May 3, 2018

Trump reimbursed Cohen for the $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels, according to Giuliani.

That's the big news this morning. I'll link to the NYT, which is reporting on last night's appearance of Giuliani on Sean Hannity's TV show.

The NYT notes that this "contradicted" what Trump has said, but only gives this:
Asked specifically last month by reporters aboard Air Force One whether he knew about the payment, Mr. Trump said, “No,” and referred questions to Mr. Cohen. He was then asked, “Do you know where he got the money to make that payment?”

“No,” Mr. Trump responded. “I don’t know.”
But what if Trump didn't know at the time that a payment was made, and Cohen simply took the initiative, and the reimbursement was arranged after the fact. Then there's no contradiction, is there?

The NYT did its own interview with Giuliani, and that seems to support my understanding of why there is no contradiction. Cohen made the payment "on his own authority" and the reimbursement was arranged "some time after the campaign is over" —  "$35,000 a month, out of his personal family account."

And Giuliani asserts that the reimbursement "removes the campaign finance violation." I haven't researched the legal question, but isn't that like a thief handing back what he took after he's caught?

ADDED: Trump is tweeting this morning:
Mr. Cohen, an attorney, received a monthly retainer, not from the campaign and having nothing to do with the campaign, from which he entered into, through reimbursement, a private contract between two parties, known as a non-disclosure agreement, or NDA. These agreements are.....

...very common among celebrities and people of wealth. In this case it is in full force and effect and will be used in Arbitration for damages against Ms. Clifford (Daniels). The agreement was used to stop the false and extortionist accusations made by her about an affair,......

...despite already having signed a detailed letter admitting that there was no affair. Prior to its violation by Ms. Clifford and her attorney, this was a private agreement. Money from the campaign, or campaign contributions, played no roll in this transaction.

283 comments:

1 – 200 of 283   Newer›   Newest»
Jake said...

So, restitution?

Michael K said...

Maybe we could send "Stormy Daniels" to North Korea. After all, she and her lawyer seem to be the lead story every day.

Mike Sylwester said...

Politics was not the only possible motive to pay Stormy to remain silent about the affair.

Trump was motivated at least in part by a desire to avoid personal embarrassment, especially in relation to his wife.

Sleeping around can get you into trouble and can be very expensive eventually.

Tank said...

If this were a Clinton or Obama situation, Stormy and her lawyer would already be in jail for extortion.

Ralph L said...

So why isn't Stormy being prosecuted for extortion? Cohen didn't just offer her the money.

rhhardin said...

No roll, no cigar.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

That's just how he rolls.

Mike Sylwester said...

This scandal does not affect my own voting decisions at all.

I always have thought that Trump was sexually promiscuous, even while married, and that his promiscuity would cause him many problems.

I always thought the same about Bill Clinton -- for whom I voted in 1992.

All other things being equal, I would vote against a promiscuous person -- but all other things never are equal.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

"These agreements are very common among celebrities and people of wealth."

Nothing for the little people to see here. Just move along. Move along.

Otto said...

Strange.Has to do with Cohen break in? Need legal analysis.

Jake said...

Wasn’t there some Congressional fund set aside to provide hush money for Congressional indiscretions?

Matthew Sablan said...

Reimbursement has fixed multiple other ethics or campaign finance problems. For example https://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/10/31/20401/pro-hillary-clinton-super-pac-accepted-illegal-contributions

So... Yeah. Problem solved. Stormy waters over.

Tommy Duncan said...

This will cause any number of pundits and commenters to develop the vapors.

Meanwhile, Stormy is using the publicity to her financial benefit. But that was the plan all along, wasn't it?

bgates said...

damages against Ms. Clifford (Daniels)

Remember when the only thing the press wanted us to know about Joe the Plumber was that his first name wasn't Joe?

Matthew Sablan said...

A 2015 article https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/23/upshot/when-the-wrong-people-give-money-to-politicians.html

etbass said...

The demos want to keep the American people inflamed against Trump using this Stormy thing so that the impeachment effort will have greater effect. But they effectively immunized Trump from the Stormy thing when they let Billy Jeff off the hook for consensual sex in the oval office with a junior employee.

Bill, Republic of Texas said...

Clintonesque phrasing.

roesch/voltaire said...

the storm watchers hear yet another story About who paid what for nothing that happened. This cover up is beginning to look like it violates laws in New York in terms of how lawyers can be paid by clients.

Kevin said...

Nothing for the little people to see here. Just move along. Move along.

The little people and everyone else sees this quite clearly.

After Stormy's lawyer appeared 59 times on CNN, there was nothing illegal in the transaction other than her speaking after signing the NDA.

After media outlet after media outlet ran breathless pieces about how Cohen would "flip" to save his skin and tell Mueller all kinds of incriminating things about Trump, we find there is nothing to tell.

After relentlessly pushing a story that got a lawyer's office raided by Mueller and the SDNY, it will simply disappear from the media as if it never happened at all.

Everyone can see it happening this morning especially, as you refer to them, the little people.

The little people probably see it most clearly of all.

Jordan Riley said...

What is the story here? A billionaire earning $100 million a year has an attorney who pays off persons who threaten to embarrass him (i.e. shake him down), having them sign a non-disclosure agreement and paying them for it. The attorney doesn't bother his famous, wealthy client with the details. His client pays his bills, probably without looking at them. Big whoop.

Matthew Sablan said...

Eh. If Clinton only got away with consensual sex, Trump may have had more fall out. It was letting him get away with rape that immunized Trump from consensual affairs. Even if it means Trump is an asshole.

Hagar said...

You have to believe Trump trusts Cohen so much that Cohen can bill him for "expenses" without detailing exactly what, thus avoiding potentially embarrassing correspondence.

Things being what they are today, I suppose it is possible that "These agreements are very common among celebrities and people of wealth," especially among the demimonde, but man, the expectations of public morality has nose-dived in the last 50-odd years!

Kevin said...

Meanwhile, Stormy is using the publicity to her financial benefit. But that was the plan all along, wasn't it?

Once her lawyer told her she might be liable, she got right on the pole.

At least it's more honest than setting up some sort of Global Foundation and having people send you "contributions".

Phil 3:14 said...

ARM, where were you in ‘98?

Matthew Sablan said...

How is Trump's set up with Cohen to protect him from liability different than Clinton using a lawyer cut out to hire foreign nationals to do opposition research?

Bay Area Guy said...

The "Get Trump" Squad is active this week! Had Trump's "fixit man", not paid Stormy $130K to silence her, she coulda spoken out about their consensual tryst before the election - and that woulda impacted the 2016 election - and then Hillary woulda won the Presidency!

Some morons actually think like that....

Kevin said...

You have to believe Trump trusts Cohen so much that Cohen can bill him for "expenses" without detailing exactly what, thus avoiding potentially embarrassing correspondence.

No, you have to believe that Trump trusts his people to work with people like Cohen and look over Cohen's expenses to see they are just and proper.

Matthew Sablan said...

This by the way is why you never pay a blackmailer.

Tom said...

Here's how that works. Lawyer does what's best for client. Client doesn't really have all the details. Client gets bill and doesn't look at the details (or the details are vague to prevent use against client). Client pays bill.

Inga said...

Structured payments, doubtful that the repayment was a “monthly retainer”. Dennis hastert knows about structured payments. Those repayments would likely be found in Cohen’s documents.

Matthew Sablan said...

Man. Even I believe he did have the affair. If he didn't, I can see why he's so mad about this. But... I mean it is no one's fault but his own people think he would.

Bruce Hayden said...

As I understand it, the legal situation is that the payment is fine if it comes out of Trump's pocket, but maybe not if Cohen paid the money. The legal issue is that it could be considered a campaign expense, and $130k exceeds the legal limits to a campaign. But individuals can legally spend as much of their own money campaigning as they want.

Of course, no one really seems to care about the $100 million scheme that Crooked Hillary used to bypass campaign limits, where large contributions were washed through the state parties, that would immediately, sometimes even the same day, cut checks back to the DNC of exactly the same size, and thence the Clinton campaign.

Browndog said...

Aaaaaand...we're off.

(CNN is about to shatter it's record of having Stormy Daniels' attorney on 59 times in a two month span)

AllenS said...

I'll accept that explanation. Now, let's move on.

cf said...

I do not care.

Kevin said...

Structured payments, doubtful that the repayment was a “monthly retainer”. Dennis hastert knows about structured payments. Those repayments would likely be found in Cohen’s documents.

Wow, after all the posts about how Cohen was going to turn on Trump and spill everything to Mueller, Inga shows up this morning to discuss the difference between structured payments and monthly retainers?

traditionalguy said...

The genius hate Trumpers have got Trump for exercising discretion about a consensual one night stand that he had out of wedlock with a sex professional 12 years ago. Giuliani convinced Donald to admit he personally paid the lawyer to do the legal work. An impeachable offense, that is not.

Anonymous said...

Trump banged her. Trump paid her. But, do we care? Meh

Kevin said...

Here's the real story: Mueller and his team have nothing. They thought they might be able to get Trump on a campaign finance violation if he hadn't paid Cohen, so they raided the office of a cooperating person to grab all the files in the hope that no reimbursement had been made.

And frankly, they would have known whether they had anything in about 48 hours. And it would have immediately leaked to CNN.

A month later the press is still spinning this like it's the only top left in the world, so Giuliani, who probably knew the whole story from the get-go, says to Trump, put me on your legal team and I'll go on Hannity and tell everyone the truth that Mueller's team knows and the press can't or won't figure out.

So we can make Joe, Mika, CNN, and Maddow look like the fools they've been all along.

WisRich said...

Trump had dalliances? Yawn. He's been in the tabloids for thirty years about this stuff.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Only the Clintons are allowed to lie.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Did you hear Comey the other day? He was telling the audience that if Hillary had won, he'd still have a job and how Hillary respects the rule of law ans stuff. I doubled over with laughter.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

And Giuliani asserts that the reimbursement "removes the campaign finance violation." I haven't researched the legal question, but isn't that like a thief handing back what he took after he's caught?

Was something stolen?

Oh right - our innocence! And Stormy's good virgin name.

Browndog said...

Trump advancing world peace by taking on N. Korea and Iran while liberals screech endlessly about Stormy Daniels and marital purity.

The funny thing is, liberals think they have the winning hand.

Bob Boyd said...

One major reason we have Trump is the constant, blatant double standard in the press and to a lesser, but increasing degree in the legal system regarding Dem malfeasance vs Republican malfeasance. It has gone on for years and gotten worse and worse.

Americans generally hate unfairness, cheating, an un-level field. Fair play is basic to the American character. That's why stuff like Stormy doesn't hurt Trump with his supporters and why the press is so frustrated that Trump supporters will not listen to them about Trump scandals. Because the press already gave the Clintons and Obama a pass for everything. They can't undo that, they wouldn't even if they could and they will do it again.

When it comes to shrugging at Trump misdeeds like this one, people are essentially saying, "No more double standards." The double standard is a far worse offense than cheating on your wife and trying to hide it. It's cheating the American voters. It's destructive to our entire system of government. Most people instinctively understand that.

Gk1 said...

We can see Guiliani's influence on Trump's legal team already. Go on a friendly forum and poke a large hole in this non story. With the addition of Flood to Trump's legal team, they are already signaling they plan on going to the mattresses. For those hoping Trump would quit in a angry,pique they have another "think" coming. Good luck trying to prove Trump used campaign money to pay for this. Good luck trying to get non trump haters to care.

FullMoon said...

Is a one night stand an affair? Did they have ongoing relationship, or bump and dump? Anyway, I think Melania knew about it, was pissed off, Trump promised never again. That is why he freaked about the piss lie. Wasn't concerned Melania would believe the piss part, but that she would believe he broke his promise.

CWJ said...

Wow, finally something to get our leftish commenters juices flowing. ARM, R/V and Inga, and all before 7:30AM.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

I hope Trump didn't stick a cigar in an intern's hoohoo in the actual oval office during his actual presidency.

I hope Trump doens't use a private server to conduct State business all in an effort to conceal money laundering to his private family foundation from international sources.

FullMoon said...

Gonna be interesting how this affects California Governor race. Married Golden boy Newsome fucked his friends wife on many occasions in actual love affair. and had alcohol problem.

Expect to hear Trump did it too.

Chuck said...

AllenS said...
I'll accept that explanation. Now, let's move on.


"Move on"! I've heard that one! Let's start an organization built around that. I'll see if I can register the domain name, "MoveOn.org," and perhaps we can use that!

Original Mike said...

Just saw Stormy Daniels’ lawyer arguing this is a “coverup”? How does that advance Daniels’ interests?

FullMoon said...

New Dem talking point, McCabe, etc leaked info detrimental to Hillary, therefore helping Trump, so everything even steven, or something.Because two wrongs do make a right.

Browndog said...

A private citizen having a consensual one night stand 12 years ago is not a scandal.

Congress setting up a secret slush fund to pay off victims of their non-consensual activities is.

Darrell said...

Trump banged her. Trump paid her.

Assumes facts not in evidence.

Hanging with Trump, befriending him, at the 2006 golf tournament was a setup to get hush money from NBC, by giving the appearance of impropriety with the Playboy bunny walking in when Trump was changing his pants. She didn't try to get money from Trump directly then. In October 2016 she contacted Trump's people and said what if I come forward now, a month before the election--would you like that? I can walk away, though.

Xmas said...

"... the expectations of public morality has nose-dived in the last 50-odd years!"

Oh, you and your repressive cis-hetero-white male expecations.

CWJ said...

I was going to add "now all we need is Chuck" to my last comment, but never mind.

I know better than to expect Ritmo this early.

Kevin said...

CNN was just asking it’s panel whether this will harm Trump with his base.

Their tone could be described as hopeful.

Darrell said...

I'm not a germaphobe, yet I would not engage in any sexual activity with a porn actress. I assume they won't stay chaste for a year while they have three AIDS tests--now, six months from now, and a year from now.

rhhardin said...

My understanding is that porn actors get tested all the time, like monthly; otherwise other porn actors won't work with them.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Get Trump on some bogus technicality. That's all this is.

Clintons can rape, lie, cheat, steal, private server for millions, secret uranium profits from Russia, bleachbit, destroy subpoena e-mails, lie, lie lie,... but if Trump paid off a porn start for something he did 12 years ago - why "Campaign finance violation!"

JohnJMac862 said...

This doesn't look great obviously, but, we are not removing a President over a hyper-technical interpretation of a $130K payment.

Chuck said...

It was indeed a very, very special breaking news edition of "Hannity"!

We now know that Jared Kushner is "expendable," White House aide Ivanka Trump is untouchable because she is a woman (and a mom)? James Comey is "perverted," and the great negotiator Donald Trump, together with his pitbull fixer Michael Cohen paid $130,000 in an "extortion" plot by Stormy Daniels (working with an attorney who had worked successfully, so to speak, with Cohen in other NDA-worthy scandals). If it was extortion, why did these tough negotiators roll so easily? Why did they set up a whole bunch of weird phony structures to make the payments?

Remember; they are saying that Trump never had sex with this porn actress. Michael Avenatti says he has a DVD. That should be interesting.

We might as well settle on this; whatever story is needed, to minimize the number and seriousness of the banking, tax and FEC violations, will be the story that Trump uses. It won't matter, if it debases Trump or his wife or anybody else. It won't matter if it involves Trump lying, or hanging Michael Cohen out to dry. No lie will be too great or too outlandish to tell, if the net result is keeping Trump out of trouble. But I'm not so sure it is even possible at this point. Bill Clinton's lying about his extramarital sex is like a one-paragraph newswire story compared to "War and Peace" with Trump's lying about his extramarital sex.

Trump's now steering this toward, "It was not campaign money" won't help. With campaign laws, there are not just fundraising issues (Where did the money come from? A campaign account, or a private account?), but there are also expenditure issues (Was it an expense related to promoting/advancing/protecting the campaign?)



Freder Frederson said...

But what if Trump didn't know at the time that a payment was made, and Cohen simply took the initiative, and the reimbursement was arranged after the fact. Then there's no contradiction, is there?

Yes there is. And this doesn't even make sense. Doesn't Cohen have a duty to inform his client what he is doing with the client's retainer.

You will believe anything to avoid saying the simple truth. Trump was either lying then or is lying now. Both statements can not be simultaneously true.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

I don't understand the strategy of the wingers here. Wouldn't it, even at this late date, make more sense to abandon Trump but reiterate the principles that he stood for (reduced or no immigration, balancing the trade deficit, etc.) before they are irrevocably tainted by Trump's unsuitability to be president?

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

@Chuck -

Bill Clinton's lying about his extramarital sex is like a one-paragraph newswire story compared to "War and Peace" with Trump's lying about his extramarital sex.


http://articles.latimes.com/1998/nov/14/news/mn-42627
*Paula Jones was trashed by the leftwing mob machine.

Kathleen Willey wanted to know if she could transition from her non paying job at the White House to something with a salary. As she met with President Bill Clinton in the Oval office, a man she had known for years since she and her husband worked on his 1992 campaign, she got something much different. She says the POTUS kissed her, grabbed her breasts and genitals and put her hand on his aroused penis. She says she thought about slapping is but didn't because you didn't slap the President of the United States. She did not come forward until being subpoenaed in the Paula Jones case. It came to light that Bill Clinton denied the charges and this is what his reasoning is, according the Starr Report:

The President responded that the harassment allegation was ludicrous, because he would never approach a small-breasted woman like Ms. Willey.

Got that? He likes big boobs, not small ones like she had.

Then there's Leslie Millwee a television reporter in Little Rock in the 1980's. She says the future POTUS took a shine to her, so much so that he followed her into the editing room at the station. She told her story to Breitbart.com.

She described the first alleged assault:

“…he followed me into an editing room. The first time I remember. That it was very small. There was a chair. I was sitting in a chair. He came up behind me and started rubbing my shoulders and running his hands down toward my breasts. And I was just stunned. I froze. I asked him to stop. He laughed.

“That happened on three occasions. And each time it escalated where the aggressive nature of his touch and what he was doing behind me escalated.”

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Juanita isn't the only one: Bill Clinton's long history of sexual violence against women dates back some 30 years

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Paula Jones was paid 850,000 by Bill Clinton, to make her go away. I sure hope that wasn't campaign money.

Darrell said...

My understanding is that porn actors get tested all the time, like monthly; otherwise other porn actors won't work with them.

And that is all worthless once you engage in sex. Three clean tests in a year without any sexual activity in between for AIDS. And herpes is almost a given.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

ARM - did you vote for Hillary?

If so - your CNN-esque moral preening is laughable.

Xmas said...

"Wouldn't it, even at this late date, make more sense to abandon Trump but reiterate the principles that he stood for (reduced or no immigration, balancing the trade deficit, etc.) before they are irrevocably tainted by Trump's unsuitability to be president?"

Those principles are already tainted. There is no one that could come forward with a plan to curb illegal immigration without being painted as racist. There is no one that could come forward with a plan to shake up trade without being labelled as stupid or crazy.

I'm 100% serious. The only way to not be labelled racist on immigration is to support open borders and an amnesty for existing immigrants. Maybe you can sneak in a "serious criminals get deported" bit in there. I challenge you to find me one candidate advocating for protected borders and no or very limited amnesty that isn't labelled a racist.

MikeR said...

Hard to believe anyone really cares about this. He lied! Wow.

Chuck said...

Hey, “Dickin’ Bimbos at Home”;

I feel certain that your information will be very valuable to the FBI and the Department of Justice. I suggest that you forward it to them immediately. You know; with statutes of limitation and all.

Good luck, best wishes and have a nice day.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Hey Chuck, yeah I really doubt anyone inside out law enforcement gives two shits about Clinton corruption. Then or now.

Darrell said...

A felony for any email on a private server. Another for every classified email. More for removing classified tags. "Million-Felony Clinton" isn't too far a stretch.

Caligula said...

Yes, well, perhaps an honest whore is one who stays bought.

But how many honest whores are there, anyway?

So perhaps the lesson here is to just not pay in the first place. Assuming you've put yourself in a position where you'd want to buy someone's silence, of course.

Original Mike said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Leland said...

As covered by the addition; it seems the money went to Cohen in advance to cover things like this. Call it a pre-emptive arrangement for any bimbo eruption effort.

rhhardin said...

We now know that Jared Kushner is "expendable," White House aide Ivanka Trump is untouchable because she is a woman (and a mom)?

Scott Adams did a podcast on that, using it as an example of watching MSNBC as if it's a comedy involving people who didn't understand anything and didn't realize that they didn't.

rcocean said...

"After Stormy's lawyer appeared 59 times on CNN, there was nothing illegal in the transaction other than her speaking after signing the NDA."

Hilarious to see Fox News covering the NK Nuke Deal, while CNN gave us Stormy Davis 24/x7. What a bunch of clowns!

Now all the legals beagles are looking into their law books and desperately trying to come up with some crime that will fit Trump's action - pathetic.

We're badly served by MSM, but everyone knows that already.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Lying about sex - 12 year old sex. Who cares? - Why the same people who told us Bill Clinton's sexual dalliances INSIDE THE OVAL OFFICE were a big nothing. The same people who told us that Bill's accusers were all lying, were all trailer trash, were all NOT to be believed.

Ken B said...

Most guys who hump her get paid to do it.

chickelit said...

I think this clears the path for Hillary’s triumphant return to the 2020 playing field. It also means a star on Hollywood Blvd for Stormy, and unimaginable wealth for Stormy’s lawyer.

rhhardin said...

"My understanding is that porn actors get tested all the time, like monthly; otherwise other porn actors won't work with them."

And that is all worthless once you engage in sex. Three clean tests in a year without any sexual activity in between for AIDS. And herpes is almost a given.


Their sex is with other porn actors, so the odds of no disease go up a lot.

When a porn actor turns up bad, everybody who worked with them gets notified.

Seems to be a good system. A bad test makes the news.

Original Mike said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Cracker Emcee Rampant said...

"Trump advancing world peace by taking on N. Korea and Iran while liberals screech endlessly about Stormy Daniels and marital purity."

Bang on. No one (you know, voters) on the ground is talking about Stormy Daniels yet lots of people talk about N. Korea. The Democrat's insistence on wedging themselves into a place of unseriousness just looks increasingly bizarre. Really, I have to think they're being lead unresistingly to the cliff by their opposition.

Chuck said...

rhharden, I watched that Scott Adams thing right after he posted it. And as I watched, I understood more than ever that Scott Adams “no longer cares about the fucking law.”

William said...

We all owe NBC a debt of gratitude for leaking that tape. Were it not for that tape we would have supposed Trump to be some kind of saint. That was always the way he presented himself in public, and people tuned in to his appearances on Howard Stern for moral guidance. But, as it was, the tape leaked and the American public gave a kind of informed consent to his character flaws when they elected him president........I would prefer to have a President who doesn't fool around with pornstars. But I would far, far more prefer a media that didn't obsess over the small details of an ill considered tryst from a previous decade.......Okay, none of this makes the President look good, but the media, Stormy Daniels, and her lawyer look worse.

Freeman Hunt said...

These news stories seem predicated on no one looking too hard. A quick look at Daniels' social media presence does not incline one to trust her. Lots of Trump-related marketing of her porn shows.

rcocean said...

Rod Dreher has another one of his absurd columns ringing his hands over the "Horror Trump" and "The decline of standards".

LOL. We've had 8 years of Bill "Blue Dress" Lewinsky, Obama, Hillary's Emails, and how many other scandals. Not to mention Al Gore going nuts in 2000, Palin getting trashed, Kerry lying about the Swift Boats, Bush getting called Bush-Hitler, etc.

But no, according to Rod, Western Civilization is doomed because of Trump.

rhhardin said...

Not caring about the law had to do with holding not caring about the Constitution as a higher priority problem.

rcocean said...

In other news, every news anchor is being shown to be a pervert or a liar.

buwaya said...

"How many honest whores are there anyway? "

Good question. It comes down to the norms of political combat and whore-economics. When vast amounts of money become available to buy whores, and their lawyers, for political purposes, then its much less likely they will stay "honest".

The political-media system is corrupt to a degree that simple honest whoredom seems like virtue.

rcocean said...

I'm really disappointed in Trump over Stormy Davis. I thought he had good taste in women.

I wouldn't touch "Stormy" without a Doctor being there.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Hillary's Crimes. Comey is a perverted corruption excusing loser.

Gk1 said...

Would it surprise anyone if Trumps approval actually begins to crack 52% and upwards? Thats what happened to Clinton during Lewinsky. We have been through this already as a country can we please move on to the impeachment that leaves Trump in place and with 60% approval?

buwaya said...

Re Dreher -

If nothing else, the last couple of decades have made it clear that this sort of thing was SOP forever and ever - or rather, anyone serious about history would have developed enough cynicism to assume this was the case. The only difference is that now it is common knowledge, or at least it is so in any case that the MSM has been directed to target.

"Standards" weren't about behavior, but about selective suppression of information.

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...

Freeman Hunt said...
A quick look at Daniels' social media presence does not incline one to trust her.


Maybe not, but when going mano a mano with the President of the United States on personal credibility she has been the undisputed winner to date.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Hillary/Stormy 2020.

Private Server and scorn + a corrupted FBI that looks the other way. Lets get us some Loretta Lynch, shall we. Loyalty pays!

John Pickering said...

An, who has been showing some glimmers of clarity recently, reverts to her default assumption that the President is an honest man, as well as a subtle thinker and brilliant humorist. Ann believed Trump when he said he never had an affair with Stormy; she believed him when he said he had no idea about the $130,000 payment; she believed him when he said he didn't reimburse Cohen for the money; and now she believes him when he says this is just the sort of thing rich people like him do all the time, and she still believes him when he says that Stormy Daniels is a liar.

Ann thinks that President Trump is a truthful man and a reliable news source! Oh my gosh, come on Ann.

On the other hand, many of Ann's readers acknowledge that he's a whorehound and a liar, but they're OK with that, because Hillary.

Darrell said...

Their sex is with other porn actors, so the odds of no disease go up a lot.

So you are saying that Trump did not have sex with Stormy Daniels, because porn actors only have sex with other porn actors. Fair enough.

Darrell said...

We no longer care about the fucking Chuck.
That's for sure.

Gretchen said...

I can't figure out what the crime is supposed to be. Unlike Clinton, he paid her off, the woman has sex for money, so this really isn't different.

Most people are aware Trump is a womanizer and jerk. So what? If lying to reporters was a crime, every politician would be jailed.

Inga said...

“On the other hand, many of Ann's readers acknowledge that he's a whorehound and a liar, but they're OK with that, because Hillary.”

They don’t know that what makes non Trumpists and liberals care even less about Hillary Clinton’s emails is Trump. Whatever scandals and dirty business Hillary engaged in, she looks like Pollyanna compared to Trump. Those still clinging to the “But Hillary!” defense are by now no longer relevant.

Inga said...

And no one cares if Trump is a dirty dog, we already knew that. The issue is that he is Corrupt.

buwaya said...

HRC (or rather, the administration she served) broke open US security to the world. Anyone who wanted to knew what the USG was discussing, internally, in real time.

And this was participated in and countenanced by the entire structure of the Federal Government.

That is a crime, and evidence of incompetence, of tremendous scope. Really, it calls to question whether there is any value in these institutions at all, thats how bad that is. A government that can't keep secrets might as well not exist, in matters of foreign policy. Its no surprise that the Chinese held the USG is contempt.

buwaya said...

To emphasize the scandal of HRC in terms of professional diplomacy, consider that a person who deliberately exposed von Metternichs correspondence to enemy powers would have been hanged.

Justly.

Kevin said...

The issue is that he is Corrupt.

And yet neither you nor the National Security and Justice organizations can find any evidence of a crime he has committed.

Perhaps you should start to contemplate that reality.

Kevin said...

Inga has moved from "Trump is guilty!" to "Who cares if Hillary is guilty?"

Checkmate.

Matthew Sablan said...

"With campaign laws, there are not just fundraising issues (Where did the money come from? A campaign account, or a private account?), but there are also expenditure issues (Was it an expense related to promoting/advancing/protecting the campaign?)"

-- Yet we have *years* of people handing back money/reimbursing campaigns with no harm, no foul. So, unless we have a new Trump precedent, that's all moot.

Inga said...

“A government that can't keep secrets might as well not exist, in matters of foreign policy.”

“President Trump boasted about highly classified intelligence in a meeting with the Russian foreign minister and ambassador last week, providing details that could expose the source of the information and the manner in which it was collected, a current and a former American government official said Monday.

The intelligence disclosed by Mr. Trump in a meeting with Sergey V. Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, and Sergey I. Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the United States, was about an Islamic State plot, according to the officials. A Middle Eastern ally that closely guards its own secrets provided the information, which was considered so sensitive that American officials did not share it widely within the United States government or pass it on to other allies.”

NYT

Matthew Sablan said...

"Yes there is. And this doesn't even make sense. Doesn't Cohen have a duty to inform his client what he is doing with the client's retainer."

-- We actually have a very similar set up/excuse with Clinton paying off foreign nationals to investigate Trump through a lawyer/cut out.

She's getting off fine, so I see no reason Trump should be held accountable for a similar deal/structure.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Paula Jones was paid 850,000 by Bill Clinton, to make her go away. I sure hope that wasn't campaign money."

-- Under the Trump standard, it was. What's the statute of limitations on this?

Inga said...

“HRC (or rather, the administration she served) broke open US security to the world. Anyone who wanted to knew what the USG was discussing, internally, in real time.”
—————————————————

“President Trump’s reported use of an unsecured cell phone and the related security risks spurred two Democratic congressmen to seek answers Wednesday from the White House Communications Agency, U.S. Secret Service and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

Reps. Ted Lieu of Arizona and Ruben Gallego of Arizona raised their concerns in a letter sent to the agencies in the wake of CNN reporting Tuesday that Mr. Trump has increasingly relied on his personal cellphone recently in lieu of placing calls through the White House switchboard, potentially putting the president’s sensitive communications at risk of being intercepted and exploited.”

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/apr/25/democrats-raise-security-concerns-over-reports-inv/

JAORE said...

"Wouldn't it, even at this late date, make more sense to abandon Trump but reiterate the principles that he stood for.."

Sure, leave those issues to the invertebrates representing the GOP....

Trump fights.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Maybe not, but when going mano a mano with the President of the United States on personal credibility she has been the undisputed winner to date."

-- Why? She said they didn't have an affair, then that they did. She's lied just as much as he has, if not more. The only reason I believe they had an affair is she's clearly not an honest person or one with high ethics, and neither is he. So, you know, no surprise.

Inga said...

For those who think Clinton is more corrupt than Trump, we’ll find out.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/the-fbi-is-investigating-the-clinton-foundation/2018/01/05/1aca0d4a-f1cf-11e7-97bf-bba379b809ab_story.html?utm_term=.f3efafec4171

The FBI has been investigating the Clinton Foundation for months, reviving a probe that was dialed back during the 2016 campaign amid tensions between Justice Department prosecutors and FBI agents about the politically charged case, according to people familiar with the matter.

The inquiry resumed about a year ago. Agents are now trying to determine if any donations made to the foundation were linked to official acts when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state from 2009 to 2013, these people said. The people did not identify what specific donations or interactions agents are scrutinizing.

Kevin said...

Shorter Inga: Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf!

Inga, your past failed predictions have lost you all credibility on this thread.

Election results: wrong
Russian collusion: wrong
Obstruction of justice: wrong
Campaign finance violations: wrong
Cohen will turn on Trump: wrong

After all that, have you found a shred of humility? Nope, TRUMP MAY HAVE USED AN UNSECURED CELL PHONE!!!!!

You either have no shame or you're a chatbot. Somehow I keep giving you the benefit of the doubt.

But given your track record, there is nothing you can post here anymore which I would take seriously.

It's time to change your name and avatar to buy some time before people figure out it's just you again.

rcocean said...

"Standards" weren't about behavior, but about selective suppression of information.

You got that right. It reached its heights with JFK. We were told he was the ultimate family man, in fact he was banging interns, gangster molls, and anything with a skirt 24/7.

We were told he was full of "vigor" and youthful good health. In fact, he had Addison's disease, a bad back, took a boatload of pills to keep going, and could barely walk half the time.

And then there's FDR running for re-election and every media outlet covering up the fact he was a dying man, and had a massive heart attack in March '44.

Inga said...

LOL! Are you woofing or wolfing, Kevin? What’s the matter? You sound awfully growly this AM. Didn’t it hurt your paws to type all those WOLFS?

John Pickering said...

Some of Ann's readers regard Hillary's email carelessness, which would have gotten her a reprimand if she were the IT officer at Morgan Stanley, as a far greater crime than anything Trump has done, from Stormy to the whole probe into how the President has become ensnared by a Russian blackmail scheme.

Such readers insist that they see no Trump Russia crime at all, that just because NSA chief Flynn and Campaign managers Manafort and Gates are Russian agents, and his lawyer and fixer is in the Russian mafia, and he got the whores to pee the bed while the Russians taped him, so what? Where's the crime? What the heck is the government so het up about?

The crime is espionage. The crime is betraying the secrets of your country to a hostile foreign power, which has gained control over your actions by means of blackmail. Trump hired an actual Russian agent to be the head of the National Security Agency and gain access to the government's most important secrets. The majority of people Trump has hired for senior jobs can't pass an FBI security clearance review.

The readers who think the US government is going to abandon the Trump investigation, which turns up crimes every day, and turn to probe the Clintons are severely under-informed.

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kevin said...

Some of Ann's readers regard Hillary's email carelessness, which would have gotten her a reprimand if she were the IT officer at Morgan Stanley

Which she wasn't. And the information handled by Morgan Stanley is not sensitive government secrets. Which is why the IT officer at Morgan Stanley isn't subject to federal statutes on handling classified information.

Let's not play the strawman game. It undercuts anything else you have to say.

Inga said...

“The readers who think the US government is going to abandon the Trump investigation, which turns up crimes every day, and turn to probe the Clintons are severely under-informed.”
———————————————————————-
Yes indeed. Caputo seems to be taking the Mueller investigation and their interest in Trump/Russian collusion (criminal conspiracy) very seriously. Caputo was interviewed by Mueller investigators on Wednesday.

“Caputo told CNN that Robert Mueller's team is "focused on Russia collusion."

"It's clear they are still really focused on Russia collusion," Caputo said, adding, "They know more about the Trump campaign than anyone who ever worked there."

Caputo, who advised the Trump campaign on communications in 2016, has long insisted he has no information about collusion between Trump's team and Russia. He spoke with Senate intelligence investigators on Tuesday for their Russia probe and outlined the differences between Congress' inquiries and the special counsel's.

"The Senate and the House are net fishing," Caputo said. "The special counsel is spearfishing. They know what they are aiming at and are deadly accurate

Yancey Ward said...

Phil 3:14 asked....

"ARM, where were you in ‘98?"

Still living in his parent's genitals.

Matthew Sablan said...

"The majority of people Trump has hired for senior jobs can't pass an FBI security clearance review."

-- Neither could Trump. Or Obama, for that matter. Bush, maaaaybe could.

Kevin said...

Why, if Hillary had been a four year-old girl who set up a home e-mail server in her bathroom she wouldn't be charged with a crime but awarded a full scholarship to MIT!

Is that really the level of discourse we're going for at Althouse?

It's making me appreciate Chuck.

Darrell said...

People with brains know that the Russia! collusion was cooked up by Obama Administration people looking for phone taps and general warrants to fish for other crimes they could pin on Trump.

Inga demonstrates what kind of person she is every day here.

Inga said...

“People with brains know that the Russia! collusion was cooked up by Obama Administration people looking for phone taps and general warrants to fish for other crimes they could pin on Trump.”

The Althouse blog comments section has become Conspiracy Theory Central. How embarrassing.

Matthew Sablan said...

"The Althouse blog comments section has become Conspiracy Theory Central."

-- Ironic statements like this convince me that Inga is not a real person, but just a blog persona.

Yancey Ward said...

On another site several weeks back, I wrote that if Cohen really did pay Daniels, the money was almost 100% certainly paid by Trump, not Cohen- a lawyer is certainly not going to fail to get reimbursement for more than a week or two. I even speculated that the money was ultimately sourced from the retainer that Trump probably pays regularly to all his lawyers.

I think the payment was make round-about because one of the purposes of getting the NDA is defeated by giving the extortionist actual physical evidence in the form of a payment.

Did Trump know about the payment? I think it quite possible he didn't. While I have no experience being a rich and well known man, I can certainly see the culture around them and think it pretty certain that people like Trump are the targets of such shake-downs on a constant basis, whether they slept with the woman or not. How much of your time would you be willing to expend dealing with such things every day? I know that I would, if I had the means, simply farm all of it out to hired lawyers to deal with as they see fit, and I would also hire the people to make sure the lawyers don't take advantage of it, too.

Bad Lieutenant said...

"Move on"! I've heard that one! Let's start an organization built around that. I'll see if I can register the domain name, "MoveOn.org," and perhaps we can use that!
5/3/18, 8:06 AM


Well, Chuck, there's precedent. Not a bad idea.

Inga said...

“Ironic statements like this convince me that Inga is not a real person, but just a blog persona.”

You folks are so far down the rabbit hole, I doubt if you’ll ever find your way out.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Did you think it up all by yourself?

cubanbob said...

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...
Paula Jones was paid 850,000 by Bill Clinton, to make her go away. I sure hope that wasn't campaign money."

Back then the Clinton's didn't have a pot to piss in. He had to fundraise to pay that settlement off along with his legal fees. One wonders what was promised to the larger donors.

Inga you are insane. To equate Hillary's tens of thousands of felony counts (and with Obama's knowledge of same) with whatever bogus nonsense you are accusing Trump of is beyond even your usual nonsense.

Chuck here is a fearless prediction: Mueller comes up with nothing even remotely resembling what the scope of the investigation was supposed to be about and then Trump fires him. The Left has a freakout , the voters recoil at the Leftist insanity and retain the Republicans in Congress and afterwards Trump has a Come To Jesus with Sessions and 2019 and 2020 become rife with Democrats and their minions being subject to criminal investigations and prosecutions.

Matthew Sablan said...

"subject to criminal investigations and prosecutions."

-- Huma Abedin is a known perjurer and hid information from investigators about files on her husband's computer. And suffered no ill consequences but some loss of Clinton's favor.

There will be no consequences for team Clinton or Obama. Accept it, and move on.

Marcus said...

rhhardin said...
My understanding is that porn actors get tested all the time, like monthly; otherwise other porn actors won't work with them

AIDS tests only clear the person up to the time it was administered. So only the first one in after that would seem safe. It would seem that those infected (and symptoms apparently don't show up for _quite_ a while) are similar to latex foodserving gloves -- only as safe/good as the last thing they touch.

Mike Sylwester said...

Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan at 8:34 AM
.... Wouldn't it, even at this late date, make more sense to abandon Trump but reiterate the principles that he stood for (reduced or no immigration, balancing the trade deficit, etc.) before they are irrevocably tainted by Trump's unsuitability to be president?

Trump has to win the Republican Party's nomination again in 2020.

He could be defeated if he becomes ineffective or becomes squishy on key issues.

He won't be defeated in the primaries, however, because of the accusation that he is unsuitable to be President.

buwaya said...

The IT officer at Morgan Stanley who did what HRC did would be marched out of his office by Corporate Security and ejected from the building. It would be a violation of all sorts of things, SOX among them. And I have seen this happen.

I can't imagine any employee of any major American company getting a pass on something like that.

Brian said...

I had said something on the comment threads at this blog several weeks ago that aligns with what Giuliani stated in his clarification today.

All those pundits who were hopeful of a) cohen being indicted on campaign finance laws or b) Trump having to testify that he knew about the payment at the time and therefore has been lying similar to Clinton and his "I did not have sex with that woman" are simply wrong.

It was either a or b. Each option spelled doom.

They forgot the middle case though. That to a billionaire like Trump $130k is literally NOT WORTH HIS TIME. It's .003% of his (assumed $4Bil with a frickin 'B') net worth. Five minutes of his time is worth more than that. More time is the only thing he can't buy.

The idea that Cohen had to approve/vet/discuss this deal with Trump beforehand is ludicrous. Cohen and Trump obviously had an understanding. That understanding was mutually beneficial to Cohen and Trump. Cohen has a billionaire client that can direct him to other business opportunities, plus a foot in the door for other billionaires. His hand has been stamped.

Trump gets the deniability and the efficiency of someone else dealing with it.

If you assume Trump is dumb, then it's easy to fall into the mental trap that he is without options.

If you understand that no man who has established a brand and success as big as Trumps in at least 3 separate and different fields (real estate, entertainment and politics) can be that lucky it all makes sense. And you can be AHEAD of the news cycle.

Yancey Ward said...

Brian,

Well stated.

Bruce Hayden said...

“.... Wouldn't it, even at this late date, make more sense to abandon Trump but reiterate the principles that he stood for (reduced or no immigration, balancing the trade deficit, etc.) before they are irrevocably tainted by Trump's unsuitability to be president?”

Funny thing there is that Trump is turning out to maybe be the most momentous President of most of our times. Rivelng, if not surpassing Reagan. Maybe it was because he followed the most incompetent President in any of our lives.
- Economy is booming. Best employment in decades, and esp in minority communities. Part of it was the tax cuts. Part was ditching some of Obamacare. Part was just getting Obama and his socialists out of control of the economy, finally ending the malaise of the eight year Obama Recession. Etc.
- Turned around the brain dead foreign policies of Obama, Crooked Hillary, and Kerry. Good chance that we can turn the cease fire we entered into when I was 2 years old into a peace treaty in Korea, and maybe even see reunification. At least the majority Sunni portion of Islam is rapidly modernizing, finally entering the 20th Century. The Iranian Shi’a portion is under siege from all sides. Decent chance of denuclearization there to. Russia is retreating from confrontation with the US.
- Deep State has exposed themselves, and will likely be pushed back as a result. DoJ OIG investigation report should be out this month.
- Race relations seem to finally be improving, with the impetus of the Kanye West / Trump lovefest. Doubling of Trump support in one week by Black men - the demographic most injured by Obama’s feckless economic, as well as his other racist policies.
- Etc.

Too much Winning.

Yancey Ward said...

We do things for ourselves, and tackle tasks for ourselves when we simply have to. Mundane activities are not fun. We can debate all day long whether or not it is good/bad for the soul body to do such tasks for ourselves/pay others, but almost none of us would actually do such activities if we had the option to pay others to do them for us.

This idea that Trump would/should need to discuss and approve such settlements with Cohen is kind of silly given the likelihood that Cohen deals with dozens of such things every year, both sexual and otherwise. At some point, your time gets tied up endlessly with such trivia and you simply say to the lawyer, "Look, unless this rises to an amount that is truly significant to my well-being, deal with it as you see fit and don't bother me with all the details- this is what I am paying you for."

Birkel said...

This is EXACTLY, but only 100%, what I predicted.

Chuck can thank me for telling him weeks ago.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

We can point out why Hillary IS CORRUPT. How is Trump corrupt? He lied about sex he had 12 years ago?

He colluded with Russians because the "hands up don't shoot" media sez so?
Walker to be indicted on phony charges any second now. Why? Because THE CORRUPT LEFT cannot abide when they lose elections.

Beldar said...

No roll?

Not a Parkerhouse? Not even a dinky little crescent?

Not even a roll smeared with butter and honey, to enjoy with your covfefe?

Bad Lieutenant said...

which would have gotten her a reprimand if she were the IT officer at Morgan Stanley

Which she wasn't.


Kevin, don't be misled by the incessant lies of the liar John Pickering, who, as usual, is lying.

If the CEO or the CIO of Morgan Stanley violated infosec policy in such a blatant, persistent and determined fashion, she would be fired, sued, and arrested, in no particular order. As would any senior staff who permitted or enabled it.

Jim at said...

And again, this has precisely what to do with the so-called Russian collusion?

Bad Lieutenant said...

I see Buwaya beat me to it. Yes, we call that frogmarching. Her feet wouldn't touch the ground.

Jim at said...

On the other hand, many of Ann's readers acknowledge that he's a whorehound and a liar, but they're OK with that, because Hillary. - Pickering

You're getting smarter. Not by much, but it's a start.

cubanbob said...

Matthew Sablan said...
"subject to criminal investigations and prosecutions."

-- Huma Abedin is a known perjurer and hid information from investigators about files on her husband's computer. And suffered no ill consequences but some loss of Clinton's favor.

There will be no consequences for team Clinton or Obama. Accept it, and move on."

Too late for that. If the Clinton's had been smart they would have advised their tools to stop it eight months ago. But they didn't and now Trump has no choice but to destroy them. They either succeed in taking Trump down or they all face prison sentences. My money is on Trump. As for the racist charges about immigration and the rest of the progressive agenda, no one who voted for Trump gives a crap. For them Trump is in trouble if he doesn't deliver.

Jim at said...

They don’t know that what makes non Trumpists and liberals care even less about Hillary Clinton’s emails is Trump. Whatever scandals and dirty business Hillary engaged in, she looks like Pollyanna compared to Trump. Those still clinging to the “But Hillary!” defense are by now no longer relevant. - Inga

And you're getting dumber.

Inga said...

“And you're getting dumber.”

And you are still a retarded gnat, unable to make a cogent comment on the subject of any given blogpost.

John Pickering said...

Federal investigators have wiretapped the phone lines of Michael Cohen, the longtime personal lawyer for President Donald Trump who is under investigation for a payment he made to an adult film star who alleged she had an affair with Trump, according to two people with knowledge of the legal proceedings involving Cohen.

It is not clear how long the wiretap has been authorized, but NBC News has learned it was in place in the weeks leading up to the raids on Cohen's offices, hotel room, and home in early April, according to one person with direct knowledge.

At least one phone call between a phone line associated with Cohen and the White House was intercepted, the person said.

Ann, who doesn't like to cover this part of the Trump garbage fire, does her readers a disservice by not adequately informing them of the evidence that the president's lawyer is a made man in the Russian mafia. That's why SDNY is after him -- for his role in organized crime. But, after all, for Ann and so many of her readers, that's ok, that's fine! Because, Hillary.

I love that expression, "retarded gnat."

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Oso Negro said...

I am utterly cynical about American politics. I couldn’t bring myself to vote in the last election but I am loving how Trump drives the left absolutely insane. He’s a prodigy.

Inga said...

“I love that expression, "retarded gnat."”

It’s apt. He’s merely a bothersome flying insect dropping poop on delectable fruit.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Cohen was wiretapped."

-- Trump was right. They were going around tapping people's wires.

Matthew Sablan said...

Also: If Cohen was tapped and they raided him, and they have as much of a nothing as they've shown so far, I want to see how they got the raid and the wiretap approved. Did they use the dossier for that too?

The Cracker Emcee Rampant said...

"They don’t know that what makes non Trumpists and liberals care even less about Hillary Clinton’s emails is Trump."

Trump or no, they never cared. Which is the whole point.

Matthew Sablan said...

It'll be beautiful when Trump uses the Edwards defense.

Beldar said...

@ Matthew Sablan, who wrote above with reference to "as much of a nothing as they've shown so far":

Are you under the misimpression that in the normal course of law enforcement, police and prosecutors are somehow obliged to regularly show you and me and the public everything they're doing while they're doing it?

Are you remotely aware of how outrageous the would be? The very reason criminal investigations are confidential before a public indictment, the very reason the DoJ (except for James Jesus-Reborn Comey) never confirms or denies or comments upon an ongoing investigation, is to protect the rights of the as-yet-unconvicted defendant, whose presumption of innocence becomes pretty damn meaningless if the FBI is passing along to the press every crackpot report in addition to every genuine smoking gun.

You don't have a bleeping clue about what the Mueller team does or doesn't have yet on Trump, Cohen, or anyone beyond the very limited paperwork that Mueller's team has so far filed in court in connection with the Flynn guilty plea and Manafort & associate indictments (and related bogus civil litigation).

It is, in Rumsfeldian Analysis, at this point a "known unknown."

Yet you are willing to be the ranch on your assessment of what you've read on the internet from other people who are equally certain that their guesswork and speculation is the be-all and end-all.

I'm picking on you and your one phrase here because it's so emblematic of the willful blindness and self-deception of so many reflexive Trump-uber-alles partisans, the true "Trumpkins" who supported him in the primaries, and who now support "My President, Right or Wrong!"

Even some very smart people who should know better than to engage in this presumption — that we know more than any of us possibly could know — have already been embarrassed by it. Former prosecutor Andrew McCarthy, who writes at NRO, is one of the most astute and well-informed observers of all this. For months and months, going back to last summer, he'd been criticizing Rosenstein and the Mueller investigation on grounds that Mueller hadn't been delegated the proper jurisdictional boundaries required by the regs. Eventually Manafort made that same pitch in a motion to dismiss the indictments against him, at which point — and not a moment before! — Mueller disclosed, in a filed response to Manafort's motion, the August 2017 supplemental memo from Rosenstein to Mueller formally confirming, and formally expanding, his jurisdiction to cover the matters that turned into the Manafort indictments. Checkmate, motion lost, next topic.

Do Trump supporters who've been wailing and moaning about Mueller exceeding his authority for the past year say, "Wow, we sure did guess wrong on that! Sorry everyone! We apologize to you, Mr. Rosenstein."

.... crickets.

Something as true of Trump and his supporters as of the Clintons and theirs: You can't shame the shameless. Both Trumpkins and Clintonistas see being shameless, therefore, as a feature, not a bug.

And then there's the rest of us, who still have some sense of decency and morality, who recoil in revulsion from both of these toxic sets of privileged, egotistical parasites. Pick a team, folks, and own your choice.

Matthew Sablan said...

I keep saying, it is possible that Mueller somehow found something, and also managed not to leak it. But, unless they've done a surprisingly better job of it than they've done with everything -- and assuming it holds up better than the FISA order they got for Carter Page, is assuming a lot.

I'll wait and see; I just don't expect to see much.

Brian said...

They wiretapped Cohen.
Cohen called the White House at least one time
Cohen was under investigation.

Those facts are then spun to allude:
Trump and Cohen are discussing illegal things and they ar all going down!!!!!

Bite that it doesn’t say Cohen called the White House frequently. It doesn’t say that Cohen and trump even talked! Those 3 facts simply mean nothing. The underlying circumstances range from nothing at all to a full blown mafia operation in he White House. CNN wants you to believe the latter simpler because “Trump”


I would hope that before raiding an attorneys offie and potentially contaminating many potential cases (fruit of the poisonous tree) they would do the bare minimum of surveillance.

The fact that Trump isn’t mentioned as a recipient of the call means that there likely wasn’t one that involved him.

Brian said...

Reading news stories today is like fading stories out of Pravda back in the 80’s....

Matthew Sablan said...

Honestly, all this talk about how hard it is to get a wiretap, let alone one on a lawyer, and how that's proof of something would have a whole lot more meaning if we didn't JUST learn that a federal judge got conned by the FBI into believing that the dossier was a reliable document, and that other sources were saying the same thing, when in reality, those other sources were the same sources, being deliberately manipulated.

Basically: Sure. There's a chance the wiretap had a legitimate reason. But, given the last contentious spying was... less than ethical, when we see the Carter Page FISA stuff, I'm going to wait and see. The FBI has not exactly covered itself in glory lately.

Mike Sylwester said...

John Pickering at 12:57 PM
It is not clear how long the wiretap has been authorized, but NBC News has learned it was in place in the weeks leading up to the raids on Cohen's offices, hotel room, and home in early April, according to one person with direct knowledge.

Robert "The FBI Whitewasher" Mueller is my guess.

Birkel said...

Beldar,
I will happily wager (no money or valuables, as per Althouse rules) on my honor that there is nothing substantive in the Russia investigation.

Incredibly I would lay a proverbial one dollar against a proverbial two dollars that there are no crimes by Trump or the Trump campaign outside of process-related foolishness.

A witch hunt will find a witch, sometimes.

buwaya said...

Beldar,

"Do Trump supporters who've been wailing and moaning about Mueller exceeding his authority..."

Note that such legal hair-splitting is not politically relevant.
This approach to this entire matter is simply autistic.
The law matters only to the extent that the people respect it.
Every day that this goes on more and more of the population cares less and less about the law. That should concern people who care about the law.

Consider the tremendous cost, in cultural terms, of this absurd and absurdly unfair procedure.

The more this goes on - wiretapping the Presidents lawyer?! - the more the establishment will be distrusted and hated, by the very people, that "conservative" middle-upper bourgeoisie, on which the establishment most relies. This stuff makes permanent enemies of people who should be friends.

Again and again, I refer people to history, not lawbooks. Such slicing and dicing of law and legal-political procedure, the misuse of law, is the very mechanism of the collapse of the Roman Republic.

Brian said...

Bridal. I agree with you that we don’t know anything. That’s my point. Just because we don’t have exculpatory info doesn’t mean all info kept from us is incriminating.

There are possible fact patterns bases on the evidence so far that cover trump as a Maria boss as well as federal prosecutors and intelligence operatives (“deep state”) violating all investigating standards to protect their bureaucracies.

The further we go down this road the more likely it’s on the extreme of either end of that spectrum and that is truly dangerous for the country.

Recognizing that doesn’t make me a Trumpkin.

Brian said...

Bridal = Beldar. That’s what I get for using my phone.

Inga said...

“Are you under the misimpression that in the normal course of law enforcement, police and prosecutors are somehow obliged to regularly show you and me and the public everything they're doing while they're doing it?

You don't have a bleeping clue about what the Mueller team does or doesn't have yet on Trump, Cohen, or anyone beyond the very limited paperwork that Mueller's team has so far filed in court in connection with the Flynn guilty plea and Manafort & associate indictments (and related bogus civil litigation).”

Thank you! Finally someone who is speaking sense regarding the ridiculous notion that if there were any validity to the investigation, we would already know about it and what charges would be forthcoming (or not). Everytime I read comments that repeat this canard, I just have to wonder why they think they know what’s going on inside the investigation, I don’t and they don’t.

Mike Sylwester said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Inga said...

“I will happily wager (no money or valuables, as per Althouse rules) on my honor that there is nothing substantive in the Russia investigation.

Incredibly I would lay a proverbial one dollar against a proverbial two dollars that there are no crimes by Trump or the Trump campaign outside of process-related foolishness.”

That because you and you aren’t alone here, delude yourself.

Mike Sylwester said...

Beldar at 1:38 PM
The very reason criminal investigations are confidential before a public indictment, the very reason the DoJ (except for James Jesus-Reborn Comey) never confirms or denies or comments upon an ongoing investigation, is to protect the rights of the as-yet-unconvicted defendant, whose presumption of innocence becomes pretty damn meaningless if the FBI is passing along to the press every crackpot report in addition to every genuine smoking gun.

Beldar, what's your best guess about who leaked the info about Cohen being wiretapped?

As I wrote above, my guess is that this leaker was Robert "The FBI Whitewasher" Mueller.

What's your guess?

Brian said...

Well said buwaya. If the law isn’t seen as justice but just arbitrary punishment then decline isn’t far. Extra legal remedies are then sought by society.

Inga said...

“Honestly, all this talk about how hard it is to get a wiretap, let alone one on a lawyer, and how that's proof of something would have a whole lot more meaning if we didn't JUST learn that a federal judge got conned by the FBI into believing that the dossier was a reliable document, and that other sources were saying the same thing, when in reality, those other sources were the same sources, being deliberately manipulated.”

WE didn’t just learn anything of the sort, this is based on conspiracy theory...once again.

Matthew Sablan said...

Inga: That's not a conspiracy theory. We know that the judge was lied to about who funded the dossier, and that the dossier composed much of the reasoning behind the FISA application.

That's a basic fact. We know this. If you refuse to accept that fact, fine.

But, then you're not even in the same reality as the rest of us.

Matthew Sablan said...

(Also, we shouldn't be surprised they lied to the judge about it. Comey lied to the president about it!)

Inga said...

“We know that the judge was lied to about who funded the dossier, and that the dossier composed much of the reasoning behind the FISA application.”

And just HOW do we know this?

Mike Sylwester said...

Inga at 2:09 AM
You don't have a bleeping clue about what the Mueller team does or doesn't have yet on Trump, Cohen, or anyone ...

Inga, what's your own best guess about who leaked the information about Michael Cohen being wiretapped?

The public knows a lot, because a lot of information is leaked all the time.

I myself think that a major leaker is Robert "The FBI Whitewasher" Mueller.

Fabi said...

"We might as well settle on this; whatever story is needed, to minimize the number and seriousness of the banking, tax and FEC violations, will be the story that Trump uses. It won't matter, if it debases Trump or his wife or anybody else. It won't matter if it involves Trump lying, or hanging Michael Cohen out to dry. No lie will be too great or too outlandish to tell, if the net result is keeping Trump out of trouble. But I'm not so sure it is even possible at this point. Bill Clinton's lying about his extramarital sex is like a one-paragraph newswire story compared to "War and Peace" with Trump's lying about his extramarital sex."

Never go full retard.

Matthew Sablan said...

By keeping abreast of current events.

Again: Mueller might have something. But when you won't even acknowledge *reality*, it makes it hard to take your objections seriously.

Inga said...

“But, then you're not even in the same reality as the rest of us.”

What is concerning is that there are so many of you, who are intelligent, buy into this conspiracy theory. I just have to shake my head and wonder if you’ll ever wake up from your delusions.

Inga said...

“By keeping abreast of current events.”

No, not exactly true. Maybe true in your mind, but not true in reality. Nunes is a Trump lackey and anything he has to say is suspect.

Matthew Sablan said...

What conspiracy theory have I proposed?

Original Mike said...

It’s been fun watching Inga morph from telling us all the ways Mueller was going to take Trump down to “we don’t know anything”.

Inga said...

“What conspiracy theory have I proposed?”

That the FISA warrant was obtained by unethical/illegal criteria/ methods.

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Inga said...

“By keeping abreast of current events.“

“Yet you are willing to bet the ranch on your assessment of what you've read on the internet from other people who are equally certain that their guesswork and speculation is the be-all and end-all.”

Matthew. You need to think about this.

Original Mike said...

”That the FISA warrant was obtained by unethical/illegal criteria/ methods.”

There’s all sorts of evidence that it was.

Chuck said...

Hey, Fabi; want to bet that Michael Cohen gets indicted?

Fabi said...

"Some of Ann's readers regard Hillary's email carelessness, which would have gotten her a reprimand if she were the IT officer at Morgan Stanley..."

She repeatedly mishandled highly-classified state secrets and violated the Federal Records act, to name two areas which have no equivalent in your ludicrous analogy.

Drago said...

Inga: "That the FISA warrant was obtained by unethical/illegal criteria/ methods."

LOL

We already know it was.

As McCabe testified under oath (and why the dems do NOT want that testimony released) without the Hillary paid for/Democrat oppo research firm controlled/Putin pal fake input dossier, there would be no FISA warrants.

And Comey himself called the hoax dossier "salacious and unverified" long after it was used to obtain multiple FISA warrants.

And, of course, it is a violation to use such information in order to a FISA warrant.

Not to worry. Rosenstein and Wray's obstruction will soon be overridden if they do not release the unredacted FISA warrants to the constitutionally appropriate oversight of the Congressional committees and then we'll get to see just what BS was put into the warrants without oppo research attribution.

Further, perhaps Trump will also declassify some other key points the FBI/DOJ are stonewalling on: specifically, was FusionGPS given access to the raw FISA 702 intercept data.

They won't tell us...which tells us something...

Birkel said...

Inga: That (sic) because you (sic) and you aren’t alone here, delude (sic) yourself.

Well, after that performance I certainly feel chastened.

The FISA warrant on Carter Page relied on Clinton-purchased opposition research (per Trey Gowdy) and nothing else.

Fabi said...

"Hey, Fabi; want to bet that Michael Cohen gets indicted?"

Only if the wager is a ham sandwich. :-)

Drago said...

LLR Chuck: "Hey, Fabi; want to bet that Michael Cohen gets indicted?"

Oh, he will definitely get indicted.

Just like Ted Stevens, Tom Delay, Gov Rick Perry, Scooter Libby, ....

Just LLR Chuck's democrat allies doing what they do best: lawfare.

Chuck said...

Well we KNOW that the ham sandwich is gonna get indicted. Indicting a ham sandwich is as easy as indicting a Trump Organization Vice President.

Birkel said...

The new legal team is going on the offense.

I would bet Trump declassifies the FISA warrant application soon enough. But only after Huber is done with his investigation.

Bruce Hayden said...

“You don't have a bleeping clue about what the Mueller team does or doesn't have yet on Trump, Cohen, or anyone beyond the very limited paperwork that Mueller's team has so far filed in court in connection with the Flynn guilty plea and Manafort & associate indictments (and related bogus civil litigation). ”

But, then again, neither do you, nor do you have any verifiable information that Mueller is not on a witch hunt. We do know that most of the younger prosecutors in the SDNY were hired by Loretta Lynch, James Comey, and Preet Bharara, because they were the US Attorneys there. We also know that the judge handling the case, Kimba Wood, was nominated by Bill Clinton to be his Attorney General. Is that coincidence? Or was there some judge shopping going on. Was she the judge who also approved the Cohen raid and Wiretap?Not sure that any Republican could get a fair shake in a district whose judges have to overcome the blue slips of the likes of Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton, and Kirsten Gillibrandand.

Should we assume impartiality of Mueller and his team? That they are politically neutral in their investigation? Why should we? Personally, I remain unconvinced that Mueller himself is a political hack, as is so often portrayed. More likely, I think, someone whom many would call a GOPe. Which suggests sympathy with the Deep State, but likely not overtly political in opposition to Trump. Of course, there were some investigations that he oversaw that were beyond questionable... But his team? That is a very different story. Most of the attorneys were Dem or Crooked Hillary contributors. Coincidence? I think unlikely, based on the numbers. And he has on his team such stalwarts of legal probity as Andrew Weismann. Indeed, I would suggest that the mere inclusion of Weismann on his team is prima facile evidence of political bias and questionable prosecutorial ethics of Mueller’s team. Making things maybe even worse, it turns out, according to Strzok/Page text messages, that the team was apparently picked by the DoJ and FBI leadership to destroy the Trump Presidency, by filling it with zealous partisan hacks, and Mueller was brought in to give them nonpartisan cover. So, again, why should we trust this team?

Should we trust them? Of course. But that was before. We have seen a significant decrease in trust for the DoJ and FBI over the last several years. Esp of the FBI. I would suggest that they have squandered the trust that was built up, in the case of the FBI (longer for the DoJ), over a century, for short term political gain.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 283   Newer› Newest»