Buffalo_Gal Posted February 28, 2019 Share Posted February 28, 2019 2 hours ago, plenzmd1 said: is this call 888-8888 I swear I think of that every single time I see one of his tweets! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said: do you not find that article misleading at all? and HMMM https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/28/us/politics/jared-kushner-security-clearance.html Edited March 1, 2019 by plenzmd1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 On 2/27/2019 at 5:10 PM, Foxx said: i might argue that it is ultimately about laying the cornerstone for impeachment. On 2/27/2019 at 6:37 PM, GG said: There was really nothing there to tie a crime while in office. To me, the leak of the financial statement supporting the Bills bid was much bigger, because it starts to implicate Trump Org, loan agreements, etc. seems i am not alone in my assessment. https://twitter.com/KimStrassel/status/1100964102292279298 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 https://twitter.com/jsolomonReports/status/1101301444727242752 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 (edited) . . Edited March 1, 2019 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 1, 2019 Author Share Posted March 1, 2019 Quote If you thought Cohen had a lot to say, wait for Weisselberg -- who’s been charged with no crime for the Republicans to holler about -- to take the House members through checks, financial statements, phone conversations and the rest detailing Trump’s finances. Judging from Cohen’s testimony it does not seem like the Southern District of New York prosecutors have much of a problem with the House plowing over some of the same ground they have covered. In other words, way before moving on to consider the possibility of impeachment there will be months of hearings laying out in public potential Trump crimes and assembling a list of Trump’s lies. None of this, or very little, may touch on the Russia probe and Robert S. Mueller’s final report. This, by the way, is why Trump and his cronies were so upset when Cohen’s office and home were raided. No wonder Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is in no rush to move to impeachment. “Impeachment is a divisive issue,” she warned at her Thursday press conference. Why bother with something that will raise hackles and in all likelihood amount to nothing. given the Senate will not agree to remove Trump? Instead, Democrats can have a year or more of hearings to inform the voters what kind of character Trump is -- while litigation on foreign emoluments, for example, delves into his foreign holdings and liabilities. Remember, provided no statute of limitations has run out, federal and state crimes (for which a presidential pardon is unavailable) can be pursued after Trump leaves office. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/03/01/heres-democrats-smartest-post-cohen-strategy/?utm_term=.aed09f9c7385 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 1, 2019 Author Share Posted March 1, 2019 https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/davis-cohen-testimony-house-intel-game-changing Quote Lanny Davis, lawyer for Michael Cohen, told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Thursday that his client’s closed-door testimony was “game changing” and included so much new information that the House Intelligence Committee decided to bring him back next week. Davis could not go into detail about the testimony, but said it mostly related to “lying and obstruction,” not the core of the Russia investigation. “I think that the Trump White House, and Mr. Trump himself, doesn’t seem to have read the definition of obstruction of justice or of suborning perjury,” Davis said. “That’s about the best I can tell you, but it’s pretty explosive.” Lanny Davis says Cohen’s closed-door testimony was “game-changing,” chock full of new information pic.twitter.com/5jIDaSdvmV — TPM Livewire (@TPMLiveWire) March 1, 2019 Cohen is slated to return before the House Intelligence Committee on March 6. “There’s not much I can say other than it was very productive,” Cohen said of the first session. “As I said, I’m committed to telling the truth, and I will be back on March 6 to finish up. There’s more to discuss.” 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Why 1 simple lie by Michael Cohen could invalidate his entire testimony CNN, by Chris Cillizza Original Article . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 (edited) perhaps there is more to the story of Talib charging Meadows with racism. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CGhxWJTKMU some interesting thoughts and back links here. Lynne Patton: “Michael Cohen turned on the President because Mueller threatened to throw his wife in jail for up to 30 years”… ... Lynne Patton: […] 3) Many of you may already know that I considered Michael Cohen to be one of my very best friends. Countless people can confirm that we were virtually inseparable during my employment at Trump – and that he is, single-handedly – responsible for introducing me to the Trump family and effectively changing my entire life. I would be lying if I didn’t admit that my heart still breaks for him and for his family, with whom I had grown extremely close. 4) What many of you may not be aware of is the fact that I can personally confirm that the ONLY reason Michael Cohen “turned on” the President of the United States is because Mueller threatened to throw his wife in jail for up to 30 years. Period. She is the co-guarantor of a $20M personal loan that Mueller discovered Michael secured back in 2015 by falsely inflating the value of his taxi medallions – effectively making her part & parcel to the federal charge of “Making False Statements to a Financial Institution,” to which Cohen ultimately plead guilty. This is also the reason why Cohen’s longtime taxi medallion partner, Evgeny “Gene” Freidman, was granted immunity. (read more) ... Edited March 1, 2019 by Foxx 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 57 minutes ago, B-Man said: Why 1 simple lie by Michael Cohen could invalidate his entire testimony CNN, by Chris Cillizza Original Article . That is an interesting article, and I agree it all hinges on the texts. As I have said, he can always claim how could the personal lawyer to POTUS not be considered a White House job..that is certainly what it meant to him!!! BTW, Cillezza can pretty funny on the Tony Kornheiser podcast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 https://twitter.com/jsolomonReports/status/1101557064239931392 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 https://twitter.com/JohnWHuber/status/1101505698674999297 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 1 hour ago, plenzmd1 said: That is an interesting article, and I agree it all hinges on the texts. As I have said, he can always claim how could the personal lawyer to POTUS not be considered a White House job..that is certainly what it meant to him!!! BTW, Cillezza can pretty funny on the Tony Kornheiser podcast Except during his testimony he stated that he didn't want a WH job, he had the job he wanted and that was 45's personal lawyer. How much of a pretzel does one have to twist the logic to say that he DID consider that a WH job when he's stated under oath that he DIDN'T consider that a WH job? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Just now, Taro T said: Except during his testimony he stated that he didn't want a WH job, he had the job he wanted and that was 45's personal lawyer. How much of a pretzel does one have to twist the logic to say that he DID consider that a WH job when he's stated under oath that he DIDN'T consider that a WH job? pretty easy actually i think...he just states he did not want an "official" white house job, but he wanted to work in the "White House" .. Listen, the guy is pure scum, there is no doubt. but we are talking lawyers here,,, they can twist anything! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 23 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said: pretty easy actually i think...he just states he did not want an "official" white house job, but he wanted to work in the "White House" .. Listen, the guy is pure scum, there is no doubt. but we are talking lawyers here,,, they can twist anything! And he can try to pursue that path. But he doesn't have the same clout 42 had when "it depends on the definition of 'is '." Will be very surprised if, as others have suggested here much more eloquently that he will, he doesn't end up with a lengthier prison term based on this round of testimony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 https://twitter.com/BreakingNLive/status/1101610338045358083 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 1, 2019 Share Posted March 1, 2019 Just now, Foxx said: https://twitter.com/BreakingNLive/status/1101610338045358083 I hope the IRS has the sense to tell the House to go pound sand up their ass. The IRS should not be handing over anyone's tax returns outside of a criminal case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts