ctm Posted November 10, 2018 Report Share Posted November 10, 2018 Sources say that Whitaker presented himself as a sympathetic ear to both Sessions and Rosenstein — telling them he supported their efforts to prevent the president from politicizing the Justice Department. A person close to Whitaker suggested to me that the then-chief of staff was only attempting to diffuse the tension between the president and his attorney general and deputy attorney general, and facilitate an agreement between the two sides. But two other people with firsthand information about the matter told me that Whitaker, in his conversations with the president, presented himself as a vigorous supporter of Trump’s position and “committed to extract as much as he could from the Justice Department on the president’s behalf.” One administration official with knowledge of the matter told me: “Whitaker let it be known [in the White House] that he was on a team, and that was the president’s team.” Whitaker’s open sympathizing with Trump’s frequent complaints about the Mueller investigation resulted in an unusually close relationship between a president and a staffer of his level. The president met with Whitaker in the White House, often in the Oval Office, at least 10 times, a former senior administration official told me. On most of those occasions, Sessions was also present, but it’s unclear if that was always the case. During this period, Whitaker frequently spoke by phone with both Trump and Chief of Staff John Kelly, this same official told me. On many of those phone calls, nobody else was on the phone except for the president and Whitaker, or only Kelly and Whitaker. As one senior law enforcement official told me, “Nobody else knew what was said on those calls except what Whitaker decided to tell others, and if he did, whether he was telling the truth. Who ever heard of a president barely speaking to his attorney general but on the phone constantly with a staff-level person?” https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/9/18080656/matthew-whitaker-trump-hillary-clinton-sessions-attorney-general Whitaker got the job because he was snitching on Sessions and Rosenstein. IsntLifeFunny, reo, and OILERMAN 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OILERMAN Posted November 10, 2018 Author Report Share Posted November 10, 2018 Whitaker can publically try and refuse to allow the Mueller report and/or stop indictments, we'll see how that goes over with the public. Then the House can subpoena him to testify and he can either lie or refuse and once again we'll see how that goes. Best case scenario for Trump is an absolute political nightmare reo 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctm Posted November 10, 2018 Report Share Posted November 10, 2018 (edited) 48 minutes ago, OILERMAN said: Whitaker can publically try and refuse to allow the Mueller report and/or stop indictments, we'll see how that goes over with the public. Then the House can subpoena him to testify and he can either lie or refuse and once again we'll see how that goes. Best case scenario for Trump is an absolute political nightmare In the Watergate case, the prosecutors indicted numerous Nixon allies. Nixon was an unindicted co-conspirator. The federal judge sent all the documents and evidence straight from his court to the House, bypassing the DOJ. So there is precedent to bypass Whitaker with the hard evidence. If Whitaker tries to stop indictments without cause, then that is potential obstruction. Whitaker is really in a bind. He's made clear or strongly implied that he'll protect Trump. How does he do that when all the top lawyers and FBI agents don't trust him because he's a hack who ratted out Sessions and Rosenstein and they are all watching and documenting his every move? Besides, he played football at Iowa and likely has had a concussion and CTE. Edited November 10, 2018 by ctm OILERMAN 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MamlngEnvy Posted November 10, 2018 Report Share Posted November 10, 2018 2 hours ago, OILERMAN said: Whitaker can publically try and refuse to allow the Mueller report and/or stop indictments, we'll see how that goes over with the public. Then the House can subpoena him to testify and he can either lie or refuse and once again we'll see how that goes. Best case scenario for Trump is an absolute political nightmare Probs earn him a future republican presidential nomination Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
begooode Posted November 10, 2018 Report Share Posted November 10, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, ctm said: Whitaker’s open sympathizing with Trump’s frequent complaints about the Mueller investigation resulted in an unusually close relationship between a president and a staffer of his level. The president met with Whitaker in the White House, often in the Oval Office, at least 10 times, a former senior administration official told me. On most of those occasions, Sessions was also present, but it’s unclear if that was always the case. Per the reporting, Trump refused to be briefed by Sessions as their relationship deteriorated so Whitaker handled all those interactions. Apparently well enough to leverage those interactions into a cabinet level job. Yet Trump played the “I don’t know him” card 4 times in 5 minutes? To my understanding the only way Whitaker could bypass the DOJ deputy is solely based on Trump’s insistence, which similarly would have to be based on Trumps specific knowledge of Whitaker,... yet it seems all Trump was aware of regarding Whitaker’s profile was that he was going to protect the prez. Hmmmmm.... obsequious pandering is all it takes for the president of the United States to anoint a staffer to a cabinet level position of a supposedly impartial justice department (recall the VA guy, Porter reconsidered for WH lawyer) Transactional Trump confirmed. Edited November 10, 2018 by begooode Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctm Posted November 10, 2018 Report Share Posted November 10, 2018 4 minutes ago, begooode said: Per the reporting, Trump refused to be briefed by Sessions as their relationship deteriorated so Whitaker handled all those interactions. Apparently well enough to leverage those interactions into a cabinet level job. Yet Trump played the “I don’t know him” card 4 times in 5 minutes? To my understanding the only way Whitaker could bypass the DOJ deputy is solely based on Trump’s insistence, which similarly would have to be based on Trumps specific knowledge of Whitaker,... yet it seems all Trump was aware of regarding Whitaker’s profile was that he was going to protect the prez. Hmmmmm.... obsequious pandering is all it takes for the president of the United States to anoint a staffer to a cabinet level position of a supposedly impartial justice department (recall the VA guy, Porter reconsidered for WH lawyer) Transactional Trump confirmed. There is a law about succession for the DOJ. The question is whether it is constitutional. Article II, section 2, clause 2 of the constitution gives the senate the responsibility for advice and consent for many high government positions. The succession law bypasses that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctm Posted November 10, 2018 Report Share Posted November 10, 2018 In most cases the constitution over rides any law that is passed. We'll see. And while Jarrett has a law degree, he's also a commentator on Fox with an agenda. He also doesn't appear to have any experience in constitutional law. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Legaltitan Posted November 10, 2018 Popular Post Report Share Posted November 10, 2018 It gets even worse. Last year Whittaker interviewed to be chief DEFENSE counsel for trump in the Russia probe before he hired ty Cobb. Now that same guy has been appointed to oversee the head prosecutor on the very same case. Jesus christ this is banana republic shit. PetroleroTitanico, IsntLifeFunny, OILERMAN, and 2 others 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justafan Posted November 10, 2018 Report Share Posted November 10, 2018 8 minutes ago, Legaltitan said: It gets even worse. Last year Whittaker interviewed to be chief DEFENSE counsel for trump in the Russia probe before he hired ty Cobb. Now that same guy has been appointed to oversee the head prosecutor on the very same case. Jesus christ this is banana republic shit. Would that be considered a conflict of interest? (I'll mark sarcasm here for the dummies) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ManningEnvy Posted November 10, 2018 Report Share Posted November 10, 2018 8 hours ago, IsntLifeFunny said: Condoms...I’m laughing at you. Look in a mirror Touched, you'll stop laughing real quick. Condoms? Only a CherryTard........ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctm Posted November 10, 2018 Report Share Posted November 10, 2018 11 minutes ago, Justafan said: Would that be considered a conflict of interest? (I'll mark sarcasm here for the dummies) Here's an article that examines both sides of the argument of whether Whitaker must recuse himself because of a prior political relationship.....same as Sessions. The DOJ dept. of ethics will make a ruling. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/should-acting-attorney-general-whitaker-recuse-himself-mueller-s-investigation-n933931 Justafan 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsntLifeFunny Posted November 10, 2018 Report Share Posted November 10, 2018 It’s going to be a true classic if he is forced to recuse himself. OILERMAN, and pat 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legaltitan Posted November 10, 2018 Report Share Posted November 10, 2018 There is no way in hell you can consult with the defense to represent them, feed information to the defense from the prosecution, and then go be in charge of the prosecution. It's such a hilarious conflicts of interest it would never even show up on a law exam Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctm Posted November 10, 2018 Report Share Posted November 10, 2018 26 minutes ago, Legaltitan said: There is no way in hell you can consult with the defense to represent them, feed information to the defense from the prosecution, and then go be in charge of the prosecution. It's such a hilarious conflicts of interest it would never even show up on a law exam It's obvious but this is Trump we are talking about. They'll probably fire the DOJ ethics officer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legaltitan Posted November 10, 2018 Report Share Posted November 10, 2018 19 minutes ago, ctm said: It's obvious but this is Trump we are talking about. They'll probably fire the DOJ ethics officer. He could lose his license to practice law and trump would have no control over that Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.