Michael Cohen's Public Hearing 2-27-19

[Airbrush]

Did anyone watch this?  I saw most of it.  It was on channels: 2, 4, 5, 7, 11, and several cable news channels.  One thing that did not get enough notice is that Trump called Cohen a "RAT."  The way Trump used the term is a common gangster reference to someone who tells the TRUTH to law enforcement.   At rat is not a liar.  The GOP questioning Cohen kept harping on the theme that Cohen is a liar and cannot be trusted.  Here is Trump's famous Tweet:  

"Remember, Michael Cohen only became a “Rat” after the FBI did something which was absolutely unthinkable & unheard of until the Witch Hunt was illegally started. They BROKE INTO AN ATTORNEY’S OFFICE! Why didn’t they break into the DNC to get the Server, or Crooked’s office?"

The FBI did NOT BREAK into Cohen's office. They had a warrant and Cohen later clarified that the FBI were professional and courteous. So Trump admits that Cohen was telling the TRUTH to law enforcement, the opposite of what the GOP were arguing.

[iNow]

What do you wish to discuss? That we watched it?

He was Trump family lawyer for 10+ years. Had an office in Trump Tower right beside Trumps throughout the 2016 presidential campaign. Was Deputy Chairman of Republican National Committee. Brought corroborating evidence with him to backup his claims. 

Instead of rebutting what he said or defending the president directly in any way, they’re going full court press and attacking him, his character, and his family. 

Everyone had their mind made up before he even spoke. So, what should we speak about here?

[rangerx]

29 minutes ago, iNow said:

Everyone had their mind made up before he even spoke. So, what should we speak about here?

I thought his testimony was compelling. He was self-deprecating and contrite. While some might view it as play acting or crocodile tears, but I think Mueller had him dead to rights.

The reason I say that is because Mueller has not felt the need to interview Trump in person, That tells me he already has hard evidence. I suspect he has the phone records and possibly voice files of the Roger Stone call to Wikileaks and subsequent call to Don Jr. Undoubtedly, Mueller has financial and tax records.

Cohen is facing three years in a penitentiary for lying to Congress and Mueller (among other things). It makes no sense, that he would go back to Congress and lie more, lest he sets himself for an increased sentence. Besides that, if he were lying, you'd think he would be more damning of Trump. Instead, he gave the appearance of some uncertainties, suspicions and opinions. That's not the sort of thing a liar or someone who was coached would do.

The checks signed by Trump himself and Don Jr. are really incriminating.  Not just because of the lies, but because of the ongoing business relationship between POTUS, his companies and his campaign. Cohen pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations and was subsequently convicted.

The hush money to the two girls came to light. He testified being a patsy to Trump, going out on a limb to withdraw the funds from his own line of credit which raised a red flag with the bank and law enforcement.

Cohen also alluded to what we already know, that Trump's MO is to stiff his contractors, irrespective of their performance. Likewise to inflate values of properties to obtain loans or to deflate property values to dodge taxes.

He testified to Trump using a shill to buy a portrait of himself for a high value, then reimbursing them from a charity. Misappropriating funds for egotistical purposes is reprehensible, no less fraudulent.

Not to mention obstruction of justice, but the Yates/Comey firings didn't have much to do with Cohen although they may have discussed it.

 

[zapatos]

16 minutes ago, rangerx said:

I thought his testimony was compelling.

Did he change your mind about anything?

[J.C.MacSwell]

29 minutes ago, rangerx said:

He testified to Trump using a shill to buy a portrait of himself for a high value, then reimbursing them from a charity. Misappropriating funds for egotistical purposes is reprehensible, no less fraudulent.
 

The hilarious part of this is that Trump would not even see that he did anything immoral when he did that, and believe it should be "no harm no foul" legally, which of course it is not.

[Ten oz]

4 hours ago, rangerx said:

The reason I say that is because Mueller has not felt the need to interview Trump in person,

Mueller has requested an interview. Trump's team has rejected it. Link

4 hours ago, rangerx said:

Cohen is facing three years in a penitentiary for lying to Congress and Mueller (among other things). It makes no sense, that he would go back to Congress and lie more, lest he sets himself for an increased sentence. Besides that, if he were lying, you'd think he would be more damning of Trump.

I saw several arguments yesterday where people tried to imply that Cohen was lying in hopes of pleasing Democrats who might then advocate for him to get a lighter sentence. It makes no sense to me. Democrats aren't in control of that. Plus Trump is in charge of the DOJ. The possible price of retribution from Trump is theoretically greater than any potential reprieve by Democrats. 

 

3 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

The hilarious part of this is that Trump would not even see that he did anything immoral when he did that, and believe it should be "no harm no foul" legally, which of course it is not.

Trump is a perfect example of why laws and regulations are so complicated. Many Politician's throughout my life have noted the size of various laws and instructions as an example of bloat or an overly involved govt. Cutting the proverbial redtape and simplifying things has been a common campaign promise of many. A**holes like Trump are one of the reasons everything is so onerous. Because people like him take advantage of everything. They work around the clock to exploit everything and bend ever rule to it's breaking point. 

As you point out Trump probably wouldn't even see anything wrong with what he's done. Following the rules in a straight forward fashion is for suckers in his mind. 

[J.C.MacSwell]

2 hours ago, Ten oz said:

I saw several arguments yesterday where people tried to imply that Cohen was lying in hopes of pleasing Democrats who might then advocate for him to get a lighter sentence. It makes no sense to me. Democrats aren't in control of that. Plus Trump is in charge of the DOJ. The possible price of retribution from Trump is theoretically greater than any potential reprieve by Democrats. 

Some of his statements sounded like he was trumpeting the Democrat horn in a way that added nothing new. I actually not just wondered about that (or getting parole early), or even still working for Trump...the rational being that he could be hiding stuff he knows while seeming to be saying everything possible against him. "see how much I hate Trump, I must be singing everything I know", when in fact he is only singing what is known that he knows.

It seems silly...but if he eventually pardons Cohen on the way out of office ("see how magnanimous I am, I'm not just pardoning all my friends...)

OK...it is silly...but the thought came to mind while Cohen added well known anti-Trump talking points where he really had no more to add than what was already out there.

Did he say anything else that is actually legally damning to Trump?

I hadn't heard the portrait thing before...which essentially I think was theft of money he himself anonymously donated. Was that already known?

Edited February 28, 2019 by J.C.MacSwell

[rangerx]

7 hours ago, zapatos said:

Did he change your mind about anything?

That's a good question. I suppose the short answer is no. Even given the sheer volume, none of the allegations Cohen leveled towards Trump surprised me, nor did the responses from the likes of Jim Jordan. He's clearly not interested justice, insomuch as looking the other way about Trump, while upholding the persecution of Hillary Clinton. He invoked her name a few times in that vain, including lying about the source of the Steele dossier. Other republicans eschewed their own committee as starting out their term as though it was little more than a liberal conspiracy, by inquiring witness testimony from "the criminal" Cohen. Clearly not true. It's the third inquiry by the committee. Not once, did any republican bring up or discuss exculpatory evidence insomuch as going on the attack.

Mark Meadows using a black woman as a prop and his triggered outrage for being called out for it was disgusting. Other than a token black or an attractive woman, I don't think anyone needs a ton of bricks to fall on their heads, that Trump is not an equal opportunity employer.

The word was never used, but Cohen openly admitted to corruption and alluded to the quasi tacit manner which Trump enables it. The whole "do I have your loyalty?" thing. He stipulated to the level of Trump's micromanagement across the board. Something Trump denies doing when it comes to criticizing other republicans for wrongdoing. In fact the whole republican position is that of Trump being naive to all of it. All that does is define Trump as a fool, a Putin asset.  A Manchurian candidate, if you will. A useful idiot. The classic example of biting off one's nose to spite their face. There's no depth too low to stoop to own the libs, it seems. That doesn't bode well for conservatives in general, no less the country as a whole.

Attacking Cohen as not credible undermined the country's ability to prosecute organized crime. Turning states evidence has been a tool for the justice department since time immemorial.

Isn't that what Rudy Juliani did to clean up gangland activity in NY?

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Some of his statements sounded like he was trumpeting the Democrat horn in a way that added nothing new. I actually not just wondered about that (or getting parole early), or even still working for Trump...the rational being that he could be hiding stuff he knows while seeming to be saying everything possible against him. "see how much I hate Trump, I must be singing everything I know", when in fact he is only singing what is known that he knows.

Cohen was hamstrung on some points by ongoing investigations. That's not a Democrat thing, it's a jurisprudence thing. He admitted that co-operating with those, he stands eligible for early parole after two thirds of his sentence is served. That's not exclusive to Cohen, in fact unless stated by a judge at the time of sentencing, it's available to anyone convicted and incarcerated for crime.

The truth shall set you free, as the old saying goes.

 

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Did he say anything else that is actually legally damning to Trump?

Cohen revealed that co-conspirator number one is indeed Donald Trump. Number two being Don Jr.. Cohen was convicted of campaign finance fraud for the money paid to the two girls. Trump signed the check and conspired to cover it up. Like Watergate, which was little more than a third rate burglary, it was the conspiracy around it that implicated Nixon. The same standard can be applied to Trump.

 

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I hadn't heard the portrait thing before...which essentially I think was theft of money he himself anonymously donated. Was that already known?

No, it wasn't his money. It was money donated by others to his namesake foundation which is under investigation by the NY AG's office. It's actually two cases of fraud. One for misusing funds from the charity itself AND unlawfully soliciting funds from the auction at his resort at Mar a Lago to cover the other.

Edited February 28, 2019 by rangerx

[iNow]

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Did he say anything else that is actually legally damning to Trump?

The checks he provided don't help, but Giuliani had already confirmed the hush money payments in previous interviews.

The real "new" thing was his mention that the Southern District of New York is actively investigating Trump on other matters about which Cohen could not speak. That was new(s).

49 minutes ago, rangerx said:

Cohen revealed that co-conspirator number one is indeed Donald Trump

I'd say "confirmed" instead of "revealed," because this was already obvious to everyone.

[rangerx]

5 minutes ago, iNow said:

The real "new" thing was his mention that the Southern District of New York is actively investigating Trump on other matters about which Cohen could not speak. That was new(s). 

Even though he couldn't specify details, the list is quite long. Insurance fraud, tax fraud, misappropriation of funds, misrepresentation, unauthorized foreign agency and breach of trust, to name a few allegations.

That's not to mention Don Jr. or Jared Kushner either. They've raised a few eyebrows too.  Don Jr. isn't bright enough to dodge bullets, but I doubt Jared won't roll over if he's implicated in all this. Albeit long after the fact.

Ivanka, I'm not so sure. I doubt there's much at her behest. If anything she's complicit by her silence, as blood being thicker than water. I think Melania found herself in a situation she didn't sign up for. I don't feel sorry for her, though. She ought to know better and is trapped in a unhappy marriage, lest she gives up her lavish lifestyle or hold outs for inheritances. She's going to make a killing when she writes her tell all book after Donny's dead and gone. But that's a whole other story.

[Ten oz]

2 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Some of his statements sounded like he was trumpeting the Democrat horn in a way that added nothing new. I actually not just wondered about that (or getting parole early), or even still working for Trump...the rational being that he could be hiding stuff he knows while seeming to be saying everything possible against him. "see how much I hate Trump, I must be singing everything I know", when in 

What influence over his sentence do Democrats have? 

[CharonY]

43 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

What influence over his sentence do Democrats have? 

I think what JC meant is that by seemingly throwing Trump under the bus, Cohen tries to make himself more trustworthy and while actually hiding potentially new and perhaps more damning revelations.  While this sounds like a cheap soap opera twist, it admittedly seems to be the theme of this administration.

[Ten oz]

1 hour ago, CharonY said:

I think what JC meant is that by seemingly throwing Trump under the bus, Cohen tries to make himself more trustworthy and while actually hiding potentially new and perhaps more damning revelations.  While this sounds like a cheap soap opera twist, it admittedly seems to be the theme of this administration.

Gotcha. That may very well be possible however Trump and his associates would have more insights on other possible crimes Cohen might've than others might. So to me throwing them under the bus for appearances is risky if Cohen has something more to hide. Stones connection to Assange and Bannon's involvement in the campaign shows that Trump has the needed connections to get stories out under the radar. If Cohen we're guilty if other crimes, especially ones not related to Trump, I suspect those would have already been leaked to the media by now. 

[CharonY]

2 hours ago, Ten oz said:

Gotcha. That may very well be possible however Trump and his associates would have more insights on other possible crimes Cohen might've than others might. So to me throwing them under the bus for appearances is risky if Cohen has something more to hide. Stones connection to Assange and Bannon's involvement in the campaign shows that Trump has the needed connections to get stories out under the radar. If Cohen we're guilty if other crimes, especially ones not related to Trump, I suspect those would have already been leaked to the media by now. 

What is interesting from that testimony is that in contrast to the seemingly amateurish twitter outbursts, Trump does seem to be far more circumspect when it comes to potentially incriminating actions:

 

Quote

In his testimony Wednesday, Cohen denied that aspect of the BuzzFeed News story. “Mr. Trump did not directly tell me to lie to Congress,” he said. “That’s not how he operates.”

Instead, Cohen’s explanation of what happened was:

During the campaign, Trump would speak in coded language to him, telling him privately “there’s no Russian business” when he knew Cohen was working on the Trump Tower Moscow talks.
Cohen did talk with Trump about his testimony, and Trump told him to cooperate with Congress, but also said, “There is no Russia, there is no collusion, there is no deal,” and that “it’s all a witch hunt” and “this stuff has to end.” Cohen said he interpreted that as Trump suggesting he should lie.
In 2017, Trump’s personal lawyer Jay Sekulow “reviewed and edited” Cohen’s false statement to Congress about Trump Tower Moscow before he submitted it. Cohen said “several changes” were made, “including how we were going to handle” the “message” about “the length of time” the project was still active.

 

[Ten oz]

2 hours ago, CharonY said:

What is interesting from that testimony is that in contrast to the seemingly amateurish twitter outbursts, Trump does seem to be far more circumspect when it comes to potentially incriminating actions:

 

 

Between federal and state courts Trump has been involved in 3,500 legal cases. It makes sense he would have some basic knowledge of how to shield himself. Considering his history I am shocked that he is as amateurish as he is. 

Edited February 28, 2019 by Ten oz

[swansont]

8 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

 Did he say anything else that is actually legally damning to Trump?

14 felonies, plus more that he was not allowed to discuss owing to ongoing investigations. I'd call that a big yes.

13 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Between federal and state courts Trump has been involved in 3,500 legal cases. It makes sense he would have some basic knowledge of how to shield himself. Considering his history I am shocked that he is as amateurish as he is. 

I think part of shielding himself involved paying people off or bullying folks, to ensure silence or a slap-on-the-wrist, and now he's in a situation where he can't actually do that. 

 

 

[rangerx]

12 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Between federal and state courts Trump has been involved in 3,500 legal cases. It makes sense he would have some basic knowledge of how to shield himself. Considering his history I am shocked that he is as amateurish as he is. 

A lot of those cases were thrown out as frivolous bully tactics. Most of them died on the vine while the remainder were settled on the courthouse steps.

Several others were contract breaches, raised knowingly for a reduction in costs by getting contractors over a barrel, especially if meant rabbit holes or breaking backs.

Numerous others were tax inconsistencies, Chapter 11's, securities violations and civil rights issues. Nonetheless most of these were stirred by greed, underhandedness or outright failure as opposed to justice and fairness.

Some are sexual in nature. A sexual assault claim from 1994 for child rape was filed against Trump on October 14, 2016, a case that was dropped and refiled, remaining in suspension as of November 4, 2016. Even his divorce from former wife Ivana was granted on her grounds "cruel and inhuman treatment"

[Ten oz]

32 minutes ago, rangerx said:

A lot of those cases were thrown out as frivolous bully tactics. Most of them died on the vine while the remainder were settled on the courthouse steps.

It is all still experience though. He has been around the court system long enough to know some of the basics. 

[rangerx]

1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

It is all still experience though. He has been around the court system long enough to know some of the basics. 

Indeed, knowing it intimidates those who aren't so savvy or resourceful. However, in recent times I suspect he's grossly underestimating those who are bringing actions against him, namely the state AG's and special counsel as though the court of public opinion or poor preparation will let him off the hook.

His response to Cohen's testimony is interesting. I would have expected him to bad mouth Cohen at every turn, but because he didn't actually implicate Trump with collusion, he embraced it as favorable to his case. The thing is, collusion isn't necessary a crime, insomuch as unauthorized foreign agency and conspiracy against the USA are. Especially given that's the book they threw at Paul Manafort. Trump is so hung up on the collusion point (because it's public opinion), he's neglected the more serious side of reality.

Edited March 1, 2019 by rangerx

[Ten oz]

1 hour ago, rangerx said:

Indeed, knowing it intimidates those who aren't so savvy or resourceful. However, in recent times I suspect he's grossly underestimating those who are bringing actions against him, namely the state AG's and special counsel as though the court of public opinion or poor preparation will let him off the hook.

In my opinion the fact Trump wasn't already in prison for his many previous frauds over the decades speaks to how unequal justice is in the United States. During the same time that Trump has been committing tax, insurance, and other crimes with impunity less privileged citizens have been going to prison for things like Marijuana. Only now that Trump made it all the way into the White House do people care about his crimes. 

1 hour ago, rangerx said:

His response to Cohen's testimony is interesting. I would have expected him to bad mouth Cohen at every turn, but because he didn't actually implicate Trump with collusion, he embraced it as favorable to his case. The thing is, collusion isn't necessary a crime, insomuch as unauthorized foreign agency and conspiracy against the USA are. Especially given that's the book they threw at Paul Manafort. Trump is so hung up on the collusion point (because it's public opinion), he's neglected the more serious side of reality.

Trump has done an excellent job defining collision in his own terms. Trump's definition of collision is fairly fluid but seems to require a bribe or quid pro qou of some type.

I think Cohen made statements that clearly show coordination with Russia. Cohen indicated that Trump knew Stone was in contact with Assange about leaking the stolen data on Clinton and the DNC. Cohen also indicated that he believes Trump was aware of the Trump Tower meeting. Only in Trump speak is coordination with crime not equal to collusion. 

[rangerx]

13 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

In my opinion the fact Trump wasn't already in prison for his many previous frauds over the decades speaks to how unequal justice is in the United States

Yeah, it's a whack-a-mole process trying to keep up with it. Despite all of the allegations against him, it's shirked regularly by a new issue d'jour it seems.

You'd think with all that's known about him, he'd back away or show some introspect, but no. It's bad enough his former attorney implicated him in fourteen crimes, yet the news cycles are newly preoccupied by the free pass he gave Kim Jong Un on nuclear armaments and human rights violations. Then of course, there's nepotism too. Having influence peddled Jared's security clearance subsequent to having previous denials for doing so.

Legal, constitution or administrative, there's just no bottom to Trump's pit of transgressions. The saddest part being, his base is totally fine with that. All the while wrongfully accusing long since ousted liberals of phony crimes, bogus constitutional illegality and imperialism. Trump and his base have effectively nullified their often recited standards of family values, personal responsibility, dignity of office and rule of law. What's worse. Trump is a rino, but at the opposite extreme. A privileged white New York liberal turncoat con man. To that end, I say good riddance. He's ended up where he belongs, on the wrong side of history with a party that deserved him.

[iNow]

I believe his point was more about how having money and means affords one a far easier experience in the US justice system than does having poverty and pittance. 

Trump is merely the latest example. He’d have continued to get away with his grift and con were he not unexpectedly catapulted into the presidency and consequently subject to congressional oversight and constitutional constraint. 

[Ten oz]

7 hours ago, iNow said:

I believe his point was more about how having money and means affords one a far easier experience in the US justice system than does having poverty and pittance. 

Trump is merely the latest example. He’d have continued to get away with his grift and con were he not unexpectedly catapulted into the presidency and consequently subject to congressional oversight and constitutional constraint. 

Right. White collar vs blue collar crime. Defrauding insurance companies, investors, employee unions, and local regulators is fine provided one is a business man. 

[Ten oz]

Trump is now suggesting that Cohen's testimony before Congress conflicted with his summit with North Korea's Kim.

Quote

President Trump says the “very important Nuclear Summit with North Korea” in Hanoi last week failed at least partly because his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, testified against him in open court while the meeting was underway. While Trump initially said last week that he walked out of talks with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un early because he found Pyongyang’s demands for sanctions relief unacceptable, he told a different story on Twitter late Sunday night. “For the Democrats to interview in open hearings a convicted liar & fraudster, at the same time as the very important Nuclear Summit with North Korea, is perhaps a new low in American politics and may have contributed to the ‘walk.’ Never done when a president is overseas. Shame!” he wrote. Link

It is mind bending that Trump calls Cohen a convicted liar & fraudster. The felonies Cohen has been convicted of were literally in service to Trump himself.