RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

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

President Trump sought information from two witnesses about matters they had discussed with the special counsel's office. (photo: Tom Brenner/The New York Times)
President Trump sought information from two witnesses about matters they had discussed with the special counsel's office. (photo: Tom Brenner/The New York Times)


Trump Spoke to Witnesses About Matters They Discussed With Special Counsel

By Michael S. Schmidt and Maggie Haberman, The New York Times

08 March 18

 

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

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

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


READ MORE


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
-19 # Rodion Raskolnikov 2018-03-08 14:35
The only way the NYT could know this is from a leak from Mueller. It seems that Mueller has really upscaled his leaks in recent weeks. He seems to be setting up something.

I don't see anything wrong is asking anyone what they discussed with Mueller or the congressional committees. These investigators sure as hell do talk a lot to reporters. This is just much ado about nothing.
 
 
+8 # chrisconno 2018-03-09 10:41
Will Trump also try to tamper with witnesses? Why wouldn't he, nothing else seems to be off limits to him. After all he's god isn't he.
 
 
0 # lfeuille 2018-03-09 19:42
Of course.
 
 
-1 # Rodion Raskolnikov 2018-03-10 06:55
chris -- until there is a formal court proceeding in the works -- i.e., an indictment filed -- there are no witnesses or evidence. We are all free do talk and do what we want. If a prosecutor send you a note signed by a court not to destroy any of your papers, you have to comply. But without that you can destroy any of your property that you like.

I'm always amazed at the knee-jerk slave reaction people have to cops like Mueller. They think they have to do everything Muelleer wants before he even says he wants it. Freedom from the police and government is the first principle. The government has to follow a "due process" before they have any right to tell you what to do with your things or what you say to your friends. It is the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments. Here is the 4th


"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

In other words, until Mueller gets a court order, he has no right to anything of yours. He has no control over whom you talk with.



Whenever I see comments like yours, I think of the great book by Erich Fromm, Escape from Freedom. people really don't want to be free. They want to be controlled by a police state.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN