GPS.

    “Ohr met Steele at some point during the presidential campaign. He met Simpson around Thanksgiving 2016. During that coffee meeting, Simpson and Ohr reportedly discussed the dossier, the Trump investigation and Simpson’s frustration with Trump’s electoral victory.”

    • Is the coup d’etat being conducted primarily by the FBI?

      FBI Director Wray refuses inquiries by Congress.

      “During a tense line of questioning in a House Judiciary Committee hearing, Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan pressed Wray to release the FBI’s application for a secret surveillance court warrant taken out last year on a former Trump campaign adviser.”
      _

      “U.S. House Republicans are drafting a contempt of Congress resolution against Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray, claiming stonewalling in producing material related to the Russia-Trump probes and other matters.”

      – DC
      ____________________________________

      “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

      – Edmund Burke
      _____________

      Will “good men” in America step up, Professor Turley?

  6. Aw, come on now. Who really believes that Dowd wrote that tweet? Who is the virtual master of stupid and ill-conceived tweets? Who never pays attention to details, and doesn’t seem to really understand what’s going on? Dowd fell on his sword. We all know it, and it’s too bad. That’s what happens when you get in bed with a dog: you get fleas.

    • Who believed that Trump was a good business man? Who believes that the women are lying? Who believed that Trump would cut taxes for the middle class? They were conned and cannot or accept that they were conned.

    • Pat: close your eyes, click your heels together 3 times and repeat: “there’s no evidence of collusion…there’s no evidence of collusion,….there’s no evidence of collusion.” Worked for Dorothy, but she had Glinda to wave her wand over her head. Maybe you can get someone to dress up like Glinda and wave a wand over your head, too. Oh, and you should be wearing ruby slippers and have a little dog named Toto with you.

        • mespo72, true dat. Hey, Natacha, if there is so much proof against Mr. T as you tacitly intimate, WHERE IS IT????

          You sound like some one clicked their heels all over your noggin while wearing logging boots.

          If not, the show us the evidence!!! Oh. Evidence has not been fabricated it yet. OK. That makes sense. IF there were any evidence, as I said before, it would have been leaked as soon as it was found & the whole world would have heard about it by now. At least 10 million times a day.

          SamFox

    • Pat C.,,
      Do NOT follow Natacha’s advice to ward off charges of illegal collusion by the Trump campaign.
      She gave you a poor ritual, incapable of countering the “Double, double, toil and trouble” ritual she and two friends stirred up to “spell” multiple criminal convictions related to illegal collusion.
      Stronger counter-measure are needed.

  7. Is justice the motivation in this investigation?

    An investigator involved in special counsel Robert Mueller’s team investigating President Trump served as a personal attorney for Obama administration officials, represented the Clinton Foundation, and even donated thousands of dollars to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

    http://thefederalist.com/2017/12/06/mueller-investigator-represented-ben-rhodes-clinton-foundation/?utm_source=The+Federalist+List&utm_campaign=a605be0f9d-RSS_The_Federalist_Daily_Updates_w_Transom&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-a605be0f9d-79248369

    • Olly, of course justice is nowhere in sight. Otherwise it would be HRC under investigation. I think she & a host of others enemies of the state will be though. Remember, it’s only year one so far.

      SamFox

  8. Writing under the name of your client (without his sign-off on the statement) raises a novel but no less troubling concern, particularly when you are attacking a potential witness against your client.

    It’s good to know that JT reads and approves all the posts made by his ghost writers.

  9. )

    When it walks like a liar, talks like a liar, lies regardless of the issue, lies even when it is not necessary, perhaps it is a pathological liar. Trump has mastered the art of creating the chaos and untruths so that each new untruth and bit of buffoonery is not contrasted, it becomes the new norm. This way the focus is off of the facts: 70% of tax cuts go to those who don’t need them and will do nothing to help the economy-from time immemorial it has been the obvious fact that the economy is driven by the most people consuming. The stock market is but a reflection of profits taken at the top-not quality of life for the majority. 8 years ago the US economy was in tatters, unemployment at 8%, real estate in the sewer, etc-the turn around has been going on for the last six to seven years because of the stability brought by Obama yet the dupes actually believe that Trump did it all by himself. It is amazing how well this routine of Trump’s works. If you have enough dupes you can say anything. And, he does.

  10. Does anybody really think, Dowd used The Orange One’s Twitter.?

    The Orange One, put his foot in his mouth again….and Dowd took the fall.

    They are all, playing the U.S. for idiots……they do not think the country can think for itself. That’s the reason

    the Orange One, wants to discredit the News… he wants it to come from HIM…….

    Is this man sick, or what.?

  11. Benson reaches a typical Benson conclusion fairy tails based on mystical other world wishful thinking.Does that make Benson a liar himself…No just someone who proves again and again anything he says cannot be trusted.

    Squeaky would have made hash of your trash.

    Paul as usual cuts to the core and makes the whole string of threads the stuff of fools

  12. Trump will slime past this as he does everything else.

    Squirrel!

    And I now declare that London belongs to Brazil. It is done. Embassy staff shall prepare to move.

  13. If Yates told McGahn in January of 2017 that Flynn lied to the FBI, then surely Comey told Yates that Flynn lied to the FBI before Yates told McGahn in January of 2017 that Flynn lied to the FBI. (Duh!) So Comey knew exactly what Trump was asking Comey to overlook.(Duh!) But did Trump know exactly what Trump was asking Comey to overlook? What did McGahn tell Trump? Only that Flynn had lied to the FBI [about something]? Or that Flynn had lied to the FBI about prior communications with The Russians–the same lie Flynn told to Vice President Pence–thereby prompting Trump to fire Flynn the day before Trump asked Comey to let Flynn go?

    If Dowd doesn’t know exactly what McGahn told Trump, then Dowd might have drafted Trump’s tweet. If Dowd knows exactly what McGahn told Trump, then Dowd did not draft Trump’s tweet.

    • You jump from one concustion of your own to another but add not proof and end up with a series of false premises to serve a conclusion that has no basis in fact.

      All tthose ‘if’s and ‘possibles’ don’t add up to squat and for sure not the assertive state ‘then comey knew this and did that treating it as a fact. then end up with two if’s and a final conclusion ignoring any other possibilities including the obvious. Noting you stated is factual and neither is the conclusion.

      • Trump’s tweet–not mine. Or Dowd’s draft of Trump’s tweet–still not mine. Flynn pled guilty to lying to the FBI.That’s a fact, Closed Parentheses. Trump fired Flynn for lying to Pence. That’s a fact, Closed Parentheses.Trump now says that he had to fire Flynn because Flynn lied to Pence and lied to the FBI. That’s a fact, Closed Parentheses.

        You’re now arguing, Closed Parentheses, that those facts do not entail that Comey knew that Flynn lied to the FBI. That’s stupid beyond belief (Duh!). And that’s a fact, too. It’s time to start taking your medication again, Michael Aarethun. (That last part is, in fact, conjecture.)

    • and now we add to IF this and IF that the dreaded “Then surely:” No wonder we refer to the left as the Stupid Party. But I reckon even stupid people need representation but I’m not sure if the political arena is where to get it. The world of Psychiatry seems more appropos.

      • Benson reaches a typical Benson conclusion fairy tails based on mystical other world wishful thinking.Does that make Benson a liar himself…No just someone who proves again and again anything he says cannot be trusted.

        Squeaky would have made hash of your trash.

        • There is exactly one way in which Dowd might not be lying to cover for Trump’s tweet; if Dowd doesn’t know what McGahn told Trump about Flynn’s lie to the FBI. Conversely, if Dowd knows exactly what McGahn told Trump about Flynn’s lie to the FBI, then Dowd did not draft Trump’s tweet. Of course, if McGahn didn’t tell Trump anything at all about Flynn’s lie to the FBI, then Trump’s tweet is just-plain demented. In which case, Dowd would be presumably demented for supposedly having drafted Trump’s tweet. That’s not likely.

      • Trump tweeted that he had to fire Flynn not only because he lied to Pence but also because Flynn lied to the FBI. If that’s a spurious flight of fancy, then it is Trump’s spurious flight of fancy–not Dowd’s nor anyone else’s.

    • the answer to Why is “You shouldn” nor should you try to turn “IF” into anything more than what it is. “Unsupported”

      • Every time you put one foot in front of the other foot while walking along, you are turning the “unsupported if” into the wishful thought for ground beneath your next foot fall. Every once in a great while the ground isn’t there anymore and that’s bad news. But most of the time the good news is that ground is still there to step upon and you continue walking along. IOW, extreme skepticism is no way to think.

      • It’s a question that’s all. For two years we’ve heard nothing about how that twitter account is Donald Trump speaking directly to the American people. One statement comes out which raises questions about obstruction of justice and all of a sudden, he didn’t write it. Serious question, is there a record of another post ever from that twitter account not attributed to Trump?

    • Well, although the Prez probably did do the tweet, as noted Dowd likely fell on his sword to save the president.
      As he has come out publicly and taken responsibility for it, for all legal intents and purposes, he wrote it.

    • enigma, so what? The tweet doesn’t really prove anything. Talk about grasping in desperation at the 1st wisp of a straw that floats by.

      SamFox

      • I don’t suggest the tweet alone proves anything. I ask why we should believe his lawyer sent it? If other people are tweeting for Trump, it’s not exactly him communicating directly with the people like he claims. The more likely scenario is that the lawyer lied to cover for Trump.

  14. The sailing of the Titanic was incautious navigation. It was a series of errors made by a series of people. Mueller has his own problems. He should have recussed himself sometime ago and as the investigation goes on, his involvement just gets deeper and easier for defendants to strike against.

      • And now you branch out into another flight of equally fanciful conjecture all based on what may fairly be called if this and if that then the other which in short term is called BS. And NOTHING more.

        There was a writer who published books about beings from outer space who actually built the pyramids and other such in Peru….This does not reeach that level I suggest you don’t give your day job.

        • Yes, there’s nothing to the Special Counsel Investigation, it’s a big nothingburger, all those being investigated whose finances and statements are being reviewed and have given testimony under oath have nothing to fear. Nothing! All those secret meetings with those Russians that they forgot to disclose or outright denied and the misleading statements made when they were uncovered… nothing. It’s all fake news! La,la,la, la, la, la… I can’t hear you!

            • Tom Nash, you have a great career ahead of you at Fox News. Total sarcasm which admittedly doesn’t translate as well in print but reading my whole reply could leave no other conclusion.
              Fox just had to retract their story saying the yearbook was forged by the way regarding Roy Moore.

              • Enignma,..
                The only jobs in the news industry that interest me are to be found at either the Onion, or Weekly World News.😉
                “The world’s only reliable news source(s).

                • Tom Nash – I want a job writing the front page stories for National Enquirer. They are the paper of record for me. 🙂

      • enigma, don’t bet our house on it. You should really do some research. You lookin very silly ATM.

        You forget that Muleear is a best friend of Comey’s? That ol’ Bob has appointed HRC supporters to his staff? You not notice Muleear is eyeball deep in collusive cover ups & conflicts of interest? Didja know the law says on the basis of conflicts of interest ol’ Bob MUST resign from the investigation? You lefties forget all that or is it a surprise? The name Peter Strzok ring any bells? You didn’t know that Muleear was a HRC supporter?

        Muleear is just now being exposed. All he is is a deep state operative.

        https://conservativepost.com/the-mueller-investigation-is-collapsing-after-scandals-reveal-corruption/

        http://conservativefighters.com/news/robert-muellers-three-outrageous-scandals-revealed/

        SamFox

        • The attacks on Mueller are the last line of defense. You really ought to get your news from better sources although “Hannity” wouldn’t be one of them. The “collapsing” investigation just spent two days grilling Hope Hicks. You think at 29, she’s willing to go to jail to keep Trump’s secrets?

          This, of course, is Mueller the lifelong Republican who they thought was a hero of the Republic after 9-11. I have little doubt that impeachable crimes will be outlined to Congress. I have great doubt that the Republican House and Senate will care. If they can embrace Roy Moore, (who to his credit came out and actually answered when America was last great). What difference will treason make?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s