"I am ashamed because I know what Mr. Trump is. He is a racist. He is a conman. He is a cheat. He was a presidential candidate who knew that Roger Stone was talking with Julian Assange about a WikiLeaks drop of Democratic National Committee emails."
From the PDF of Michael Cohen's opening statement to the House Oversight Committee.
You can watch the action live here.
February 27, 2019
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
627 comments:
1 – 200 of 627 Newer› Newest»Ugh. Who the Fuck Cares?
Imagine if the president had received BJs in the oval office from an intern.
LIAR, LIAR, LIAR!!!
"I have lied, but I am not a liar."
Bet he's not a crook, either.
NothingBurger
You can watch the action live here.
Can you see the marionette strings?
I like the hearsay comments about Trump's supposed racism. No way to prove any of it - but hey - it fits perfectly with the democrat's narrative.
He sounds like Mitt Romney.
Cohen isn’t particularly bright but was useful for Trump. Trump is still using Cohen. But Dem donors are paying him. Take care of his family while he’s in prison. When he gets out, Trump will still be president.
"I’m giving the Committee today three years of President Trump’s financial statements, from 2011-2013"
So when did Mr. Trump give permission to release his financial records?
"I am giving the Committee today a copy of the $130,000 wire transfer from me to Ms. Clifford’s attorney during the closing days of the presidential campaign that was demanded by Ms. Clifford to maintain her silence about her affair with Mr. Trump. "
Isn't that extortion by Ms. Clifford?
Pretty clever of Pelosi. Scheduling this opposite trumps summit so all democrats could bash the president while overseas. The democrat party is more dangerous to the US than Russia, China or Iran.
In pursuit of the Russians and Trump -the left have turned into the Russians.
What Michael Cohen says may or may not be true, but what purpose does calling Trump a racist serve other than political? Even if true, it's not an element of any crime so is entirely superfluous to any criminal investigation and probably inadmissible in any court other than the one of public opinion.
He is a racist.
Asserting someone is a racist doesn't matter. Dems / the left believe everyone who disagrees with them is a racist. In order to convince anyone he has to provide examples and given his history he has to provide corroborating evidence.
So we'll see what happens but I suspect if corroboration existed it would already have come out.
He is a racist. He is a conman. He is a cheat.
And Cohen is a known profligate liar, who after being disbarred yesterday, even now -- with respect to those few things he is telling the truth about -- tramples on the the most sacrosanct principle of legal ethics, the attorney-client privilege.
Nothing he says has any value beyond purely partisan warfare.
Well, I assume that Professor Emerita Althouse knows a great deal more about attorney-client privilege than I do, but I don’t know which is more troubling — that Congress can and would compel testimony from Trump’s lawyer, or that Trump would have such a thorough-going sleazebag for a lawyer. I think the former is a very bad precedent, but if I had to do business in New York I guess I would want a lawyer know which officials you had to bribe so that your paperwork wouldn’t mysteriously vanish into his trash can.
Unless Cohen has a photo of Trump in blackface, this hearing is going to be dull.
Trump fucked Stormy Daniels a decade ago and reimbursed Cohen for paying her $135,000 in blackmail. But Stormy took the money and has blabbed anyway and Cohen is going to prison.
Nothing new here. Maybe Cohen can say Trump fucked Hillary. Break some news.
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! The Democrats put this joke out there while President Trump is trying to get world peace. Nice Job. Shows how desperate the Democrats really are.
Cohen should call Trump Anti-Semitic for not pardoning him
There is a starving audience for this silly theater. There are people who need to believe this is something even when it's clearly nothing. This will make some money for the media, generate some ratings. But when it's all done nobody will have changed their position on Trump or Cohen or any of the other feature players other than to confirm their biases even harder.
If Dick Blumenthal can lie to become a Senator; why can't Cohen lie to Representatives? Gillibrand wants people to believe she isn't a stooge of the Pharmaceutical Industry while they fundraise for her. Come on Democrats, tell me more of your sweet sweet lies. Heck, bring back Andrew McCabe next!
There is one negative thing that the whole Cohen business clearly says about Trump, that may be significant: it puts the lie to Trump's claim of always hiring the best people...
Everything else is, like, "Eh?" Cohen is a low-life proven liar who has always been out for himself and (according to him) broke the law (as a lawyer)... so now he is believable?
Maybe he is telling the truth, maybe he isn't; I don't know. But I DO know that in at least one case Trump chose a terrible person to work for him.
"mccullough said...
Maybe Cohen can say Trump fucked Hillary."
Everyone would know that it was a lie. Because Trump doesn't drink. And let's face it, it would take an ocean of scotch...
OK, Trump is a jerk. What's the crime? What was illicit? I want to know. Exactly.
Remember Bill Clinton lying under oath. That wasn't enough.
@Martin, read my comment at 10:07.
"As he watched the eyeless face with the jaw moving rapidly up and down, Winston had a curious feeling that this was not a real human being but some kind of dummy. It was not the man's brain that was speaking, it was his larynx. The stuff that was coming out of him consisted of words, but it was not speech in the true sense: it was a noise uttered in unconsciousness, like the quacking of a duck."
"Whatever it was, you could be certain that every word of it was pure orthodoxy, pure Ingsoc."
I like the part about how Trump demanding schools keep his educational records secret was somehow nefarious.
Those records are protected by laws and demanding the holders of those records to maintain privacy is the definition of a nothingburger.
Including that bit in the testimony is padding.
It reveals the vacuity of Cohen's testimony.
Trump bought a portrait of himself with his charity's money. Fuck! Hillary paid for her daughter's wedding with her charity's money.
Cohen's opening statement is pure Lanny Davis BS.
Cohen's claim that he has a conscience is new.
Cohen's claim that he has a conscience is new.
Cohen's claim that he has a conscience is a lie. Had he a conscience, he would demonstrate a little more remorse and humility, rather than brazen bravado in a resentful attack that lies and otherwise at best plays fast and loose with the facts.
Liberals are insane.
'Hey, headed off to prison for lying to Congress? Before you go, mind if you come back to Congress and lie to us for 3 straight days? We'll even give you a full day of wall-to-wall television coverage on all the networks.'
Watch Jim Jordan
Bill's crimes - no one in the media interested.
Hillary's private server - no one in the media interested.
that's the law now.
I find it amusing that after all this condemnation of Trump demeaning the office of the Presidency - which, frankly, is true, but not really any more true than Clinton or Obama or Nixon or Kennedy - the same people invite this guy to testify in front of Congress. If he has evidence then we would be glad to see it. If he is just going to talk, then I don't care. If it's not in writing it didn't happen.
Hillary's fixers live inside the FBI.
"Grossly negligent" changed to... "Extremely Careless." by Peter Strozk.
Jordan knows what happened and will destroy
Bruce Hayden or Althouse?
Isn't most of what he is saying protected by Trump's attorney-client privilege? I know there is an exception for ongoing or future criminal activity, but WTF?
He was a presidential candidate who knew that Roger Stone was talking with Julian Assange about a WikiLeaks drop of Democratic National Committee emails.
Is having knowledge a bad thing now?
Cohen's opening statement is pure Lanny Davis BS.
Indeed.
Lanny DAvis - a democratic operative.
Would CNN be so deranged as to call the Trump/Un summit a "distraction" from the Cohen testimony?
Of course not. They call it "the ultimate distraction. (CNN.com)
Page 16 of his opening statement (near then end)
Questions have been raised about whether I know of direct evidence that
Mr. Trump or his campaign colluded with Russia. I do not. I want to be
clear. But, I have my suspicions.
Game.Set.Match. No EVIDENCE of collusion. Thanks for playing.
Watch the House Democrats enable an unethical, proven liar for political gain. Democrat sore losers are destroying our country!
Martin said...
There is one negative thing that the whole Cohen business clearly says about Trump, that may be significant: it puts the lie to Trump's claim of always hiring the best people...
I suspect Trump hired Cohen in the first place precisely because Cohen was a scumbag. He believed having a lowlife fixer like that on his payroll would be beneficial in his world of large scale commercial real estate development. So one could argue in a way he may have been the "best person" for that role at that time. Of course it wasn't "the best" thing to do in terms of ethics or morals. Trump isn't an angel and few people, even among his most ardent supporters, believe that his is.
Static Ping said...
... "If it's not in writing it didn't happen."
If it's not on Instagram it didn't happen.
John Lynch said...
OK, Trump is a jerk. What's the crime? What was illicit? I want to know. Exactly.
Remember Bill Clinton lying under oath. That wasn't enough.
"Individual 1."
Watch Jim Jordan
I've watched him before. He's another that likes to make speeches instead of asking a lot of questions in a serious examination of the witness.
Liar.
"Martin said...
There is one negative thing that the whole Cohen business clearly says about Trump, that may be significant: it puts the lie to Trump's claim of always hiring the best people...
But I DO know that in at least one case Trump chose a terrible person to work for him."
LOL Significant? How?
Cohen may or may not be the best in class, but he has been under extreme duress for, what is it now, eight trimesters. There is not credible evidence (e.g. partners, employees, family, friends) that Trump is a jerk, and certainly not a diversitist, but rather that he is known to respond in kind to past actions, which may also inform current and seemingly proactive measures.
That said, the multi-trimester displacement of Clinton's Water Closet, despite a persistent lack of viability, seems to have a motive similar to the Convington Affair, which effectively removed focus from a human rights campaign to end age discrimination (which hasn't been thoroughly normalized despite obfuscation through, for example, technical terms of art, "fetus"), to reject summary judgments and honor the constitutional right to due process, to end cruel and unusual punishment, protection for BOPs (babies of planning), etc. I have to wonder what good or bad news this trial press of emotion and innuendo is meant to cover.
CNN be so deranged as to call the Trump/Un summit a "distraction"
That may be it.
In general, the attorney/client privilege only protects communications related to seeking or giving legal advice, or carrying out a client's instructions in the capacity of an attorney.
I watched a bit of Cohen's opening attempt to make himself a sympathetic character. He failed. His entire demeanor screams 'lying scumbag'.
Unless Cohen has a photo of Trump in blackface
I want this to be true. Oh, the double standard would be glorious.
In other words, the privilege doesn't cover every private conversation between Trump and Cohen.
He knows what sells and wants to sell it.
I give Trump a pass for hiring Manafort. He needed help with his campaign, was under time pressure and hired someone with experience in a profession not known for its high ethics. Manafort was fired after about two months.
TI don't give him a pass with Cohen. Cohen worked closely with Trump for over 10 years. I don't think Cohen is trustworthy and there's definitely something slimy about him, but Trump had to know that. Why would he keep someone like that for over 10 years if he didn't need him in his organization?
It not unusual for powerful figures in politics or business to have a shady character do the dirty work for them. LBJ had Bobby Baker. But if the shady character turns on the boss, it reflects poorly on the boss. At a minimum for working so long and closely with the shady character, at a maximum for if some of the the damaging allegations made are true.
I agree with some of the comments above that the racist allegation made by Cohen is not relevant to any crimes Trump may have committed. Including it makes Cohen look bias, like he has an ax to grind and will use any means to take Trump down. But that doesn't let Trump off the hook for working with a guy with this so long.
All I could think of in the few seconds I could stand watching him was this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkYNBwCEeH4
Chuck don't hide behind the lame arrangement made with SDNY. Tell us in plain language what law(s) Trump broke when he paid the blackmail demand from Stormy.
“Cohen worked closely with Trump for over 10 years. I don't think Cohen is trustworthy and there's definitely something slimy about him, but Trump had to know that.”
Trump prefers scum bags until they turn on him.
"But, I have my suspicions"
He and Comey
buster said...
In other words, the privilege doesn't cover every private conversation between Trump and Cohen.
It would if that was an hour that Cohen billed for. How many free hours do you think Cohen gave Trump?
I lied to Congress the last time I was here but I am not lying now. Mueller has imprisoned people he knew to be innocent. He destroyed General Flynn's life over nothing. He bullies. Paul Manafort confessed but not enough and so he's going to prison. I see these things going on but I have not been frightened into my testimony which is mostly hearsay from an admitted perjurer facing prison. I say I was driving in car alone with Trump and he said racist things and another time he laughed at the government's tax policies. I say that I was in a room alone with Trump and Trump said that Roger Stone said that Roger knew what Wikileaks was going to do. I was in a room and Don Jr. whispered to his father and I say that that whisper was about a meeting supposedly to get dirt on Hillary (though it turned out not to be that.) And there's a lot more I can remember all feeding the Democrat's narrative. So it's true. I am not a Jussie.
Speaking of racial politics, -
"So, the nation’s Newspaper of Record got at least an average of one out of three of its “This Week in Hate” stories right. On the other hand, the facts in another one out of three cases undermine the NYT’s Narrative.
For the Times to be right on merely a simple majority (11 of 21) of its handpicked stories of white Trump criminality, four of the seven unlikely incidents would have to turn out to be true.
Therefore, the Times probably failed to reach even 50 percent accuracy."
Chuck believes Individual 1 broke a law that Chuck cannot cite.
Cite the specific statutory language that makes paying a blackmail demand while running for office a crime.
Name it, Chuck, disinvited racist fopdoodle.
Use your Lexis or Westlaw and find the statute that applies.
HINT: A lying liar convicted of lying pleaded guilty to a non-crime as a political statement to save his lying ass.
“Mueller has imprisoned people he knew to be innocent. He destroyed General Flynn's life over nothing.”
Your opinion, doesn’t make it fact.
Amexpat:
I think you're wrong. I don't know Michael Cohen; he seems like a really unsavory character. But I heard from someone important that Michael is a good man.
Like Paul Manafort, convicted of multiple felonies, is a good man.
Just months ago, both statements were made. By Trump, after Cohen was arrested and after Manafort was found guilty.
Inga and her lefty ally LLR Chuck have got to be disappointed that Cohen is simply regurgitating the same old stuff.
LOL
Inga, even loony lefty Jeffrey Toobin was trying to warn you yesterday not to get your hopes up, but some lefty cannon fodder foot solders like Inga never get the word.
And poor LLR Chuck!! Trump jumps all over LLR Chuck's beloved lying Stolen Valor dem hack Blumenthal with an epic tweet last night.
I'll bet that Trump tweet re:Blumenthal sends Chuck back into therapy!
Jim Jordan is a determined force for the truth. Startling isn't it. He is directly rude to liars as if he has no fear of them. Apparently the man knows what Trump has on the Criminal Deep State.
I give Trump a pass for hiring Manafort. He needed help with his campaign, was under time pressure and hired someone with experience in a profession not known for its high ethics. Manafort was fired after about two months.
The Trump kids hired Manafort on the mistaken assumption that he was experienced in convention strategy. His experience was ten years old and he was a thief.
Cohen is the sort of sleazy character you find in sleazy places like New York City.
LIAR, LIAR, LIAR!!!
Why is it so important to you that these are lies? If everything Cohen is saying is true, you wouldn't care. Democrats are worse, you'd say.
If you were shown undeniable, 100% proof that Trump bullied women into having abortions, or jeopardized American interests in order to get some private advantage in real estate, you'd come up with some reason it's not so bad. Because you don't actually care about those things.
80% of the commenters here make it a point of personal pride that they will literally swallow anything as long as it means they can pretend "conservatives" are winning. So why insist that you are swallowing nothing?
You hate most of America, so you don't mind Trump hastening the decline. You know we're not going back. Why not just admit that you're nihilistic cheerleaders with no tonsils?
New info about Russia, Trump KNEW about Stone coordinating with Wikleaks, Cohen was in his room when Trump spoke to Stone on speaker phone. I’d say that was pretty interesting.
Cohen seems to think that "I am going to prison" is proof that this time, he is not lying.
Inga: "New info about Russia, Trump KNEW about Stone coordinating with Wikleaks, Cohen was in his room when Trump spoke to Stone on speaker phone. I’d say that was pretty interesting."
LOL
And Lanny Davis you find under a rock, only when pajistani generals equatorial Guinea chieftains and Ukrainian oligarchs come calling
“80% of the commenters here make it a point of personal pride that they will literally swallow anything as long as it means they can pretend "conservatives" are winning. So why insist that you are swallowing nothing?”
Indeed.
@Amexpat,
You provide a nice sober assessment above, particularly:
I agree with some of the comments above that the racist allegation made by Cohen is not relevant to any crimes Trump may have committed. Including it makes Cohen look bias, like he has an ax to grind and will use any means to take Trump down. But that doesn't let Trump off the hook for working with a guy with this so long.
This would be true -- if we were living in a sane political world, but we are not.
The "Get Trump" Squad is using every tactic to nail Trump or his associates, because they still haven't gotten over losing the 2016 election.
Almost all powerful men in politics and business have subordinates to do some of the ugly stuff. So, LBJ had Bobby Baker, Nixon had Bebe Rebozo, Obama had Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers, and Trump has/had Cohen.
Jim Jordan is a determined force for the cover of sexual abuse at OSU
Fuck you, Birkel. I'm not doing your legal research for you. It isn't even legal research. I gave you the link to the SDNY criminal information in Cohen's case.
If you were an intelligent commenter, asking in good faith, I might engage with you. But you are not worth it, you piece of shit. I want nothing to do with you. Not so much because we disagree but because you are stupid and contemptible.
You won't do me any favors even if I asked. So I'll ask this of you for Althouse; do us all a service and ignore all of my comments going forward. It will cut down on the comment page "clutter" that Althouse abhors.
Drago nervously laughs as he walks past the graveyard.
Chuck can't name the "crime" Trump committed in paying the pussy blackmail. Because paying isn't the crime, soliciting it is. And Chuck the alleged lawyer thinks that Cohen can plead guilty on Trump's behalf somehow. You're pathetic, LLR. Beria indeed!
No that would be Robert Mueller and it isnt rhetorical.
Is the economy roaring?
Yeah, RotM, that means we hate the country.
Learn to code, bro.
Inga: "Drago nervously laughs as he walks past the graveyard."
So, let me see, the actual "evidence" that what you wrote is "true" is the word of Michael Cohen....and literally nothing elae, correct?
LOL
No Inga, Im just laughing at you and your lefty mini-me LLR Chuck.
Gee, business dealings in Russia eh?....there must be oodles of paperwork on that........not!
"New info about Russia, Trump KNEW about Stone coordinating with Wikleaks, Cohen was in his room when Trump spoke to Stone on speaker phone. I’d say that was pretty interesting."
What's so interesting? What's so bad about Wikileaks? Are you against a free press? Are you in favor of prior restraint? How many Deplorables voted for Trump because of Russia? How many of them even care about Russia?
Yes they freaked out when miss fields pulled that ambulance chaser routine with Lewandowski, Manafort served a purpose, as has bamnon.
Birkel says who cares if the president is a corrupt scumbag, as long as the economy is improving.
No, Chuck, disinvited racist fopdoodle, you would not attempt to show a statute you know is not anywhere in the Code.
Instead you would call names, lie, and point fingers to distract from your own falsehoods.
You too are a liar.
FREE ADVICE: Ask for a real attorney if ever you are questioned by a state or federal investigator?
The Dems are largely focused on: (1) Payments to Stormy Daniels (which ain't a crime) and (2) Julian Assange's disclosure of DNC emails (which blew Hillary out of the political waters).
Both of these items are tired, old news from the campaign, and just show that during the campaign Trump's team was sharp and reacted quickly to those two developments.
Still trying to re-fight a campaign that lost.
When assangr was burning assets programs personnel the times the post the guardian were fine with it, it's only when Assange got into their cozy rizzotto tray deal.
Haven’t been watching, but two comments based solely on reading Althouse’s posts.
1. I’m supposed to be disappointed in Trump over the public disclosure of Wikileaks?
2. The quoted testimony seems oddly shaped to fit the demands of a partisan prosecutor. Rehearsed for worst possible impact on the image of the president.
Inga: "Birkel says who cares if the president is a corrupt scumbag,..."
What "corruption"?
LOL
Is Trumps "corruption" right next to that hoax dossier "thingy" you went on and on and on and on about?
“What's so bad about Wikileaks?”
Wikileaks disseminated emails that were STOLEN. I guess that’s not important to you.
Please don't refer to the slovenly attachment to all things Trump as swallowing. TMI, not that there's anything wrong with that
Chuck can't name the "crime" Trump committed in paying the pussy blackmail.
Well I can. And we have already been over this. He had Cohen made an illegal contribution to the campaign.
You (or rather Trump) could use the defense that the payment would have been made regardless of whether he was running for president (as John Edwards successfully argued in a very similar situation). But the payment could reasonably be seen as an illegal campaign contribution.
And what exactly is the law Stormy Daniels broke?
Royal ass Inga,
We don't elect a pope and I am not a cardinal.
Obama's policies were all that mattered to me, as he squeezed the middle class and helped the very rich donors who financed his campaigns.
Policy matters to me.
You should be more consistent, beyond being foolishly ignorant.
Inga: "Wikileaks disseminated emails that were STOLEN. I guess that’s not important to you."
The NYT has been in possession of the classified FISA warrant improperly leaked by dem Senate Intelligence staffers since 2017.
Number of Inga complaints about this leak? ZERO
“What's so bad about Wikileaks?”
Wikileaks disseminated emails that were STOLEN. I guess that’s not important to you."
That were very detrimental to the Democratic Party, which we know you don't care about.
Well I can. And we have already been over this. He had Cohen made an illegal contribution to the campaign.
No. Generally, not a crime. Campaign violations happen in every campaign. Obama campaign was fined $375K -- the largest in history. Nobody went to jail or cares.
“Policy matters to me.”
Having no principles is a pathetic way to go through life.
Serious question: Is Cohen testifying as part of a plea agreement?
Freder: "And we have already been over this. He had Cohen made an illegal contribution to the campaign."
LOL
Nope.
Looks like Freder is back to his old Bundy Trial Results lying again!
Well, it is a day ending in "Y".
Nothing we haven't already heard. Nothing Burger
Read Roger Stone's indictment documents prepared by Mueller's team. Wikileaks gave Stone nothing- literally nothing. Stone was constantly trying to get a detailed heads-up on what was coming (so were hundreds of journalists), but if you go back and read Stone's own public tweets, he was wrong every single time he made a claim/prediction about what was coming. Stone never knew anything more than the public did- that much is blindingly obvious.
Wikileaks published tweets weeks and months before the various data dumps that gave some hint of what they would publish, but not details. Hell, I had some idea of what Wikileaks was going to publish before they did so because Wikileaks told me and everyone else with open tweets. Cohen's testimony would only be meaningful if Stone had told Trump actual details about the material, which Stone didn't have (again, see the indictment). Stone, Trump, and everyone else got the material on the same day and hour that Wikileaks provided the public key. Say what you will about Wikileaks, but they don't give out special access to anyone outside the organization- a good principle they live by.
"I am ashamed that I chose to take part in concealing Mr. Trump’s illicit acts rather than listening to my own conscience."
To believe that, we'd have to believe his conscience was his guide in all things non-Trump.
Unfortunately for Cohen, there have been too many illegal and unethical actions taken by him that have nothing to do with the President.
Royal ass Inga wants the Washington Post criminally prosecuted for The Pentagon Papers.
Fucking Burger Court!
Inga: "Having no principles is a pathetic way to go through life."
LOL
Dont you dems have a Gov and LtGov in Virginia to dispose of?.......
"Principles".....
Inga: "Wikileaks disseminated emails that were STOLEN. I guess that’s not important to you."
See Pentagon Papers in 1971. Big historical item, perhaps you've heard of it?
General rule: Stealing classified info is the crime; publishing it in the papers is not. (See, Hanks, Tom and Streep, Meryl in The Post.)
Roost of moon has some pent up rage issues.
Howard: "Nothing we haven't already heard. Nothing Burger"
Now is not the time for a straightforward review of what is actually being asserted.
Omidyar who is one of the lion tamers of thos show against israel and the gulf states owns ths Panama papers archive.
“Stone never knew anything more than the public did- that much is blindingly obvious.”
Only “obvious” to those who wish to believe this. We know nothing of the sort. Mueller most likely does.
I missed an opportunity not just to beat Bay Area Guy to the punch, but also a quip:
Fucking Nothing Burger Court!
Wikileaks published tweets weeks and months before the various data dumps that gave some hint of what they would publish, but not details. Hell, I had some idea of what Wikileaks was going to publish before they did so because Wikileaks told me and everyone else with open tweets. Cohen's testimony would only be meaningful if Stone had told Trump actual details about the material, which Stone didn't have (again, see the indictment). Stone, Trump, and everyone else got the material on the same day and hour that Wikileaks provided the public key. Say what you will about Wikileaks, but they don't give out special access to anyone outside the organization- a good principle they live by.
Trump, Stone, Wikileaks, Russia, Election Fraud, illegitimate, impeachment.
Repeated ad nauseam by the major media outlets, it doesn't have to make sense to those who need it to be true.
Inga...Allie Oop said...
“What's so bad about Wikileaks?”
Wikileaks disseminated emails that were STOLEN. I guess that’s not important to you.
Hell, the Pentagon Papers were stolen AND Classified. Didn't stop the NYT or WaPo from publishing material useful to their meme. Nearly every single document that ends up in the hands of a reporter has been "stolen" in the sense that it does not belong to the person who leaked it.
Even Comey's memo's that he wrote himself were "Stolen". They were both classified and as work product, belonged not to Comey, but rather the Government run by Trump.
Only “obvious” to those who wish to believe this. We know nothing of the sort. Mueller most likely does.
It's going to be fun watching Inga pivot from "Mueller knows everything" to "It's obvious to everyone" when the report comes up empty.
Pro-tip: If Mueller had the goods, the Dems would be waiting for his devastating report rather than trotting out convicted liar Cohen to make a public case.
Michael Cohen: "I am afraid you are mistaking me for someone who has an interest in fair treatment of Donald Trump. I'm not your guy. I am interested in smearing him, hurting him and prejudicing people against him."
And one should consider that ellsberg probably only culled part of the private record, much of the documentation that moyar relied upon in victory forsaken was not included.
Wikileaks disseminated emails that were STOLEN. I guess that’s not important to you.
If we really cared about stuff like that, wouldn't we be equally upset about information fed to reporters off the record which is then immediately published?
I mean, if we cared about that stuff...
Is the economy roaring? Yeah, RotM, that means we hate the country.
My point is, you don't care about that. If you cared about that, you'd be mad about the nonsensical tariffs.
Roost of moon has some pent up rage issues.
Pent up something, certainly. It seems like the appropriate amount of piss & vinegar, given that the president is plainly a crook, and his party won't hold him accountable. But whatever it is, it's manifesting today as an inability to get over how funny this is:
“Mr. Trump had frequently told me and others that his son Don Jr. had the worst judgment of anyone in the world”
-Michael Cohen, under oath
Birkel, in Ingas defense history began anew this morning so she is unaware of the Pentagon Papers and that the lefties/LLR's are FOR that one.
“Mr. Trump had frequently told me and others that his son Don Jr. had the worst judgment of anyone in the world”
-Michael Cohen, under oath
LOL
"Under oath".....a guy that has already been convicted for lying "under oath"...
Wikileaks disseminated emails that were STOLEN. I guess that’s not important to you.
.....................................
Access to the emails was given away by Mr. Podesta. The server was not hacked.
I read the statement last night when it was published. There is no there there. However, I did make one conclusion based on the statement- I now think we can be sure that the January Buzzfeed story that Mueller immediately contradicted was sourced to either Michael Cohen or Lanny Davis, with a possibility that it came via the House committee that is hearing Cohen this morning. I will explain below:
The thing to note about the statement is that Cohen explicitly writes that Trump did not direct him to lie to Congress about him carrying on negotiations with the Russian government concerning the possible Trump Tower well into 2016. This, combined with the innuendo that follows in that statement about how Cohen's prepared testimony was reviewed and approved by the White House counsel, tells me that there was an earlier proffer of Congressional testimony that did make that explicit claim that Trump suborned perjury. Maybe Cohen wasn't being completely clear in that proffer and the House Democrats misunderstood it, but it doesn't matter- either Cohen was lying in that original proffer, or the Democrats over-interpreted what Cohen was suggesting.
The question to ask is this- why would Mueller feel it necessary to come out and contradict the Buzzfeed story? The reason should be blindingly obvious. How do you think Mueller knew Cohen had lied to Congress? Mueller knew this because the White House and Trump's lawyers provided him detailed documentation proving Cohen had lied. This is the only story that makes any sense whatsoever, and I suspect it is why Cohen turned on Trump so viciously. Someone had to refer Cohen's testimony to Mueller as potential perjury, and the White House lawyers are the most likely source for that.
"(N)onsensical tariffs" that got foreign leaders to redefine the terms of trade agreements in terms more favorable to the United States seem fine to me.
Also, it makes your use of the word nonsensical... wait for it... nonsensical.
Your TDS is showing, RotM.
The Dem Illinois Congressman asking Cohen about Trump extensive use of NDAs and why they are bad. Two questions later, Cohen says he can’t answer a question because federal prosecutors in New York asked him not to talk about it.
The Congressman: “I can respect that.”
Fucking idiots.
In Pentagon Papers, Nixon fought to shut it down and slander Ellsberg. WikiLeaks case has Trumpians actively exploiting the Intel as agent of foreign agents
in Ingas defense history began anew this morning so she is unaware of the Pentagon Papers
The Pentegon papers were literally stolen.
"In 1971, Daniel Ellsberg, a Defense Department employee who had turned completely against the war, began to smuggle portions of the papers out of the Pentagon.."
“Wikileaks disseminated emails that were STOLEN. I guess that’s not important to you.”
“If we really cared about stuff like that, wouldn't we be equally upset about information fed to reporters off the record which is then immediately published?”
Hacking is illegal. I think you folks keep wanting to brush this under the rug. If Trump knew that the emails Stone was talking about to him were hacked, he should’ve contacted the FBI. We’ll eventually find out what he knew and when he knew it.
Fave info smuggler is the departed Sandy Burglar.
What a leg-acy.
Will the House Dems convince Pelosi to allow an impeachment vote based on Cohen's testimony? (assuming Mueller's report is a "decline to prosecute").
Inquiring minds, want to know.
I'm thinking No. The grounds are flimsy, the Senate won't remove, Pence will be worse, and it will send middle-of-road voters over to Trump.
I could be wrong.
Inga: "Only “obvious” to those who wish to believe this. We know nothing of the sort. Mueller most likely does."
LOL
Inga keeps forgetting what her position on waiting for Mueller happens to be.
My favorite Inga posts are those where she contradicts herself within the same post!
Those are the best.
Royal ass Inga,
Maybe you could ask Howard if Daniel Ellsberg committed a crime by giving the classified information that was stolen from the Pentagon and given to the Washington Post newspaper that was the subject of the 1971 Supreme Court case, The Pentagon Papers.
Your ignorance is your strength.
2+2=5
They got their campaign video soundbite out of Cohen.
Ol' Sleepy eyes Cohen, ever the serpent, ever the creep.
If I leave my email password on my desk and someone sees it and uses it to access my emails, is that hacking Inga and is it illegal?
If I forward my bosses emails to my husband's computer and he accesses the emails is that hacking and is it illegal?
If I leave $1000 on a park bench and someone takes it, is that theft?
Howard: "WikiLeaks case has Trumpians actively exploiting the Intel as agent of foreign agents"
LOL
Drago, do you think if you keep repeatedly say things that have no meaning, that they magically will the more you say them?
We’ll eventually find out what he knew and when he knew it.
Your erstwhile hero Mueller already told you but your doing the fingers-in-the-ear "la la la" and ignoring it. His filings on Stone and Manafort show the FACT that neither had ANY communication with Wikileaks. NONE! And the cherry on top is that even if they did it ain't a crime, which your sideways elisions above illustrate cleverly.
You're really going to be bummed out when Mueller's turd drops into the water.
But Bernie said no one wants hear about those damn emails.
I mean, we can go there now.
"But I have my suspicions." That's the funniest line I've heard since "The devil made me do it."
Theory:
Royal ass Inga believes that it is only stealing of computerized data is illegal.
That should have been Ellsberg's defense.
I wonder why Ellsberg's attorneys never though of that legal theory.
Blogger Unknown said...Pretty clever of Pelosi. 2/27/19, 10:02 AM
"...Clever..." is not what I would call it - moronic - yes. The Democratic Party is collapsing itself with their TDS. Using a disbarred attorney and liar in a investigation is a laugher. I love the headline grabbers like Cohen and "Occasional Cortex" gifts which keeps on giving.
Cohen reminds me of Lee Harvey Oswald. “I’m just a Patsy.”
Nope.
Cohen plead guilty to making an illegal campaign contribution. The question is whether Trump knew about it.
Obama's PDF of a long-form birth certificate shows he was born in the U.S. ... but I have my suspicions.
Jim Jordan to Cohen:
"When you filed a false tax return in 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016 was all that out of blind loyalty to the President?"
Cohen: "No."
The guy has violated the first principle of power struggle when trying to nail your boss -- don't try to commit regicide with a rubber knife.
Or as Omar in The Wire once said, if you come after the King, you'd best not miss.
Inga: "Drago, do you think if you keep repeatedly say things that have no meaning, that they magically will the more you say them?"
Hoax dossier gal / Smollett fangirl would like to lecture on believing in magical things.
Lets all pay attention...
Elizabeth Warren is indeed part Indian ... but I have my suspicions.
Your TDS is showing, RotM.
Oh come on. You have to actually picture Trump saying it, but I guarantee, once you do, it's hilarious.
“Mr. Trump had frequently told me and others that his son Don Jr. had the worst judgment of anyone in the world”
And frequently! You couldn't write it funnier. Me and others. It's the kind of funny that transcends genius.
Freder: "Cohen plead guilty to making an illegal campaign contribution. "
Which wasnt illegal.
Try again Bundy-Liar.
Joe Biden has the mental competency to win the presidency ... but I have my suspicions.
Glad to see the lawyers--especially around here--wholeheartedly support the death of attorney/client privlege. Let's slap those bastard lawyers around to they spill the beans on those we don't like.
Inga...Allie Oop said...
“What's so bad about Wikileaks?”
Wikileaks disseminated emails that were STOLEN. I guess that’s not important to you.
We all know Inga only has one principle. Power over other people.
Her hypocrisy here is brutal in it’s evidence.
Democrats are just terrible people.
Hillary Clinton and her husband Bill have a child they produced together in a night of hot passion ...but I have my suspicions.
“His filings on Stone and Manafort show the FACT that neither had ANY communication with Wikileaks. NONE! And the cherry on top is that even if they did it ain't a crime, which your sideways elisions above illustrate cleverly.”
No they don’t.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/02/donald-trump-robert-mueller-special-counsel-report
“Mueller may be deliberate, but he’s not necessarily straightforward. As his investigation appears to draw to a close, the key to understanding his intentions relies not only on examining the information he has included in previous filings, but also upon considering the information that he appears to have omitted, or redacted, from them.
Mueller’s 24-page indictment of Roger Stone, issued in January, revealed that the self-described dirty trickster encouraged radio host Randy Credico “to do a ‘Frank Pentangeli’”—a reference to a character in The Godfather: Part II, who lied to Congress only after his mobster brother showed up in the courtroom. But Mueller, the former Marine, also included numerous vagaries in the document.
He outlined a series of cases where Stone was in contact with Trump campaign officials about WikiLeaks’ plans to release stolen e-mails, but did not identify said officials, in accordance with D.O.J. policy. Resultantly, we are left guessing the identity of the person who “directed” an unnamed “senior Trump campaign official “to contact Stone about any additional releases and what other damaging information [WikiLeaks] had regarding the Clinton Campaign.” In the end, the filing prompted nearly as many questions as it answered.“
M Jordan is running away with the thread
Freder Frederson,
Cite the statute.
You cannot because no statute exists on the point you would like to forward.
Cite the statute.
Barack Obama thought marriage was between a man and a woman in 2012 ... but I have my suspicions.
Chuck said...
John Lynch said...
OK, Trump is a jerk. What's the crime? What was illicit? I want to know. Exactly.
Remember Bill Clinton lying under oath. That wasn't enough.
"Individual 1."
***************************
Funny...I don't remember Mueller indicting Trump for anything he did in cahoots with Cohen.
Do you? Maybe "Individual 1" is a ham sandwich.
The party of rape, infanticide, and the KKK wants you to be mad about paying mistresses to keep quiet about consensual relationships.
Yeah Vanity Fair!!
Are they convinced yet that Sarah Palin's son is actually her own?
I am convinced but I'll bet Michael Cohen has his suspicions..
RotM,
Your TDS is still showing.
The tariff threats were used to gain better trade deals.
Your use of the word nonsensical... wait for it... nonsensical.
Michael Cohen paints an ugly portrait of Donald Trump because he is trying to cleanse his conscience ... but I have my suspicions.
(Okay, I'm done here.)
Okay, I'm done here.)
Noooooooooooooooo!
At least stick around until Laslo shows up!
“Mueller also dedicated much of the January indictment to unraveling the various lies that Stone told about his contacts with Credico, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, and conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi. But the special counsel did not explicitly say whether Stone, Credico, or Corsi were ever actually in contact with WikiLeaks or Assange about the stolen e-mails.
In a court filing three weeks later, Mueller at least partially addressed this issue. After previously describing Stone’s attempts to contact Assange through hapless go-betweens, the special counsel’s team said for the first time that it “obtained and executed dozens of search warrants on various accounts used to facilitate the transfer of stolen documents for release, as well as to discuss the timing and promotion of their release.”
Consequently, prosecutors wrote, “Several of those search warrants were executed on accounts that contained Stone’s communications with Guccifer 2.0”—the Russian entity that hacked the Democratic National Committee—“and with Organization 1,” a.k.a. WikiLeaks. In other words, Mueller has the receipts when it comes to Stone’s contacts with Guccifer 2.0 and WikiLeaks. What is unclear is the substance of these contacts, and whether they are limited to what is publicly known.”
Cohen plead guilty to making an illegal campaign contribution.
And some smart folks wonder whether it's even a crime or not.
The question is whether Trump knew about it.
That may be your question, but it's not the question.
India and Pakistan seem to be on the verge of an all out war, but this idiotic little farce is consuming all the MSM air time.
He outlined a series of cases where Stone was in contact with Trump campaign officials about WikiLeaks
Learn some reading comprehension. At no time does Mueller show Stone (or Manafort) actually contacted Wikileaks. No shit sherlock on him talking to Trump's team. He was working with Trump. But Mueller can't find any evidence Stone talked to Assange or anyone with "inside" info. Jesus! I hope you retired because I'd hate to be served by a nurse as dumb and unable to comprehend simple English as you are.
Game time again: assuming you're correct where is the crime in SPEAKING to Assange? Are you alleging coordination among Media and campaign officials? Like Hillary being able to kill or promote stories before publication? Do you think Assange ran the data by Trump first the way Politico and WaPo and NYT "reporters" ran their stories by Hillary first?
'Cause that would be weird.
Royal ass Inga wants talking to Wikileaks to be criminal?
Or does she admit that only lying to state or federal law enforcement about those (alleged) contacts is illegal.
Honest question.
"But Mueller, the former Marine, also included numerous vagaries in the document."
Ah...former Marine?
Well then...
Breathless "reporting" isn't the same as court filings.
If Al Gore can rape a masseuse to a mix tape given to him by a lesbian feminist singer--with impunity--Cohen can save his mangy ass with tall tales for Democrats that can't accept election results.
Dog bites man.
News at eleven.
Lee Harvey Oswald was a Marine.
Wikileaks ACCURATELY disseminated emails that were STOLEN.
Funny how that important point is so often overlooked - no one disputes anything that was contained int he subject e-mails.
Wikileaks disseminated emails that were STOLEN. I guess that’s not important to you.
Do you know what CNN did with confidential federal documents given to them by James Comey?
Inga wrote:
"Hacking is illegal. I think you folks keep wanting to brush this under the rug. If Trump knew that the emails Stone was talking about to him were hacked, he should’ve contacted the FBI. We’ll eventually find out what he knew and when he knew it."
Sigh......Inga, I knew on June 12th of 2016 that Wikileaks was going to publish some e-mails damaging to Clinton's campaign (they did so starting on July 22nd 2016 and finished in October of the same year). Do you know how I knew that? Because Julian Assange said so publicly in an interview whose details published in the fucking Guardian on June 12th 2016. I know you probably didn't read Cohen's prepared statement, but here it quoted verbatim:
"As I earlier stated, Mr. Trump knew from Roger Stone in advance about the WikiLeaks drop of emails. In July of 2016, days before the Democratic convention (emphasis added by Y. Ward), I was in Mr. Trump's office when his secretary announced that Roger Stone was on the phone. Mr. Trump put Mr. Stone on the speakerphone. Mr. Stone told Mr. Trump that he had just gotten off the phone with Julian Assange and that Mr. Assange had told Mr. Stone that, within a couple of days, there would be a massive dump of e-mails that would damage Hillary Clinton's campaign."
So, in short, Cohen is claiming that Stone told Trump something in mid July that I already knew more than a month earlier because Assange made it public on June 12th of 2016.
“Learn some reading comprehension. At no time does Mueller show Stone (or Manafort) actually contacted Wikileaks. No shit sherlock on him talking to Trump's team. He was working with Trump. But Mueller can't find any evidence Stone talked to Assange or anyone with "inside" info. Jesus! I hope you retired because I'd hate to be served by a nurse as dumb and unable to comprehend simple English as you are.”
Sadly your Trump Cultism has affected your reasoning. Trump has made you stupid, or maybe you were already stupid and that’s why you’re still a Trump Cultist. I’d suggest re-reading the excerpts I posted
anything that stops the clintons from maintaining power - is illegal.
"If I leave my email password on my desk and someone sees it and uses it to access my emails, is that hacking Inga and is it illegal?
If I forward my bosses emails to my husband's computer and he accesses the emails is that hacking and is it illegal?
If I leave $1000 on a park bench and someone takes it, is that theft?"
Yes, yes and yes - just like if I leave my keys in my car and someone drives off with it, my stupidity and carelessness does not prevent it from being theft.
HOWEVER, there remains no evidence that any of this was done by Trump or his campaign, and if publication (again, not by Trump or his campaign) helped Trump politically, there is still no crime committed by Trump or his campaign.
He should be reading from documents, otherwise it's just hearsay, now that was the whole point of ths Steele dossier, but we have higher standards
All Inga's bloviating and she failed to include this gem from the same Vanity Fair article she extracted shit from at length above: But the special counsel did not explicitly say whether Stone, Credico, or Corsi were ever actually in contact with WikiLeaks or Assange about the stolen e-mails.
Gee why would Mueller NOT say the thing Inga wants so badly to read into this story?
Your stupid as shit Russia collusion thing is DOA, Inga.
Move on to your next stupid obsession.
You've lost, idiot.
I’d suggest re-reading the excerpts I posted
Ha ha ha. I'd suggest you read the REST of the article you excerpted. Does it hurt your head to be this thick?
And they are relying on crowdstrike for the attribution, which is a mugs game.
Dems keep telling Cohen to talk to his attorneys during lunch.
I appreciate that Cohen calls her “Stormy Daniels” not her real name like this Dem Reps since no one knows who they are referring to.
Mike: "All Inga's bloviating and she failed to include this gem from the same Vanity Fair article"
Inga only reads headlines.
LLR Chuck proudly only posts DNC/lefty inspired smears.
Freder purposely lies about easily researched court findings in the hopes he can push lefty talking points without being challenged.
Howard keeps using terms incorrectly knowing it drives me crazy and puts in jeopardy my buying a beer for him next time I am in LA.
Representative Amash (R - Michigan) asks "What is the truth that you know that President Trump fears the most?" The hell kind of question is that? (Cohen couldn't answer).
The harder she tries the funnier it gets.
Inga will be looking for the key evidence long after Trump has finished his second term, like the mythical Japanese soldier fighting on long after the war is lost. And, ironically, on the side of fascism just like them.
Indeed, in the iTv interview, Assange used almost the exact same language- "a few days before the convention".
Stone was always pretending to have special knowledge he didn't actually possess. You can just read his tweets from the Summer of 2016 if you don't believe me- he constantly over-promised the impact because he had literally no clue as to what was coming.
Inga should call the fire department to remove her picture window and hoist her out so that she can get some fresh air and spend a day on the town. She deserves a break.
First principles:
1. In 2016, Hillary and her supporters thought she had a cakewalk to the presidency.
2. Somebody either hacked or simply downloaded many DNC emails and gave them to WikiLeaks.
3. In June of 2016, Wikileaks published the DNC emails.
4. The emails greatly embarrassed the DNC and Hillary.
5. In Nov 2106, Hillary LOST, in part, due to the emails.
The Left still hasn't gotten over the LOSS (it's still fun to say this), and still want to re-litigate the emails hack and/or disclosure.
But most sane folks don't care.
Did Cohen call him “Mr. Trump” the decade he worked for him?
Chuck slithered away leaving her to argue alone. Sad.
"Drago the English Professor"... Staring Rodney Dangerfield
I still think an enterprising young attorney (perhaps Chuck?) should file a Writ of Attachment on Stormy Daniels' fake boobs.
It may help defray court costs, when she loses.
Inga, I knew in June of 2016 that the e-mails were stolen, should I have contacted the FBI?
Wikileaks disseminated emails that were STOLEN. I guess that’s not important to you.
Both Romney's and Trump's stolen tax returns were publicized by high ranking Dem officials. No Dems or left wingers criticized these uses.
You'd think one single time Inga would consider whether these standards she believes prove some conduct particularly outrageous have been violated in other circumstances. But she cannot because justifying partisan hatred is literally the only thing she cares about.
“So, in short, Cohen is claiming that Stone told Trump something in mid July that I already knew more than a month earlier because Assange made it public on June 12th of 2016.”
Did Trump know that the emails were stolen and that Stone was coordinating with Wiklieaks and Assange on his behalf? If so, Trump should’ve contacted the FBI. The timing isn’t as important as this question: If Trump knew that Stone was/ had been working with Assange on his behalf in releasing stolen emails (no matter WHEN they were released) Trump becomes an unindicted co-conspirator? Is that the correct terminology?
When WikiLeaks is doxxing spies, the Democrats are cool with it.
All you need to know.
Trump hotel raised its prices for the inauguration.
Good business practice.
Post a Comment