LaxPower Back-Up Stick

seacoaster wrote:

tech37 wrote:

Trinity wrote:How long will Senate Republicans prop up their nightmare in the Oval?

"nightmare in the Oval?"... so long as the Dem Party is beholden to the left wing nut jobs of late, don't count on much change.

This response is the embodiment of our time in one sentence. The President is a criminal; his son and campaign manager meet with Russian intelligence, his manager gives Russians proprietary polling data, and he instructs his lawyer to lie to the Congress. And it’s about the “Dem Party.” Perfect.

As usual you boys don’t get it. Trump, criminal or not, the GOP will stick together when the alternative I mentioned is considered. Trump was not the point of my post but right away the haters assumed I was defending him. Typical...

Here ya go, SaltyRad...some more on the timeline...

"...big questions remain. When exactly did Trump give Cohen this directive? How did the President transmit the request? Who else knew about Trump’s ask, and in what format did they learn about it?

BuzzFeed’s article offers some hints. It says Trump’s direction for Cohen to lie to Congress happened “after the election” and that special counsel Robert Mueller learned about it “through interviews with multiple witnesses from the Trump Organization and internal company emails, text messages, and a cache of other documents.” Cohen then confirmed the directive during interviews with Mueller’s team, according to BuzzFeed.

The Senate and House Intelligence Committees announced that they would investigate Russia’s interference in the 2016 election on Jan. 13 and Jan. 25, 2017, respectively. Cohen first provided false information to the committees via a letter sent on Aug. 28, 2017. That letter, Cohen’s prepared remarks to the Senate committee submitted on Sept. 19, 2017, and his subsequent Oct. 26, 2017 closed-door testimony before that committee all contained falsehoods means to “minimize links” between a planned Trump Tower project in Moscow and Trump, Mueller wrote in a November 2018 document charging Cohen with lying to Congress."

..

Oh and with this latest supposed “bombshell,” try not to drool on yourselves

dislaxxic wrote:There may be blood...

Again, informed opinion from Josh Marshall at TPM (this is again behind the prime paywall...)

"I want to discuss some details in the background of that new Buzzfeed reporting about Trump, Cohen and the Trump Tower Moscow deal. It’s more a matter of deduction, inference and some speculation. But you can’t understand what’s happening between Trump and Cohen without this part of the story.

As noted in last night’s post, the most logical source of this story is federal law enforcement centered out of New York City. But Michael Cohen also appears to be talking extensively to congressional investigators. In any case, President Trump obviously knows whatever it is he himself did. He doesn’t need to hear about it from Buzzfeed or sources on Capitol Hill. For all these reasons, President Trump clearly has a lot to fear from Michael Cohen, about topics that go far beyond the details of his hush money payments and campaign finance law violations. Trump wants to punish Cohen and shut him up.

Next consider that ABC News reported yesterday that Cohen was thinking of rolling back his congressional testimony because he feared President Trump’s escalating attacks are endangering his family. I checked in on this and Cohen’s worries seem to be two-tiered. One is the standard and understandable fear that the President’s railing could trigger some unhinged person to do something violent and rash. But it’s hard to figure where Trump’s comments are more likely to do that this week than they were last week or last month. The other concern – I suspect the driving concern – is that Cohen worries that Trump is trying to endanger his family, specifically his father-in-law, either legally or through violence.

This requires closer attention.

In all likelihood Michael Cohen is going to spend three years in federal prison because of his father-in-law, Fima Shusterman. Cohen got a stiff sentence because he was not willing to enter a formal cooperation agreement. He seemed to talk freely about his criminal acts tied to the hush money payments. The Special Counsel’s Office seemed satisfied that he’d been fully candid and cooperative with them. It was other crimes that Cohen either participated in or knew about that he was unwilling to talk freely about. That refusal earned him a significant prison term.

Why would he do that?

Trump’s right that Cohen’s money comes from his father-in-law, directly and indirectly, at least in the sense that that’s where Cohen first got into the business of transacting millions of dollars in real estate, taxi medallions and more. Shusterman is from that emigre world of all cash businesses and close ties to Russian/Ukrainian organized crime in Brighton Beach. He is himself a naturalized immigrant from the former Soviet Union, specifically from Ukraine. Cohen didn’t want to blow up his family by serving up his father-in-law, who is obviously his wife’s father. (That wouldn’t go over well.) Do I know this specifically and concretely? No. But knowing Cohen’s history, his range of businesses dealings and Shusterman’s background, it is the overwhelming likelihood.

The story gets more interesting when we remember that Trump almost certainly knows Shusterman and knows him well. There are many stories about just how Cohen came into Trump’s orbit. Helping him stand down a tenant/shareholder revolt at one of his New York residential buildings was part of it but probably not the true origin of the relationship. Federal investigators told Seth Hettena that Trump originally hired Cohen as a favor to Shusterman. “Fima may have been a (possibly silent) business partner with Trump, perhaps even used as a conduit for Russian investors in Trump properties and other ventures,” a former federal investigator told Hettena.

Here’s one key passage in Hettena’s book Trump/Russia: A Definitive History, which I strongly recommend.



It hasn’t gotten a lot of notice but Trump has repeatedly, on Twitter and TV, goaded investors to look more closely at Shusterman. He did so as recently as this morning.

Kevin Corke, @FoxNews “Don’t forget, Michael Cohen has already been convicted of perjury and fraud, and as recently as this week, the Wall Street Journal has suggested that he may have stolen tens of thousands of dollars….” Lying to reduce his jail time! Watch father-in-law!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 18, 2019

Trump is positively obsessed with Shusterman. This morning’s reference is the fourth time he’s specifically called out Shusterman as Cohen’s “father-in-law” and demanded he be investigated. He’s more generally called out Cohen’s “family” a number of other times. Now this all raises the obvious question. If it’s really true that Shusterman is from the Russian/Ukraine world of emigre money laundering and he has a business past with Trump himself, why on earth is Trump trying to get people to look into his finances and criminal past? That might be bad for Cohen but it’s like Trump putting a gun to his own head. Why? It’s a good question.

I think the answer is that Trump is getting desperate and reckless. He has one strategy and impulse: aggression and revenge and he knows that Cohen poses a mortal threat. He wants to lash out at Cohen. He wants revenge. He also wants to silence him. The best illustration of Trump’s dangerous, contradictory gambit came over the weekend in that interview with Jeanine Piro. Most people focused on Trump’s bizarre refusal to deny being a Russian agent. But there was another revealing exchange.

Here Trump tells Pirro that people need to look into the business background of Cohen’s “father-in-law”. Pirro is game to go wherever Trump wants to lead her. So Pirro asks “What is his father-in-law’s name?” Good question, Jeanine! Then Trump goes dumb somehow. “I don’t know but you’ll find out. And you’ll look into it. Because nobody knows what’s going on over there.” Trump is this obsessed with Cohen’s wife’s father, knows this much about the source of Cohen’s money, had Cohen as an employee for a decade and doesn’t know the guy’s name? Please. Trump can’t help using this cudgel against Cohen. The need to fight back, to punish runs too deep in his psyche, even though Trump is probably further endangering himself in doing so. But when it comes to getting asked for something as simple as the guy’s name suddenly he knows nothing.

Here’s the video …

1/ Trump says he’s a totally honest guy and doesn’t even know the name of Cohens father-in-law whos the source of Cohen money. pic.twitter.com/GBHWW2F9fJ

— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) January 13, 2019

Many are noting that this is the President publicly threatening a witness against him. That’s true. But it’s more than that. Trump has a relationship with Shusterman that goes back years, probably decades. Trump’s lashing out in a wildly self-destructive way because he’s that desperate."

..

Makes you so proud to be an American. Don Don as President. Making America Great Again.

... and Hillary would have been worse

COMPROMISE: BEFORE TRUMP WON HIS FIRST PRIMARY, PUTIN COLLECTED HIS FIRST RECEIPT

"All of which is to say that when Cohen called Peskov’s assistant, he would have told her that he was speaking on behalf of Donald Trump, that Trump remained interested in a Trump Tower in Moscow (as he had been in 2013, the last time Putin had dangled a personal meeting with Trump), and that on Trump’s behalf Cohen was willing to discuss making a deal involving both a sanctioned bank (whichever one it was) and a GRU officer.

So it’s not just that Trump was pursuing a real estate deal while running for President. He was pursuing a real estate deal involving a sanctioned bank — possibly one sanctioned for its involvement in Crimea — and involving someone with ties to the intelligence agency that was preparing to hack Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager.

Cohen told Peskov’s assistant Trump was willing to negotiate that deal while running for President. The assistant wrote all that down (how Mueller knows this is an interesting question on its own right). And then she or Peskov passed on at least the content of the notes to get Putin’s office to contact Sater."

..

dislaxxic wrote:Here ya go, SaltyRad...some more on the timeline...

"...big questions remain. When exactly did Trump give Cohen this directive? How did the President transmit the request? Who else knew about Trump’s ask, and in what format did they learn about it?

BuzzFeed’s article offers some hints. It says Trump’s direction for Cohen to lie to Congress happened “after the election” and that special counsel Robert Mueller learned about it “through interviews with multiple witnesses from the Trump Organization and internal company emails, text messages, and a cache of other documents.” Cohen then confirmed the directive during interviews with Mueller’s team, according to BuzzFeed.

The Senate and House Intelligence Committees announced that they would investigate Russia’s interference in the 2016 election on Jan. 13 and Jan. 25, 2017, respectively. Cohen first provided false information to the committees via a letter sent on Aug. 28, 2017. That letter, Cohen’s prepared remarks to the Senate committee submitted on Sept. 19, 2017, and his subsequent Oct. 26, 2017 closed-door testimony before that committee all contained falsehoods means to “minimize links” between a planned Trump Tower project in Moscow and Trump, Mueller wrote in a November 2018 document charging Cohen with lying to Congress."..

Thanks dis -- looks like no recording. Looking more like 2nd or 3rd party hearsay, unless someone claims to have been in the room, or on a conf call, when Trump specifically directed Cohen to lie to Congress.

a fan wrote:Yes, but that 40% of the population are supporting Senate Republicans. And until that support goes.......

It's not the base's support of the Senator's themselves so much as it is their support of Trump. What the Senators are beginning to see is the 60% who will support anybody but them if they are tied to Trump. These senators are the beneficiary's of Trump's base, but that base has no love for these senators, the base likes Trump. Senator X can be anyone whom Trump designates, the base doesn't care. Those opposed to Trump however don't just hate Trump, they hate anyone who is associated with him. These senators are moving into an environment where they are only weakly support as proxies. Their opposition is not weak in their opposition, the senators are not proxies to the opposition. This is a different environment from the pre-November election period. I would argue we are leaving the era of Trump.

tech37 wrote:

seacoaster wrote:

tech37 wrote:

Trinity wrote:How long will Senate Republicans prop up their nightmare in the Oval?

"nightmare in the Oval?"... so long as the Dem Party is beholden to the left wing nut jobs of late, don't count on much change.

This response is the embodiment of our time in one sentence. The President is a criminal; his son and campaign manager meet with Russian intelligence, his manager gives Russians proprietary polling data, and he instructs his lawyer to lie to the Congress. And it’s about the “Dem Party.” Perfect.

As usual you boys don’t get it. Trump, criminal or not, the GOP will stick together when the alternative I mentioned is considered. Trump was not the point of my post but right away the haters assumed I was defending him. Typical...

So what you're saying here is that it's okay to have criminals and nut jobs (make no mistake about this, the Prez is a nut job) running the country as long as they have Rs following their name?

tech37 wrote:"nightmare in the Oval?"... so long as the Dem Party is beholden to the left wing nut jobs of late, don't count on much change.

As usual you boys don’t get it. Trump, criminal or not, the GOP will stick together when the alternative I mentioned is considered. Trump was not the point of my post but right away the haters sssumed I was defending him. Typical...[/quote] THAT is what we're supposed to get from your sentence?

Here's your sentence

tech37 wrote:"nightmare in the Oval?"... so long as the Dem Party is beholden to the left wing nut jobs of late, don't count on much change.

"the GOP will stick together when the alternative I mentioned is considered",-----THAT is what we're supposed to get from the above sentence?

You've jumped on me before for putting words in your mouth----now you're on us because you think we should somehow know you were talking about the GOP, when you made no mention of them. And then called us haters when we got the interpretation wrong.


And to top it off, your line of accession is wrong. Pence is on deck. Not the "left wing nut jobs of late". Have a great weekend, tech.....

No dmac of course that isn’t what I said... unreal

old salt wrote:

dislaxxic wrote:Looking more like 2nd or 3rd party hearsay

Direct testimony from Cohen is not "hearsay". If that testimony is backed by "internal company emails, text messages, and a cache of other documents", only the most committed of Trump apologists would acquit Trump.

But plenty of those still around, most notably in the US Senate.

CU77 wrote:

old salt wrote:

dislaxxic wrote:Looking more like 2nd or 3rd party hearsay

Direct testimony from Cohen is not "hearsay". If that testimony is backed by "internal company emails, text messages, and a cache of other documents", only the most committed of Trump apologists would acquit Trump.

But plenty of those still around, most notably in the US Senate.

And here on FanLax

a fan wrote:

tech37 wrote:"nightmare in the Oval?"... so long as the Dem Party is beholden to the left wing nut jobs of late, don't count on much change.

As usual you boys don’t get it. Trump, criminal or not, the GOP will stick together when the alternative I mentioned is considered. Trump was not the point of my post but right away the haters sssumed I was defending him. Typical...

THAT is what we're supposed to get from your sentence?

Here's your sentence

tech37 wrote:"nightmare in the Oval?"... so long as the Dem Party is beholden to the left wing nut jobs of late, don't count on much change.

"the GOP will stick together when the alternative I mentioned is considered",-----THAT is what we're supposed to get from the above sentence?

You've jumped on me before for putting words in your mouth----now you're on us because you think we should somehow know you were talking about the GOP, when you made no mention of them. And then called us haters when we got the interpretation wrong.


And to top it off, your line of accession is wrong. Pence is on deck. Not the "left wing nut jobs of late". Have a great weekend, tech.....[/quote]


If you read properly, Trinity was referring to the GOP and I replied to his post. Thanks for chiming in though!

I saw that....I'm just saying, i'm trying to respect the intent of your postings and not put words in your mouth. Calling us haters for misunderstanding an unclear post doesn't help that cause.

I've misunderstood old salt like this before...and it led to pages of wasted time both for me and old salt. Just trying to get at the center of your thought....

Typical Lax Dad wrote:

CU77 wrote:

old salt wrote:

dislaxxic wrote:Looking more like 2nd or 3rd party hearsay

Direct testimony from Cohen is not "hearsay". If that testimony is backed by "internal company emails, text messages, and a cache of other documents", only the most committed of Trump apologists would acquit Trump.

But plenty of those still around, most notably in the US Senate.

And here on FanLax

You left out this part of my post :

The reporter also says his sources say there's corroborating evidence.

I'm referring to corroboration of Cohen's assertion.

Omarosa has THAT tape. Don’t confuse us, Salty.

Seems to me like Mueller has been issuing his report to us one legal filing at a time.

Cohen has presumably been involved in loads of sketchy stuff over the years. Yet note what Mueller's filings w/r/t Cohen focus on:

1. Cohen lied to Congress about the Moscow Tower deal.
2. Cohen circulated and coordinated his Congressional testimony with Trump related persons. Presumably so they could lie/obstruct as well.
3. Cohen frequently updated Trump, Junior and Ivanka about the Moscow Tower deal.

The obvious point here is that Mueller has already told us publicly what Mueller thinks he can prove here and where he is heading. Mueller has also told us that Mueller finds Cohen very credible and helpful on these matters. Mueller has told us that Mueller can corroborate Cohen's story.

In that context, the Buzzfeed article is interesting and pretty credible if only because it is 100% consistent with what Mueller himself has already foreshadowed. And because it gives us a rare peek into the mountain of evidence that Mueller has -- Trump Org emails, texts, document cache.

Mueller knows, and he has receipts.

He’s got to convince half the gop Trump is a traitor. That’s where we are. They don’t care about ethics or conflicts or grifting. At all. I never thought I’d see this. He’s threatening family. Oh look, Cohen is Russian mob. They don’t care.

Trinity wrote:He’s got to convince half the gop Trump is a traitor. That’s where we are. They don’t care about ethics or conflicts or grifting. At all. I never thought I’d see this.

Not really, just a few hundred thousand in the right districts. The one's who voted for BHO, were left behind and hate HRC will flip on Trump in a heart beat..."it's the economy stupid".

I’m talking about elected officials. They know better. They’re going along to get along.