Anybody Else Amused that Trump's Lawyer Cohen Named Hannity?

[Baptist Believer]

For one thing BB he denies it.
We just don't know for sure.

Certainly, we don't know that for sure, but it seems odd that his personal attorney would pay her $130,000 and prepare an agreement between Trump and Daniels for her silence.

Trump claims he doesn't know anything about it which would mean that Cohen is doing some shady things. No valid contracts can exist if one of the parties doesn't know about the contract.

What does that say about your rush to judgement?

I'm not rushing to judgment. Why is the President suing Daniels is there is nothing there, and he did not sign an agreement. Why hasn't he blasted her publicly the way he has blasted others?

It doesn't add up.

 

[Wingman68]

What’s not amusing is that this judge was picked by B Clinton to be his AG, but she had to withdraw after having trained as a playboy bunny, & had employed an illegal immigrant as a nanny. Why did she not recuse?

 

[Wingman68]

Forgot to add, she officiated Soro’s wedding, so we know she will be unbiased in this political case, right.

 

[HankD]

The judge who signed the search warrant did not agree. There is a very high bar for conducting a search of an attorneys documents, and there has to be substantial evidence that there is criminal activity involved and that there is a minimal chance of violating attorney-client privilege. Attorney-client privilege does not extend to conspiracy to commit a crime, which is apparently alleged between the President and Mr. Cohen.

Sean Hannity's denials that Cohen represents him undermines the argument that attorney-client privilege extends to anyone beyond the Republican who had Cohen "fix" a situation where he got a woman pregnant and then the situation with Trump.

IMO we need to wait to see who's who in this three ring circus.

I believe this is a deflection - a smokescreen.
After multi millions of taxpayer dollars Mueller still has nothing.

Yet it (the "investigation") still needs to be prolonged to the "October surprise".

It seems to me the public is being intwitterated with a consigliere and a blonde lady.
That should buy Mueller another month (maybe - at most).

What's next?

 

[church mouse guy]

How would you be reacting if it were news that Obama’s personal lawyer, while being the subject of a criminal investigation, was also secretly the lawyer for Rachel Maddow—and she had been using her show to defend the lawyer without disclosing that relationship?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

Rachel Maddow?? There's one who hurts the eyes. She needs a public defender.

 

[InTheLight]

Why are you now encompassed in a daisy for an avatar?

It's the sun. In The Light...get it?

 

[HankD]

It's the sun. In The Light...get it?

OH OK

 

[HankD]

Certainly, we don't know that for sure, but it seems odd that his personal attorney would pay her $130,000 and prepare an agreement between Trump and Daniels for her silence.

Trump claims he doesn't know anything about it which would mean that Cohen is doing some shady things. No valid contracts can exist if one of the parties doesn't know about the contract.


I'm not rushing to judgment. Why is the President suing Daniels is there is nothing there, and he did not sign an agreement. Why hasn't he blasted her publicly the way he has blasted others?

It doesn't add up.

Then we need to wait until it does.

As an example: Comey himself admitted he was a leaker of US government information.

 

[InTheLight]

For one thing BB he denies it.
We just don't know for sure.

What does that say about your rush to judgement?

So, $130,000 was paid to Stormy Daniels by Michael Cohen, for what purpose?

 

[Baptist Believer]

Rachel Maddow?? There's one who hurts the eyes. She needs a public defender.

Wow, can't answer the question, just a slam against her appearance! What a fine example of a Christian man you are!

 

[Baptist Believer]

Then we need to wait until it does.

As an example: Comey himself admitted he was a leaker of US government information.

I am happy to wait and see. Others around here (including you) are spinning all sorts of theories and rushing to judgments about how this is a "deflection - a smokescreen" (your words) and that "[a]fter multi millions of taxpayer dollars Mueller still has nothing" (a charge that you cannot know whether or not is true since he hasn't issued a report).

You have also stated that this is a "nothing burger" and that "Mueller violated the constitutional right of protection from illegal search and seizure along with all those who put their stamp of approval on it."

Yet you scold me for 'rushing to judgment' for stating allegations and facts that publicly known? Sorry. You have already pronounced judgment on the Mueller investigation without it having come to a conclusion and having the report submitted to the Deputy Attorney General.

I know you are a fundamentally decent person, but I think you are deceiving yourself regarding your objectivity here. You are making some huge claims without substantiation. That's okay, but don't claim others are "rushing to judgment" for analyzing the facts and allegations of the case that are publicly available that don't lead to the same judgments you have already made.

 

[Calminian]

Wow, can't answer the question, just a slam against her appearance! What a fine example of a Christian man you are!

I'm just glad you're consistent and criticize Comey's appearance insults on Trump.

 

[Baptist Believer]

I'm just glad you're consistent and criticize Comey's appearance insults on Trump.

I have not heard the Comey interview. I've been extremely busy. If he made petty shots at Trump, then he is in the wrong as well.

 

[Calminian]

I have not heard the Comey interview. I've been extremely busy. If he made petty shots at Trump, then he is in the wrong as well.

I haven't either, just checked the news. It's been all over the place in every story about the interview. Probably heard the comments 25 times since the interview.

But I am glad you often come down on those insulting Trump's appearance on these boards. You've been very strong in that area.

 

[HankD]

So, $130,000 was paid to Stormy Daniels by Michael Cohen, for what purpose?

I don't know neither do you.
You should ask him, not me.

 

[Calminian]

I'm wondering what happened to the Russian investigation. Remember that, ITL?

 

[HankD]

I am happy to wait and see. Others around here (including you) are spinning all sorts of theories and rushing to judgments about how this is a "deflection - a smokescreen" (your words) and that "[a]fter multi millions of taxpayer dollars Mueller still has nothing" (a charge that you cannot know whether or not is true since he hasn't issued a report).

You have also stated that this is a "nothing burger" and that "Mueller violated the constitutional right of protection from illegal search and seizure along with all those who put their stamp of approval on it."

Yet you scold me for 'rushing to judgment' for stating allegations and facts that publicly known? Sorry. You have already pronounced judgment on the Mueller investigation without it having come to a conclusion and having the report submitted to the Deputy Attorney General.

I know you are a fundamentally decent person, but I think you are deceiving yourself regarding your objectivity here. You are making some huge claims without substantiation. That's okay, but don't claim others are "rushing to judgment" for analyzing the facts and allegations of the case that are publicly available that don't lead to the same judgments you have already made.

OK in this case I will cede - It is my opinion. However I believe time will tell that it is not I who rushed to judgement.

Think about it - you may be next somewhere down the line to have your fundamental rights compromised.

You condemned an individual (by innuendo - "What does that say about the President?") before all the facts were shown.

We will both answer for this at the Bema.

 

[InTheLight]

I don't know neither do you.
You should ask him, not me.

I don't have to ask Cohen. Michael Cohen has already said it was paid as hush money. He says he did it for his client Donald Trump without Trump's knowledge.

 

[InTheLight]

I'm wondering what happened to the Russian investigation. Remember that, ITL?

I'm wondering what's in the recordings the FBI took out of Cohen's office. Apparently he was very Nixon-like about making audio recordings. Maybe Hannity is on one of them. HA!

 

[carpro]

This is another one of those non news items that gets blown all out of proportion.

Who really cares if Hannity was or was not Cohen's client? It makes no difference at all.

Because it means so little, this thread may go 10 pages.