Cont: Mueller Investigation pt3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Let's assume it's true. Let's say that Cohen is entirely innocent of the campaign finance charge, but pled guilty to it because the prosecutors forced his hand with the tax evasion charges, and that the reason the prosecutors did this is because Trump is implicated with the campaign finance charge.

Even if there could be no criminal charges brought, surely Trump could sue? Given that he's innocent, and very clever, we should be expecting that soon - right, thread legal experts?
 
Dr. Keith said:
How deluded does one have to be to think that the worst attorney to ever work for a president and the biggest liar to ever sit in the oval office were not on record clearly stating that the only reason they were paying this money was because of the stupid campaign?

Arguing about the law is irrelevant when the facts are this bad. No nuance can save these idiots from their own worts impulses.
Click to expand...

Dr. Keith said:
Which facts?

Clearly stated:
1) Worst attorney to ever work for a president
2) biggest liar to ever sit in the oval office

Add in from the thread:
3) hundreds of secret recording by said attorney
4) hundreds of thousands of documents seized from said attorney
5) said attorney plead guilty
6) prosecutors referenced documents seized and recordings to support the plea agreement

Yeah, no need for nuance.

You can stand their and smirk all day, but those aren't freckles, the fan has already been thoroughly introduced to the ****.
Click to expand...

Curious, you seemingly missed the highlighted part of one's own post. Curious.

Speaking of garbage attorneys tho actively ******** on the fan?

Lanny Davis Played You

From the Post:

The information in the Post story, which was attributed to one person familiar with discussions among Cohen’s friends, came from Davis, who is now acknowledging his role on the record.

Davis said he should not have expressed such confidence in his information.

“I should have been more clear — including with you — that I could not independently confirm what happened,” Davis said, adding: “I regret my error.”

This sure puts the Post, who reported a story based on Davis’ claims, in an awkward position. Perhaps they should have known better than to trust Davis, a renowned slimeball who has represented dictators and helped legitimize the 2009 Honduran coup.
Click to expand...

And Mr. Davis was instrumental in getting Cohen to plead.

https://splinternews.com/lanny-davis-played-you-1828615712
 
The Big Dog said:
Curious, you seemingly missed the highlighted part of one's own post. Curious.
Click to expand...

The facts I listed lead me to believe that there is a high probability that there are records as described. Ziggurat has taken the stance that such records are possible. You have taken the stance that they can not exist. Only one has taken an absolute stance, so only one of us can be wrong. We will see.

I guess that arbitration clause was just as rock solid as you thought it was. Haven't heard from Stormy in days.
 
The Big Dog said:
Lanny Davis Played You
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1033860804326694919

I think many will misread this news. As I said earlier this week, Davis needs to walk back his claims because making those claims publicly hurt his client by (a) angering Mueller, and (b) teasing what Cohen has in a way that hurts his bargaining position.
Click to expand...

Let's see which side history supports, shall we? I know who I think has the better track record at predicting the future between The Big Dog and "the poet".
 
Dr. Keith said:
The facts I listed lead me to believe that there is a high probability that there are records as described. Ziggurat has taken the stance that such records are possible. You have taken the stance that they can not exist. Only one has taken an absolute stance, so only one of us can be wrong. We will see.

I guess that arbitration clause was just as rock solid as you thought it was. Haven't heard from Stormy in days.
Click to expand...

I have certainly not taken the position that they "can not exist."

On the other hand, certain correspondents have gone from a not unreasonable wait and see approach to now this morning declaring other people "deluded." It would indeed appear that one is taking an absolute approach, and that person is certainly not your humble correspondent.

Yes, my analysis of the arbitration clause remains rock solid, unfortunately the landscape has changed, would you not agree?

Say maybe the stout prosecutors of the SDNY will go after the porn star for "campaign violations" what?
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Do you think it's credible that Michael Cohen is guilty of the campaign finance violation charge he pled guilty to?
Click to expand...

The Big Dog said:
Nope
Click to expand...

The Big Dog said:
I have certainly not taken the position that they "can not exist."
Click to expand...

Just not credible. What fine line you have left yourself between credible and possible. Something to be proud of, I'm sure.


Yes, my analysis of the arbitration clause remains rock solid, unfortunately the landscape has changed, would you not agree?
Click to expand...

I would agree that your legal analysis can be used for landscaping. Proper composting is encouraged, though.
 
The Big Dog said:
Well we already know, and not just because The Poet's self serving speculation is worthless.

We know that Lanny spread rumors that Lanny knew he could not corroborate, and we also know that Lanny is total scumbag.
Click to expand...

Is this that "not unreasonable wait and see approach" you're in favour of?

I'd say we should wait and see what, if anything, transpires between Cohen and Mueller before coming to any firm conclusions about what transpires between Cohen and Mueller.
 
Matthew Best said:
Trump's scumbag lawyer has a scumbag lawyer.

Are these "the best people" we were told about?
Click to expand...

I wonder how our legal specialist feels about Giuliani? Good to get that on record so we can see how it plays out after Trump disposes of him.
 
Dr. Keith said:
Just not credible. What fine line you have left yourself between credible and possible. Something to be proud of, I'm sure.
Click to expand...

Wait, you refer to my statement that I do not believe that the charge is credible is an "absolute'" position, while referring to people who might not agree with your speculation as "deluded"?

This is the part of the thread where the irony meters explode.
 
Last edited:
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Is this that "not unreasonable wait and see approach" you're in favour of?

I'd say we should wait and see what, if anything, transpires between Cohen and Mueller before coming to any firm conclusions about what transpires between Cohen and Mueller.
Click to expand...

In the meantime, we can certainly agree that lanny davis is a scumbag, correct?
 
crescent said:
Not legal trouble. So long as the expense related to the campaign, it would be a legal campaign expense. It would still be a PR nightmare, but not legally problematic.

This is different from, say, Duncan Hunter who spend something like $1500 of campaign funds on video games. Those games have no relation to the campaign, so it was not a legitimate expense. Had he spent $1500 of his personal money on video games that had no relation to the campaign, he would obviously not be in trouble.

Personal funds used on campaign and not reported = legal problems
Personal funds donated to campaign, reported as such, and then used on campaign = no legal problems.
Click to expand...

Well there was the side issue that it seems that the money came from the Trump Foundation and not out of Trumps Pocket.

But it almost seems as if the laws are written so that it is not easy to pay out hush money during a political campaign, almost as if the public had a right to know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom