I'm not overly optimistic about the witness tampering charge holding up.

[mobeau69]

If the only evidence is that TFG appeared on the witnesses caller ID, that would be hard to convict on. Wouldn’t it be better if the call was taken and even better if it had been recorded? A lot depends upon who the witness is, I guess.

I’m just getting pessimistic about ever bringing the slob to justice.

[mucifer]

1. How do you know it's not recorded??

[mobeau69]

9. Don't. My premise was "if only".

[dameatball]

18. I know what you mean and I was thinking the same thing. I hope there is more than just a call with

no message. Sure, we "know" what his intent probably was, but will that stand up in court? I doubt it.

[brush]

2. There's a whole lot more than just that phone call. Have not been watching the hearings?

[mobeau69]

8. Just talking abound the witness who tampering.

[Ocelot II]

3. We don't know that, could have been a voicemail message.

[mobeau69]

6. True.

[fightforfreedom]

4. The committee does not agree with you.

They referred it to the DOJ for a reason.

[mobeau69]

5. True.

[Novara]

13. Right.

And it's not just a pattern, this time it was he himself contacting a witness rather than getting somebody else to do it for him.

That tells me the J6 committee really got to him. And I'm pretty sure they have more than caller ID, otherwise they would not have referred it to the DOJ immediately.

[Voltaire2]

14. At this point all the evidence is that J6 know

exactly what they are doing.

[Hortensis]

7. It's part of an ongoing pattern! Fwiw, I don't fuss what I don't know

and enjoy instead listening to all the ex- DoJ prosecutors, former AGs, top-drawer legal scholars, etc, etc, on TV explaining what they're seeing, and of course in written media even more. I remember when to get an answer I'd have to drive to the library to look it up. Card catalogs and 20-year-old books.

[mobeau69]

11. ⬇️

[getagrip_already]

10. The doj probably won't even follow up with witness....

With all the truly major and easily proveable crimes they have to choose from, this would only be a distraction.

And if they aren't going to move on those, they won't bother with this.

It wouldn't even rate a guffaw over drinks at lunch.

[mobeau69]

12. Agree.

[Novara]

15. I see t as the opposite

This is the easiest one to convict. They have proof of witness tampering. Proof. Most everything else we've seen so far is a shit ton of circumstantial evidence. Granted, people get convicted on circumstantial evidence all the time. but this has a direct connection we haven't seen with the other crimes. YET.

I hope nobody thinks this is a minor crime. The punishment is up to 20 years in federal lockup, just like seditious conspiracy.

[emulatorloo]

22. +1

[Voltaire2]

16. Conspiracy laws are a wonderful thing

they transform minor felonies into major felonies.

[PJMcK]

17. Wait and see

I don't think Rep. Cheney would make this allegation as the cliff-hanger at the end of the hearing unless it was something more than a caller ID. That seems trivial whereas witness tampering by the former president would be a huge deal.

But we won't know until the committee reveals its cards.

My bet is Trump, an idiot as always, left a voicemail message which was passed from the individual to their lawyer then to the committee and onto the DOJ. It's the only kind of evidence that would be powerful and undeniable enough to withstand scrutiny.

But, we'll see.

[dameatball]

19. I hope you are right on your bet.

[Mz Pip]

23. I hope so to.

Maybe a voice mail. It’s got to be more than a call not answered.

[sinkingfeeling]

20. Agree. Calling isn't witness tampering nor intimidation. Need the threats.

[Samrob]

21. Mr., X, the former President, Mr. Trump is on the line..."click"

[chowder66]

24. I agree about the caller ID issue but there is so much more to this.