Yeah the Cohen statement is huge. It's the first tangible (if not totally rock-solid) evidence that Trump committed any crimes during the campaign or since.
Michael Cohen’s attorney, Lanny Davis, released the following statement Tuesday:
“Michael Cohen took this step today so that his family can move on to the next chapter. This is Michael fulfilling his promise made on July 2nd to put his family and country first and tell the truth about Donald Trump. Today he stood up and testified under oath that Donald Trump directed him to commit a crime by making payments to two women for the principal purpose of influencing an election. If those payments were a crime for Michael Cohen, then why wouldn’t they be a crime for Donald Trump?”
Looks like someone finally realized Trump doesn't believe in loyalty.
Yes, my non-expert opinion on the question "can the president be indicted" has always been "yes, of course he can, he's not above the law. Why is that a question that even needs to be asked?" I know removal from office is a political process, not a legal process, but removal from office and criminal prosecution/conviction/incarceration are separate things.
+16
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
“If those payments were a crime for Michael Cohen, they why wouldn’t they be a crime for Donald Trump?”
As Stephen Colbert said, when your lawyer needs a lawyer... you need a lawyer.
So far the story on this is "it's a plea deal, and not a guilty verdict from a jury, so therefore *mental gymnastics* it means nothing and it's not real news."
Yes, my non-expert opinion on the question "can the president be indicted" has always been "yes, of course he can, he's not above the law. Why is that a question that even needs to be asked?" I know removal from office is a political process, not a legal process, but removal from office and criminal prosecution/conviction/incarceration are separate things.
Your non-expert opinion contradicts the official stance of the United States Department of Justice (that it has held since 1970).
Since the DoJ won't bring charges, there is no way to test it in court, outside of a State AG bringing charges against Trump.
Oh, goody, I see today's events have drastically moved up the date that American Greed does an episode about Trump's bullshit.
From what I've seen it looks like very little of what was seized during that raid got deemed being covered by client/attorney privilege. So the feds probably got most of the good stuff and just having Cohen admit to what he has thus far, is a huge boon for them. It's likely going to put cause panic in the ranks of those involved and someone will fuck up even more.
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
I'm willing to bet Rudy "I'm not a lawyer I just play one on TV" Giuliani (or a WH staffer under him) just did a search for "Trump" throughout the legal documents and he made his comment based on that. Because why read shit or apply any comprehension to what has been written?
I'm willing to bet Rudy "I'm not a lawyer I just play one on TV" Giuliani (or a WH staffer under him) just did a search for "Trump" throughout the legal documents and he made his comment based on that. Because why read shit or apply any comprehension to what has been written?
That or he’s just lying, since no Trump supporter will bother reading it.
I'm willing to bet Rudy "I'm not a lawyer I just play one on TV" Giuliani (or a WH staffer under him) just did a search for "Trump" throughout the legal documents and he made his comment based on that. Because why read shit or apply any comprehension to what has been written?
Because they're the defendants; Stormy is suing them for being shitty.
Man, I thought Cohen/Trump were suing to enforce the NDA and Stormy counter sued with an anti-slapp.
They tried to press the NDA in arbitration, not sure if it was before she challenged its legitimacy. She has since also filed a defamation suit over a tweet
Posts
Gotta link to that stuff here only
The President can be forced to testify in a civil case related to acts before said president took office.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_v._Jones
Avenatti's a character but this case matters and could end up mattering A LOT
That President was a Democrat. We'll see what happens if the issue comes up again.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Nixon?wprov=sfla1
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Let’s break some fuckin norms
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/michael-cohen-attorney-donald-trump-directed-him-to-commit-a-crime Looks like someone finally realized Trump doesn't believe in loyalty.
So far the story on this is "it's a plea deal, and not a guilty verdict from a jury, so therefore *mental gymnastics* it means nothing and it's not real news."
What a long, strange trip it's been.
Your non-expert opinion contradicts the official stance of the United States Department of Justice (that it has held since 1970).
Since the DoJ won't bring charges, there is no way to test it in court, outside of a State AG bringing charges against Trump.
I mean, they would be the ones bringing the charges so....
Right up there with this one.
My god, this pack of hypocritical assholes.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
Because they're the defendants; Stormy is suing them for being shitty.
Individuals within the DoJ would be. It can indeed ignore its own policy (see Comey)
MSNBC also talking about Cohen.
FOX is jonesing on the illegal immigrant story.
Man, I thought Cohen/Trump were suing to enforce the NDA and Stormy counter sued with an anti-slapp.
From what I've seen it looks like very little of what was seized during that raid got deemed being covered by client/attorney privilege. So the feds probably got most of the good stuff and just having Cohen admit to what he has thus far, is a huge boon for them. It's likely going to put cause panic in the ranks of those involved and someone will fuck up even more.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
Just Individual 1 who became president in January 2017.
It could be anyone!
Just a person that got coffee
Being shitty before he was president specifically.
That or he’s just lying, since no Trump supporter will bother reading it.
pleasepaypreacher.net
Why would they drop it?
Noise has a value all on its own.
Internal screaming intensifies.
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
pleasepaypreacher.net
FFXIV - Milliardo Beoulve/Sargatanas
They tried to press the NDA in arbitration, not sure if it was before she challenged its legitimacy. She has since also filed a defamation suit over a tweet
https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/30/politics/stormy-daniels-defamation-lawsuit/index.html