Michael Cohen Investigation

[Brisketexan 105096]

Just now, Chooky said:

Just because we have a donkey for a president doesn't mean that every institution should start braying like a jackass.  Tap the brakes and get it right.  If anything, truth is at an even higher premium because of these degenerates.

I certainly agree.  I actually think it's more important than ever -- if we want to hold up "objective truth" as a fundamental value, then we need to demonstrate it as well as possible.

That said, the fact that the same people attacking an outlet for making a mistake (and correcting it) are the same people who enable and CELEBRATE a pathological liar.  The cognitive dissonance...it's deafening....

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Yeah, I think the media is fully aware of the pressure they’re under.

Fuckups will still happen no matter what, thank god we have good citizens to berate them when a mistake is made.

Edited May 3, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Chooky 13307]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

I certainly agree.  I actually think it's more important than ever -- if we want to hold up "objective truth" as a fundamental value, then we need to demonstrate it as well as possible.

That said, the fact that the same people attacking an outlet for making a mistake (and correcting it) are the same people who enable and CELEBRATE a pathological liar.  The cognitive dissonance...it's deafening....

Well, using a boiling cauldron of pedophiles, liars, thieves, drooling morons and hypocrites as the measuring stick for decorum in journalism isn't going to helpful.   

[Bat Guano 359]

9 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I certainly agree.  I actually think it's more important than ever -- if we want to hold up "objective truth" as a fundamental value, then we need to demonstrate it as well as possible.

That said, the fact that the same people attacking an outlet for making a mistake (and correcting it) are the same people who enable and CELEBRATE a pathological liar.  The cognitive dissonance...it's deafening....

One side doesn't give a flying fuck about the truth and lies to further its own ends. The media has nothing but its credibility. Lose that, and it's lost everything. All it can do is provide an example to contrast with the liars, and the only way to do that is by never making this kind of unforced error. This example is especially egregious because it shows neglect of such a fundamental tenet.

Edited May 3, 2018 by Bat Guano

[Chooky 13307]

5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Yeah, I think the media is fully aware of the pressure they’re under.

Fuckups will still happen no matter what, thank god we have good citizens to berate them when a mistake is made.

Good citizens and bad citizens should all berate them when they get it wrong.  Fuckups that are easily avoidable should never happen, especially from a corporate leviathan like NBC.  If some blogger with a full ashtray and an open jar of Vaseline on his desk got sideways like this I'd be willing to grant them the pass that you want granted here.  This is NBC.  Truth is going to be key.  This was easily avoidable.  The gamble they took was to be either first or thorough.  They chose the former.  Fuck 'em.  

[Dutchrudder 11137]

1 hour ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Legitimate media can't make mistakes like this anymore, even if they have corrected.  Be better, please. 

 

 

Am I being too cynical when my first thought in response to this is, "oh I guess they didn't have a warrant for the content of the calls?"  

I thought the Snowden revelations from a few years ago pretty well explained how the US government is monitoring and/or recording all non-encrypted telecommunications. It can't be that hard to get copies of what they want, when they want it. 

[Dutchrudder 11137]

delete

Edited May 3, 2018 by Dutchrudder
delete

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

The real question is when do we start the “Rudy Giuliani Investigation” thread?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Don Jr doesn’t waste any time.

[sheeeit 129]

Lets at least be honest here, the only reason NBC retracted the statement was because they got caught.  Comey has now twice (once in his congressional testimony and once in his interviews recently) said that at least 2 articles that supposedly used fbi peeps as sources were completely false.  No retractions on those.

When they report a fact (like this about wiretapping) they get continually burned.  When they just report so and so said this, then there are no retractions because there isn't anyone to refute them.  For instance, they write something like the potus talked about firing mueller.  So who gets to fact check that?  That is their common bs tactic these days. 

And how about this from the upstanding lawyer Avenatti.  How is this going to be walked back or retracted?

"

Michael Avenatti, the lawyer for adult film actress Stormy Daniels, said on MSNBC Thursday he had knowledge that law enforcement intercepted text messages from President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer Michael Cohen before the FBI raid of Cohen’s home, office and hotel room.

The attorney, who filed a defamation lawsuit on behalf of Daniels, whose legal name is Stephanie Clifford, against Trump this week, was reacting to a new NBC News report that federal investigators had obtained a wiretap of Cohen’s phone lines. According to NBC, law enforcement intercepted at least one phone call between Cohen and the White House. The report said it was unclear how long the wiretap had been in place. 

“I don't think we're going to find out that this was confined just to email or voice wiretaps. My understanding is that they were also wiretapping text message communications for the weeks leading up to the FBI raids,” Avenatti said.  Pressed on how he garnered the information, Avenatti responded: “I’m not speculating, that’s a fact."

Avenatti said he believed intercepted communications gave investigators reason to believe that evidence could be destroyed if they didn’t move in and raid Cohen's properties.

"I also think that it will ultimately be disclosed that during these wiretaps the FBI learned of means by which Michael Cohen and others were going to potentially destroy or spoliate evidence or documentation," Avenatti said. "That's what served as the predicate or the basis for them to be able to go in and get the warrant to search the home, the office and the hotel room of Michael Cohen."

Anyone think that MSNBC is going to correct the Avenatti rant?  Think Avenatti will just admit he made it all up?  That perhaps when he said "I'm not speculating, that's a fact." that he was, in fact, speculating and talking right out of his ass.  How is that Genie getting back in the bottle.

 

I also love the Pods and Hugo narrative that this is Trumps people feeding bad info to the willing media to try and diffuse the actual news.  That trumps people have been using the media and manipulating them.  I mean even you guys would admit that reporters would only let a source burn them once right?  yet you are suggesting this has been going on for a year.  The smart ethical journalists just keep using these trump sources that keep burning them.  And, now that trumps peeps are in tight with the media and acting as informants, they decided to blow their cover on a story about Cohen's phones being tapped which can, and was, easily proved wrong.  The trump peeps worked really hard to get in a position to influence the media narrative and then blew it all away on a nothing story about cohen.  Seems logical.

The media has been using anonymous sources to drive ratings for a year and a half and you guys love it.

 

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

And now Sheeit is back with walls of bullshit text. #thanksNBC

[hayden_horn 11362]

Just asking questions, man. Lulz

[SizzleChest 8283]

52 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Don Jr doesn’t waste any time.

 

[burntorangebongos 10710]

That is why they are paid the big bucks to get it right. That is why they have an enormous responsibility to truth and the people who consume their information to make informed opinions.

[David Dennison 18854]

5 minutes ago, burntorangebongos said:

That is why they are paid the big bucks to get it right. That is why they have an enormous responsibility to truth and the people who consume their information to make informed opinions.

It's also why they retract it when they are wrong.

Unlike some news outlets.

[Hank Kingsley 20921]

Yes, but at that point, it's too late.  Trump is lying 95% of the time he opens his mouth, but none of his supporters give a shit.  The MSM can be reporting facts 95% of the time, but that 5% where they fuck up ANYTHING will immediately deem them as "fake news" by Trumpkins.  It's obviously ridiculously unfair, but that's the reality.  There is a war on truth and it's been obvious ever since Trump won the Republican primary.  There is no need to rush any breaking news, as it's a 24 hour cycle of shit everyday with Trump.  Get it right. They should be striving for perfection right now in this fucked up timeline we live in. 

 

Edited May 4, 2018 by Hank Kingsley

[jimmyjazz 45900]

The fact that Fox News is wholly incapable of showing any restraint whatsoever, and routinely makes mistakes as big or bigger as NBC's mistake about Cohen's phone lines matters not one bit to the Trumpkins.  This thread is glaring proof.  Interesting how those who are critical of Fox are now also critical of NBC.  You know . . . balance.

[Bat Guano 359]

14 hours ago, sheeeit said:

Lets at least be honest here, the only reason NBC retracted the statement was because they got caught.  Comey has now twice (once in his congressional testimony and once in his interviews recently) said that at least 2 articles that supposedly used fbi peeps as sources were completely false.  No retractions on those.

When they report a fact (like this about wiretapping) they get continually burned.  When they just report so and so said this, then there are no retractions because there isn't anyone to refute them.  For instance, they write something like the potus talked about firing mueller.  So who gets to fact check that?  That is their common bs tactic these days. 

And how about this from the upstanding lawyer Avenatti.  How is this going to be walked back or retracted?

"

Michael Avenatti, the lawyer for adult film actress Stormy Daniels, said on MSNBC Thursday he had knowledge that law enforcement intercepted text messages from President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer Michael Cohen before the FBI raid of Cohen’s home, office and hotel room.

The attorney, who filed a defamation lawsuit on behalf of Daniels, whose legal name is Stephanie Clifford, against Trump this week, was reacting to a new NBC News report that federal investigators had obtained a wiretap of Cohen’s phone lines. According to NBC, law enforcement intercepted at least one phone call between Cohen and the White House. The report said it was unclear how long the wiretap had been in place. 

“I don't think we're going to find out that this was confined just to email or voice wiretaps. My understanding is that they were also wiretapping text message communications for the weeks leading up to the FBI raids,” Avenatti said.  Pressed on how he garnered the information, Avenatti responded: “I’m not speculating, that’s a fact."

Avenatti said he believed intercepted communications gave investigators reason to believe that evidence could be destroyed if they didn’t move in and raid Cohen's properties.

"I also think that it will ultimately be disclosed that during these wiretaps the FBI learned of means by which Michael Cohen and others were going to potentially destroy or spoliate evidence or documentation," Avenatti said. "That's what served as the predicate or the basis for them to be able to go in and get the warrant to search the home, the office and the hotel room of Michael Cohen."

Anyone think that MSNBC is going to correct the Avenatti rant?  Think Avenatti will just admit he made it all up?  That perhaps when he said "I'm not speculating, that's a fact." that he was, in fact, speculating and talking right out of his ass.  How is that Genie getting back in the bottle.

 

I also love the Pods and Hugo narrative that this is Trumps people feeding bad info to the willing media to try and diffuse the actual news.  That trumps people have been using the media and manipulating them.  I mean even you guys would admit that reporters would only let a source burn them once right?  yet you are suggesting this has been going on for a year.  The smart ethical journalists just keep using these trump sources that keep burning them.  And, now that trumps peeps are in tight with the media and acting as informants, they decided to blow their cover on a story about Cohen's phones being tapped which can, and was, easily proved wrong.  The trump peeps worked really hard to get in a position to influence the media narrative and then blew it all away on a nothing story about cohen.  Seems logical.

The media has been using anonymous sources to drive ratings for a year and a half and you guys love it.

 

1. Why should MSNBC correct Avenatti? He said what he said. People go on TV all the time and lie their asses off, er, that is, give their opinions about the news of the day. The network didn't report what he said as news; they put him on the air and he said what he wanted to say. Just like every other talking head they put on every day. That's the difference between opinion chat shows and straight news, or it's supposed to be.

2. Of course the Trump people are feeding bad info to the media to try to discredit them. It's the Dan Rather model - put a fake memo or, in this case, a juicy nugget of info that's hard to verify immediately, that is false by design, and if they swallow the bait you use it to discredit the whole story and the network and the entire mainstream media, if you can. It depends on having a willing echo chamber to shout about the fakery of the media, but of course they have that in spades. The nets should be aware of this tactic - I'm sure they are - but obviously NBC's greed for the scoop overrode their judgement yet again. Their own fault; they need to be better.

Edited May 4, 2018 by Bat Guano

[Bat Guano 359]

12 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Yes, but at that point, it's too late.  Trump is lying 95% of the time he opens his mouth, but none of his supporters give a shit.  The MSM can be reporting facts 95% of the time, but that 5% where they fuck up ANYTHING will immediately deem them as "fake news" by Trumpkins.  It's obviously ridiculously unfair, but that's the reality.  There is a war on truth and it's been obvious ever since Trump won the Republican primary.  There is no need to rush any breaking news, as it's a 24 hour cycle of shit everyday with Trump.  Get it right. They should be striving for perfection right now in this fucked up timeline we live in. 

 

Yup. Back the fuck off and make absolutely, 100% sure what you put out there is accurate. The truth is damaging enough to the Trumpkins; there's no need to run with unverified stuff when you can wait a few hours or a day, check it out, and make it stick.

[TornACL 7698]

16 hours ago, Chooky said:

That sack of egg flatulence, Chuck Todd, was just on in the background.  He had George Will on his idiotic program, which is like watching a Rolls-Royce participate in a monster truck show and the venue is in a sewer. 

Lines like this right here is why you come to this website.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

The more I think about it, the more clear it is that the Giuliani thing is an attempt to influence Cohen post-raid.  The previous plan was for Cohen to lie and say it was 100% him.   After the raid, they know they can't hide the reimbursements from Trump.   They can't communicate directly because the feds are watching.  So Giuliani is supplying new cover story through the media — Trump reimbursed, but didn't know he was reimbursing the money because Cohen repaid himself from a regular draw covering his expenses. 

[Pig Bellmont 8713]

16 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

The more I think about it, the more clear it is that the Giuliani thing is an attempt to influence Cohen post-raid.  The previous plan was for Cohen to lie and say it was 100% him.   After the raid, they know they can't hide the reimbursements from Trump.   They can't communicate directly because the feds are watching.  So Giuliani is supplying new cover story through the media — Trump reimbursed, but didn't know he was reimbursing the money because Cohen repaid himself from a regular draw covering his expenses. 

If we’re speculating, I think your read is wrong. I think Trump and Giuliani calculated less of a campaign finance penalty if Trump repaid a personal loan, and so they made up a story about how Trump repaid Cohen directly. There’s no record of the payment, so he has to attribute “several payments over a period of months funneled through a law firm”. I think the reality is that the campaign paid Cohen $130k almost immediately after the payment was issued. 

The fallout relates to the fact that this wasn’t well thought out and Giuliani may have implicated Trump in a few felonies. 

Oh and last night Cohen apparently told a reporter that Giuliani doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Oops. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Trump and Giuliani know the truth is going to come out eventually per the Cohen raid.

They are just getting out in front of it and going “muddy the waters” to create confusion as to what the real facts are.  The details of the Stormy Daniels payment story will probably change several more times over the coming months, per the Trump Team.

Few will know what the truth is in the end.

Edited May 4, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[wildcat09 29349]

16 hours ago, Pods said:

They need to burn their sources when their sources burn them. Yes they lose the source, but the source isn't reliable anyway.

Fucking this. You’re dealing with people who are even more obsessed with talking to the media than Maggie Haberman is with “access”. You can set the terms of your dealings with them. When they lie to you, fucking burn them. You’ll find other sources for White House gossip. Shit, someone new starts there virtually every day and every single one of them is desperate to speak to the media.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

8 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

If we’re speculating, I think your read is wrong. I think Trump and Giuliani calculated less of a campaign finance penalty if Trump repaid a personal loan, and so they made up a story about how Trump repaid Cohen directly. There’s no record of the payment, so he has to attribute “several payments over a period of months funneled through a law firm”. I think the reality is that the campaign paid Cohen $130k almost immediately after the payment was issued. 

The fallout relates to the fact that this wasn’t well thought out and Giuliani may have implicated Trump in a few felonies. 

Oh and last night Cohen apparently told a reporter that Giuliani doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Oops. 

If the campaign paid Cohen back immediately, there will be a record of that.   Giuliani would know that.  Why would he cook this up knowing that is out there? 

[Bat Guano 359]

3 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

If the campaign paid Cohen back immediately, there will be a record of that.   Giuliani would know that.  Why would he cook this up knowing that is out there? 

Because they're playing Whack-a-Mole. That story got them through a news cycle. They'll deal with the fallout some other time, or not.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

1 minute ago, Bat Guano said:

Because they're playing Whack-a-Mole. That story got them through a news cycle. They'll deal with the fallout some other time, or not.

But Giuliani created the story where there was nothing new.   It was totally out of the blue.  If he hadn't gone on TV to say that, it would have been just another day like today.  

[TahoeHorn 107]

23 hours ago, DanTheHorn said:

Quick article on how bad Cooley is as far as law schools go.

https://lawschooli.com/should-i-attend-cooley-law-school/

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/05/04/trump-michael-cohen-lawyer-cooley-law-school-218318

[Bat Guano 359]

3 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

But Giuliani created the story where there was nothing new.   It was totally out of the blue.  If he hadn't gone on TV to say that, it would have been just another day like today.  

They were getting out ahead of the story that they knew was coming. That's what counts as strategic thinking in Whack-a-Mole: you hit where the mole is going to be, because of your unerring gut instincts.

[Pig Bellmont 8713]

15 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

If the campaign paid Cohen back immediately, there will be a record of that.   Giuliani would know that.  Why would he cook this up knowing that is out there? 

My understanding is that the payment is out there. Trump and Cohen maintain that Cohen worked for the campaign and the payment was unrelated to hush money 

[Chad Fuck 17671]

Wasn't there a story a while back about $129k payment from the campaign to Cohen right around the time of his payment to Stormy?  

I'm sure I saw it here.  If that's the case, then why are we bickering about $35k/mo retainers?  I mean, aside from the fact that $35k/mo is absolutely ludicrous unless you're paying off many, many porn stars?

[atomheartbevo 89652]

14 minutes ago, Bat Guano said:

They were getting out ahead of the story that they knew was coming. That's what counts as strategic thinking in Whack-a-Mole: you hit where the mole is going to be, because of your unerring gut instincts.

Bonus: people are talking more about Guiliani’s idiocy instead for Trump or Stormy. 

Rudy doesn’t think things through well.  Hell, he married a cousin, knowing full well she was his cousin. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

6 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

Wasn't there a story a while back about $129k payment from the campaign to Cohen right around the time of his payment to Stormy?  

I'm sure I saw it here.  If that's the case, then why are we bickering about $35k/mo retainers?  I mean, aside from the fact that $35k/mo is absolutely ludicrous unless you're paying off many, many porn stars?

IIRC, someone cherry picked small payments that added up to $129k and change, but it didn't seem that convincing to me. 

[Brisketexan 105096]

6 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

Wasn't there a story a while back about $129k payment from the campaign to Cohen right around the time of his payment to Stormy?  

I'm sure I saw it here.  If that's the case, then why are we bickering about $35k/mo retainers?  I mean, aside from the fact that $35k/mo is absolutely ludicrous unless you're paying off many, many porn stars?

Because it's the 3-card Monte/shell-game technique that money launderers use.  Have SO much money flowing around in SO many transactions among SO many persons and entities that it's difficult to determine which payment is for what.

Team Trump does so many of the things that classic Organized Crime groups do, it's not even funny.  Truly, it's amazing to watch.  It's just basic Mob-101 shit.

[Pig Bellmont 8713]

12 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

Wasn't there a story a while back about $129k payment from the campaign to Cohen right around the time of his payment to Stormy?  

I'm sure I saw it here.  If that's the case, then why are we bickering about $35k/mo retainers?  I mean, aside from the fact that $35k/mo is absolutely ludicrous unless you're paying off many, many porn stars?

Because it matters whether that was campaign money vs Trump’s money. Federal law limits not only contributions, but also expenditures. Paying off porn stars isn’t exactly copacetic. 

[burntorangebongos 10710]

I think they used Cohens law office as a conduit to pay for things with campaign funds in the guise of a retainer. They are trying to take the heat off of Cohen somehow, so he won't flip. But the Feds have all his work product so I  am not sure how this will work out. I assume they are trying to find the least damaging crime. Otherwise, i think this is money laundering and all kinds of campaign fraud violations. Maybe they are okay to admit to that because there are bigger things that they need Cohen to not cooperate on.

[TornACL 7698]

20 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Because it's the 3-card Monte/shell-game technique that money launderers use.  Have SO much money flowing around in SO many transactions among SO many persons and entities that it's difficult to determine which payment is for what.

Team Trump does so many of the things that classic Organized Crime groups do, it's not even funny.  Truly, it's amazing to watch.  It's just basic Mob-101 shit.

It's almost as though the people who were trying to say, during the primaries even, that Trump was basically a mob boss, were actually on to something!

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

The funny thing is the Stormy payment scandal is so minuscule when compared to the other MASSIVE scandals in this administration.  

 

[jimmyjazz 45900]

16 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Because it matters whether that was campaign money vs Trump’s money. Federal law limits not only contributions, but also expenditures. Paying off porn stars isn’t exactly copacetic. 

Are you sure that's the story here?  It's my understanding that Cohen's payment to Stormy Daniels AT THAT TIME constituted an in-kind campaign contribution.  It was considered a payment to a 3rd party on behalf of the campaign because of the value to the campaign (her silence).  Trump's repayment just further adds to the story, and in the right context, leads to potential felony prosecution.

[triplehorn 2664]

33 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

Wasn't there a story a while back about $129k payment from the campaign to Cohen right around the time of his payment to Stormy?  

I'm sure I saw it here.  If that's the case, then why are we bickering about $35k/mo retainers?  I mean, aside from the fact that $35k/mo is absolutely ludicrous unless you're paying off many, many porn stars?

Specific steps taken in a short time frame to disguise the transactions.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

26 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

My understanding is that the payment is out there. Trump and Cohen maintain that Cohen worked for the campaign and the payment was unrelated to hush money 

Then I guess I don't understand how your take is meaningfully different than mine.   We both agree that Trump is copping to a later, more innocent payment to cover from the real reimbursement, which they know they can no longer hide after the raid.  I think Giuliani went public to let Cohen know the new story and get him on the same page.  I guess you disagree there and think Giuliani went public to soften the blow when the real payment surfaces, so he can say "look, it's not news that I repaid him, but I've already shown you where that reimbursement happened later from my personal funds"? 

The thing is, none of this matters if Cohen flips.  Cohen can identify exactly what his reimbursement was. It makes more sense to me that they knew Cohen's "I was never repaid" lie would be easily broken by investigators and they need to get a new story straight now.  Cohen breaking has to be their primary concern. 

[WhatTheBuck 28777]

42 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

Wasn't there a story a while back about $129k payment from the campaign to Cohen right around the time of his payment to Stormy?  

I'm sure I saw it here.  If that's the case, then why are we bickering about $35k/mo retainers?  I mean, aside from the fact that $35k/mo is absolutely ludicrous unless you're paying off many, many porn stars?

There was a story about payments totaling that amount made from the campaign to several Trump properties. I never saw anything explicitly linking those payments to Cohen. But that was the implication based on coincidence. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Things I see Cohen could be facing:

Bank Fraud

Wire Fraud

Money Laundering

Campaign Finance Violations

Conspiracy to Defraud the United States

Misprision of Felony

Accessory after the fact

Crime Fraud

Concealment of Assets

Bribery 

Asset Forfeiture 

Coercion of political activity

Extortion

Blackmail

Making false statements 

Fraud and related activity in connection with electronic mail

Obstruction of justice

Conspiracy to obstruct justice

RICO

 

But maybe he's completely innocent and this is a witch hunt. 

[Grade of D as in David 13253]

1 hour ago, Mojo Hand said:

If the campaign paid Cohen back immediately, there will be a record of that.   Giuliani would know that.  Why would he cook this up knowing that is out there? 

Because they think that people will believe whatever shit falls from their mouths, truth be damned.

 

Unfortunately they are right. They lie time after time and the rubes eat it up. When NBC fucks up they are dragged through the streets.

 

We are getting what we deserve.

[Jiggy-Z 3432]

14 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

Specific steps taken in a short time frame to disguise the transactions.

So were those sequential and hand picked or did they fall out just like in the spreadsheet?

Also. Just like Trump to short her by 28 cents.

[Grade of D as in David 13253]

2 minutes ago, Jiggy-Z said:

So were those sequential and hand picked or did they fall out just like in the spreadsheet?

Also. Just like Trump to short her by 28 cents.

Why not, President shrimp dick shorted her during the sex as well.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

That spreadsheet shows payments from the campaign to Trump Org.   There still needs to be evidence of a $130K payment from Trump Org to Cohen. 

[WhatTheBuck 28777]

They're going to change their story on the Stormy Daniels payment again. 

[jimmyjazz 45900]

3 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

There still needs to be evidence of a $130K payment from Trump Org to Cohen. 

Why?

[triplehorn 2664]

Just now, Mojo Hand said:

That spreadsheet shows payments from the campaign to Trump Org.   There still needs to be evidence of a $130K payment from Trump Org to Cohen. 

Correct.  However, that spreadsheet provides a compelling explanation of where funds originated to backfill the 130k payment to Cohen - Trump campaign.