Trump Counsel Dowd, Again, Under Fire For Controversial Public Statements

donald_trump_president-elect_portrait_croppedI have previously discussed the blunders of the Trump legal team and how they have undermined their client, including missteps by counsel John Dowd.  (here and here and here).  This weekend saw yet another Dowd statement and retraction on a subject of immense importance to his client.  Dowd is quoted as calling for the termination of the Mueller investigation in the name of President Trump. After an outcry and reported contradiction from the White House, Dowd insisted that he was speaking just for himself.

 

Dowd previously got into hot water when he suggested that Trump knew that former national security adviser Michael Flynn lied to the FBI long before his termination.  He also revealed confidential information in a loud conversation in a restaurant while sitting near a New York Times reporter.

In his latest blunder, Dowd not only called for the termination of the Mueller investigation but reportedly did so on behalf of President Trump to The Daily Beast:

“I pray that Acting Attorney General Rosenstein will follow the brilliant and courageous example of the F.B.I. Office of Professional Responsibility and Attorney General Jeff Sessions and bring an end to alleged Russia collusion investigation manufactured by McCabe’s boss James Comey based upon a fraudulent and corrupt dossier.”

It is a stupid public statement since it will not happen and just makes your client look, again, terrified of what the investigation might uncover.

After the White House reportedly said Dowd was not authorized to make the statement, he insisted that he was only speaking in his personal capacity. There are two obvious problems with that argument. First, that is not what he reportedly told the reporter in the original statement.  Second, he represents the President of the United States and does not have the free license to offer personal observations that might undermine his client.

Unless Dowd is covering for his client on this issue, the latest controversy reveals a surprising lack of discipline on a legal team heading into the most precarious stage of this litigation.

113 thoughts on “Trump Counsel Dowd, Again, Under Fire For Controversial Public Statements”

  1. Professor Turley, is it kosher to alter 302’s?
    __________________________________

    “Huge scoop. Like my other big stories (Susan Rice, security clearances, Conyers) will take media a long time to confirm.

    You know how Peter Strzok’s system didn’t back up.

    You know why?

    McCabe altered his 302 of the Flynn interview, and deleted all history of revisions.”

    – Mike Cernovich

  2. NATIONAL REVIEW

    “Strzok and Page Plotted Covert Meeting with Presiding Judge in Michael Flynn Case”
    _____

    Professor Turley, are you acquainted with Judge Contreras?

    Agent Strzok refers to him as “Rudi” when considering invitations to cocktail parties.

  3. Blog readers will want to remember to attend the $2,700 meet and greet today to talk with Virginia’s Rep. Garrett (funded by the Kochtopus) and, with Rep. Rohrbacher (Congress’ most famous Russophile) at the home of Erik Prince (Blackwater).
    Opportunities abound. Prince may elaborate on randomly, running into Putin-linked Russians on an island in the middle of the ocean (Seychelles). Guests can decide if Prince is as smart as his sister, Betsy DeVos (Trump’s Cabinet Secretary of Ed. was interviewed last week on 60 Minutes -excruciating). Maybe Prince’s 2nd wife will be there and can be asked about pregnant girlfriends attending the funerals of the wives of their “Christian” menfriends. Maybe the Mercers will be there and questions can be asked about their company, Cambridge Analytica, which has been in the news this week for links to a Russian oil company. BTW- nods of agreement will confirm that there’s no problem with money in American politics. And, laughter will ring out when free speech is touted as the antidote to the dark money, elimination of net neutrality and media ownership by the richest 0.1%.

  4. Trump’s choice of lawyers appear as bad as his choices of Sessions and Tillerson as SOS. Rudy G would have been a much better AG!

    1. Evidently, Trump tried to find better lawyers when this all started last year and was turned down multiple times by the best ones. What sane, high powered, excellent DC lawyer would want to firebomb his law practice by associating with Trump?? So he ends up with two guys who go to a DC restaurant right next to the NYT’s DC bureau, sit outside, and talk about their legal strategy in public.

      Trump: “I hire the best people.”

      Deep Throat: The truth is these were not very bright guys and things got out of hand.

    2. Trump’s choice of DeVos wasn’t inspired, either. The SNL skit last night was too close for comfort. Is Betsy still getting a $1 mil. a month security detail at taxpayer expense? I still laugh every time I think about a publicity photo of DeVos, that her team distributed. The caption was something about her working. On the desk were carpet samples that she was perusing.

  5. Trump Attorney John Dowd, the subject of Professor Turley’s piece, was floating a ‘trial balloon’ with his suggestion that Mueller should be fired. And one can be quite certain that Dowd is floating this trial balloon at Trump’s behest. The trial balloon is a signal to right-wing media to pursue the “Fire Mueller” call.

    Trump is getting desperate because Mueller is now investigating the Trump Organization which has extensive ties to Russian investors. Trump know those investors are cronies of Putin. No one gets to be in billionaire in Russia without Putin’s sponsorship.

    1. How would think it appropriate to post videos of Alex Jones? In recent divorce proceedings, Jones admitted that he’s just an ‘entertainer’. His ex-wife, however, portrayed Jones as totally paranoid and obsessed with conspiracies. In any event, the fact that you reference Jones as a ‘source’ gives us into your level of intellect.

      1. Peter Hill:

        Well you’ve got that ad hominem thinky down cold and you have no peer in the “insult-for-argument -category-for- two-hundred-Alex.”

        Does save a lot of time putting forth rational rebuttal. Wanna shoot for post hoc ergo propter hoc next?

        1. How can ad hominem attacks even apply to Alex Jones..?? No one in the mainstream of American thought looks to Jones for wisdom. Jones’ stock in trade are over-the-top conspiracies tailored for the intellectually vacuous. And by posting these videos, Oky1 has revealed his, or her, membership to that group.

          1. Because the rules of logic and argumentation apply to all assertions. No one in the main stream looked to Gen Jimmy Doolittle either until it did. Jones is no Doolittle but he’s worthy of analysis and rebuttal. And if he’s so crazy you ought to be able to vanquish him in a sentence or two.

            1. The rules of logic forbid the appeal to an inappropriate authority. Alex Jones is an inappropriate authority on the law. That can be easily demonstrated by the title on the video: Trump Preparing To Indict Clinton . . .

              P. S. Keep up the good work, Peter Hill.

      2. Bingo. In reality though, the fact that many of the wackjobs might actually believe this hokum does make one feel pity for their pathetic little lives.

        this is to “direct hit amidship” peter

        1. As for the “respond with logic” assertion to this buffoon, it’s also a waste of time to engage flat-earthers. This wackjob with a radio show is no different at all. The fact that the day glo bozo refers to this Klown Kar reject informs one of yet another shortcoming of the elected con man.

  6. Turley is and always has been, the only decent, objective and fair legal minded man, in the entire U.S.
    He has maintained his objectivity, flawlessly. I, first began listening to him in the early Clinton years.
    God bless and preserve him. He is one of a few of America’s great minds. His Mother must be constantly
    beaming with pride, at the wisdom his Creator has endowed him with.
    Be never strays, or wavers.

    1. Turley wrote that money is not the problem in politics (Citizens United opinion). Yet, the donor class thinks it’s the solution. (The Koch’s will spend $400,000,000 on the midterm elections and, the Mercers’ financed Bannon and Breitbart.)
      If Turley is objective, why is he is widely described as a conservative?
      Would you, Guinness, cite any occasion in which Turley supported labor’s view’s e.g. their right to free speech? Turley’s posts frequently align with the view of the richest 0.1% Republicans. Labor’s share of national income is at the lowest point in recorded U.S. history.

    2. Guiness,
      You have an opportunity to self-reflect about why you think opinions that agree with yours, and only those, are objective. To assist you, the following likely is true, tribalism reinforces your prejudices, evidence that undermines your prejudices makes you uncomfortable…
      Examples of empirically proven facts regardless of the blather on Fox and Hannity (a) Trickle down theory doesn’t work. (b) Minorities and women are not lesser. (c) Labor is receiving the lowest share of national income in recorded U.S. history (d) Gerrymandering destroys the legitimacy of voting (e) The U.S. has become an oligarchy…..

    1. The subject of an investigation does not get to decide what the truth is anymore than the subject of an investigation gets to decide when the investigation ends. Trump has been publicly proclaiming his innocence from the get go, while either threatening to fire, or actually firing, the investigators. Should we take Trump’s word for his own innocence and stop turning over stones to see what slithers out?

      1. Diane – Mueller seems to be going further and further afield to get a conviction. He is a prosecutor in search of a crime.

        1. The Trump Organization may offer numerous clues of dealings with Russian billionaires. After all, Donald Junior is on tape reporting that Russian investors were boosting the company’s fortunes.

          1. Peter Hill – wasn’t it Obama’s idea to have a global economy? What is wrong with dealing with Russian banks? Apple is in league with the Chinese, who is investigating them?

            1. If all the deals are legal and financially astute, Trump should have nothing to worry about. But he’s squealing like a pig! Even if you’re guilty don’t howl with indignation. The stealthiest criminals know to keep cool when the heat is on.

        2. PCS, every aspect of every citizen’s life must be fully investigated until every crime and every potential crime is discovered if America is ever to achieve true equal justice.

          If America has a need to know about ONE citizen’s crimes and potential crimes, America has a need to know about ALL citizen’s crimes and potential crimes.

          America may well be riddled with criminals.

          Law and order is imperative.

          right?

          We should put bots on the case(s).

  7. What blunders? Telling the truth is now a “blunder?” The fact is that leftists like Jon Turley and carbon copies in the media will always find some way to attack Trump no matter what he does or doesn’t do. Trump and his administration can do no right, as far as they are concerned.

    The bottom line is that after spending tens upon tens of millions of dollars and countless man-hours of investigative work, Professor Mueller and his band of leftist fabricators have been unable to make ANY hay out of anything to remotely connect Donald Trump and his campaign in any way shape or form to an purported “Russian Conspiracy” to get him elected.

    And, mind you, MuellerCo IS performing a complete, comprehensive and thorough investigation in which nothing is left unearthed–something that has never before been done by the government before. For example, if the government did 1/100th of the effort being put forth by MuellerCo into, say, investigating terrorist suspects, there would have been no Boston Marathon bombings, no Orlando mass murders, and no Parkland mass murders. All of the perpetrators in those crimes were well known to the government and had been actively investigated, but the investigations were ordered to be stopped because the FBI, Mueller’s alma mater, couldn’t care less about protecting American lives. Had investigators followed through with the same diligence, tenacity, and dedication that they’ve demonstrated into the bogus “Russian Conspiracy” investigation, none of those murders would have happened because all of the perpetrators would have been stopped before they committed their crimes.

    But that does not stop the torrent of Nothingburgers from continuing unabated.

    Take the New York Times, for example. Even they had to admit that the latest effort of MuellerCo to try to tie Trump to Putin have turned up absolutely nothing–because there IS nothing,

    Here is what the Times had to say:
    ——————————-
    Perhaps the closest Mr. Trump came to launching a real estate project in Russia was during the presidential campaign, when he signed a letter of intent in late 2015 for a Trump hotel to be built in Moscow. Ultimately, the deal never materialized.

    In email exchanges with Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael D. Cohen, Felix Sater, a Russian émigré who had previously helped develop Trump SoHo in New York, talked about securing financing for the Moscow project from VTB, a major state-owned Russian bank under American sanctions. He also mused about how the deal, if supported by Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, would “fix relations between the countries by showing everyone that commerce & business are much better and more practical than politics.”

    “I will get Putin on this program and we will get Donald elected,” Mr. Sater wrote in one of the emails.
    Mr. Trump signed the letter of intent with Andrey Rozov, a developer of retail and residential projects in the Moscow region. If the deal went through, Mr. Trump would receive a $4 million upfront fee in exchange for licensing his name, and his company would manage the completed hotel.

    By January 2016, the project seemed to have stalled. At one point, without success, Mr. Cohen emailed an aide to Mr. Putin seeking help jump-starting it. There is no evidence the Kremlin provided any assistance for the project.

    The Trump Organization has said that it received no government approvals or financing and that the effort was abandoned in early 2016.
    ——————————-

    Get it? No connection. Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Zero. In fact, by comparison, a Nothingburger would be downright nutritious.

    But that will not stop the enormous waste of MuellerCo. What is really needed is for a SECOND independent counsel to be conducted, that will investigate MuellerCo, the FBI, AND the DOJ itself. But that’s unlikely to happen because if a real such investigation into the Deep State corruption were to ever be conducted, they’d have to build entirely new jails to hold the number of operatives involved.

    1. Ralph, the business deals are a cover story. The business deals bring Trump and various Russians into face-to-face contact with one another where they can discuss all manner and type of “dealings” other than the cover-story “business,” which, of course, conveniently never materializes. That Trump keeps on publically announcing his innocence remains insufficient warrant to end an investigation that is still positively brimming-over with probable cause to continue. And since when did a special counsel have to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in order to investigate a POTUS???

      Turley’s right. Calling for an end to the special counsel’s investigation raises even more suspicion that Trump has something to hide.

    2. Professor Turley is now a ‘leftist’..?? The same Professor Turley who argued in court on behalf of forces aligned against Obamacare..?? Your contentions that Turley is a ‘leftist’ illustrates how Trump supporters must keep attacking anyone who criticizes Trump. It’s a never-ending purge that completely ignores past political affiliations.

  8. The issue of blunders is somewhat overshadowed by the number of Americans who don’t care. Blunders server a purpose for the ilk of the turnip. They detract from the damage being done. They detract from the more serious issues. They reduce the subject matter to chaos and confusion. The turnip couldn’t ask for more. No one is talking about the budget, the environment, the oligarchy, nothing but sex, legal mumbo jumbo, and Melania’s outfits.

      1. T rump promised them beautiful healthcare. Guess they figured out that T rumpcare ended up being s pile of dung and their premiums are going up as fast as da kleptocrats income is rising.

  9. There was little if any “collusion”. What is “collusion” anyway? I pull up to a stop light and look over at the guy on the right. I nod and he goes on through the green light like he ought to. Did we “collude”? No.
    I am at a bar in Florida and I ask if there are any alligators in the water in the creek out to the rear of the bar. The bar tender says yes there are. Is he colluding with the alligators?
    The Trump and Russian thing is all BS. BS in America is Bum itShayheads. I use pig latin so as to stick within the guidelines.
    Muller is a dork. Mule Er is a dork. Miller is a beer. All three proiounciations mean different things. Different strokes for different folks.

  10. Squeeky – What is your theory about the secret, undisclosed meetings with Russians that they later lied about by; Donald Trump Jr, Paul Manafort, Jared Kushner, Michael Flynn, Jeff Sessions, George Papadopolous, Michael Cohen, Erik Prince, and Carter Page. Forgive me for anyone I left out.

        1. So its a crime to meet with Russians? Think not. Unless someone lies about it to authorities, it is a joke of an investigation.

          1. You know Flynn, Gates, and Papadoupolous have already pled guilty to lying to the authorities about it. The public statements of all the others have been proven to be lies and the President dictated a public statement which was a lie about one of his son’s meetings.

              1. Excerpted from the article linked above:

                But in a September 2015 interview on “The Hugh Hewitt Show,” he had made the Miss Universe pageant seem far more important.

                “I called it my weekend in Moscow,” Mr. Trump said. “I was with the top-level people, both oligarchs and generals, and top-of-the-government people. I can’t go further than that, but I will tell you that I met the top people, and the relationship was extraordinary.”

            1. As I wrote, it’s a crime to lie to authorities, but it’s not a crime to lie in public statements. The Mueller investigation has been in search of crimes since its beginnings. That’s not what a Special Counsel is appointed for according to the law.

              And that’s why besides Pres. Trump, and many folks call Mr. Mueller’s investigation a witch hunt.

              The ONLY evidence of a crime during the 2016 election was the hacking of Mr. Podesta’s emails. And since there wasn’t a Special Counsel hired to investigate the hacking of our own government departments or the breaches of Target, Sony and countless others, there was certainly no need for Mr. Rosenstein to appoint a Special Counsel because someone lost an election.

              1. The need for the Special Counsel arose because the Attorney General had to recuse himself because not only was he a possible witness but he also lied to Congress about his contacts with Russians (hint… a crime).

                1. Special Counsels are SUPPOSED to be appointed when a crime has been found to have been committed. Losing an election isn’t a crime. What did we know from the election? The only ‘crime’ that we were informed about and could have had an effect, was the hacking of the Podesta emails. That’s all there was. Then we heard rumblings about Russian interference and then Congress had 3 committees start their own investigations.

                  That’s how its SUPPOSED to work. If they find evidence of a crime, then a Special Counsel can then be appointed.

                  And in this case, Mr. Rosenstein did a monumentally poor job of choosing. Mr. Mueller had/has very obvious conflicts of interest since he has interviewed Mr. Comey and Mr. McCabe.

                  With an investigation of this magnitude, every possible attempt to be as neutral as possible was necessary. And not only did Mr. Mueller not have the ethics to not accept the position, he surrounded himself with practically all DC people.

                  And that’s why the whole investigation is a sham. Trump defenders will never accept any legitimate charges due to the misplayed hand of Mr. Rosenstein.

                  1. “In the United States, a special prosecutor (or special counsel or independent counsel or independent prosecutor) is a lawyer appointed to investigate, and potentially prosecute, a particular case of suspected wrongdoing for which a conflict of interest exists for the usual prosecuting authority.”

                    It goes without saying that some if not most of the Trump defenders will “never accept any legitimate charges.” Good of you to acknowledge it.
                    He “surrounded himself with practically all DC people.” If you mean Washington, D.C. people? Many Federal prosecutors do have that type of experience and have worked in both Republican and Democrat administrations as die Republican appointed Mueller. If you are referring to Democrat people, that all seems to hinge on reports that several of them at one time in their life contributed to Democrat candidates as did say… Trump. We (you) don’t know if they also contributed to Republicans because that isn’t the narrative.

                    1. So you just proved my point. What was the ‘suspected wrongdoing’? For all the conspiracies you throw out there due to all these meetings, its pretty remarkable that we only learned about Podesta emails. Nothing else that was shown to us could have affected the election.

                      So what was the wrongdoing? There were no reports of tampering. No reports of people not being able to vote. No reports of people being denied access to vote.

                      Zip, zero. That’s why having the Special Counsel was illegitimate. Sorry you can’t accept the facts, but keep researching all the meetings that all the Trump folks attended and were plotting to overthrow the election and maybe you can write something more factual.

                    2. Mike, Mike, Mike, now you want me to prove “suspicion.” Okay, the campaign was suspected of coordinating with Russia to affect the outcome of the election. The suspicion was heightened by all the undisclosed (adds to the suspicion) meetings, which they lied about (further suspicion) and the specificity of the social media targeting which suggested American help (read the current claims about Cambridge Analytical and its usurping Facebook data (adds to the suspicion). The attempts to persuade Russia not to react to the sanctions imposed by the Obama administration for interfering with the election which Trump did actually prepare to get rid of until Congress blocked him and imposed additional sanctions which he didn’t enforce. His continued denial of Russian interference (highly suspicious) and his dubious financial history with Russia which funneled millions to him (very suspicious) which were known before the Special Counsel was appointed.
                      The investigation could have and would have been conducted by the Justice Department except for Sessions lies and conflicts.
                      BTW, there were thousands of complaints about people being unable to vote although I can’t distinguish between any possible Russian involvement and regular Republican voter suppression.

                    3. Mike Peterman, you’re arguing that Mueller has to prove a crime beyond a reasonable doubt before Mueller can investigate suspicious circumstance in which a crime might have been committed. Your argument nullifies the concept of probable cause. There was, and still is, beaucoup probable cause for investigating the Russian information warfare operation in 2016.

          2. Depends on what da Russians are selling you and what you are givin em back.A lot goin on with T rump and Putin and da Russian oligarch mobsters.Money trails exist and T rump is scared.

          3. Mike Peterman asked, “So its a crime to meet with Russians?”

            Mike’s question is deliberately vague. The answer depends upon exactly with which Russians one meets and exactly what topics of conversation are broached during those meetings with whichever Russians. And that is also to say that there is probable cause for investigating meetings between Trump associates and Russians. Moreover, nobody has alleged that the meetings in and of themselves were crimes. The question is whether the meetings were used to further a conspiracy to commit some other act that would be a crime. Therefore, the several facts that the meetings took place, that the meetings were not disclosed and that various Trump associates have lied about the meetings and the topics of conversation discussed in those meetings all bolster the probable cause to continue the special counsel’s investigation.

            1. No, we’re discussing the genesis of the Mueller investigation. It was an illegitimate call for a Special Counsel. The Congressional committees were performing their own investigations. If they had come up with an actual crime, then a Special Counsel could be appointed. That’s how it’s supposed to work.

              1. The Congressional committees have nothing to do with the Justice Department investigation (which had begun before either the Senate or the House. The Justice Department isn’t supposed to wait and see if Congress refers a crime to them. They are the ones that investigate crimes and enforce the law. That’s how it’s supposed to work. The need for a Special Counsel arose because Sessions was both a potential witness and had lied to Congress about his contacts with Russians which is how we got Mueller.

                1. You claim that Sessions has lied to Congress. He says he didn’t. So why do you believe one over the other?
                  There’s no proof who is correct.

                  We now know the FBI started an investigation before the election, but we were unaware at the time. And after 20 months, there still hasn’t been any crime related to the election besides lying to the FBI.

                  1. Among the lies Sessions told was that he “never met with any Russians” which he did on more than one occasion. Spin it all you like, that’s a lie.
                    No offense but you really don’t know what crimes have been found and whether they relate to the election (not that I’m forgiving crimes not associated with the election). Mueller found enough to flip I believe now 4 cooperating witnesses which I suspect was more than just lying to the FBI. The good thing is that we likely will ultimately see, although Republicans have refused to have any more open hearings since the first couple became embarrassing and the Justice Department could still ultimately suppress Mueller’s report.

                    1. According to Sessions, he met with them at a function. Of course you can consider it a secret meeting but again, no way to refute what he said. That is truth, not spin.

                      And again, 4 indictments for crimes with zero relation to the election. Gee, what he was supposed to be investigating.

                      And of course, I can only comment on what’s been presented. However, you know as well as I, if there was anything of merit, it would’ve been leaked. Please don’t tell me that Mueller is running a tight investigation. Another ‘leaking’ was us knowing that subpoenas were issued for the Trump Organization.

                      According to the Repubs, they stopped the House investigation because of all the leaks. And since Mueller is still running his investigation, no harm, no foul.

                      So you can keep your hopes up, but your instead of trying to compile all of your conspiracies about meetings into something nefarious, maybe you should wait for an actual ‘crime’ to be reported.

                    2. You missed the part where Sessions said he never met with any at all. That would be a lie.

                      You just keep believing no crimes were committed, this is all a witch hunt and Trump is a man of integrity that has done no wrong, except for the pornstars, sexual assaults, and harassment which you know about but are willing to overlook.

            2. Don’t know if these folks are paid or the porno pres has blinded em with his orange glow but doesn’t it seem to you that their tactics are becoming weaker by da minute as da facts come out.

    1. All nonsense. Van Jones was right about a year ago when he called the whole thing a nothing burger.

      Now, if you want a really good conspiracy theory, ask yourself what really happened at Roswell back in 1947??? Because that spaceship has finally been reverse engineered, and we have this:

      https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/12/politics/unidentified-aircraft-navy/index.html

      It’s from CNN, sooo you won’t get cooties.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

            1. Excerpted from the NYT article linked above:

              Experts in United States-Russia relations said such an encounter — even on an informal basis at a social event — was a concern because of its length, which suggested a substantive exchange, and because there was no note taker or national security or foreign policy aide present.

              “We’re all going to be wondering what was said, and that’s where it’s unfortunate that there was no U.S. interpreter, because there is no independent American account of what happened,” said Steven Pifer, a former ambassador to Ukraine who also specializes in Russia and nuclear arms control.

              “If I was in the Kremlin, my recommendation to Putin would be, ‘See if you can get this guy alone,’ and that’s what it sounds like he was able to do,” added Mr. Pifer, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington.

          1. Excerpted from the article linked above:

            Trump had eagerly hoped Putin would attend the 2013 Miss Universe pageant that Trump hosted in the Russian capital.

            To Trump’s apparent dismay, an oligarch close to Putin, Dmitry Peskov, told Trump that the president wouldn’t be able to make it, but invited Trump to attend the upcoming Winter Olympics in Sochi and told him that Putin had a gift he wanted to give him.

            After the pageant was over, the daughter of another Russian oligarch, Aras Agalarov, delivered a package for Trump to the Miss Universe office in New York City. The package was apparently the gift Putin had mentioned, and contained a polished black box that contained sealed letter from the Russian president himself. The contents of the letter remain unknown to this day.

            1. From the Wikipedia article on Dmitry Peskov:

              “Dmitry Sergeyevich Peskov (Russian: Дмитрий Серге́евич Песков, IPA: [pʲɪˈskof]; born October 17, 1967) is a Russian diplomat, translator and turkologist. Since 2012, Peskov has been the Press Secretary for the President of Russia, Vladimir Putin.”

              Trump met with Putin’s Press Secretary in 2013. Putin gave Trump a gift in 2013 that included a letter from Putin. Maybe it’s just a thank-you note. Somebody remind me when The Magnitsky Act was enacted. Was it 2013? I can’t remember.

    2. Enigmain, let’s assume for argument’s sake that there what you say is true, that there were “secret, undisclosed meetings with Russians” involving Donald Trump Jr, Paul Manafort, Jared Kushner, Michael Flynn, Jeff Sessions, George Papadopolous, Michael Cohen, Erik Prince, and Carter Page. Let us also further assume for argument’s sake that all of those individuals “lied” and said that they did not meet with the Russians.

      What does all this prove, even assuming your purported “facts” are true?

      Nothing! It provides zero evidence of any collusion between the Trump campaign or administration and the Russian government. So, what’s your point?

      Even with the most overambitious anti-Trump spin on those purported “facts,” the very strongest argument that might validly be made is that those individuals may have merely considered obtaining information from the Russians that might be helpful to their cause. Might happen? Might consider? That’s less than a Nothingburger compared to the far more serious actual criminal offenses committed in the FBI/DOJ/FISA/Clinton/Phony Dossier Conspiracy to falsely invent the phony “Russian Conspiracy” as a pretext to hatch their anti-Trump scheme to begin with.

      1. It’s certainly reasonable cause for an investigation. Apparently, nothing but a video would satisfy you as evidence. The fact you’re questioning those meetings even took place suggest a faulty information flow.

        1. enigmainblackcom

          Trumpsters use one tactic far more often than any other one: ask questions about theoretical possibilities.

          1. Billyboy, leftists seem to be only capable of responding with hypocrisy. I have not asked about theoretical possibilities. I have GRANTED Enigmain’s own theoretical arguments as TRUE. But I’ve asked him to tell me what that PROVES. But thanks for sharing your double standards. If it weren’t for double standards, you’d have no standards at all.

            1. Ralph, all we have to go by is press reports. Most of those press reports have been leaked from the White House for the purpose of making everything appear to be either innocuous or, if possible, innocent. There’s a pretty good chance that Mueller has gathered evidence not yet leaked to the press that could change the current complexion of the seemingly innocent and innocuous explanations for the meetings between Trump associates and Russians that White House has leaked. There is not yet any innocent nor innocuous explanation for initially covering up those meetings nor subsequently lying about the subjects discussed at those meetings. Keep in mind that face-to-face meetings with seemingly innocent and innocuous cover stories can nonetheless be used to further a conspiracy that would be neither innocent nor innocuous. We are no more inclined to take Trump’s word for his innocence that you would be inclined to take HRC’s word for her innocence. You see how it works, Ralph. Don’t you?

              1. P. S. Remember that meeting on the tarmac between Lorretta Lynch and Bill Clinton, Ralph? Take that as a counter example to your complaint about double standards in the burden of proof.

        2. “Mights” and “Mays” are a “reasonable cause for an investigation? Only in your beloved Leftist Police State World. And, sorry to disappoint you, but EVIDENCE is required to prove a crime. And in many areas of law, INTENT is also required. You want to pretend that suppositions, guesswork, and the mere fact that leftists like you hate Trump are sufficient.

          1. I’m confident there is plenty of evidence, particularly of Trump’s financial crimes which are in black and white if one has the records and knows what one is looking for. Guess what? Mueller’s team has the records and knows what they’re looking for. Ask Manafort and Gates. Soon you can ask Kushner and Trump.

          2. Also, “Mights” and “Mays” don’t get you convictions, they are exactly the reason for investigations, to see whether or not there were actual crimes. Trump freaked out again this morning, making him look as guilty as I’m sure he is.

        1. Excerpted from the article linked above:

          “We’ve never worked in Russia,” said Mr. Nix, head of a data consulting firm that advised the Trump campaign on targeting voters.

          But Mr. Nix’s business did have some dealings with Russian interests, according to company documents and interviews.

          Mr. Nix is a director of SCL Group, a British political and defense contractor, and chief executive of its American offshoot, Cambridge Analytica, which advised the Trump campaign. The firms’ employees, who often overlap, had contact in 2014 and 2015 with executives from Lukoil, the Russian oil giant.
          Continue reading the main story

          Lukoil was interested in how data was used to target American voters, according to two former company insiders who said there were at least three meetings with Lukoil executives in London and Turkey. SCL and Lukoil denied that the talks were political in nature, and SCL also said there were no meetings in London.

          The contacts took place as Cambridge Analytica was building a roster of Republican political clients in the United States — and harvesting the Facebook profiles of over 50 million users to develop tools it said could analyze voters’ behavior.

          Cambridge Analytica also included extensive questions about Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, in surveys it was carrying out in American focus groups in 2014. It is not clear what — or which client — prompted the line of questioning, which asked for views on topics ranging from Mr. Putin’s popularity to Russian expansionism.

  11. Maybe the President should fire all of them and hire you Professor T.(* I am not being funny so that no one in the JT community starts getting excited or getting a coronary…you’re one of the best legal minds in the Country…AND a must read for me for my commitments at my Start-up AND on-going commentary/consulting work). Even the President (despite my profound disagreements with him as epitomized by comments I made in response to his latest Twitter Tirade) is entitled to the presumption of innocence…the problem is that, as you noted, is his ill-advised tweets and tirades shows guilt..if he’s got nothing to hide, he should just focus on getting the job done……

    1. ..and you base this on what? You have a “mole” inside the White House that told you this or you are being a parrott for @FoxNews–I guess 16 intelligence agencies are wrong and you’re right–suggest you go beyond @foxnews, @briebart, @inforwars and the rest of the right wing nut jobs and actually look at some facts…but for folks who believe in conspiracy theories, facts don’t matter……

      1. Uh, can you name the 16 agencies for me??? Because this example of “fake news” has been debunked for quite a while. But I know you will not believe me, sooo maybe you should do your own research!

        Anchors away, me buckos!

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

        1. Sorry Squeeks. I know you can defend yourself, but I get too pissed at all the inaccuracies of our fellow posters.

          1. What are you apologizing for??? Give ’em hell! It ain’t like these people are going to listen to me anyway. That clown probably figured that Abby from over at NCIS was the one who found the computer evidence! (Because NCIS was one of the 17 agencies!)

            🙂

            Squeeky Fromm
            Girl Reporter

      2. See, your facts are incorrect. 3 out of 17 intelligence agencies concluded that the Russians hacked the DNC/Podesta emails. Since of course Mr. Brennan and Mr. Clapper were in charge, their credibility isn’t very good.

        While it certainly is possible that the Podesta emails were hacked by someone employed by the Russians, we will never know who ‘took’ the DNC emails. Why? Because they refused to turn the server over to the FBI when requested. So those emails taken, aren’t even a crime.

        And those, Mikepouraryan are facts.

        1. I disagree. Brennan (“I proudly voted for Communist Gus Hall”) and Clapper (“I’ll even lie under oath just for the heck of it”) have 100% credibility. That is, you can be 100% certain that anything they say is false.

          1. http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-17-intelligence-agencies-20170112-story.html

            17 offices:

            1. Office of the Director of National Intelligence

            2.Central Intelligence Agency

            3. National Security Agency

            4. Defense Intelligence Agency

            5. Federal Bureau of Investigation

            6. Department of State – Bureau of Intelligence and Research

            7. Department of Homeland Security – Office of Intelligence and Analysis

            8. Drug Enforcement Administration – Office of National Security Intelligence

            9. Department of the Treasury – Office of Intelligence and Analysis

            10. Department of Energy – Office of Intelligence and Counterintelligence

            11. National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

            12. National Reconnaissance Office

            13. Air Force Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance

            14. Army Military Intelligence

            15. Office of Naval Intelligence

            16. Marine Corps Intelligence

            17. Coast Guard Intelligence

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

w

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.