Ken Starr on Trump's Legal Jeopardy: 'We're Nowhere Near' Indictable or Impeachable Offenses

[JasperL]

Cohen plea bargained and told the prosecutors exactly what they wanted to hear. That doesn't mean the prosecutors proved their case against Trump.

The burden, if push comes to shove, will be for the state of NY to prove Trump used campaign funds to repay Cohen who used his own loan money in a private transaction to protect Trump's reputation, brand, and keep the affair from his wife, Melania. It's going to be an awful tough burden for NY to prove Trump's money was "intended" for any other reason. Cohen's word is not credible. He told the NY prosecutors what they wanted to hear to save himself.

OK, but buried in that response is an assumption that what Cohen said was untrue, and that there's no evidence to support his story. You just don't know that. I can't prove he does have evidence, but we know Cohen didn't trust Trump and recorded lots of conversations. It's also unbelievable that an attorney comes out of pocket for $150k, and is repaid that with bogus retainers totaling over $400k, and Trump isn't made aware of what the legal bills are paying for, which was Cohen taking care of bimbo eruptions. It's also unbelievable he'd risk $150k of his own money to pay off Stormy, and not run that by the boss ahead of time.

And Cohen didn't use his own money, at least not at the end of the day. He advanced the money and was repaid, plus taxes, plus fees, plus a bonus. The argument is the money was used for campaign purposes, which made it campaign funds.

You're right, as I understand it, that the argument for Trump is paying off the bimbo eruptions had nothing to do with the election, but with protecting his reputation as a choir boy, which he fostered by sleeping with a constant stream of women... That's a possible defense but it's a matter for a jury.

 

[trixare4kids]

The statement he made is absurd. Nixon engaged in a campaign to protect his underlings and in so doing committed obstruction of justice. The Trump situation is miles away from that. It's not in the same solar system.

The thread is loaded with intellectual dishonesty.
SSDD, different thread.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

What felonies? Using your own money for something NOT a crime, is hardly a felony. Now, destroying evidence subpoenaed by Congress. yea that's a felony. Wonder who did that.

What felonies? You just proved my point again.

Womp womp.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

The thread is loaded with intellectual dishonesty.
SSDD, different thread.

LOL! How on earth would you know?

 

[trixare4kids]

OK, but buried in that response is an assumption that what Cohen said was untrue, and that there's no evidence to support his story. You just don't know that. I can't prove he does have evidence, but we know Cohen didn't trust Trump and recorded lots of conversations. It's also unbelievable that an attorney comes out of pocket for $150k, and is repaid that with bogus retainers totaling over $400k, and Trump isn't made aware of what the legal bills are paying for, which was Cohen taking care of bimbo eruptions. It's also unbelievable he'd risk $150k of his own money to pay off Stormy, and not run that by the boss ahead of time.

And Cohen didn't use his own money, at least not at the end of the day. He advanced the money and was repaid, plus taxes, plus fees, plus a bonus. The argument is the money was used for campaign purposes, which made it campaign funds.

You're right, as I understand it, that the argument for Trump is paying off the bimbo eruptions had nothing to do with the election, but with protecting his reputation as a choir boy, which he fostered by sleeping with a constant stream of women... That's a possible defense but it's a matter for a jury.

It doesn't matter what Cohen said, it's a proven fact that he didn't think he deserved jail time because he gave the NY prosecutors precisely what they wanted to hear to save his own ass. He said that! It's a matter of public record. Now if there is something more damning in the eleven tapes we haven't heard yet, that's another story. IF Trump is indicted, the state will have to prove Trump used campaign funds so he could get elected.
That's their burden. Tough to prove; John Edwards?

 

[veritas1]

What felonies? You just proved my point again.

Womp womp.

Obstruction of justice. I would imagine that using fake evidence bought by your campaign to get FISA warrants on your opponent and lying to the judge about it multiple times is also a felony. But hey, Trump paid Stormy to shut up. Oh, the humanity!!!!:lamo

 

[JasperL]

Since the relationships Trump has with MacDougal and Daniels had already been made public, I do not think that argument will be found credible.

I don't either, but that is, from what I understand, the defense.

 

[trixare4kids]

LOL! How on earth would you know?

With the exception of this post of yours, I only reply to your intellectual dishonesty every now and then...

 

[trixare4kids]

I rather suspect that when push comes to shove, yes, there will be. This is only in the case of building a campaign finance case against Trump.

OK, but what does this have to do with my post? Um, nothing...

Let me reiterate my point for the umpteenth time...
I agree with both Starr and Turley. Presently, presently being the key word, there is no there, there.

 

[JasperL]

It doesn't matter what Cohen said, it's a proven fact that he didn't think he deserved jail time because he gave the NY prosecutors precisely what they wanted to hear to save his own ass. He said that!

And competent prosecutors would demand more than "Trust me" in exchange for leniency on a bunch of serious felonies. If all they got from Cohen was unsubstantiated rumors, he said/he said, then they're gullible idiots and I wouldn't want to bet the house on Mueller or SDNY being idiots. Do you think career prosecutors in SDNY are unaware that the first line of defense for Trump will be "Cohen is a liar!" and that when it's raised in court or in other settings, the prosecutors traded leniency for "Well, you got us there. Cohen is an admitted liar, and it's Cohen's word against Trump, so Ok, you win."

It's a matter of public record. Now if there is something more damning in the eleven tapes we haven't heard yet, that's another story. IF Trump is indicted, the state will have to prove Trump used campaign funds so he could get elected.
That's their burden. Tough to prove; John Edwards?

Yes, as I said, the state will have to prove to a jury that the motivation for paying off the bimbos was to get Trump elected. If so, those payments are "campaign funds."

 

[JasperL]

In avoiding public embarrassment he will prevent possible damage to his presidential prospects. That would go for anyone, not just Trump. John Edwards did the same but the difference was that he used $1M in campaign funds to do it. That's why his career ended. Had he used his own funds, he may have lost the nomination but he would not have been charged with a crime. There is a difference between a poor personal choice and breaking the law. Democrats are attempting to conflate the two in their eagerness to get Trump.

There is little difference between what Edwards did through fat cat supporters of his campaign and Trump. The funds were allegedly "campaign" funds because they were used to advance Edwards' election prospects. Cohen did what Edwards' supporters did - pay off a woman to stay silent.

It went to a jury with Edwards and they deadlocked. Who knows what a jury will decide in this case if it goes to trial.

At any rate, this is the sideshow to the real issues at stake. He's not going to be impeached over this, and I don't see prosecutors taking this case to trial after he leaves office, whenever that is. More than anything it's a look into Cohen and Trump, which are two corrupt men who don't believe that laws apply to them.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

With the exception of this post of yours, I only reply to your intellectual dishonesty every now and then...

LOL! And yet you cannot cite any intellectual dishonesty from me here.

Funny, given what you've posted.

Unintentional irony is the best sort of irony.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Obstruction of justice. I would imagine that using fake evidence bought by your campaign to get FISA warrants on your opponent and lying to the judge about it multiple times is also a felony. But hey, Trump paid Stormy to shut up. Oh, the humanity!!!!:lamo

Thanks again for proving my point.

Still, it's fun to watch you in so far over your head you just spout inanities.

 

[veritas1]

Thanks again for proving my point.

Still, it's fun to watch you in so far over your head you just spout inanities.

Your tired canned responses simply let me know I'm right and you have no factual rejoinder. Thanks for playing.

 

[Tanngrisnir]

Your tired canned responses simply let me know I'm right and you have no factual rejoinder. Thanks for playing.

It's OK that you cannot rebut a single thing I've said and need to cling to your fantasy narrative.

This is going to be a very, very bad coming year for Trump True Believers™, and I'm very much looking forward to the anguish it will cause them.

It'll be sort of like an involuntary curative.

Fun!

 

[MovingPictures]

Actually it was the House committee that initiated impeachment.

Um, yeah, we all know that's how it works. :lol:

You'll have to provide a source/link for each and every one of those points.

For what? All you'll do is hand wave them away and let out a primal "BUT HILLARY!" again.

And unless you've been stranded on an island, most of those points made the evening news.

Waits for the "fake news!" cry.

 

[American]

Um, yeah, we all know that's how it works. :lol:


For what? All you'll do is hand wave them away and let out a primal "BUT HILLARY!" again.

And unless you've been stranded on an island, most of those points made the evening news.

Waits for the "fake news!" cry.

Why, because you yourself know you've been making **** up out of thin air?