Althouse: "You have lied under oath numerous times, Mr. Cohen — isn’t that correct?"/"That’s correct."

October 25, 2023

"You have lied under oath numerous times, Mr. Cohen — isn’t that correct?"/"That’s correct."

I'm reading "Cohen Denounces Trump During Courtroom Face-Off/Michael D. Cohen accused his onetime boss, Donald J. Trump, of manipulating his net worth as Mr. Trump stared blankly ahead. It was their first interaction in five years" (NYT).

25 comments:

Mary Beth said...: Someone admitting that they have lied in the past does not mean anything they are saying now is true.; 10/25/23, 6:04 AM
Rich said...: There’s a magical place called Mar-a-Lago — where men enter as lawyers and emerge as witnesses.; 10/25/23, 6:08 AM
Enigma said...: Hell hath no fury like a politician scorned.

It's better to rule in hell than serve in heaven.; 10/25/23, 6:19 AM
Clyde said...: Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.; 10/25/23, 6:55 AM
boatbuilder said...: This ought to be a relatively simple case, if the law is what the "civil prosecutors" and the judge claim it is--Trump (allegedly) fraudulently inflated the value of his real estate holdings in order to (allegedly) deceive banks into lending him money, based on the value of those properties as security.

You don't need Michael Cohen for that. Michael Cohen may be the single most impeachable witness in the history of witnesses at this point.

Why are they calling him?; 10/25/23, 6:59 AM
BillieBob Thorton said...: boatbuilder said...
Why are they calling him?

Part of his plea agreement was to testify against Trump. If he doesn't he goes back to jail.

Same goes for all the rest who have signed plea agreements.; 10/25/23, 7:18 AM
tim maguire said...: What happens when the bank execs tell the court they don't rely the borrower's assessment of value but conduct their own valuation?

There is a term in residential real estate for loans that rely on the attestation of the borrower--"liar's loans." There is zero chance Trump's claims as to the value of his properties played any role in the bank's decision to extend credit.; 10/25/23, 7:20 AM
Dixcus said...: "Why are they calling him?"

Because no actual banks have complained. That's why. Not a single bank has sued Donald Trump for fraudulently inflating the value of his real estate holdings. Because "value" is inherently an opinion. The "value" of something is continually fluctuating and is based only upon what two people agree that the value is at a point in time. Something that might have a certain value today might not tomorrow. The value might go up. Or down. It depends.

If you attempt to go to the bank and borrow $1 million, and you offer to put your house up as collateral ... but you live in a mobile home ... then the bank can either give you that loan or not. It's entirely up to them. They probably won't give you the loan, but it's legal for them to and it's legal for you to suggest that your mobile home is "worth" $1 million. They're free to disagree. That's called "negotiating." And it's legal.

What you are seeing is a show trial in a corrupt, failing, third-world country, overseen by a Kangaroo Court. It's not required that it make any sense. The outcome has already been decided. Trump is guilty. He's not going to be allowed to run for President (because he might win and this time if they board up the windows while counting the votes, then those election offices are probably going to be burnt to the ground). Trump is going to have all his assets stolen from him and he's going to prison, where he will be murdered by Hillary Clinton's team.

That's all coming.; 10/25/23, 7:41 AM
Limited blogger said...: With inflation running at about 25% under Biden, can you imagine what Trump is worth today?; 10/25/23, 7:51 AM
Brian said...: He's not going to be allowed to run for President (because he might win and this time if they board up the windows while counting the votes, then those election offices are probably going to be burnt to the ground).

The problem for them this time is that I think Trump can win even in jail. Biden won from his basement. Trump doesn't need to campaign.

They want him to give up, he won't give up. I fear the only remaining thing they will resort to is assassination.; 10/25/23, 8:19 AM
Mike of Snoqualmie said...: He's not going to be allowed to run for President (because he might win and this time if they board up the windows while counting the votes, then those election offices are probably going to be burnt to the ground).

They can keep him off the printed ballot. That doesn't mean people won't write-in "Donald J. Trump" on their ballots. The Democrat counting centers can attempt to not count those votes, but they'll generate a huge eruption of voter fury and charges of election fraud. I can see hangmen's neckties being displayed and possibly used on those same election officials.; 10/25/23, 8:40 AM
GRW3 said...: Cohen was a fixer, not a serious player in the Trump organization. He wouldn't be let anywhere near serious money issues.; 10/25/23, 9:14 AM
Michael K said...: The show trials continue and I agree that the end point is assassination.; 10/25/23, 9:17 AM
Darkisland said...: So far I think 5 people, Sydney Powell being the only one whose name I recall, have had their charges in the RICO case essentially dropped. Powell pled guilty to 6 misdemeanors and will pay a $6,000 fine and do 5 years probation. At the end of the probation, her record gets wiped clean like it never even happened. The others have taken similar deals.

She did agree to testify in the case. She did not, as I understand it, agree to testify "against" President Emeritus Trump, just to testify truthfully in the trial. It will be interesting to see what, if anything, she can testify to that implicates him. It will be interesting to see if she even testifies at all.

Ditto, I think, the others.

Now we have NY calling Cohen, a convicted perjurer, to testify. What possible benefit can his testimony have? Even if true, how would anyone know? Seems like he, by his nature, whatever he testifies to, will only weaken the prosecution's case.

I wonder if "they" (you know, the powers that be, behind the lawfare) have realized that the whole lawfare is backfiring against them. It gets PEDJT in the public eye as an underdog. It reinforces the view by more and more people that the Brandon administration in particular and the Anti-Trumpers in general are objectively fascist (by Mussolini's definition of fascism.)

We could argue whether they are or not but more and more people are coming to perceive them as fascist. Perception, true or not, is the only thing that matters.

And more and more people are losing their fear of saying "fascist" out loud. A good thing, I think.

They need to make these cases go away. They can't just say "Never mind" and drop them. Perhaps pleading out these cases (in GA) and nobbling the NY case with perjured testimony is a work around.

Now before you call me crazy for this theory, let me say that I fully agree with you. It is a crazy theory. Can it be true? I doubt it. OTOH, it does seem like a possibility as I lay awake at night trying to sleep.

Now excuse me while I go add a couple extra layers to my tinfoil hat.

And someday remind me to tell you my theory about how the govt and CIA/FBI are at war with each other. That govt realizes that they can't go up against them directly and are using the "worse is better" approach with Brandon to try to defeat them. You may need a bigger tinfoil hat.

John Henry; 10/25/23, 9:22 AM
cassandra lite said...: Too bad--underlined, bolded, and all caps--it's not a prosecutable crime for prosecutors to lie in the performance of their duties. Overcharging in order to compel less-serious pleas, twisting the truth to construct ridiculous scenarios in an effort to cover the holes in their theory of the case, eliciting sympathy on re-direct for prosecution witnesses whose testimony has been challenged--and all the hundred things they do instead of doing justice. In short, it should be a felony to file against a defendant s/he doesn't believe deep in her kischkes is guilty of the crime for which s/he is charged.

Oh, and the consequences of violating Brady aren't nearly serious enough.; 10/25/23, 9:44 AM
mikee said...: The problem the Dems have is not Trump. The problem the Dems have is that their product is so foul that half the country prefers even Trump over their offerings. Until they realize that, and take steps to correct it, the successors to Trump might continue to be surprising to the opposition.; 10/25/23, 10:17 AM
Joe Smith said...: Lawyer: You're an admitted and documented liar, aren't you?

Cohen: Wait, is this a trick question?

This is hilarious, asking a liar if he's a liar...; 10/25/23, 10:43 AM
Joe Smith said...: I wanted to redo the backyard of our modest (but nice) suburban house.

I wanted to go all Playboy Mansion with the design...grotto, water slides, hidden passages...the usual.

So I went to the bank for a loan, as one does, using my home value as collateral for the sweet cash.

I asked for $14 million and change (the BBQ part of the outdoor kitchen was getting expensive).

And they just gave it to me! My yard is now awesome!

I had the house re-appraised and the value had risen by $150,000 as it is now the sweetest house on my street.

I love banks. I love America.; 10/25/23, 10:49 AM
Kai Akker said...: ---He's not going to be allowed to run for President (because he might win and this time if they board up the windows while counting the votes, then those election offices are probably going to be burnt to the ground) [Dixcus]

It's getting harder and harder to believe there will be a Presidential election on Nov. 5, 2024.; 10/25/23, 10:50 AM
Joe Smith said...: By the way, I will pay twice the judge's appraisal for Mar-a-lago.

And I will keep paying that price for as many more that you can build.

There isn't a sane person on earth who thinks that place is worth less than $100M.; 10/25/23, 11:35 AM
n.n said...: Let's toss a Cohen. Heads, he is lying. Tails, he is lying.; 10/25/23, 1:19 PM
JAORE said...: Our government/Democrats basically incentivized buyers into lying about their salaries to obtain large mortgages WAY back in 2008.

Seems like the opposite side of the same coin. Except, with Trump the banks came up with their own numbers, virtually no one went to jail and no bank lost money.; 10/25/23, 4:48 PM
JAORE said...: "I will pay twice the judge's appraisal for Mar-a-lago."

Yeah, that was stoooooopid.

Trump should have a public auction with an unspecified reserve. Let the bidding begin. I give it an over/under of $125,000,000.; 10/25/23, 4:52 PM
Hassayamper said...: As I understand this "consumer protection" law in New York-- or at least the way they are attempting to apply it to Trump-- any property-owning entity in the state that ever submitted a loan application with an estimated value that differs from the tax assessor's valuation by even a penny could see it confiscated and their company dissolved by judicial fiat, without even the benefit of a runaway 100% Democrat jury verdict.

It is among the most tyrannical banana-republic Star Chambers I have ever seen from the enemy Democrat occupation government, and that is really saying something.

If ever you fancied that we could avoid a bloody civil war to permanently rid ourselves of this tyrannical enemy scum, perhaps this case should make you reconsider. Such people should not be treated as human beings, let alone fellow Americans.; 10/25/23, 8:31 PM
Michael Fitzgerald said...: Cohen is such a liar that he's eligible for employment with the New York Times.; 10/26/23, 6:04 AM