It's impossible to know what this "legal advice" was, but it was always a dubious claim.

The software project itself is probably fine. The legal risk is always going to be with the person that hosts it with the intention of facilitating the unauthorized access of Twitter's website. Seems like that could run afoul of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

Those people should seek their own legal advice and not listen to anything this guy says.

I was misled by an individual who claimed to be helping the Nitter project pro bono with a team of lawyers. He made up a timeline of events that sounded mostly believable.

I have not given legal advice to any Nitter operators, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say?

[dead]