Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2018 15:32:23 GMT -5
I was thinking Vince was comparing Trump's campaign finance imbroglio with Edwards's. A number of people have made this comparision but, as I noted, I think there's a good bit of difference.
I truly think this Stormy thing is a tip-of-the-iceberg situation. I think what Trump did there is something he did repeatedly and might have continued to get away with -- were it not for the fact he got elected as president. Now he's got Mueller on his tail, and this gives him yet another thing to consider while he's burrowing into Trump's finances and dealing for evidence on funky Russian dealings.
Watching Trump's Twitter feed today, it's clear his lawyers and advisers are trying to keep him on a leash. But I'm betting they won't succeed. And every word he says is bound to dig him in deeper.
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Mar 26, 2018 18:52:42 GMT -5
Yes. The Edwards case was the closest comparison I could come up with, and it did end up with charges filed, but IIRC, he was acquitted.
This was not a "The other side does it" sort of comment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2018 19:00:53 GMT -5
Yes, Edwards was acquitted.* but see my previous post on why he was acquitted. In my opinion, this is quite a different kettle of fish.
ETA:
*To be more precise, he was acquitted on one charge--which was with regard to a payment made after he suspended his campaign-- and there was a hung jury and a mistrial with regard to the others.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 9:46:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Mar 27, 2018 11:47:31 GMT -5
I can see differences in the Edwards thing on it's face, but overall it seems like it's very similar. However, it also sounds like he was acquitted at least in part because it's so complex it's hard to get a conviction of this. Doesn't mean the same thing won't happen with Trump or will.
On the other hand the denials may do him in, especially if it comes under oath.
I thing we all agree Cohen is spouting BS about paying of Stormy out of his own pocket with no discussion of getting it back from Trump, but in theory, if it can't be proven it's bunk and in the end, he did, is that a legal out? Is it an out for Trump and then Cohen goes to jail or gets disbarred? Could Trump pardon him?
I mean, I wouldn't go to Jail for a day for someone, but maybe Cohen would? Didn't Susan McDougal refuse to testify against Bill Clinton? I don't know that Trump engenders that sort of loyalty, but he could.
I still say most will shrug at this. Most will believe Trump has the affair, but they've already forgiven him for worse or they already have a low opinion of him that it's got no room to drop any lower.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 12:04:32 GMT -5
As a lawyer -- the differences between the cases are quite significant.
The charge Edwards was acquitted on involved a payment made after his campaign was suspended. OBVIOUSLY that wasn't made to affect the election. The others were a hung jury because Edwards had a clear, yuuuuuge, motivation (his dying wife) to hush up the scandal -- a motive that had nothing to do with the election. Moreover, unlike Trump's situation, the situation he was trying to cover up was current, not a decade old. That's the complexity -- sure, the campaign might have been a factor, but the other factor is pretty yuuuuge and conceivably, especially given the timing, was the chief motivation.
Think about it -- why on earth did Trump wait ten years to pay hush money, and then do it on the eve of the election, unless it was to prevent the news from killing his campaign.
There's also the factor that Edwards wasn't in the running any more for anything, whereas Trump is our president, possibly BECAUSE he managed to suppress Stormy and others. Then there's the fact that Edwards had one situation ( and well before the election), and it's looking more and more like Trump had several in the immediate run up to the election
And then there are the threats. There are several credible allegations of threats out there, from more than one person. Seriously, you think that's a nothingburger, legally?
I repeat: The sex is pretty much a nothingburger, sure. I agree. Who cares who he slept with? BUT THE SEX IS NOT THE ISSUE HERE.
Also -- to answer your question, Cohen is almost certainly going to have serious charges brought against him in New York State -- and Trump cannot pardon him for those charges. I'd bet my IRA that he'll be disbarred, at a minimum, and very likely the consequences will be more serious.
ETA:
As for loyalty -- yeah, Cohen is not one of nature's nobleman. He was loyal to Trump because Trump paid him well. Trump himself shows loyalty to no one. If Cohen is in a situation where Trump cannot help him, but squealing on Trump might, Cohen will squeal like a stuck pig. Not to mention that Cohen is dumb as a rock and could well hurt Trump while trying to help (indeed, he has already done so).
And even Cohen shuts up, Trump's own stupidity has already gotten him in enough of a quandary that even Cohen's loyal silence might not help him.
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Mar 27, 2018 12:08:39 GMT -5
I don't think the charges are a nothing burger, but they're not a burger at all. It's a 7 course meal with a lot of small touches that an average person might not get. I think it sounds like it's about sex, when it's not. You actually break it down well, so we'll see, but I'm not hearing it broken down well by others.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 12:21:02 GMT -5
I think I might be paying more attention than a lot of people who are all distracted by the sex aspect. The sex is just a sideline giggle for me (oh, that spanking!) -- it's the other stuff that matters. Also, to be fair, there is so much craziness going on (see my "yeah, all this shit is happening, too" thread) that it all tends to blur. I've been following stuff I think could genuinely come back to bite him. I steadfastly believe this is one of those things, and that the more serious aspects are flying under most people's radar because of the giggleworthy prurient aspects and all the cray-cray.
The thing is, if Trump and Cohen had left it alone, they would have been better off. The payoff attempt itself was a mistake, I think (the coverup is nearly always worse than the crime). And certainly the way it was executed was a yuuuge mistake. But they compounded it tenfold, both of them, by the way they've addressed it since it came out.
As a lawyer, I've been absolutely boggled by Cohen's every move and word throughout this whole thing.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 27, 2018 12:31:28 GMT -5
The sex in this scandal isn't very sexy as sex between a 27-year-old woman and a 60-year-old man usually isn't. What is sexy are the titillating questions that have gone unasked of Trump and thus far remain unanswered. Matthew Ygelsias of Vox is asking two questions that may relate to how compromised Trump really is. Others are musing out loud that Trump's reluctance to be critical of Vladimir Putin is due to his fear the former KGB agent has some dirt on Trump. Wouldn't you like to know what Putin knows about Trump? I'd love to know...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2018 12:41:54 GMT -5
The sex in this scandal isn't very sexy as sex between a 27-year-old woman and a 60-year-old man usually isn't. What is sexy are the titillating questions that have gone unasked of Trump and thus far remain unanswered. Matthew Ygelsias of Vox is asking two questions that may relate to how compromised Trump really is. Others are musing out loud that Trump's reluctance to be critical of Vladimir Putin is due to his fear the former KGB agent has some dirt on Trump. Wouldn't you like to know what Putin knows about Trump? I'd love to know... Exactly. Stormy isn't an isolated issue. She's part of a much bigger context. As I noted, that context includes other women he's slept with and bullied and bribed (and others he allegedly bullied and bribed in a business context). And it also includes something yuuuuuge that is simmering on a burner of the Russia investigation: i.e., does Putin have kompromat on Trump, and if so, just what would and has Trump done to keep it quiet? In light of the fact we now have some credible evidence that Trump has e.g., slept with a porn star sans protection and attended a club that was known for "golden shower" and other explicit shows, is it so hard to believe that the golden showers and prostitute allegations is the famous Dossier are so far fetched? ETA: And given the lengths he went to cover up Stormy, we know he's not beyond bribery. If Putin has dirt on him... I'd honestly be more surprised if Putin DIDN'T have some dirt on Trump -- personal and financial.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 27, 2018 18:39:11 GMT -5
The sex in this scandal isn't very sexy as sex between a 27-year-old woman and a 60-year-old man usually isn't. What is sexy are the titillating questions that have gone unasked of Trump and thus far remain unanswered. Matthew Ygelsias of Vox is asking two questions that may relate to how compromised Trump really is. Others are musing out loud that Trump's reluctance to be critical of Vladimir Putin is due to his fear the former KGB agent has some dirt on Trump. Wouldn't you like to know what Putin knows about Trump? I'd love to know... Exactly. Stormy isn't an isolated issue. She's part of a much bigger context. As I noted, that context includes other women he's slept with and bullied and bribed (and others he allegedly bullied and bribed in a business context). And it also includes something yuuuuuge that is simmering on a burner of the Russia investigation: i.e., does Putin have kompromat on Trump, and if so, just what would and has Trump done to keep it quiet? In light of the fact we now have some credible evidence that Trump has e.g., slept with a porn star sans protection and attended a club that was known for "golden shower" and other explicit shows, is it so hard to believe that the golden showers and prostitute allegations is the famous Dossier are so far fetched? ETA: And given the lengths he went to cover up Stormy, we know he's not beyond bribery. If Putin has dirt on him... I'd honestly be more surprised if Putin DIDN'T have some dirt on Trump -- personal and financial. Jane Mayer is a credible journalist and while I have my issues with Michael Isikoff and David Corn, do I believe Trump would have visited a sex club in Las Vegas where urination was simulated? Yes. Yes, I absolutely would believe it. Not because I simply despise All Things Trump and readily believe the worst about him, but because I've interviewed and written about porn stars and escorts, high and low-end, and from what I've learned someone like Trump absolutely fits the profile of the kind of guy who would seek out that sort of woman. Going from spankings by Stormy to golden showers by Russian prostitutes doesn't require that large of a leap on the kink scale. It's just indicative of what's in Donald's porn stash.
|
|
|
Post by iolo on Mar 28, 2018 6:49:35 GMT -5
How even the most self-obsessed richboy can keep posturing in public after all this escapes most of us out here in the real world. How can even the most closed-minded and brainwashed right-wing weirdoes live with it?
|
|
|
Post by Don on Mar 28, 2018 10:15:36 GMT -5
How even the most self-obsessed richboy can keep posturing in public after all this escapes most of us out here in the real world. How can even the most closed-minded and brainwashed right-wing weirdoes live with it? I know a couple of those. Mostly they're in hardcore denial. Anything bad about Trump is either "fake news" or "the price we had to pay to avoid Hillary." I find no more logic in their arguments than I did when the left was excusing Obama's droning and deportation records. Team sports and logic are apparently mortal enemies.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2018 12:14:52 GMT -5
Okay. I'm getting mildly annoyed by the people on Twitter arguing that (a) Trump didn't know anything about the contract with Stormy Daniels at the time it was made (that's what Michael Cohen's attorney, David Schwartz is now arguing), and yet (b) Stormy Daniels is nonetheless still bound by that contract.
No.
1. Let's assume for a minute that Cohen is telling the truth that Trump knew nothing at all about the Stormy Daniels contract at the time it was made, and that it was all Cohen -- the payment, the contract, everything. Trump was innocently watching Fox & Friends or humping a playmate, and knew nothing about it.
If that's the case, the agreement is void. Set aside the Trump not having signed it thing -- that's not what I'm talking about. The problem is that specific promises are made in that contract on behalf of Trump, and the contract states that these promises are essential to Stormy agreeing to enter into the contract. If Trump knew nothing about those promises, he could not possibly have kept them. E.g., in the contract, Trump agrees to release any claims he might have against Stormy. He agrees to stay away from Stormy and her family. The contract specifically states that these terms are material -- by the terms of the contract, Stormy was entitled not only to the $130,000, but also those promises. But how can Trump possibly keep his end of the bargain if he doesn't even know about those promises? He can't. If Trump never made those promises, the contract is void.
Oh, by the way, taking aside the fact that the agreement is void if Cohen really entered into this contract without notifying Trump, Cohen also is certainly in violation of campaign finance laws in that event and in breach of New York attorney ethical violations. Seriously, I don't see how Cohen gets out of this mess with his license to practice law.
(2) If Trump isn't a party to the agreement, rather odd that he's suing Stormy for $20 million as "aka David Dennison" for enforcement of the contract...
(3) Cohen's attorney might just be an even worse lawyer than Cohen is. And that's saying something.
|
|
|
Post by michaelw on May 3, 2018 17:06:02 GMT -5
|
|