Sam Nurnberg testifies at Russia probe grand jury after TV meltdown in which he said he wouldn't

At one point this week Mr Nunberg said he thinks it would be 'funny' if he were arrested

(Getty Images)

After a bizarre week that included erratic media appearances, former Trump political adviser Sam Nurnberg has testified before a grand jury investigating allegations of collusion between President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia.

Just days earlier, Mr Nunberg embarked on a strange string of erratic live interviews on America’s major news networks, telling each that he planned on tearing up the subpoena he had been given by special counsel Robert Mueller’s team.

During some of those appearances, show hosts asked if Mr Nunberg understood that defying a subpoena could lead to some jail time, and the conservative activist challenged Mr Mueller to arrest him. During at least one interview he said getting arrested would be “funny”.

Mr Nurnberg seemed less interested in speaking to the media Friday when he left the federal courthouse in Washington, ignoring the assembled reporters there eager for a comment.

His lawyer, Patrick Brackley, also did not comment.

Mr Nunberg worked for Mr Trump starting in 2014, was fired and rehired once, then was fired once more in late 2015 for racially insensitive Facebook posts.

He is thought to be able to provide potential information on several areas of Mr Trump’s career, though it is not immediately clear what areas of interest Mr Mueller might be most interested in, or what he told the grand jury Friday during his appearance there.

Following Mr Nunberg’s erratic interviews in which he said he planned on defying the subpoena, the former Trump adviser quickly backed down and indicated that he was planning on showing up to testify before the grand jury after all.

In yet another twist to the affair, Mr Nunberg also told a Fox Business Network reporter that he was planning on beginning substance abuse treatment after the grand jury appearance. During at least one of the live interviews in which he said he was going to defy the subpoena, an anchor suggested to him that they could smell alcohol on his breath.

“There’s something, and drinking I believe is a big part of it, and that’s what happened yesterday,” Charles Gasparino, the reporter, said. “That’s where the story actually goes from here.”

That potential drug or alcohol addiction led to a slew of analysis in which it was pondered whether the grand jury would accept testimony from someone who is incapacitated in some way or another. Others wondered if Mr Nunberg was bluffing, and had delivered the strange interviews on purpose in order to draw attention to the issue.