Rich Delmar, a counsel to the IG, said that in response to media reports, the office was “inquiring into allegations” that Suspicious Activity Reports on Cohen’s banking transactions were “improperly disseminated.”
Michael Avenatti, the lawyer for porn star Stormy Daniels, released a summary of the information Tuesday, showing that a number of companies, including one connected to a Kremlin-linked Russian billionaire, paid Cohen’s firm more than $1 million, supposedly for assorted services.
Avenatti declined to reveal the source of his information during an interview with the DC paper.“The source or sources of our information is our work product, and nobody’s business,” Avenatti said.
“They can investigate all they want, but what they should be doing is releasing to the American public the three Suspicious Activity Reports filed on Michael Cohen’s account. Why are they hiding this information?”
This has become all too common, and in fact is actually illegal for exactly the reasons we are seeing today. Michael Cohen is under investigation, his business and personal information seized by court order, and he may or may not eventually be indicted. But the reality is that while under investigation the Federal Government is not allowed to simply release private information to embarrass or shame a suspect. They cannot leak it to the media for that same reason.
What is amazing is that this Avenatti is some sort of 2018 attorney, who openly is questioning why someone has not disclosed the Suspicious Activity Reports. Perhaps the reason is that disclosing it would be a federal crime. These reports are mere speculation that there is something that needs to be looked into. The report itself is not evidence of anything other than suspicion. That is why these reports are not a matter of public record. Either Avenatti is a naive attorney, or a someone who knows how to play to his audience.
Because unfortunately this is the world we live in today. When it comes to Trump (or anyone associated with him) neither procedure, etiquette, or even the law should matter. Make Trump and his associates look bad at all costs. Yeah, break the law if you have to.
100 comments:
"Feds probing how Stormy lawyer got Cohen’s banking info"
Exactly what I've been wondering.
Why do you write "the Federal Government is not allowed to simply release private information to embarrass or shame a suspect"? While that's true, why do you believe that the Federal Government DID release any of that information?
That's almost as bad as speculating about the payments Cohen received, without having the full story. It does make it harder to paint Cohen as a sympathetic figure though doesn't it? The whole fictional narrative about the upstanding lawyer being persecuted "because Trump" just comes tumbling down.
Trump has no grounds for complaint. He was egging Russia on, and whatever hackers were involved in stealing the DNC data, so anyone eagerly grasping onto Avanetti's leaks is just following Trump's example.
"Why do you write "the Federal Government is not allowed to simply release private information to embarrass or shame a suspect"? While that's true, why do you believe that the Federal Government DID release any of that information?"
Well, it IS a Federal investigation.
Going out on a limb here, one would presume that the Feds have their own "discovery" or at least are in control of it...
"He was egging Russia on, and whatever hackers were involved in stealing the DNC data, so anyone eagerly grasping onto Avanetti's leaks is just following Trump's example."
Fuck the rule of law, eh?
He was egging Russia on, and whatever hackers were involved in stealing the DNC data,
Do you mean this?
“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
Because that was simply a dig to the fact that Clinton claimed that she deleted 30,000 emails from her server because they were about yoga and wedding plans.
No, it can't possibly be this statement you are confusing with the the actual hacked DNC server...
Can it be, WP?
We need to pass the hat for WP.
Come on,man.
WP wants us to believe he pay, $20 k, a year on Meds?
While that's true, why do you believe that the Federal Government DID release any of that information?
Because the Federal Government should be the only people who have access to these Suspicious Activity Reports and because Avenatti states that he has "sources" for his information.
Perhaps you should take your own advice, and use this cynicism when dealing with allegations about Trump, which you not only seem to believe as gospel if alleged, but generally have a tendency to toss your own opinions of nefarious intent for everything.
You believe that there is nefarious justification for the entire investigation into the Russian intervention into our election system.
Except for millions of dollars donated to the attorney who represented the President for decades.
Roger, do TRY to keep up.
K?
Despite the fact that most of the data in this report may have violated some privacy concerns, a Russian oligarch gave millions of dollars to the "fixer".
They had nefarious intent that doesn't seem to disturb you.
You believe that there is nefarious justification for the entire investigation into the Russian intervention into our election system.
Nope... I, just like everyone I know would like to see a full account of how the Russian's intervened into our election.
But that simply has zero to do with Michael Cohen setting up consulting contracts with people who want his "insight" into the President. There is literally no connection there. In fact the Russian Businessman who probably isn't involved anyways is neither a friend of Putin, the Russian Government, or Donald Trump.
While you might think this sort of thing is unseemly, and you might even want to retroactively change all the laws to make it criminal if the President is Trump... the fact is that it's common, legal, and not part of the Russian interference.
But hey Rog!
If you are really that concerned with someone investigating the Russian influence into the election...
You must be stark raving seething mad that Mueller might have fucked up the indictments against the Russian businesses?
You must be angry as hell at Mueller for not having his ducks in a row. We finally have the opportunity to get some actual insight into the election problems, and our Special Counsel is requesting delays (because he didn't realize that they would show up in court).
So explain to me how much this pisses you off?
Twit, take a break and quit trying to keep up.
"Twit, take a break and quit trying to keep up."
Way ahead of you, drunky drunk drunk.
"because he didn't realize that they would show up in court"
I love the smell of legal discovery...
Hey Scott thanks to one judge raised legitimate concerns about how the subpoenas were obtained does not mean that the entire investigation had nefarious intent. I read his ruling and for his concerns and for once I agreed with Alan Dershorich sp. But you always seem to find the entire investigation is a political ruse.
Why doesn't Rudy Giuliani piss you off when he started information damaging the President?
Sober and clean and healthy and happy for a lot longer than you have been suffering from Alzheimer's disease .
Well, it IS a Federal investigation.
It is a civil lawsuit between the porn star and Cohen.
"Fuck the rule of law, eh?" - now you know why people were bothered by Trump “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing." To name one among several.
Because the Federal Government should be the only people who have access to these Suspicious Activity Reports and because Avenatti states that he has "sources" for his information.
Banks have access to the information. The parties involved have access to the information. You are assuming that it's from some particular document owned by the Feds, but you have confused his suggestion that the Government release them for his actually having them. There is no information yet that this is the case.
The big difference between Avenatti suggesting that the Feds release those reports, and Trump suggesting that hackers release stolen information, is that Trump was talking about illegally obtained information.
Roger, do TRY to keep up.
K? " Ette
It would be a first.
It is a civil lawsuit between the porn star and Cohen.
Ah... and here I thought Michael Cohen was under federal investigation and that Suspicious Activity Reports would have been part of that investigation.
But you are apparently explaining to us that...
um what are you suggesting exactly?
Banks.
Avenatti has nothing to do with a criminal investigation. He is representing Stormy Daniels in her civil litigation against Cohen.
That there is also a criminal investigation ongoing into Cohen's activities is less than no reason to believe that Avenatti got his information from them. There is an inquiry because he probably should NOT have some of that information. There are several reasons to suspect that he might have gotten it from the Feds somehow, but the simple fact that there is an investigation is an exceedingly tenuous one.
CH thinks that he has Suspicious Activity Reports, because he suggested that the Feds release them. You think he has investigative data because the Feds have that data. Just think for a minute, does it really follow from that, that he illegally obtained information from the Feds? It's probably the LEAST likely of any scenario, legally obtained or otherwise.
WP
Suspicious Activity Reports are specific documents. Again, against the law to publicly disclose. But let's say that it is a bank that is simply providing the information that is contained in those reports.
A bank providing one attorney the private information to another attorney?
Are you suggesting that this would not be against the law?
Ah... and here I thought Michael Cohen was under federal investigation and that Suspicious Activity Reports would have been part of that investigation.
You are confused. There are no indications that Stormy Daniel's lawyer has access to Suspicious Activity Reports.
Do you truly fail to see how weak that is, what you're trying to claim?
There are no indications that Stormy Daniel's lawyer has access to Suspicious Activity Reports.
You mean other than the fact that Avenatti specifically mentioned the reports themselves, as well as fact the FBI Inspector General is investigating it as if it was Suspicious Activities Reports being improperly leaked??
Rich Delmar, a counsel to the IG, said that in response to media reports, the office was “inquiring into allegations” that Suspicious Activity Reports on Cohen’s banking transactions were “improperly disseminated.”
Again,the amount of cynicism you seem to have when defending anyone anti-Trump is mind boggling in comparison to how far you are willing to stretch the possibilities in order to believe most every accusation thrown at Trump or his associates.
Sober and clean and healthy and happy for a lot longer than you." HB
Funny shit, from drugs, to porn, to alchol to whoring, cheating on your then wife with your current dirty leg.
Liberals are praying for Storm damage.
And every allegation that the IG looks into is a foregone conclusion, Coldheart?
He "specifically mentioned" them- LOL, his mention consisted of suggesting that they be released to the public.
Are you deliberately trying to look like a dumb person, "he mentioned them" so he must have illegally obtained them somehow?
The NY Times has already verified many of the transactions from public sources they say. Does the Times have the secret documents, Coldheart?
Hey Scott thanks to one judge raised legitimate concerns about how the subpoenas were obtained does not mean that the entire investigation had nefarious intent. I read his ruling and for his concerns and for once I agreed with Alan Dershorich sp. But you always seem to find the entire investigation is a political ruse.
One judge suggested that Rosenstein basically lied to the American public by making public statement that he was appointing a special counsel to investigation the Russian interference and possible links to the Trump campaign...
When in fact, attorneys for Special Counsel admitted in court proceedings that Special Counsel was provided with "secret authorization" to investigate other areas that have still not been turned over either to Congress, or the Judge who was overseeing this hearing.
Attorneys also argued (in court) that whatever violations they may have committed were not legally enforceable in court because they are just DOJ regulations. Rosenstein and Mueller likely believe that they can break DOJ regulations without consequences because of the political ramifications of firing them.
Politicians and Americans like yourself have insulated Mueller and Rosenstein from having to be honest or to have to follow regulations, because they pretty much know that the possibility of them being fired is remote.
There is never a "good honest reason" to mislead the American public while simultaneously not following DOJ regulations when you are involved in something this important.
Why would you disagree?
And every allegation that the IG looks into is a foregone conclusion, Coldheart?
Of course not... but it certainly doesn't help your argument that there is no indication that Avenatti had access to the report. If there was "no indication" then the IG wouldn't be investigating it.
Are you deliberately trying to look like a dumb person, "he mentioned them" so he must have illegally obtained them somehow?
Avenatti was the one who first suggested that they exist.
How would Avenatti know that there even "is" Suspicious Activity Reports, seeing how they are actual secured government documents that are not allowed to be released to the public?
Right it doesn't help my argument, because I haven't made an argument. Cohen may or may not have access to a Suspicious Activity Report. But the fact that they exist doesn't make it likely that he does. The fact that he said the words "Suspicious Activity Report" doesn't mean that he does. This is just a reality check against your full steam ahead, where you're basically assuming a foregone conclusion.
The IG investigates allegations. We have gone through this already, and their primary concern is if and who may have leaked them, rather than how Avenatti ultimately got ahold of any content.
"How would Avenatti know that there even "is" Suspicious Activity Reports"
This is what I mean by deliberately acting dumb. How would he NOT know that there would be, if he's knowledgeable in those things? If he didn't know, isn't the obvious answer "someone told him"? And you leap from that possibility to him having illegal access to them. It is, frankly, what a dumb person would argue. I don't believe that you're dumb CH, but I think that you're misusing your native faculties in a reach to impeach anything that might impact your favored politician, and it goes to foolish extremes sometimes.
a result of Trump/GOP health initiatives, I have been paying $400+ per month EXTRA, out of pocket, for just some of my wife's prescribed medications "
WP.
$20 k on drugs a year. Your plan sucks.
WP...
Not sure why this is difficult. There are only two ways this information can be obtained.
1) From someone at the FBI.
2) From someone at the bank who knew the FBI had been provided the information.
Either way, the information Avenatti obtained regarding Cohen's banking and the Suspicious activity reports was not obtained legally. Even if someone else obtained this information and then "told him" - that someone else obtained the information illegally.
Moreover, the fact of the matter is that the FBI IG is investigating this as if it is a leak from the FBI. I am guessing that the FBI IG has a specific reason for this suspicion. It may even include the very reasons I stated. On the flip side, if the FBI felt it was a bank employee who was leaking private banking information, we'd be seeing a different investigation.
But hey... if you want to argue that the FBI IG is "dumb" because they are spending the time to investigate this as a possible leak. By all means, call them "dumb".
Obviously it takes someone "really really smart" like you... to figure an Attorney making public statements about internal Government Reports (that by penalty of federal law cannot be released) somehow got that information by legal means.
Or as you suggested in a very "smart" way:
How would he NOT know that there would be, if he's knowledgeable in those things?
Indeed, he knew because he knew. Who knew?
I believe the transactions Avenatti listed came from more than one bank.
Trump
Derangement
Syndrome on steroids.
"Either way, the information Avenatti obtained regarding Cohen's banking and the Suspicious activity reports was not obtained legally."
We don't even know that it wasn't legal. His information could have come from sources other than the SAR, which should be clear to you from the simple fact that a newspaper could verify it within a day or two.
Any of the information we've seen publicly could potentially have arisen from any of a number of sources, some legal, some not legal, and not necessarily including an documents held by the FBI.
"Indeed, he knew because he knew. Who knew?"
I submit that any lawyer, having even average intelligence, who is generally informed about investigations and knows what Suspicious Activity Reports are, could deduce that some existed for Cohen. All he needs to do is mouth off in the news about some bank transactions, some specifics that he's dug up, and make a vague reference to SAR's, and watch all of the idiots jump to the conclusion that he knows far more that he hasn't yet made public from those SAR's, thereby trashing the remaining shreds of Cohen's reputation.
And you fall for it, hook line and sinker. Has it even niggled at the edge of your consciousness, that half of what he's exposed might not even be true, and you're giving it credibility with your gullible conviction that he stole some confidential FBI documents and is doling it out?
Stop with the dumb arguments already.
" Even if someone else obtained this information and then "told him" - that someone else obtained the information illegally. "
And in your hypothetical, that would mean the the lawyer did NOT have the SAR. And again, the person who told Avenatti about the SAR's might have been legally entitled to the information. In fact, you don't have the first clue who that person is, if any, let alone whether or how he obtained information. Yet here you are, running off about someone violating the law.
"Moreover, the fact of the matter is that the FBI IG is investigating this as if it is a leak from the FBI."
Means that there was an allegation.
" I am guessing that the FBI IG has a specific reason for this suspicion."
Someone alleges that there *may* have been a leak, that instigates an IG internal investigation. That is a specific reason and is a far cry from your conclusions.
The clown can't even multiply 400 by 12, and he thinks he knows what someone else's insurance plan is.
Any of the information we've seen publicly could potentially have arisen from any of a number of sources, some legal, some not legal, and not necessarily including an documents held by the FBI.
Exactly what "legal" sources could have gotten either confidential banking information involved with an official confidential government report or the official confidential government report itself?
" involved with an official confidential government report "
By which you must mean the name of it, "Suspicious Activities Report".
Too bad that's a generic name for a document that likely exists for EVERY financial investigation in the FBI.
So, Coldheart, you're so certain that there actually are three of those. Since you have that confidential information from secret "official confidential government reports", by your reasoning YOU must have gotten them illegally.
You'd better lawyer up, because it's only a matter of time before the FBI finds out about it.
So, just to be clear Coldheart, tell us all specifically what information was made public that is only on those secret Suspicious Activities Reports. Other than what it's called, LOL.
I need it to fill out the bottom part: https://tips.fbi.gov/
All I've got so far is:
"This guy aka "Coldhearted Truth" suspiciously knows all about the Suspicious Activity reports. He knows what they're called. He knows that there was one on Cohen. There's only ONE WAY he could possibly know this stuff, and that's if he ILLEGALLY OBTAINED those documents."
So, anything you'd like to add to that?
When did WP go full on asshat?
My wife is not eating drugs like they are bon bons, eating up $20K of your income.
I can't stop you from acting ignorant about corporations and insurance plans that you know literally nothing about, but I do think this is happening across America right now, and I'm pretty sure that consumers are going to start balking when some of these companies cross that line. We're all going to know, eventually, why it's happening." WP
I have been paying $400+ per month EXTRA, " WP
Well, your base is what for her drugs?
1,$100
2,$200
3,$300
4,$400 +
Add "$400 extra"
Then your add your premium.
Your topic.
Lol, look WP, this is not Dear Abby. Stop complaining about your low quality benefits and blaming others.
One thing is true, I shouldn't have exposed that she required prescription medicines here, to people like this one. Some people are not to be trusted to handle that kind of information, and I briefly forgot that.
Lying about other people, and mocking their misfortune, is apparently the standard. Which one should expect from Trumpians, but somehow it always comes as a surprise to me.
KD stop being a moron and maybe someone will engage you in conversation.
Awww, so liberal of ya. You crybaby on this blog, bitch about your life and now puke up.
You brought your plight in life here, like HB, and like HB, you complain when your topic gets discussion time.
And this is a typical liberal here...
"It's all you've got because you don't have a working brain shut the f****** you stupid b**** or go to hell the sooner the better the world will be better off without you.
https://coldheartedtruthblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/violence-in-virginia.html?m=1
Compliments of Roger Amick
Not to be outdone...
Commie chimes in.
"Good ol bucket cunt injin can't stay away. Sorry excuse of a human....too bad you weren't run over by a nazi!!!!
Two death wishes.
By two liberals here.
https://coldheartedtruthblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/presidents-statement.html?m=1
Coldheart, since all that got sidetracked, let me bump this for you. I'm sure you must have something more than "Avenatti knew there were Suspicious Activity Reports" and "There's an IG inquiry" so here's your chance to prove it.
So, just to be clear Coldheart, tell us all specifically what information was made public that is only on those secret Suspicious Activities Reports. Other than what it's called, LOL.
I need it to fill out the bottom part: https://tips.fbi.gov/
All I've got so far is:
"This guy aka "Coldhearted Truth" suspiciously knows all about the Suspicious Activity reports. He knows what they're called. He knows that there was one on Cohen. There's only ONE WAY he could possibly know this stuff, and that's if he ILLEGALLY OBTAINED those documents."
So, anything you'd like to add to that?
WP:
You must not believe that SAR filings are an actual tangible real thing. That they are just a "description" of a generic bit of information.
Effective July 1, 2012 all SAR Reports must be filed through FinCEN's BSA E-filing System.[8]
A SAR has five sections each containing information about the filing institution or the activity in question:
Part I - Subject Information
Any name, address, social security or tax ID's, birth date, drivers license numbers, passport numbers, occupation and phone numbers of all parties involved with the activity.
Part II - Suspicious Activity Information
Date Range and codes for the type of Suspicious Activity
Part III - Information about Financial Institution where Activity Occurred
Part IV - Filing Institution Contact Information
Usually[clarification needed] contains the contact information for the financial institution's compliance officer or equivalent and list of any law enforcement agency that has been contacted while investigating the activity..
Part V - Suspicious Activity Information - Narrative
A written description of the activity.
Unauthorized disclosure of a SAR filing is a federal criminal offense.[4]
Financial institutions undertake an investigation process prior to filing a SAR to ensure that the information reported is appropriate, complete, and accurate. This process will often include review by financial investigators, management and/or attorneys prior to filing.
To encourage complete candor and cooperation, there are disclosure and evidentiary privileges that protect SAR filers. First, an individual or organization is precluded from discovering the existence or contents of a SAR that includes the individual or organization's name. SARs filers are immune from the discovery process.[5] Second, SAR filers enjoy immunity for all statements made in their SARs, regardless of whether those statements were allegedly made in bad faith.[6][7]
Here is the latest article that reports that A Treasury Department IG is investigating Avenatti over the confidential bank records.
The fact that it's an Internal IG investigation is why most are speculating that the leak came from the Government (not the bank).
Although the article states that other experts believe that he might have gotten if from the bank. Either way, it's illegal.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/386931-treasury-watchdog-probing-how-stormy-daniels-lawyer-got-cohens-bank
WP...
You still haven't provided any reasonable explanation for how you believe Avenatti otherwise obtained Cohen's banking information under some perfectly legal manner?
Only one of us is actually backing up their argument.
The fact that it's an Internal IG investigation is why most are speculating that the leak came from the Government (not the bank).
i'm puzzled as to why some here would be hesitant to believe that the government would somehow leak this info.
so far we know for a fact that the following people have leaked info that was not to be made public:
muller or someone(s) on his team
clapper
brennan
schiff
mccabe
comey
and i'm sure i missed a few.
that avenatti might have received the info from the government is not only believable, it's probable.
Only 18 percent of Corp tax cuts are going to share buy back. Enriching the continuing share holders.
Vote Democrat 2018. They promise to stop wealth creation.
Ette , it is the default position of the 5 liberal stooges of CHT.
Bring a personal issue to the blog, then get leaky about discussions about thier topic.
Ie. The breathlessness of jane @$72 oil, but nada at obama"s $113 oil.
You still haven't provided any reasonable explanation for how you believe Avenatti otherwise obtained Cohen's banking information under some perfectly legal manner?
Nor how he obtain emails Keith Davidson turned over to the US Attorney for the southern district of New York.
Hillary had a blue wall 2016
Radicalized Dems had a blue wave 2018*
(*update @ blue waive)
"You still haven't provided any reasonable explanation for how you believe Avenatti otherwise obtained Cohen's banking information under some perfectly legal manner?"
You haven't provided any reasonable explanation for why you believe that it came from a Suspicious Activity Report.
As near as anyone can tell, it's from nothing more than an insinuation by the lawyer that you think would be incriminating himself. Even you have to admit that it would be far-fetched.
Nov 8th, 2016 right way/wrong way poll was 64 % wrong way.
Today 53 % wrong way.
Tennis legend John McEnroe says before Donald Trump was in office, the real estate mogul offered him $1 million to face off with either Venus or Serena Williams, but he turned it down."
Muller has dispatched 8 lawyers , Sue this is the smoking gun.
So WP...
An attorney provides information regarding actual bank payment made to Cohen including the companies and the amounts, suggests all sorts malfeasance, demands that the Government should "release the "Suspicious Activity Reports"...
Causing an internal Treasury IG to look into where he got his information...
And you believe that this all came from some sort of "good guess" on the part of Avenatti?
Trolling trolling trolling...
Alright, I get it. You are seeing exactly how absurd you can get with your argument before people stop engaging it?
Knowledge of a payment must have come from a secret FBI document. Because that document exists somewhere. I get your argument. It's hard to believe that you're serious, but I get it.
So how does this work in your mind, Avenatti is contacted by his spy in the FBI who says hey, here's a secret SAR document that isn't useful in your case, but have it anyway. Avenatti knows that disclosure is criminal, but why not release it in a press statement? Coldheart's idea of not only plausible, but the only way it could happen.
Do you really think that the information on the SAR's just magically appeared there, and were otherwise impossibly hidden from everyone else?
How about, Avenatti hires some investigators who come up with some bank transactions involving Cohen? There's no use for them in his actual case, but he can trash Cohen's reputation. Just release some details, suggest that the FBI releases the SAR's, and all of the gullible Trumpians are going to be absolutely convinced that he has the SAR's! If he's reading off of those, it all must be true! And you're so eager to believe that, that you don't even question it.
Got PBS on to see the top stories.
Bears Ear Indian Monument
ISRAEL in the wrong for defending itself
HATE Trump
Good money spent on liberal garbage.
Yeah WP...
Lord knows that there is nobody in the Government willing to leak stuff for political purposes. Why would anyone fathom to believe such a thing?
It must be a "spy".
Good one!!
Hillary bitched about yet another reason she lost Yugely to Our President Trump. She was not radically Liberal enough.
So taking that to heart:
"
by JOHN BINDER
10 May 2018
President Trump called out Democratic National Committee Chairman Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) for wearing a t-shirt that promoted open borders during a rally on Thursday in Elkhart, Indiana.
This week, Ellison was seen wearing a t-shirt that read “I do not believe in borders” in Spanish, during a May Day parade in Minneapolis, Minnesota, as Breitbart News reported."
Come on,man.
You brough this topic to this blog , because?
wphamiltonMay 10, 2018 at 7:55 AM
Yes, of course, a comprehensive benefits package. I work for a US corporation that provides business research and analytics, and risk management analytics and legal analytics. The worlds largest data storehouse of certain types of information. Our company had to REDUCE benefits to comply with ACA (having so-called Cadillac Plans), and they were still more comprehensive than the vast majority of group insurance plans.
I don't care what you or anyone else believes that I pay in meds. I don't use any, period. But, and this is a new thing which I think is a result of Trump/GOP health initiatives, I have been paying $400+ per month EXTRA, out of pocket, for just some of my wife's prescribed medications while the prescriptions insurance was stringing her doctors along with bogus instructions. Without the threat of enforcement, there is little that I can do to recover it.
"But, and this is a new thing which I think is a result of Trump/GOP health initiatives"
Looks like someone chose the wrong plan.
I agree.
And working for a company that does not value thier workers. The company I worked for, for 32 years paid 100% for single plan and 80% for family plan. And it still does today. With a defined benifit retirement and a 457b retirement saving plan.
The number that rocked me was after his co-pay, his companies contribution on premiums, his pay in on premiums and his substantial base payout for meds, he still pays an additional $400 a month.
Easily he pays $20 k a year on health care.
Rudy Giuliani in 1998:
If the President is subpoenaed to testify,
“he’s gotta do it. He has no choice.”
"Rudi"
It's 'Rudy'
You're welcome.
Apparently the "Rudi" poster just emerged from mommies skirt.
Well enjoy your laughs now, but if that can happen with the quality of plans that my company provides, I hope that you never have a family member that needs that level of prescription medications. Because these are the best available. And no, the person speculating is wrong here as he tends to be in everything else, in the better plans currently the RX and health are combined in a single deductible and OOP.
It does show your colors though. Someone gets screwed by a prescription insurance company, and your reactions are all, "your own fault". Keep it in mind, if someone is cheating you for thousands of dollars by trying to stop your family member from her health care, it's your fault.
False Narratives of WP abound.
WP, you said your plan was reduce by your Company because of ObamaCare.
Blogger C.H. Truth said...
Yeah WP...
Lord knows that there is nobody in the Government willing to leak stuff for political purposes. Why would anyone fathom to believe such a thing?
It must be a "spy".
[It appears that] the FBI secretly had a person on the payroll who used his or her non-FBI credentials to interact in some capacity with the Trump campaign.
This would amount to spying, and it is hugely disconcerting. It would also be a major escalation from the electronic surveillance we already knew about, which was bad enough. Obama political appointees rampantly “unmasked” Trump campaign officials to monitor their conversations, while the FBI played dirty with its surveillance warrant against Carter Page, failing to tell the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that its supporting information came from the Hillary Clinton campaign. Now we find it may have also been rolling out [covert agents] to infiltrate the Trump campaign.
Which would lead to another big question for the FBI: When? ... [W]hen precisely was this human source operating? Because if it was prior to that infamous Papadopoulos tip, then the FBI isn’t being straight. It would mean the bureau was spying on the Trump campaign prior to that moment...
...I believe I know the name of the informant, but my intelligence sources did not provide it to me and refuse to confirm it. It would therefore be irresponsible to publish it. But what is clear is that we’ve barely scratched the surface of the FBI’s 2016 behavior, and the country will never get the straight story until President Trump moves to declassify everything possible. It’s time to rip off the Band-Aid.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/about-that-fbi-source-1525992611
Keep it in mind, if someone is cheating you for thousands of dollars by trying to stop your family member from her health care, it's your fault."
Little early in the day for me to hand out this award but I feel confident.
The strawman building award goes to our Socialist WP.
[It appears that] the FBI secretly had a person on the payroll who used his or her non-FBI credentials to interact in some capacity with the Trump campaign."
The dark black state.
In a just and rational world, the FBI spying and interfering with the electoral process would be the story.
Not porn stars, or nonexistent Russian collusion.
WASHINGTON — Kirstjen Nielsen, the homeland security secretary, told colleagues she was close to resigning after President Trump berated her on Wednesday in front of the entire cabinet for what he said was her failure to adequately secure the nation’s borders, according to several current and former officials familiar with the episode.
Ms. Nielsen, who is a protégée of John F. Kelly, the White House chief of staff, has drafted a resignation letter but has not submitted it, according to two of the people. As the head of the Department of Homeland Security, Ms. Nielsen is in charge of the 20,000 employees who work for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Mr. Trump’s anger toward Ms. Nielsen, who was sitting several seats to his left at the meeting, was part of a lengthy tirade in which the president railed at his cabinet about what he said was its lack of progress toward sealing the country’s borders against illegal immigrants, according to one person who was present at the meeting.
Asked about the heated exchange at the meeting, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary, said Thursday that “the president is committed to fixing our broken immigration system and our porous borders.”
He didn't duck Daniels and the Russians didn't intervene in the election to help Trump win.
TDS
Every single report in the real world shows that he's a short tempered moron.
Yet you are in denial.
"Well enjoy your laughs now"
Oh WP, I'm not laughing...far from it.
Obamacare changed the actuaries long before Trump came along...I know that for a fact.
There's help with copays out there.
Here's one that might help you.
www.copay.org
oh, hey alky.
the nielsen story is old news as is your chronic TDS.
so... your point?
Obamacare has nothing to do with it. The SAME insurance company, same policies, same group plan, no problems at all during those years. It's only this year that there is a prescription partner that has apparently decided to pull out all the stops. It's not actuaries, it's not insurance policy changes, it is literally arbitrary denial of performance. You want to know one of their excuses? Uncertainty and chaos because of the changes in laws and regulations this year. As if they aren't sure what to do, to authorize medications that have been prescribed for years. What that really means is, taking the opportunity to deny coverage wherever they can get away with it.
What's changed this year is not Obamacare, but the regulatory policies in DC.
I can afford the "extra" out of pocket, so copays.org would be useless to me. My choices are to just eat it, or accept alternate medications which are ineffective and (proven) dangerous to her health, or to take them head on. Which will be a losing battle as long as there is no enforcement leverage, and you'd better believe that there isn't, any more. So we'll just wait it out and pray that her health holds out, without bankrupting us, until the scoundrels who are creating these problems lose control.
WP, I forgot to add...
Sometimes the drug company itself will help.
Ironically, Novartis offers financial assistance for patients taking Infinitor. My sister takes it and they offer her about $15 grand a year to help with her copay which would be at least $900 a month
If your wife is seeing a specialist, they usually have a person on staff who works with patients about this very thing.
Hope some of this helps.
Trump didn't understand why he couldn't just close the border completely and keep everyone out, that's why he blew up at his Homeland Security chief. He didn't want to hear "excuses" like laws and real efforts. Just close it.
I feel sorry for the people who work for him. Nobody should have to put up with that.
Yeah, Obama could never quite get his head around laws either.
The pen and phone came in handy for him...
WP, I forgot to add...Sometimes the drug company itself will help.
Yeah the doctor, and he IS specialist, gave one of those cards to my wife, who took it to one of the pharmacies on the list. The first thing they asked was, "Medicaid?" No, then "insurance"? They would only honor it if the insurance had approved it, otherwise she'd save a grand total of $3. Second pharmacy, the same. We asked the specialist WTH was up with that, and his answer is "yeah some of them do that."
More like "all" of them. The "medicaid" question is highly suspicious, and maybe I could recoup something with a whistleblower tip, but I'm not climbing down into that kind of snake-pit. Unraveling what's going on in between pharmaceutical, specialists and pharmacies in the context of medicaid would be time-consuming, burning a lot of bridges, and probably would lead to a wrist-slap in the end in this current environment. Not just the Federal agencies, but remember this is Tom Price territory, the self-regulated and provider-permissive health care that he spent his political career designing. It's not a fight I can take up now.
The bottom line is, it doesn't work - not here, not for these medications, not unless your insurance company is being honest.
Actually, in this particular case (Novartis) my sister deals with Aetna Specialty Pharmacy over the phone.
Her meds are shipped to her via UPS.
The only drugs she gets from the pharmacy is Exesmustane (sp) and anything else she needs now that it's progressed.
*Exemestane
President Trump taking on Prescription drugs costs today.
Yesterday WP:
"Our company had to REDUCE benefits to comply with ACA (having so-called Cadillac Plans)"
Today, like HB , WP story changed.
After eight years of displeasure with the presidency of Barack Obama and faced with a choice between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, Dennis Schminke of Austin, Minn., didn’t have to think hard about how he would vote in 2016. A retired corporate manager, a staunch conservative and a county Republican official, he supported the New York businessman.
Since then, there has not been a day that Schminke wished that Clinton, rather than Trump, were president. But week by week, month by month, as he has watched the events of Trump’s presidency, he has become increasingly conflicted and concerned about what he has seen. The turmoil, he said, has often left him feeling “motion sick.”
Lol, BLUE WAIVE.
Post a Comment