Just another day at the office
The other times he’s done this (Flynn, Manafort, Stone) he was signalling that his DOJ would go easy on them if they did not cooperate. I’m sure that’s not related at all.
His press secretary has sionce defended the statement stating the President was concerned she might be murderlized before her day in court. He “concerned” about “Justice” she says.
This is a guy who bragged about walking in on underage girls dressing at beauty pageants.
Trump was good buddies with Epstein, and attended “parties” with him. He also knew Ghislaine Maxwell very well. It would be a shame if she mentioned anything unsavory in connection with these relationships, what with the election getting close and all. I see a pardon guarantee in the works, or a sentence commutation, or whatever it takes to keep her quiet.
Fox News is already on the job:
Did he say anything other than that? Because if he did not, perhaps what he meant was, “I wish her well, because hopefully she isn’t guilty of anything, in which case, she won’t go to jail, and no one will have suffered in the past because of her actions.”
I say this not to defend Trump in any way, because we all know the kind of shit he is capable of. But here you have yet another example of someone in the news media ginning up a whole story about someone in Trump’s orbit, when nothing at all has been proven. Elie Honig (the writer of the article), while discounting the possibility of Trump pardoning Maxwell, is already implying guilt before Maxwell has been anywhere near a courtroom.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: there is SO much shit out there to attack Trump for, why is it necessary to just invent stuff like this?
And another thing: Trump was asked a question, and he answered it. What do people expect him to say: I, as President of the United States, hereby state that all Americans should join with me together in saying “I hope Maxwell rots in hell”, even though she has not been tried, and it would violate one of the most sacred rights we as Americans have: the right to be thought innocent until proven guilty, in a trial by a jury of our peers?
The question was whether he thought she would implicate any powerful men (or something like that). He seemed to go out of his way to say (twice) “I wish her well.” He should have said “I don’t comment on pending cases being brought by the Justice Department.” But, of course, he comments on everything.
Agreed. That is the proper response: “No comment.”
Oh hey, Bricker’s back.
This is kinda what I said Trump should have said. “No comment”, but with out the, well, snark.
“No Comment” would be sketchy sounding. If it was me in that position, I’d say “it’s a very unsavory situation, and I hope that justice is served.”
Sure, I can’t argue with that.
Exactly, he is openly tampering with a witness.
Yet again.
Think about it: he is openly tampering with the trial of someone accused of supporting an underage sex trafficking operation. Remember Comet Ping Pong? Republicans always are guilty of the thing they accuse Democrats of doing.
“It would be inappropriate for me to comment on an open federal case.”
On brand.
Yup, he is signaling to her ‘don’t talk and I’ll do what I can for you’ since she has the goods on trump also.
I really hope there are state crimes on top of the federal crimes. And I hope they are in states where the GOP governor won’t pardon them. Not sure if DeSantis in Florida will or not, but Cuomo in NY will not.
I’m sad that I live in a country where GOP presidents and governors will pardon sex crimes against children as long as it benefits their party, but here we are in 2020.
The funny thing is, Donald Trump has never actually wished anyone well in his life.