This is getting interesting.
Apparently someone has finally told Tre45son that he can obstruct justice by lying in his tweets.
So this morning, what does he do instead? Rather uncharacteristically, he phrases everything as a question.
So let’s imagine responding to the baby’s questions with questions.
- What kind of a lawyer would tape a client? Well, would a lawyer who trusts his client tape the client? Probably not. So what kind of client needs to be taped by his lawyer? Would that be the same kind of client who needs to be interviewed by two lawyers at a time?
- Is this a first, never heard of it before? I don’t know. Have you never heard of this sort of thing before? Or was Roy Cohn the first to tell you about it, when you learned dirty tricks at his knee?
- Why was the tape so abruptly terminated (cut) while I was presumably saying positive things? Wait a minute, DonTheCon. PRESUMABLY? And don’t you have this tape now? Don’t you know whether the things you were saying were positive?
- I hear there are other clients and many reporters that are taped – can this be so? I don’t know, DonTheCon, but it sounds like it. Speaking of, how did you “hear” that many reporters are taped? Have you ever taped any of your own conversations with reporters?
More generally, DonTheCon, is there a reason you phrase these “statements” as questions?
In addition to telling you that there are other tapes, did your lawyer tell you that tweets can be evidence of obstruction of justice?
Especially tweets containing lies?
Is that why you don’t assert any facts in this tweet?
Because you want to muddy the waters, without actually lying?
Any other questions?