Michael Cohen's Congressional testimony

Meadmaker said:
You are right, at least sort of.

The thing is, Donald Trump is the sort of guy who has, all of his life, lived on the margin of the law. Admit it. On a personal level, the guy is pond scum. Right? I mean....Trump University? Can you try to defend the indefensible there? He tiptoes around the law, always trying to stay on the right side of it, and frequently succeeding, with so far only an occasional, or not so occasional, civil suit where he got caught.

In order to do that, you have to have lawyers who are willing to play along, and Trump knew that. And the same sort of lawyers who will go along with those barely legal schemes, and we know that Donald Trump likes a lot of things that are barely legal, are the sorts of guys who would try their own barely legal, or even "it's only illegal if they catch you", schemes. That's the sort of guy Michael Cohen was, and Donald Trump knew it.

So, he almost certainly did not know the details of Mr. Cohen's tax evasion, but he knew that Cohen was the sort that would find a way to get around paying taxes by any means necessary.

What's happening right now is that there are a whole lot of people (i.e. Democrats) who have a very powerful incentive to look at everything The Donald has ever done and find somewhere that he stepped onto the wrong side of the line. I don't know whether or not they'll find one, or if they do, whether they will be able to turn that into impeachment, but they'll keep looking. So far, they don't have it, but they'll keep looking.

And even if they don't find that impeachable offense, in the course of it, what they will show is that Donald Trump wasn't exactly the sort of successful businessman he claimed to be. Instead, more of them will see that he's the sort of successful businessman whose success came out of screwing everyone he could, and throwing partners under the bus when they, like Michael Cohen, were not longer useful.

A lot of people thing he's a good president, and in some cases, they have very strong arguments, but on a personal level, wouldn't you agree that this is one really bad hombre?

Answer honestly.
Click to expand...

Minor correction. There is no reason to think that Trump minded about the legality, just about whether he'd get caught. And being narcissistic, and surrounded by yes men (and I do mean men) for most of his life, his assessment of his own cunning has grown.
 
Is the question whether Trump is one bad hombre? The answer is absolutely yes.

The thing is that expecting Trump to know about Cohen personal affairs is silly. There are lots are really sleazy lawyers who make millions every single year, and many of them are pinnacles of the Democrat Party. See Madrigan, Burke, Avenatti, etc.

****, Mike Avenatti makes Cohen look like a god damn choir boy.

Think of the monsters the Clintons surrounded themselves with.
 
The Big Dog said:
Is the question whether Trump is one bad hombre? The answer is absolutely yes.

The thing is that expecting Trump to know about Cohen personal affairs is silly. There are lots are really sleazy lawyers who make millions every single year, and many of them are pinnacles of the Democrat Party. See Madrigan, Burke, Avenatti, etc.

****, Mike Avenatti makes Cohen look like a god damn choir boy.

Think of the monsters the Clintons surrounded themselves with.
Click to expand...

A reasonable answer.

Ok. So it includes the usual whataboutism, but that's not entirely inappropriate under the circumstances.

Of course, that's based on the evidence currently available. It could be, and many of us suspect it will be, that further information will come to light to help us further refine our estimates of relative badness.
 
Last edited:
Meadmaker said:
A reasonable answer.

Ok. So it includes the usual whataboutism, but that's not entirely inappropriate under the circumstances.

Of course, that's based on the evidence currently available. It could be, and many of us suspect it will be, that further information will come to light to help us further refine our estimates of relative badness.
Click to expand...

Well the question is whether clients should know of the misdeeds of their lawyers, as such it is difficult to imagine how I could be accused of whataboutism.

Hell there are people who actively seek out m. avenatti despite the fact he is one of the worst people on earth.

Trump was looking for someone who would push the envelope but not break it, just like thousands of other clients do everyday.
 
The Big Dog said:
Trump was looking for someone who would push the envelope but not break it, just like thousands of other clients do everyday.
Click to expand...

Given that he accepted illegal loans to keep his casino afloat only to have a punishment far weaker than the outcomeof not making the debt payment, it isn't clear that he wants to keep things legal.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Given that he accepted illegal loans to keep his casino afloat only to have a punishment far weaker than the outcomeof not making the debt payment, it isn't clear that he wants to keep things legal.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's clear he had no concerns about legality, only about being caught.
 
Meadmaker said:
A reasonable answer...
Click to expand...

But also non-substantive. As I tried to point out -- tongue in cheek -- calling someone a bad hombre can be actually be praise, in certain contexts, especially with people who use, or try to use, street slang.

I see this comment on many message forums, not just this one, where people of various political persuasions try and get Trump defenders to at least address some of the issues with Donnie. I posed a common set of questions yesterday --Are you really arguing that Trump is not corrupt? You see no evidence that he is a constant liar and manipulator? -- but it wasn't responded to, at least not directly. And it never is, here and elsewhere. There's never any real discussion between those who think Trump is dangerous and those who support him. There have to be a few areas where we could agree, at least somewhat, but it takes two to Tango.
 
It's also telling that at first Trump called Cohen a rat, but not a liar.
 
The Big Dog said:
Is the question whether Trump is one bad hombre? The answer is absolutely yes.

The thing is that expecting Trump to know about Cohen personal affairs is silly. There are lots are really sleazy lawyers who make millions every single year, and many of them are pinnacles of the Democrat Party. See Madrigan, Burke, Avenatti, etc.

****, Mike Avenatti makes Cohen look like a god damn choir boy.

Think of the monsters the Clintons surrounded themselves with.
Click to expand...

9F7hA8N.png
 
Meadmaker said:
...
So, he almost certainly did not know the details of Mr. Cohen's tax evasion, but he knew that Cohen was the sort that would find a way to get around paying taxes by any means necessary....
Click to expand...
Upon what evidence do you base that?
 
newyorkguy said:
But also non-substantive. As I tried to point out -- tongue in cheek -- calling someone a bad hombre can be actually be praise, in certain contexts, especially with people who use, or try to use, street slang.

I see this comment on many message forums, not just this one, where people of various political persuasions try and get Trump defenders to at least address some of the issues with Donnie. I posed a common set of questions yesterday --Are you really arguing that Trump is not corrupt? You see no evidence that he is a constant liar and manipulator? -- but it wasn't responded to, at least not directly. And it never is, here and elsewhere. There's never any real discussion between those who think Trump is dangerous and those who support him. There have to be a few areas where we could agree, at least somewhat, but it takes two to Tango.
Click to expand...


Thus the difference between the Democrats and the Republicans for the last 30 years. The GOP conducting every dirty trick in the book: Voter fraud, stonewalling Federal/Supreme court nominations, Benghazi hearings.

But then scream "political stunt" when a confident of the president is brought before them to testify about his/their irregularities.

The GOP is too busy screaming about the (mostly made up) "hypocrisy of the left!" to even acknowledge their own hypocrisy.
 
cantonear1968 said:
Thus the difference between the Democrats and the Republicans for the last 30 years. The GOP conducting every dirty trick in the book: Voter fraud, stonewalling Federal/Supreme court nominations, Benghazi hearings.

But then scream "political stunt" when a confident of the president is brought before them to testify about his/their irregularities.

The GOP is too busy screaming about the (mostly made up) "hypocrisy of the left!" to even acknowledge their own hypocrisy.
Click to expand...
And apparently the Republican corruption in the Congressional race in North Carolina is all the fault of them pesky Democrats too, according to McConnell at least. Who would have guessed the Dems were so good at being bad?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom