• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cohen says Trump knew hush money payment was wrong

JacksinPA

JacksinPA

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 3, 2017
Messages
26,290
Reaction score
16,771
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46563979

US President Donald Trump's former lawyer insists Mr Trump knew making hush money payments during the 2016 presidential campaign was wrong.

Speaking after he was sentenced to prison for campaign finance and fraud crimes, Michael Cohen told ABC News: "He directed me to make the payments."
==================================
Cohen further stated that nothing was ever done in the Trump Org. without his approval.

The web continues to enmesh Trump. I hope the country survives.
 
JacksinPA said:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46563979

US President Donald Trump's former lawyer insists Mr Trump knew making hush money payments during the 2016 presidential campaign was wrong.

Speaking after he was sentenced to prison for campaign finance and fraud crimes, Michael Cohen told ABC News: "He directed me to make the payments."
==================================
Cohen further stated that nothing was ever done in the Trump Org. without his approval.

The web continues to enmesh Trump. I hope the country survives.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't surprise me at all to find out that Trump knew they were wrong but wanted Cohen to do it anyway.
 
I mean we have Cohen and Pecker testifying in court that he was involved in committing a felony. We have a third person saying he was literally in the room. We have Cohen saying that the SCO has all the information corroborating this, and we also know that has to be the case given that Cohen couldn't have plead guilty and stated in his guilty plea that that was the case if there wasn't evidence that prosecutors had.

All that's left for the cultists is to attack the justice system and rule of law.
 
Last Friday it became confirmed that Trump ordered Cohen to commit campaign finance crimes, which was subsequently confirmed later by AMI. Since that week, the rebuttal has changed from "Cohen is lying" to "these aren't real crimes" to "I don't care if he committed to crimes" to "Clinton skated by impeachment so don't care."

Now, a full week later, Giuliani admits his client committed that crime:

“Nobody got killed, nobody got robbed… This was not a big crime,” Giuliani told The Daily Beast on Wednesday.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-j...-cohen-as-trumps-national-enquirer-connection
 
Cardinal said:
Last Friday it became confirmed that Trump ordered Cohen to commit campaign finance crimes, which was subsequently confirmed later by AMI. Since that week, the rebuttal has changed from "Cohen is lying" to "these aren't real crimes" to "I don't care if he committed to crimes" to "Clinton skated by impeachment so don't care."

Now, a full week later, Giuliani admits his client committed that crime:

“Nobody got killed, nobody got robbed… This was not a big crime,” Giuliani told The Daily Beast on Wednesday.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-j...-cohen-as-trumps-national-enquirer-connection
Click to expand...

No fing way. Giuliani said that? What an idiot!
 
Cardinal said:
Last Friday it became confirmed that Trump ordered Cohen to commit campaign finance crimes, which was subsequently confirmed later by AMI. Since that week, the rebuttal has changed from "Cohen is lying" to "these aren't real crimes" to "I don't care if he committed to crimes" to "Clinton skated by impeachment so don't care."

Now, a full week later, Giuliani admits his client committed that crime:

“Nobody got killed, nobody got robbed… This was not a big crime,” Giuliani told The Daily Beast on Wednesday.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-j...-cohen-as-trumps-national-enquirer-connection
Click to expand...

Too bad Giuliani wasn't Bernie Madoff's lawyer. I'll bet he would have gotten him off with that line. "Nobody got killed!".
 
JacksinPA said:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46563979

US President Donald Trump's former lawyer insists Mr Trump knew making hush money payments during the 2016 presidential campaign was wrong.

Speaking after he was sentenced to prison for campaign finance and fraud crimes, Michael Cohen told ABC News: "He directed me to make the payments."
==================================
Cohen further stated that nothing was ever done in the Trump Org. without his approval.

The web continues to enmesh Trump. I hope the country survives.
Click to expand...

Mr. Trump has announced that he was acting on Mr. Cohen's advice in making the payments

Trump invokes ‘advice-of-counsel’ defense in campaign probe

AND that he never told Mr. Cohen to make any "illegal payments".

The first of those could cause Mr. Trump a couple of problems. First, it means that when you rely on it that means that you have waived ALL "solicitor-client privilege". Second, it opens Mr. Trump up to the possibility of a civil action (which the US Supreme Court has already ruled CAN be launched against a sitting President) for defamation of character and, in that suit, Mr. Cohen would be entitled to use all of his notes, recordings, and correspondence in order to show that the defamatory remark was not true while Mr. Trump would have to actually produce the notes, recordings, and correspondence to show that it was true - AND, in both cases there is no longer any "solicitor-client privilege".

The second could potentially be factually accurate because what actually happened is that Mr. Cohen did lay out what the law respecting the payments was and Mr. Trump responded along the line of


"Well maybe they are illegal, and maybe they aren't. That hasn't been tested in court yet so we really don't know. Now I believe my gut over anything that some so-called 'expert' tells me and my gut tells me that we should make the payments to shut those B***hs up and I can be **T*H*E** **P*R*E*S*I*D*E*N*T** - so MAKE THE DAMN PAYMENTS."
​
 
JacksinPA said:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46563979

US President Donald Trump's former lawyer insists Mr Trump knew making hush money payments during the 2016 presidential campaign was wrong.

Speaking after he was sentenced to prison for campaign finance and fraud crimes, Michael Cohen told ABC News: "He directed me to make the payments."
==================================
Cohen further stated that nothing was ever done in the Trump Org. without his approval.

The web continues to enmesh Trump. I hope the country survives.
Click to expand...

I love how in today's world, liars, and scum like Cohen can redeem themselves, and their reputation simply by saying what liberals want to hear....
 
j-mac said:
I love how in today's world, liars, and scum like Cohen can redeem themselves, and their reputation simply by saying what liberals want to hear....
Click to expand...

I love how in today's world, liars, and scum like Trump can redeem themselves, and their reputation simply by saying what Conservatives want to hear....
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Mr. Trump has announced that he was acting on Mr. Cohen's advice in making the payments

Trump invokes ‘advice-of-counsel’ defense in campaign probe

AND that he never told Mr. Cohen to make any "illegal payments".

The first of those could cause Mr. Trump a couple of problems. First, it means that when you rely on it that means that you have waived ALL "solicitor-client privilege". Second, it opens Mr. Trump up to the possibility of a civil action (which the US Supreme Court has already ruled CAN be launched against a sitting President) for defamation of character and, in that suit, Mr. Cohen would be entitled to use all of his notes, recordings, and correspondence in order to show that the defamatory remark was not true while Mr. Trump would have to actually produce the notes, recordings, and correspondence to show that it was true - AND, in both cases there is no longer any "solicitor-client privilege".

The second could potentially be factually accurate because what actually happened is that Mr. Cohen did lay out what the law respecting the payments was and Mr. Trump responded along the line of


"Well maybe they are illegal, and maybe they aren't. That hasn't been tested in court yet so we really don't know. Now I believe my gut over anything that some so-called 'expert' tells me and my gut tells me that we should make the payments to shut those B***hs up and I can be **T*H*E** **P*R*E*S*I*D*E*N*T** - so MAKE THE DAMN PAYMENTS."
​
Click to expand...


Oh, you were in the room? Do tell....
 
The key question in determining whether Cohen broke the campaign finance law is: Were the payments to Daniels and McDougal personal expenses or campaign-related expenses?

Many legal experts don’t believe such payments are campaign-related. Wealthy celebrities are faced with these types of embarrassing claims all the time, and often pay nuisance settlements (even if they are not running for office) to avoid bad publicity.

The Justice Department only prosecuted someone for a campaign finance law violation like the one Cohen pleaded guilty to on one occasion and the department lost its case – despite having stronger evidence.

The previous prosecution took place in 2012 and targeted a former Democratic vice presidential nominee, presidential candidate and senator, John Edwards. The Justice Department argued that $1 million paid by campaign contributors to Edward’s mistress – who was working for his presidential campaign – was a campaign-related expense. Prosecutors said the contribution exceeded the legal limit and should have been reported.

The government was unsuccessful in its claim that these payments were intended to “influence the election” by hiding Edwards’ affair when he was seeking the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008. Edwards was acquitted on one charge and a mistrial was declared on five other counts.
Click to expand...

The above was part of an op-ed by Hans A. von Spakovsky, former justice department attorney who claims, Michael Cohen and Trump did NOT violate campaign finance law – despite Cohen's guilty plea.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/mic...mpaign-finance-law-despite-cohens-guilty-plea
 
Fruityfact said:
I love how in today's world, liars, and scum like Trump can redeem themselves, and their reputation simply by saying what Conservatives want to hear....
Click to expand...

Not so fast....Many like me may seem like that to you today, but I am awaiting the conclusion of this mess. Unlike you libs who clamor for Trump's jailing without trial at every stupid daily report....
 
"Trump associate sentenced to life imprisonment! Pleads guilty to killing 4 people 20 years ago and failing to pay a parking ticket while picking up lunch on the campaign trail.

The President knew it was illegal to park there, but he told me to do it. Honest! Like, I'm serious! Now I have to spend the rest of my life in jail and it's all Trump's fault!

Mueller had recommended the man be spared the death penalty for assisting with the investigation of Trump."
 
j-mac said:
I love how in today's world, liars, and scum like Cohen can redeem themselves, and their reputation simply by saying what liberals want to hear....
Click to expand...

Can you find one liberal anywhere saying Cohen is "redeemed?" He's a scumbag criminal fixer rolling over on his scumbag criminal boss so that his rightfully-earned prison sentence is shorter.

When lower-level gangsters roll over on their boss, it's good for law enforcement because they can get the bigger fish. Does that make you think highly of the gangsters? Because I sure don't.
 
If Cohen knew that these transactions violated the law why didn't Cohen just refuse to do them, after all he is the lawyer and he should have know the law regardless if Trump ask him to do it anyway, just say NO.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
No fing way. Giuliani said that? What an idiot!
Click to expand...
If Giuliani was defending anyone else, those kinds of statements would be utterly idiotic, and bury the client. However, this is not a normal case. The statute of limitations is 5 years, and the DoJ's policy is that it won't indict a sitting president, so the only way Trump will face criminal charges is if he loses the next election. Giuliani is not playing to a prospective jury, he is trying to sway public opinion.

Giuliani's strategy may be unethical and destructive to the integrity of the rule of law, but he's doing what he was hired to do -- prevent Trump from getting impeached.

Jeffrey Toobin pointed this out in a recent article with the New Yorker, which included interviews with Giuliani.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/09/10/how-rudy-giuliani-turned-into-trumps-clown
 
Terryj said:
If Cohen knew that these transactions violated the law why didn't Cohen just refuse to do them, after all he is the lawyer and he should have know the law regardless if Trump ask him to do it anyway, just say NO.
Click to expand...

Because he's a scumbag criminal fixer and that's literally the sort of thing he was hired for?
 
Deuce said:
Can you find one liberal anywhere saying Cohen is "redeemed?" He's a scumbag criminal fixer rolling over on his scumbag criminal boss so that his rightfully-earned prison sentence is shorter.

When lower-level gangsters roll over on their boss, it's good for law enforcement because they can get the bigger fish. Does that make you think highly of the gangsters? Because I sure don't.
Click to expand...

I reject your characterization that our President is a "gangster".
 
Terryj said:
If Cohen knew that these transactions violated the law why didn't Cohen just refuse to do them, after all he is the lawyer and he should have know the law regardless if Trump ask him to do it anyway, just say NO.
Click to expand...
He probably should have refused, but he didn't. Cohen is a criminal. That's why he is going to a (cushy) jail for 3 years.

As to the motivation? Cohen was not Trump's lawyer, he was his fixer -- and Trump was his only client. His job was to make problems go away, and if he refused, he'd lose everything, just as his boss had a shot at becoming the President. I don't think he cared that what he did was illegal, until he was already hanging in the metaphorical noose.

More important is, why did he cooperate? Cohen was also very loyal, saying he would die for Trump, until he realized that loyalty was only flowing in one direction. Cohen probably hoped that Trump would pick up the tab for his legal fees, and was sorely disappointed; Trump also cannot directly promise a pardon, as that would definitely qualify as an obstruction of justice. Other public statements suggested that Trump was throwing Cohen under the bus this summer, e.g. Giuliani claiming that the tapes of Cohen and Trump discussing the MacDougal payment were "exculpatory" -- for Trump -- essentially fingering Cohen for the illegal actions (an absurd legal theory btw). Top that off with SDNY getting their hands on 99% of Cohen's documentation, and voila, Cohen flipped.
 
j-mac said:
I reject your characterization that our President is a "gangster".
Click to expand...

The gangsters were a parallel example of someone rolling over on their boss.

Feel free to dodge more, though. It proves my point.
 
Deuce said:
The gangsters were a parallel example of someone rolling over on their boss.

Feel free to dodge more, though. It proves my point.
Click to expand...

As long as you think so, I guess.
 
j-mac said:
Not so fast....Many like me may seem like that to you today, but I am awaiting the conclusion of this mess. Unlike you libs who clamor for Trump's jailing without trial at every stupid daily report....
Click to expand...

No you're the type of person to argue that we never needed a trial to begin with. If at the same time, you're the type of person to chant "lock her up", you need to take a look in the damn mirror.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom