Jump to content

Michael Cohen Investigation

DanTheHorn

By DanTheHorn
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Chooky
Chooky

Now we go live to Rudy Guliani:

Chooky
Chooky

Ms. Bechard is deeply distressed that someone has revealed that she allowed a gelatinous, half-amphibian half-man thing caterpillar across the bedroom on its belly like a walrus, bellowing like a dyin

Chooky
Chooky

If it's revealed he lied I'm as positive about anything that Brisket Goth wouldn't hesitate even a second to call him a pants on fire doo doo head. But what's fascinating here is your sudden into

Chooky

Chooky 13307

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

Sales on office shredders must be plummeting. Who wants to start an Office Document Incinerator Company with me? The Instant Pot of Evidence Annihilation. 

I'm in.  The first model will just be a metal drum that comes with lighter fluid.  We can call it the Exzybyt E-Lemon-8R 2000.  The executive model will just be a wrought iron fireplace painted red, white and blue called the Freedumb Keeper.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

Sales on office shredders must be plummeting. Who wants to start an Office Document Incinerator Company with me? The Instant Pot of Evidence Annihilation. 

I’m working on an acid based document destruction device that just liquifies paper instantly.

I’ve already got EPA approval thanks to the lifetime supply of dildos I am now contractually obligated to supply Scott Pruitt and his wife.

Most people don’t realize hydrochloric acid is about as cheap as bottled water.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VRHorn

VRHorn 718

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, RayDog said:

I am waiting for the report that the 16 pages of shredded documents that we spent tens of thousands of dollars on were credit card offers.

Like that dumpster fire of a human being has a high enough credit score to get a credit card...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105139

Posted
Posted
Like that dumpster fire of a human being has a high enough credit score to get a credit card...

Probably shredded all record of his Blockbuster account. You know a dick like that didn’t rewind ANY of his movies, and he thinks he can skip out in a couple hunnert in penalties. Not so fast, fucker...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TDunk

TDunk 590

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


Probably shredded all record of his Blockbuster account. You know a dick like that didn’t rewind ANY of his movies, and he thinks he can skip out in a couple hunnert in penalties. Not so fast, fucker...

Wouldn't you with titles of "Good Will Humping", "You've got Male", "Willy Wanker and the Fudge Packing Factory", "Oklahomo!", and "Yank My Doodle, It's a Dandy"?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chooky

Chooky 13307

Posted
Posted

Cohen cites separation at the border as the reason he's resigning from RNC.  Who knows considering that he's about to be arrested any minute now.  The motives and angles for these guys is impossible to predict.  Wouldn't be surprised if he's still perfectly compatible with the Trump.   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105139

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Well, see, Michael, here's the thing.  We're both lawyers, I'm gonna throw a little Latin at ya: qui cum canibus concumbunt cum pulicibus surgent.

 

Wait, your law Latin isn't too strong?  Here, I'll help you out.

Benajmin-Franklin-Poster-Dogs-Fleas.jpg

 

You're getting exactly what you should have expected.  Really need to brush up on your Latin, buddy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tuco

Tuco 5076

Posted
Posted

The truly amazing aspect is that the RNC didn't fire him previously.  I speculate that either a) they were somehow trying to exert some attorney-client privilege, including a pathway for further discussions; or b) they figured a firing would be a recognition of the strong likelihood that he was guilty, and they didn't want him signaling the same regarding Trump.  But obviously all bets are off now.  Whatever angle they had is closed.  Maybe it was  simply a natural progression of the third party review on what wasn't privileged.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Tuco said:

The truly amazing aspect is that the RNC didn't fire him previously.  I speculate that either a) they were somehow trying to exert some attorney-client privilege, including a pathway for further discussions; or b) they figured a firing would be a recognition of the strong likelihood that he was guilty, and they didn't want him signaling the same regarding Trump.  But obviously all bets are off now.  Whatever angle they had is closed.  Maybe it was  simply a natural progression of the third party review on what wasn't privileged.   

There’s no way Cohen was cooking the books or embezzling from the RNC for Trump. 

There’s just no way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Post Oak

Post Oak 20213

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, Tuco said:

The truly amazing aspect is that the RNC didn't fire him previously.  I speculate that either a) they were somehow trying to exert some attorney-client privilege, including a pathway for further discussions; or b) they figured a firing would be a recognition of the strong likelihood that he was guilty, and they didn't want him signaling the same regarding Trump.  But obviously all bets are off now.  Whatever angle they had is closed.  Maybe it was  simply a natural progression of the third party review on what wasn't privileged.   

They knowingly worked with the russians imo

This thing is going to be so big

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 16929

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Well, see, Michael, here's the thing.  We're both lawyers, I'm gonna throw a little Latin at ya: qui cum canibus concumbunt cum pulicibus surgent.

 

Wait, your law Latin isn't too strong?  Here, I'll help you out.

Benajmin-Franklin-Poster-Dogs-Fleas.jpg

 

You're getting exactly what you should have expected.  Really need to brush up on your Latin, buddy.

There's that fag talk we talked about.  /Dr. Lexus.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ghost of LL

Ghost of LL 15531

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Well, see, Michael, here's the thing.  We're both lawyers, I'm gonna throw a little Latin at ya: qui cum canibus concumbunt cum pulicibus surgent.

 

Wait, your law Latin isn't too strong?  Here, I'll help you out.

Benajmin-Franklin-Poster-Dogs-Fleas.jpg

 

You're getting exactly what you should have expected.  Really need to brush up on your Latin, buddy.

I prefer the more concise: Sic semper Traditori.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gil Bang

Gil Bang 25957

Posted
Posted

Federal authorities have subpoenaed the publisher of the National Enquirer for records related to its $150,000 payment to a former Playboy model for the rights to her story alleging an affair with Donald Trump, according to people familiar with the matter.

The subpoena from Manhattan federal prosecutors requesting information from the publisher, American Media Inc., about its August 2016 payment to Karen McDougal is part of a broader criminal investigation of Mr. Trump’s former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, they said.

Investigators are probing any potential efforts by Mr. Cohen to suppress damaging information about Mr. Trump during the presidential campaign, including whether he coordinated with American Media to pay Ms. McDougal and then not publish her account, other people familiar with the matter said.

Prosecutors are examining whether the payment violated campaign-finance or other laws, the people said.

American Media hasn’t been accused of wrongdoing, and the company has denied paying Ms. McDougal to suppress her story.

“American Media Inc., has, and will continue to, comply with any and all requests that do not jeopardize or violate its protected sources or materials pursuant to our first amendment rights,” a company spokesman said in an emailed statement.

Karen McDougal has said she had an affair with Donald Trump. Mr. Trump and his representatives have denied a sexual encounter.
Karen McDougal has said she had an affair with Donald Trump. Mr. Trump and his representatives have denied a sexual encounter. PHOTO:DIMITRIOS KAMBOURIS/GETTY IMAGES

Ms. McDougal has said publicly that she had a nearly yearlong affair with Mr. Trump beginning in 2006. The tactic of paying for a story but not publishing it is known in the tabloid world as “catch and kill,” The Wall Street Journal previously reported.

The company’s chairman and chief executive, David Pecker, has said he is a longtime friend of Messrs. Trump and Cohen, and the Enquirer aggressively supported Mr. Trump’s campaign. Ms. McDougal said in a March lawsuit against the publisher that she realized after the fact the payment was intended to muzzle her during the campaign.

Two months after American Media’s payment to Ms. McDougal, Mr. Cohen wired $130,000to former adult-film star Stephanie Clifford so she would keep silent about an alleged sexual encounter with Mr. Trump, also in 2006. That payment occurred 12 days before the presidential election.

Mr. Trump and his representatives have denied he had sexual encounters with Ms. McDougal or Ms. Clifford, who is professionally known as Stormy Daniels. Mr. Trump has acknowledged repaying Mr. Cohen through monthly retainers. The White House and Mr. Cohen didn’t respond to requests for comment for this article.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have been examining whether Mr. Cohen committed bank fraud or violated campaign-finance or other laws in connection with the payment to Ms. Clifford and other matters, according to people familiar with the investigation. Mr. Cohen has denied wrongdoing and hasn’t been charged.

 

Federal agents raided Mr. Cohen’s home, office and hotel room in April. A search warrant obtained by federal investigators authorized seizure of documents related to the payments to Ms. Clifford and Ms. McDougal, the Journal has previously reported. The search warrant also contained a broad provision asking for materials related to any effort or payment to deal with sources of negative publicity, a person familiar with the matter said.

Around that time, federal prosecutors sent a subpoena to American Media asking for records related to the McDougal payment, people familiar with the matter said. The company is in the process of producing the documents, one of the people said.

Phone records show that Messrs. Cohen and Pecker were in frequent contact around the time of the negotiations with Ms. McDougal, another person familiar with the matter said. It isn’t clear whether investigators have obtained any information reflecting the substance of their discussions.

The Justice Department’s guidelines for federal prosecutors describe subpoenas sent to news organizations as “extraordinary measures, not standard investigatory practices.”

Corporations are barred from making contributions to candidates under federal election law. If investigators find evidence that Mr. Cohen pressed American Media to buy Ms. McDougal’s story to protect Mr. Trump’s campaign, prosecutors could bring charges against Mr. Cohen, the company or both, legal experts said.

In such a case, prosecutors would have to prove Mr. Cohen coordinated with American Media to provide Mr. Trump something of value for the purpose of influencing the election, said Douglas Spencer, a professor of law and public policy at the University of Connecticut. Proving coordination would likely be the most difficult prong of such a case, he said.

The Federal Election Campaign Act makes clear that news stories, commentaries or editorials aren’t considered campaign expenditures, a press carve-out that could add First Amendment complications to an investigation of American Media.

But the exemption isn’t absolute, said Thomas Frampton, a lecturer at Harvard Law School who studies criminal law. “If the other evidence is there, I don’t think AMI’s status as a media company will preclude liability,” he said.

American Media, Mr. Pecker, and Dylan Howard, the company’s chief content officer, have all retained separate lawyers in connection with the investigation, people familiar with the matter said.

American Media released Ms. McDougal from her contract with the company as part of an April legal settlement. Her lawsuit alleged that American Media and her lawyer at the time lured her into the agreement under false pretenses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29672

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Gil Bang said:

....

 

re: National Enquirer

Just to reinforce how far gone the olds are, my own mother, whom I've never known to ever even pick up a copy of the National Enquirer while standing in the check out line, mentioned last week a recent "story" they had about how FAT Michelle Obama has become as if that somehow justifies something (if even remotely true).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tuco

Tuco 5076

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, bolverk said:

re: National Enquirer

Just to reinforce how far gone the olds are, my own mother, whom I've never known to ever even pick up a copy of the National Enquirer while standing in the check out line, mentioned last week a recent "story" they had about how FAT Michelle Obama has become as if that somehow justifies something (if even remotely true).

 

I usually check out their cover in line.  They have been consistently pro-Trump since he started campaigning, with some headline either supporting him (and what challenges he faces in cleaning up Washington) or attacking Clinton, Obama, Comey, or some other Trump enemy. Shortly after Cohen was raided, they headlined "Trump's Fixer's Secrets and Lies" on the same cover that includes "Trump passed Polygraph Proving No Russia Collusion".  At the time, I was assuming they were attacking Cohen on Trump's behalf, but it's certainly possible they were doing it for their own protection.    Over the last few weeks, I've noticed they've avoided mention of Trump, on the cover at least.

Edited to add NYT article on the relationship between Trump and AMI (National Enquirer):

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/11/us/politics/trump-national-enquirer-american-media.html   

Edited by Tuco
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29672

Posted
Posted

Yeah, my response to her was something along the lines of "You do know the head of the National Enquirer is buddy-buddy with Trump, right? He even paid for the story of one of his mistresses and then suppressed it."

The look of unfathomable incredulity and scorn on her face just told me to let it drop. There's no reaching people like her or my father, which is heart-breaking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Royal We

The Royal We 3072

Posted
Posted

I've got some of the same thing going on in my family Bolverk.  I used to think it was really lazy to chalk it all up to Fox News, but I'm not sure there is really any other valid explanation.  I really think it is rotting brains and suppressing any critical thinking abilities.  I tried confronting it through calm conversation initially, but it's gotten to the point where they just don't want to talk to me about it any longer.  At one point a calm conversation with some extended family devolved into shouting when I lost my composure after being shouted down repeatedly by a MAGA uncle who has gone off the deep end.  It's heart breaking indeed.

I haven't talked to them about it, but I'm sure most of my family supported this most recent policy (or were convinced the policy didn't exist) at the border.  It's hard for me to understand other than they all get the vast majority of their news from Fox.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted

^^^  Eric Garland had some relevant comments yesterday in a minithread:

And don’t get it twisted - the Op was Left and Right and even Center. Everyone has been propagandized by people paid to make coherent political discussion unbearable if not impossible. They weren’t content to steal your democracy from you. They wanted to steal your grandfather

Tech helped them profile all of us. They studied what made us mad, happy, afraid. Then media created content especially designed to inflame those feelings. And tech let foreign spies and domestic traitors cause as many fights as possible.

Moreover, the executives of these companies were warned. Repeatedly. They did it in 2016 and continue the practice to keep out of jail just that few extra weeks. If they stole your uncle, they still want to see if they can get your Mom, too.

Let the last days of each of these traitors be spent in a prison cell away from *their* families. Or anyone else’s.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

^^^  Eric Garland had some relevant comments yesterday in a minithread:

And don’t get it twisted - the Op was Left and Right and even Center. Everyone has been propagandized by people paid to make coherent political discussion unbearable if not impossible. They weren’t content to steal your democracy from you. They wanted to steal your grandfather

Tech helped them profile all of us. They studied what made us mad, happy, afraid. Then media created content especially designed to inflame those feelings. And tech let foreign spies and domestic traitors cause as many fights as possible.

Moreover, the executives of these companies were warned. Repeatedly. They did it in 2016 and continue the practice to keep out of jail just that few extra weeks. If they stole your uncle, they still want to see if they can get your Mom, too.

Let the last days of each of these traitors be spent in a prison cell away from *their* families. Or anyone else’s.

Tech didn't destroy the olds. Most of the older men don't even use Facebook, and the women mainly use it to keep up with their grandkids.

It was all television and almost exclusively Fox News. By the time I realized what had happened it was too late. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NameAlreadyInUse

NameAlreadyInUse 5112

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

Tech didn't destroy the olds. Most of the older men don't even use Facebook, and the women mainly use it to keep up with their grandkids.

It was all television and almost exclusively Fox News. By the time I realized what had happened it was too late. 

Not all.  My mom doesn't watch Fox News, nor does my dad.  My mom got it from right wing talk radio and Facebook.  My dad from the internet on places like Breitbart and Free Republic. My grandmother, OTOH, is all Fox News.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted
51 minutes ago, The Royal We said:

I've got some of the same thing going on in my family Bolverk.  I used to think it was really lazy to chalk it all up to Fox News, but I'm not sure there is really any other valid explanation.  I really think it is rotting brains and suppressing any critical thinking abilities.  I tried confronting it through calm conversation initially, but it's gotten to the point where they just don't want to talk to me about it any longer.  At one point a calm conversation with some extended family devolved into shouting when I lost my composure after being shouted down repeatedly by a MAGA uncle who has gone off the deep end.  It's heart breaking indeed.

I haven't talked to them about it, but I'm sure most of my family supported this most recent policy (or were convinced the policy didn't exist) at the border.  It's hard for me to understand other than they all get the vast majority of their news from Fox.

The olds grew up in a much different media environment than we did.  Growing up, they could mostly trust the reporters they watched on the television without the built in skepticism the younger generations have today.

They never developed that skepticism when Fox News showed up and they’ve been blindly getting all their political information from that single source.  It’s very hard to get them to break from a habit they’ve had for 10+ years.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...