Trumps legal team appears to be operating partly in the dark

So, Dowd never actually did any sort of investigation to make sure that what his client was telling him was true. A client that has a well known habit of lying and exaggersting about even meaningless details.

Neither did he conduct any interviews with witnesses that were speaking to Mueller, not even a debrief after the fact.

That actually sounds like it’s getting close to ■■■■■■■ legal malpractice it’s so bad.

Guess that’s what you get when none of the decent lawyers will represent you.

Like, seriously. I’m not even a lawyer and this sounds bananas.

"Mr. Trump’s expanded and reconstituted legal team is now dealing far more aggressively with Mr. Mueller. But only in recent weeks, when it was reported that the soon-to-depart White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II, [spent at least 30 hours with Mr. Mueller’s investigators], have Mr. Trump’s lawyers fully understood just how much of an advantage Mr. Mueller gained because of Mr. Dowd’s initial strategy.

Mr. Dowd took Mr. Trump at his word that he had done nothing wrong and never conducted a full internal investigation to determine the president’s true legal exposure. During Mr. Dowd’s tenure, prosecutors interviewed at least 10 senior administration officials without Mr. Trump’s lawyers first learning what the witnesses planned to say, or debriefing their lawyers afterward — a basic step that could have given the president’s lawyers a view into what Mr. Mueller had learned. And once Mr. Dowd was gone, the new legal team had to spend at least 20 hours interviewing the president about the episodes under investigation, another necessary step Mr. Dowd and his associates had apparently not completed."

"Mr. Dowd explained that he had a special bond with Mr. Mueller because they had both served in the Marine Corps, and that he thought he could get him to end the investigation in a matter of weeks. Mr. Dowd said that he thought that he might even get the Justice Department to declare that Mr. Trump was not under investigation."

That’s that usual Trump level of competence.

Ya but Dowd isn’t some nobody. He’s far from the best but how could he ■■■■ things up that badly? I swear being around Trump makes these people dumber.

These “investigations” that you speak of. Investigations into what, exactly?

You asked.


This line from the article really stuck out to me:

Mr. Dowd took Mr. Trump at his word that he had done nothing wrong and never conducted a full internal investigation to determine the president’s true legal exposure.

I’m sorry - but what kind of lawyer doesn’t verify the facts as one of the initial steps? Perhaps my thinking is different as a an accountant, but if I’m going to sign off on a tax return or audit, I’m going to double and triple check all the data that has been supplied to me and do everything I can to verify said information independently. This seems to be lack of professionalism at a minimum.

It’s bonkers.

Even with a client that you think is a saint, you’d at least try and fact-check his story.

I think the lack of a debrief might legit be even worse. These are WH employees talking to Mueller, and you’re not checking what they’re saying to him?

1 Like

A negative article about Trump…in the NYT? That’s baaaa, baaaa, baaaad but you sheeple keep feeding.

The article is barely about Trump, it’s about his legal team. And it’s from Haberman.

1 Like

Yummy, yummy, yummy…I’ve got hate in my tummy. :sunglasses:

NY Times bad.

Infowars good.



Good morning my friend.

I’m just saying, ad hominem attacks might have more impact if you would reverse your previous statement labeling Infowars employees as journalists.

1 Like

I like Millie. She’s cute. :sunglasses:

Alex Jones…not so much.

I liked watching her chase someone down the street screaming questions at them because not that many people want to talk to someone on camera about whether 9/11 was an inside job.

Made me laugh for a little while.

Then I was sad because there are people who can’t tell real journalism from people like her.

1 Like

There is nothing of substance to respond to. It is simply more of the same Trump-hating crap.

Trump is a liar; Trump is an idiot; Trump is unhinged Trump isn’t fit to be President; yada; yada; yada.

That’s not true at all. It’s an interesting piece. It ties together a lot of what we knew and expands on it.

How dumb is Dowd that he actually believed Trump was telling him the truth?

1 Like

I read the article. Pretty much a rehash of information already available, just as with Woodward’s book. I saw nothing new in the article, other than yet another opportunity to bash Trump. Those trying to pretend this is about Trump’s legal team and not about Trump, are being dishonest. It is very much about Trump.