One question fellow Yanks, is this normal?
Trump/Russia/SDNY investigation
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
Sounds like lobbying to me with Cohen not registering as a lobbyist.
He'll probably just retroactively register as a lobbyist.
The land of unlimited opportunities , including legalized corruption.
If that does turn out to be the case, then its not going to look good and will damage their credibility.
His strategy of publicity is exactly what Trump and Cohen doesn't want. I think it's the best strategy for him and Daniel's as perception plays a huge part in the preliminary determination of guilt. Added to that, keeping in the public eye that anyone had sex with a porn star and blackmailed that said porn star isn't exactly good news anyway you slice it.
It seems like most people don't get this. I tried explaining that to someone yesterday and it was clear to me that a lot of people don't see the connection.
That's because the same shell company operated by Cohen was being used by companies to make payments which are completely unrelated to the hush money.
CNNs Toobin has a very Trump-like tan today.
Michael Cohen - The singerThe replies.
I don't think it's that simple. Where the money is coming from is secondary, the question is whether Trump is David Dennison and whether he can be part of the agreement without signing it. There is nothing to suggest that you cannot be part of a contract that involves payment without paying and that's to say it can be proven that Trump didn't pay one way or the other which is imo extremely difficult.
Which is none of Avenatti's business (as Cliffords lawyer), as I have explained earlier. It's up to judicial and political oversight.
The payment of 130'000$ itself is not illegal, what is illegal is the mishandling of funds from the campaign. If that would make the payment illegal and render a contract invalid, then parties of a contract would have to exert extensive background checks each time they do business... Seems to me you are confusing criminal liability with contract law. Clearly the mishandling is a criminal activity which is illegal and as such is subject to state attorneys. Contract law however is not designed to take these things into account, it's designed to facilitate business.
Well nothing you said actually proves otherwise. Avenatti has to prove his case to a judge so even if it all the campaign stuff etc. were his business, which it is not, he'd have to present the argument to the judge making all the media presence PR since they don't help him with that. But, again, that's no problem and completely legit.
How the hell is Avenatti getting this information? Crazy stuff.
They went public. Novartis payment looks like a lobbying attempt to me.
Cohen is a real modern day renaissance man
Can someone post that video where all the bad guys get taken down by the feds? 
Cohen is a real modern day renaissance man
Are you telling me Cohen is an expert in the accounting, medical and legal industries?
Korea Aerospace Industries are well placed to win s $16bn contact from the US Air Force.
So not via Mueller or the SDNY as suggested in this forum earlier.
Question for the legal bods in here.
If Avenatti improperly obtained the documents via an unauthorised leak, will the judge allow that information/evidence to be used in court proceedings?
If Avenatti improperly obtained the documents via an unauthorised leak, will the judge allow that information/evidence to be used in court proceedings?
Makes perfect sense. People are blaming Avenatti for too much exposure on TV. Meanwhile his exposure is resulting in people contacting him to leak information regarding the case. He is winning the battle.
I dont think Avenatti would be using that as evidence against cohen in any of his law suits. If he really wanted to use bank records against cohen in a lawsuit he would just subeona them anyway as he would have ability to hav e discovery. So even if he got his information currently from illegal means he would be able to get it legally when he finally is allowed discovery in his law suit. But i dont see how this is relavant to his lawsuit anyway. Its just more like him doing Gods work for the public
Stinks to high heaven.
Lawyers use investigators to help there cases. If one of his Lawyers found this information then it is completely admissible.
And the fact that the company is owned by the cousin of a Russian Oligarch who is banned from doing business in the USA is totally coincidental. Right. Move along nothing to see here. Okay move along now.
What I would say is if nothing illegal has occurred, then there's something wrong with the law.
If this much is out in the media, just imagine how much more Mueller is sitting on at the moment.