- Cohen has been under investigation for a while.
- Cohen is under investigation for actions that only "include" Donald Trump (but not exclusive to Trump).
- There was no emails or any other correspondence between Cohen and Trump.
Each of these things is significant for a variety of reasons.
The overall concept is that the FBI is interested in what is supposedly a set of coincidences where Cohen is representing high profile clients with reputations to protect, while another attorney by the name of Keith Davidson is in each case representing the clients who are being paid off to keep quiet about alleged affairs. The payments range anywhere from $30,000 for a doorman to keep quiet about an alleged Donald Trump affair, to a seven figure payoff to a playboy bunny who became pregnant from a relationship with a high profile political fundraiser. But in each case, Cohen and Davidson are the two attorneys involved.
Andrew McCarthy calls this the biggest potential legal threat for the President (or least people around the President). That being said, McCarthy has always discounted the idea of Russian collusion, or obstruction being a real legal issue. So that would mean some potential legal liability is worse than no legal liability. While McCarthy admits that what is publicly known (or being leaked at this point) does not constitute a criminal action, he believes that the potential for such a finding is much more likely than anything Russian or obstruction related.
The reality is that the NDAs are not illegal. But if there was some scheme or secret agreement between Cohen and Davidson to manipulate these situations into expensive pay offs (where the attorneys naturally make a large financial gain) then it could be argued that the parties (clients) involved were defrauded or even extorted into the agreements.
Now how that possibly relates to the President is in whether or not he was a complicit partner in these arrangements specific to him. Of course, that is where the reports that there were no sorts of correspondences between Cohen and Trump seized in the raid fit in. Now I am one hundred percent certain that the reason this information was being leaked was to push back on the President's claim that the FBI was infringing on his client/attorney privilege. But if the leaks are true, it probably goes a long way to insulating the President from potential legal jeopardy.
In the constant world where the next shoe is always ready to drop, the anti-Trump brigade will suggest that Cohen is the next to "turn" on the President and finally send him down the river where he belongs. But there is still quite a bit of distance between some technically legal coincidental non-disclosure agreements,and a criminal conspiracy that involved the President.
32 comments:
James Boswell of Normal, Illinois is a pedophile.
Jane, you swore to CHT on your cultist bible to stop spamming.
Why can't you keep your promise?
Loretta, grow the fuck up....
The reality is that the NDAs are not illegal.
No one is claiming that....especially here except for weak minded posters who attribute that thought to others....What is illegal is campaign contributions of that size that were made by Cohen. Toss in the potential he lied about going to Prague to do donnie's bidding and what do you have???? Collusion with Russia!!!!!! It is a matter of time before we find out the truth and put to bed your stupid strawmen BS CH....
what do you have???? Collusion with Russia!!!!!
Wanna bet?
CHT, Collusion is so yesterday.
25th Amendment , wait rhat flashed the pan.
Then it was "Emoluments Clauses", fizzled
Then whores, well, aka "Legendary sex life"
But first it was the obama/hillary/skanky Stien vote Challenges. Epic Fail.
Wanna bet?
Sure....6 pack of PBR....
I don't know where you're reading "leaks and rumors" from, but I've been seeing the opposite of " actions that only "include" Donald Trump".
Pres. Stien , lol.
CH is a conspiracy theorist.
In the constant world where the next shoe is always ready to drop, the anti-Trump brigade "is the FBI/Doj"will suggest that Cohen is the next to "turn" on the President and finally send him down the river where he belongs. But there is still quite a bit of distance between some technically legal coincidental non-disclosure agreements,and a criminal conspiracy that involved the President.
He drinks better beer than PBR.
but I've been seeing the opposite
Of course, WP... there are always going to be some people who believe every thing that happens, has everything to do with Donald Trump, and nothing to do with anyone else.
Admit it... a scheme between two attorneys to facilitate non-disclosure agreements between celebrities (represented by one) and people with secrets (represented by the other).
Seems a much higher likelyhood of warranting an FBI raid, than the rumors that suggest this is about Hollywood access or exclusively about Stormy Daniels.
Apparently the FBI suspects that they - or Cohen - were doing far more than "facilitating agreements". Unless you accept that "extortion" is just another way of saying "facilitating". Cohen's business dealings are also reportedly under investigation.
WP...
This is what I wrote in my post:
The reality is that the NDAs are not illegal. But if there was some scheme or secret agreement between Cohen and Davidson to manipulate these situations into expensive pay offs (where the attorneys naturally make a large financial gain) then it could be argued that the parties (clients) involved were defrauded or even extorted into the agreements.
So in typical fashion, you sort of suggest that there is a disagreement, when in fact there is not. But either way you look at it, this is about Cohen, possibly another attorney, clients (that both include Trump and others who are not named Trump).
It would seem at this point that the $130K payoff is probably not at the top of the list (other than the fact that it has association with Trump and therefor is more news worthy).
But time will tell. As many of the actual legal experts have suggested, there has to be "more" to this than just what is being reported. While all of it looks suspicious, there isn't anything technically illegal about an NDA in and of itself.
All of which contradicts your #2 leak "Cohen is under investigation for actions that only include Donald Trump".
If there was extortion then it goes beyond the simple under-the-table collusion between attorneys that you suggest. Most likely that is the case, since a simple mutual backscratching deal is not risible to warrant that search and seizure. Moreover, if it did involve communications with Trump, it would be far more serious than the situation that you imply (which wouldn't actually involve Trump at all). That seems to be the common thread in your treatments. You try to minimize the issue or potential crime, then hypothesize situations which would exclude Trump, and then ask what the big deal is. That's precisely what you attempted here.
Hypothesizem is incurable Trump can do no harm. But he's giving the Democrats an entire generation of they play it right.
Poll: Young people think Trump is racist, dishonest, 'mentally unfit for office'
AOL.com editors
AOL.com editors
AOL.comMarch 30, 2018
As President Donald Trump's approval ratings ebb and flow, a new poll reveals a negative view of the commander in chief among America's youngest populations.
The new AP/MTV poll reveals a slim 33 percent of Americans ages 15 to 34 approve of Trump's White House performance. This response comes as Trump's weekly approval stood at 39 percent with Gallup last week. His daily approval with Rasmussen stands at 47 percent as of Friday.
"He doesn’t seem to be really for women. He doesn’t seem to be for Black Lives Matter. He doesn’t seem to be for DACA," 23-year-old Meghan Carnes told AP. "He doesn’t seem to be for the kids worried about guns. It’s extremely disappointing to have a president who doesn’t seem to care."
All of which contradicts your #2 leak "Cohen is under investigation for actions that only include Donald Trump".
Okay... poorly written. By putting quotes over the word "include" for emphasis... it was meant to say in only INCLUDES Donald Trump, rather than being "exclusive" to Donald Trump. "Includes" would suggest others are also "included". The way one item might be "included" in a larger group.
I would have thought the rest of the post would have backed that up, but I was wrong.
I amended that to say (but not exclusive)... for clarification.
You try to minimize the issue or potential crime, then hypothesize situations which would exclude Trump
Am I? The person under investigation at this point in time is one of his personal attorneys, and the leaks/buzz is that here was no correspondence between Cohen and Trump found. The latest buzz is that it has more to do with a possible scheme with another attorney.
My gut feeling is that if this was really about the 2016 election, and Trump was a major part of some sort of election related offense, that Mueller would have stayed on the case (and that Rosenstein would have agreed).
In fact, I think most reasonable people could have accepted the idea of special counsel being provided leeway to follow up on potential Trump wrongdoing in the 2016 election. If they have authorization to go after Gates and Manafort (as being related) - then why not this?
The new AP/MTV poll
That age group doesn't have a clue of what AP or MTV were or currently are.
PTSD President Trum Stress Disorder
My gut feeling is that if this was really about the 2016 election,
Trumpism
"He doesn’t seem to be really for women. He doesn’t seem to be for Black Lives Matter. He doesn’t seem to be for DACA," 23-year-old Meghan Carnes told AP. "He doesn’t seem to be for the kids worried about guns. It’s extremely disappointing to have a president who doesn’t seem to care."
what you meant to say child, is that trump is not practicing identity politics.
well, if you had listened to his inauguration speech this should come as no surprise.
now run along little one, go snort a condom and snack on a tide pod, and just be thankful that you're still on mommy and daddy's health insurance.
CH asked, "If they have authorization to go after Gates and Manafort (as being related) - then why not this? "
Possibly:
A, what Mueller had on Cohen did not involve Trump and was not related to Russian election interference.
B, Mueller's boss didn't want to panic the country into thinking that something dramatic was eminent with Trump.
C, If the raid was mainly about putting the fear into Trump associates then the referral lets some other FBI unit take the heat instead of the Special Investigation.
D, When it's all said and done, if charges are filed then Meuller can take credit for it anyway.
HB "gut" is wrong.
And let's get real here. Trump is worried about the FBI having Cohen's records, as are his supporters, and it's not because they're concerned about Cohen hiring someone to intimidate a porn star. You're all worried that Cohen has records about Trump's business deals and you're afraid that criminal elements of those deals will come to light. I am stating the obvious here because everyone seems to be dancing around it.
More specifically, you're afraid that whoever is examining the data to sift out the communications protected by privilege will happen across something so egregious that they'll feel justified in abrogating their lawful obligations and will provide clandestine "hints" to some team of agents who, already knowing the facts will "discover" further evidence not derived from the forbidden information.
I will even grant that it would be unlawful and ethically wrong for that to happen, no matter what they see. Privileged is protected, and should remain so. But I have to wonder about Trump partisans, acknowledging that the possibility is that strong, that Trump's dealings might be so egregiously criminal as to impel agents and lawyers of impeccable integrity to abandon their own principles, why you so ardently still support and defend a man who is that likely to be a criminal?
Lol @wp
Lol @wp
Well WP...
The first thing you need to realize is that most Trump supporters I know do not believe that there is a hidden slew of criminal behavior that has just not been uncovered.
As someone who didn't vote for Trump, but feel he is doing better than I expected... I am also not under any assumption that Trump is hiding previous criminal behavior through correspondences with his personal attorney. Like any multi-billionaire with his hands in a lot of cookie jars, there will be questionable things done by people within his organizations, his business associates and even clients.
But as a matter of fundamental logical definition... there can be no actual evidence that Trump himself has done anything "illegal" that has simply not been "found" yet. Because if it had been found, he would have been charged long ago and it investigators would not be still "looking for it".
By complete 100% logical factual reality... any belief that there is criminal behavior is entirely speculation (and quite possibly simply wishful thinking).
Furthermore, if he was some sort of a criminal who confessed his sins to his Attorney, then we both know that this sort of information would be privileged anyways. Only something "ongoing" or "planned" would be subject to seizure.
So no... to answer your fantastic diatribe against Trump posed as an allegation of paranoia by Trump and his supporters... I (as a pseudo-Trump supporter) am not really worried that the Cohen investigation by the New York U.S. Attorney is designed to uncover criminal behavior regarding Donald Trump, or is going to uncover criminal behavior by Trump.
Sorry if that offends.
The fear, as you probably know CH, is not that Trump "confessed his sins" to his attorney as you put it, but that the attorney was involved in Trumps criminal enterprises should any such exist. Which of course is logical that he would be involved. It is furthermore almost certainly the reason behind Trump's meltdown over the raid.
Likewise, few people would believe agree with your reasoning that if anything were "found" implicating Trump he would already be charged with it. He's the President, just about the last person in the USA who would "already be charged" before a strong enough case could be made. If you were being entirely honest with yourself, you would acknowledge that your real fear is that the FBI finds enough concrete evidence in Cohen's files to make a strong case against Trump. A case which you probably suspect is fully warranted, but not prosecutable due to Trump's position.
Sorry WP...
You are obviously incapable of understanding this situation from the eyes of someone who doesn't already assume that Donald Trump is guilty of some sort of crime.
If it was even "possible" for you to look at it from that angle, you would understand my argument "completely". You certainly wouldn't continue to argue that you know better than I do, about how I view this.
But you simply view everything from within the tunnel vision of your predisposed assumption of guilt of something (that will eventually be found if they keep looking).
Reality (like it or not) is that Trump is not a target in the Mueller investigation (or the NY investigation). The further this investigation drifts and the broader they search, the more it becomes obvious that they have nothing.
Because as you point out, Mueller is the type to keep searching till he is told he has to quit.... not necessarily because he has anything substantial to go on.
We've already seen criminal behavior by Trump, litigated by Federal authorities, paid off in a settlement. Twice, on the same crime. Sure, this was in Trump's dark past, but for someone to say "any belief that there is criminal behavior is entirely speculation" and then call that falsehood "100% fact" is simply in denial of reality.
I believe there is "likely" criminal behavior now, because there has been in the past. His business has always been "shady" to put it euphemistically. So no, I don't believe that anyone with the capacity for objective thought truly believes that there is no possibility, that "nothing has been found" because Trump hasn't been charged. You keep pretending that nothing at all has turned up about Trump, that no one is even investigating him, and everything they find doesn't impact him. THAT is wishful thinking.
The only way this turns out well for Trump is if he DOES shut it down, buries everything that been unearthed, and browbeats Congress into dropping it. I'd be tempted to say that Americans deserve it for enabling him, but there are too many good Americans left for that to be true.
I guess I must be uninformed of Trump's criminal past.
I am aware that a couple of his businesses paid fines. A Rental Property was found in violation of discrimination laws, and a Casino was found in violation of properly following through on procedures put into place for preventing gambling winnings to be used as money laundering. But neither of those were exclusive to his business holdings (many Rental Properties and many Casinos were fined around that same time for similar transgressions). I know many of his companies have been sued for a variety of reasons.
But I am unaware that Trump has been charged with any personal crimes, copped any sort of plea, and was given any sort of sentence for criminal activity that included fines...
In fact, generally the term "settlement" is used in civil litigation, rather than criminal charges. Generally even at the corporate level, the terms litigation and settlement are usually used in some sort of regulatory investigation (rather than a specific criminal action outside of some paperwork or regulatory deal).
But surely you will inform me of what I am missing. Surely you will provide me with when Trump (as a citizen) paid criminal fines for criminal behavior. I am curious...
But I am unaware that Trump has been charged with any personal crimes, I am aware that a couple of his businesses paid fines.
Trump is the 100% owner of the trump empire....your claiming he has not been charged with personal crimes is a matter of semantics and your opinion....Still waiting for those tax returns he promised....NY is going to be a problem...Having lived there in the trump hey day...his slimy antics have now been accepted to even people like you who used to have a brain....
Microsoft has been fined literally billions of dollars for a variety of reasons... Does that make Bill Gates or Paul Allen criminals?
Yer an idiot, CH....Apples and tennis sneaker comparison which makes less sense than most of the crap you now post.....
Post a Comment