Donald Does It Again: He Commits Witness Tampering in "Real-Time"

[Professor Piggy 59]

 

Just like the mob boss he is, Donald apparently seems incapable of stopping himself from committing crimes. Aside from that he's a real class act, however.

 

'Witness intimidation in real-time': Democrats see more evidence of Trump obstruction

Even Republicans expressed their discomfort with Trump attacking the former ambassador to Ukraine while she was testifying.

 

 

House Democrats are calling Donald Trump’s decision to attack Marie Yovanovitch mid-hearing on Friday a blatant example of witness intimidation, further building the case to charge the president with obstruction in potential articles of impeachment.

Lawmakers of both parties were stunned to see Trump’s disparaging tweet about the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine in the middle of a hearing where she had already described in great detail how she felt personally threatened by the president.

“What you saw today — witness intimidation in real-time by the president of the United States,” House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff told reporters during a brief pause in the hearing.

“Once again, going after this dedicated and respected career public servant in an effort to not only chill her but to chill others who may come forward,” Schiff added. “We take this kind of witness intimidation and obstruction of inquiry very seriously.”

Some lawmakers, meanwhile, were already speculating that it could act as more evidence in their articles of impeachment against Trump.

Democrats have previously discussed charging Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress for his attempted blockade of witnesses and documents in their impeachment inquiry, though articles have not yet been drafted.

“It looks like witness intimidation to me,” Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), who sits on the Intelligence panel, told reporters. “She presented compelling testimony. It obviously got under his skin. He just couldn’t help himself, he had to tweet.”

Trump’s tweet — in which he wrote, in part, “Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad” — came one hour into the hearing designed to show how White House officials had personally targeted the former ambassador.

Even Republicans admitted it was problematic for the president to be criticizing the witness, a respected career diplomat, at the same time she was testifying against him. Still, none would directly criticize the president, and many avoided questions about the tweet altogether.

“It’s not something I would do,” Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas), who sits on the House Intelligence Committee, told reporters during a break from the hearing.

Asked if it amounted to witness intimidation, Conaway did not offer a direct answer: “I’m not a lawyer, I’m not familiar with it, but it’s just not something I would do. It’s just not my style.”

Several Republicans on the Intelligence Committee dodged the topic entirely. Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) refused to answer questions about the tweets as he ducked on to the House floor, while Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas) quickly whipped out his cell phone and began talking into it, even though his home screen was visible and there was no call in progress.

And Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, told POLITICO: "I don't discuss committee business."

Notably, Nunes only briefly mentioned Yovanovitch in his opening statement.

Other GOP members argued that the tweet did not amount to witness intimidation, even if they disagreed with the contents of it.

“I have no reason to think she's done a bad job,” said Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah).

Even some of Trump’s most hardcore supporters have been careful not to directly attack Yovanovitch, for fear it could play into Democrats’ hands.

“Respectfully, this is all you need to know about Ambassador Yovanovitch's testimony,” tweeted Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), one of Trump’s closest allies. “She admits she can't bring any firsthand knowledge to” certain elements of the impeachment inquiry.

For many Republicans, the mid-hearing attack embodies what has come to define the Trump era: a baffling or bombastic tweet, followed by a whole lot of GOP hand-wringing.

“I have never been a fan of attacking people. That opinion has not changed this week or today,” said retiring Rep. Paul Mitchell (R-Mich.).

White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham rejected Democrats' accusations.

"The tweet was not witness intimidation, it was simply the President’s opinion, which he is entitled to," she said in a statement. "This is not a trial, it is a partisan political process — or to put it more accurately, a totally illegitimate, charade stacked against the President."

Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters Friday afternoon that she hadn’t seen the tweet and couldn’t comment on whether it could be added to potential articles of impeachment, but added, “witness intimidation is a crime.”

“We have so much else going on. I’m so proud of the dignity and the grace of the ambassador and her patriotism, I haven’t really paid a lot of attention to the president,” the California Democrat said.

Asked if the tweet was inappropriate, Pelosi quipped: “Appropriate and president in the same sentence? Why would we start making that judgment now?”

Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.), who also sits on the House Intelligence Committee, said he believed the tweet was “more evidence of intimidation, which is in effect, obstruction.”

“I would have assumed that the Republicans would have tried to spend their time playing down the fact that she was intimidated and forced out,” Quigley said. “And the president opens with intimidation and getting rid of her.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/11/15/trump-impeachment-witness-intimidation-071129

 

 

 

[Thebowflexbody 2,342]

18 minutes ago, Professor Piggy said:

Just like the mob boss he is, Donald apparently seems incapable of stopping himself from committing crimes. Aside from that he's a real class act, however.

'Witness intimidation in real-time': Democrats see more evidence of Trump obstruction

Even Republicans expressed their discomfort with Trump attacking the former ambassador to Ukraine while she was testifying.

House Democrats are calling Donald Trump’s decision to attack Marie Yovanovitch mid-hearing on Friday a blatant example of witness intimidation, further building the case to charge the president with obstruction in potential articles of impeachment.

Lawmakers of both parties were stunned to see Trump’s disparaging tweet about the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine in the middle of a hearing where she had already described in great detail how she felt personally threatened by the president.

“What you saw today — witness intimidation in real-time by the president of the United States,” House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff told reporters during a brief pause in the hearing.

“Once again, going after this dedicated and respected career public servant in an effort to not only chill her but to chill others who may come forward,” Schiff added. “We take this kind of witness intimidation and obstruction of inquiry very seriously.”

Some lawmakers, meanwhile, were already speculating that it could act as more evidence in their articles of impeachment against Trump.

Democrats have previously discussed charging Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress for his attempted blockade of witnesses and documents in their impeachment inquiry, though articles have not yet been drafted.

“It looks like witness intimidation to me,” Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), who sits on the Intelligence panel, told reporters. “She presented compelling testimony. It obviously got under his skin. He just couldn’t help himself, he had to tweet.”

Trump’s tweet — in which he wrote, in part, “Everywhere Marie Yovanovitch went turned bad” — came one hour into the hearing designed to show how White House officials had personally targeted the former ambassador.

Even Republicans admitted it was problematic for the president to be criticizing the witness, a respected career diplomat, at the same time she was testifying against him. Still, none would directly criticize the president, and many avoided questions about the tweet altogether.

“It’s not something I would do,” Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas), who sits on the House Intelligence Committee, told reporters during a break from the hearing.

Asked if it amounted to witness intimidation, Conaway did not offer a direct answer: “I’m not a lawyer, I’m not familiar with it, but it’s just not something I would do. It’s just not my style.”

Several Republicans on the Intelligence Committee dodged the topic entirely. Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) refused to answer questions about the tweets as he ducked on to the House floor, while Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas) quickly whipped out his cell phone and began talking into it, even though his home screen was visible and there was no call in progress.

And Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, told POLITICO: "I don't discuss committee business."

Notably, Nunes only briefly mentioned Yovanovitch in his opening statement.

Other GOP members argued that the tweet did not amount to witness intimidation, even if they disagreed with the contents of it.

“I have no reason to think she's done a bad job,” said Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah).

Even some of Trump’s most hardcore supporters have been careful not to directly attack Yovanovitch, for fear it could play into Democrats’ hands.

“Respectfully, this is all you need to know about Ambassador Yovanovitch's testimony,” tweeted Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), one of Trump’s closest allies. “She admits she can't bring any firsthand knowledge to” certain elements of the impeachment inquiry.

For many Republicans, the mid-hearing attack embodies what has come to define the Trump era: a baffling or bombastic tweet, followed by a whole lot of GOP hand-wringing.

“I have never been a fan of attacking people. That opinion has not changed this week or today,” said retiring Rep. Paul Mitchell (R-Mich.).

White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham rejected Democrats' accusations.

"The tweet was not witness intimidation, it was simply the President’s opinion, which he is entitled to," she said in a statement. "This is not a trial, it is a partisan political process — or to put it more accurately, a totally illegitimate, charade stacked against the President."

Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters Friday afternoon that she hadn’t seen the tweet and couldn’t comment on whether it could be added to potential articles of impeachment, but added, “witness intimidation is a crime.”

“We have so much else going on. I’m so proud of the dignity and the grace of the ambassador and her patriotism, I haven’t really paid a lot of attention to the president,” the California Democrat said.

Asked if the tweet was inappropriate, Pelosi quipped: “Appropriate and president in the same sentence? Why would we start making that judgment now?”

Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.), who also sits on the House Intelligence Committee, said he believed the tweet was “more evidence of intimidation, which is in effect, obstruction.”

“I would have assumed that the Republicans would have tried to spend their time playing down the fact that she was intimidated and forced out,” Quigley said. “And the president opens with intimidation and getting rid of her.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/11/15/trump-impeachment-witness-intimidation-071129

Boy.  All this animation and other garbage is really swaying my opinion on the President.  LOL.  What a colossal  waste of time by some people.  Glad they're so busy and productive.  Pussies.

[SackMan518 5,324]

LOL. How do you intimidate a witness who is currently giving testimony and has no clue that he's even tweeting about her? I can't believe that someone at Politico even wrote that piece and even more so that you actually believed it.

[HipKat 123]

 Because she was told as he tweeted it by the people who are questioning her.

witness intimidation is a felony. It is also grounds for impeachment. It is the exact reason that Roger stone was convicted today. Donald Trump may as well just throw his hands up in the air and proclaim to the world that he is guilty. Furthermore, to everyone of his supporters, he is laughing at you for being stupid enough to keep supporting him.

it doesn’t matter if she knew about it while he was doing it. What matters is that he did it. He may as well be pissing gasoline on a roaring fire.

I was listening live when she was told of the tweet. And when asked how it made her feel, her answer was intimidated. In a quart room, that would make a jury pay attention.

[foster 8,386]

16 minutes ago, HipKat said:

 Because she was told as he tweeted it by the people who are questioning her.

witness intimidation is a felony. It is also grounds for impeachment. It is the exact reason that Roger stone was convicted today. Donald Trump may as well just throw his hands up in the air and proclaim to the world that he is guilty. Furthermore, to everyone of his supporters, he is laughing at you for being stupid enough to keep supporting him.

it doesn’t matter if she knew about it while he was doing it. What matters is that he did it. He may as well be pissing gasoline on a roaring fire.

I was listening live when she was told of the tweet. And when asked how it made her feel, her answer was intimidated. In a quart room, that would make a jury pay attention.

The intimidation doesn't stop with her, but is designed to also influence those that are still to be questioned.  

[HipKat 123]

1 hour ago, foster said:

The intimidation doesn't stop with her, but is designed to also influence those that are still to be questioned.  

It would make me more determined to tell my story hoping it would be part of his downfall

[Zan186 2,741]

2 hours ago, HipKat said:

It would make me more determined to tell my story hoping it would be part of his downfall

Why was this ambassador yovanovitch even at this hearing?  She was fired because she was a Democrat appointment and Trump wanted a different policy than her.  As for his tweet:  Since when does an opinion become intimidation?  He stated bluntly that she sucked at her job, cited jokingly how her service went in Somalia, then Ukraine.  Stated the Ukraine Zelensky said she was bad news, and stated that the President can fire and replace an Ambassador.  Where is the intimidation?  

 

Intimidation would be something like..."If you testify I will have the IRS look at your tax returns".  If you say "anything negative the CIA will make you disappear"  Now that is intimidation.   Wearing a Tank Top with your guns pumped and giving "that guy the look"....I am gonna rip off your head and SH$T down your neck.  That is intimidation!

[HipKat 123]

1 hour ago, Zan186 said:

Why was this ambassador yovanovitch even at this hearing?  She was fired because she was a Democrat appointment and Trump wanted a different policy than her.  As for his tweet:  Since when does an opinion become intimidation?  He stated bluntly that she sucked at her job, cited jokingly how her service went in Somalia, then Ukraine.  Stated the Ukraine Zelensky said she was bad news, and stated that the President can fire and replace an Ambassador.  Where is the intimidation?  

Intimidation would be something like..."If you testify I will have the IRS look at your tax returns".  If you say "anything negative the CIA will make you disappear"  Now that is intimidation.   Wearing a Tank Top with your guns pumped and giving "that guy the look"....I am gonna rip off your head and SH$T down your neck.  That is intimidation!

She was a Democrat Appointment? Lol. You’re a moron, for sure. She was first appointed by George Bush in 2004, you fucking clueless dolt.

Would intimidation be something like if you testify you”re going to through some things. Some uncomfortable things. Told to you by the President of the United States? 
 

Anything else you want to be wrong about?

[212frawk 8,314]

11 hours ago, SackMan518 said:

LOL. How do you intimidate a witness who is currently giving testimony and has no clue that he's even tweeting about her? I can't believe that someone at Politico even wrote that piece and even more so that you actually believed it.

 

[HipKat 123]

 

[SackMan518 5,324]

She actually wasn't fired, she was recalled and is still making a sweet salary from your tax dollars. Also, she got caught in a lie yesterday so I expect her to get the Roger Stone treatment.

[HipKat 123]

Being prepared and meeting him are two different things. Not quite sure how that’s a lie

[Woody 15,626]

10 hours ago, Zan186 said:

Why was this ambassador yovanovitch even at this hearing? 

Because Trump hurt her fee-fees.  Hurting fee-fees is a crime and Trump must be held accountable.

 

[HipKat 123]

1 hour ago, Woody said:

Because Trump hurt her fee-fees.  Hurting fee-fees is a crime and Trump must be held accountable.

Obviously that’s not the case but when the President of the United States tells you that if you testify “you’re going to go through some things” that is witness harassment and intimidation. Then while she is testifying he tweets the things he did about her yesterday, that’s the same thing. That is a felony and an impeachable  offense

[Woody 15,626]

12 minutes ago, HipKat said:

Obviously that’s not the case but when the President of the United States tells you that if you testify “you’re going to go through some things” that is witness harassment and intimidation. Then while she is testifying he tweets the things he did about her yesterday, that’s the same thing. That is a felony and an impeachable  offense

Release the hounds!!  Go get'em Hip! 

 

 

[foster 8,386]

11 hours ago, HipKat said:

She was a Democrat Appointment? Lol. You’re a moron, for sure. She was first appointed by George Bush in 2004, you fucking clueless dolt.

Would intimidation be something like if you testify you”re going to through some things. Some uncomfortable things. Told to you by the President of the United States? 
 

Anything else you want to be wrong about?

She’s worked under 4 Republican and 2 Democratic Presidents over her 30+ years in govt service. 

[SackMan518 5,324]

3 hours ago, HipKat said:

Being prepared and meeting him are two different things. Not quite sure how that’s a lie

Watch the Stefanik segment of her questioning. Yovanovitch gets roasted. She's a liar plain and simple. Her orders were to shield the Biden corruption from outside eyes and found herself in a bind when Zelensky won the election. Even Obama officials knew the Biden moves in Ukraine were far too optic and could come back to bite them in the ass but hey, let's impeach Trump because he wanted to extirpate it.

[HipKat 123]

2 hours ago, SackMan518 said:

Watch the Stefanik segment of her questioning. Yovanovitch gets roasted. She's a liar plain and simple. Her orders were to shield the Biden corruption from outside eyes and found herself in a bind when Zelensky won the election. Even Obama officials knew the Biden moves in Ukraine were far too optic and could come back to bite them in the ass but hey, let's impeach Trump because he wanted to extirpate it.

I’ll have to go back and watch it. I’m missing most of it because of work so a lot of it I have to go back and search for when people refer to different testimonies.

[212frawk 8,314]

3 hours ago, SackMan518 said:

Watch the Stefanik segment of her questioning. Yovanovitch gets roasted. She's a liar plain and simple. Her orders were to shield the Biden corruption from outside eyes and found herself in a bind when Zelensky won the election. Even Obama officials knew the Biden moves in Ukraine were far too optic and could come back to bite them in the ass but hey, let's impeach Trump because he wanted to extirpate it.

lol roasted.  you suck at this brah.  really.suck.at.this. 

 

 

[Thebowflexbody 2,342]

4 hours ago, 212frawk said:

lol roasted.  you suck at this brah.  really.suck.at.this. 

No he doesn't.  He just scares you.

[212frawk 8,314]

6 hours ago, Thebowflexbody said:

No he doesn't.  He just scares you.

it's true, there are many things about s0s that are frightening

[jc856 9,678]

36 minutes ago, 212frawk said:

it's true, there are many things about s0s that are frightening

He honored his bet and put that putrid “thing” on his avatar for the agreed amount of time. He shoulda put this one.

[212frawk 8,314]

2 minutes ago, jc856 said:

He honored his bet and put that putrid “thing” on his avatar for the agreed amount of time. He shoulda put this one.

this one is better

[jc856 9,678]

54 minutes ago, 212frawk said:

this one is better

You love shaved white vaginecks, it’s ok to admit it. Everyone has some kind of fetish or another. 😎

[HipKat 123]

 

1 hour ago, jc856 said:

You love shaved white vaginecks, it’s ok to admit it. Everyone has some kind of fetish or another. 😎

 

 

Mine happens to be cuffs, women with furry gloves, and.... Oh, wait. Wrong forum