It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Feds probing how Stormy lawyer got Cohen’s banking info

page: 10
33
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 10 2018 @ 09:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen





He seems very involved with her; almost like
they are having an affair. Is he married?

Is she still married?

Creepy vibes.




posted on May, 10 2018 @ 10:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

OK, let's turn this around... there have apparently been rumors that Avernatti is not fully disclosing who is paying for his services. Can Cohen subpoena all of Avernatti's bank records? Michael Cohen is both an attorney and a litigant in the case.

As I read the link you provided, it's just not making sense that an attorney can issue a subpoena without any oversight, which is what the third-party subpoena explanation seems to suggest. However, since all subpoenas must originate from a court per FRCP 45(a)(1)(A)(i), it does make sense that either a court clerk or an attorney before the court may issue a subpoena with approval of the presiding judge. I think that is what we may be missing.

I'm still reading, but here is FRCP 45.

TheRedneck



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 10:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Grambler




Again, how would this subpoena get info from multiple banks
Each bank which responded would have received its own subpoena, I would think.


Would this subpoena be given to every bank in the world, with just the name “Michael Cohen” with no ss number, middle name, or any other identifying markers given?
Probably not.

Would not these very protestations apply to subpoenas from Mueller?


Yes they would. Which is why I doubt this was info obtained through subpeonas.

For it to be subpeonas from anyone (strmy lawyer, mueller etc.) that would mean that tey would have had to gone out to many many banks, and multiple of those banks would have had to make mistakes and gave info on the wrong person out.

My guess is that this more likely came from searching some sort of database of records for transactions for micheal Cohen, and getting results that way.

And I would guess the only legal way for that to happen would have to be a government agency.



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 10:23 PM
link   
Avenatti exposed!

About that 5 million dollars he owes in unpaid Federal Taxes....



the outspoken lawyer has been a central figure in dozens of lawsuits over the last four years related to the cult Seattle-based chain Tully's Coffee. Avenatti purchased Tully's out of bankruptcy in 2013, in partnership with actor Patrick Dempsey, who is best known for his role as Derek "McDreamy" Shepherd in the TV show "Grey's Anatomy." Dempsey sued Avenatti in August 2013 to break off the partnership.


www.businessinsider.com...



Since his investment firm bought bankrupt Tully’s Coffee for $9.15 million at auction five years ago, Avenatti’s company has been named in more than 50 state and federal legal complaints, including commercial lawsuits, breach of lease actions and warrants for unpaid taxes, court records show.

All the while, Tully’s has shuttered store after store — from Everett to Bellevue, Tacoma to Seattle, and beyond — with employees left in limbo, landlords left unpaid and customers left holding now seemingly worthless loyalty cards.
www.americanthinker.com...



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 10:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: bulwarkz

Or a third party subpoena from Avanatti.

So how does that get multiple peoples records using the name Michael Cohen? Different banks even if I am not mistaken.
This part of it is so out of place I am convinced this "evidence" was planted for them to find.
And if they got it from Michael Cohens own files in his office it would explain the confidence Avenetti had in the info where he went public before vetting it.

It is almost exactly the sting they ran where Gen. Kelly left his cell phone behind accidentily on purpose. They tracked leakers.
I think Avenetti got stung on this. The info he got most likely came from sources that are now tracked. I see a sophisticated sting manifesting itself publicly irt.



posted on May, 10 2018 @ 11:31 PM
link   
a reply to: burntheships

Some connections coming out about both being part of the NXVIM scandals.

Wait for a coming bombshell soon.

😉



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 12:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler


My guess is that this more likely came from searching some sort of database of records for transactions for micheal Cohen, and getting results that way.

I agree it sounds on the surface like a database search.

The big question is, what government agency has that kind of information? Who has the bank records of all citizens, including deposits down to as low as $980? I certainly don't know of any, and if they do exist, what is the purpose of SAR reports of the information already exists in even greater detail?

And if it's not government... who has that database? Who knows every transaction every person makes?

TheRedneck



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 01:07 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

The Treasury, they are the only department to
hold such records.

Now, if someone from the Treasury gave these records
to Mueller's team, who then leaked them to Avenatti
that might make the most sense.



posted on May, 11 2018 @ 01:43 AM
link   
a reply to: burntheships

The Treasury has access to SARs... but under $10k? One of the (lower) deposits were in the amount of $980... that's less than 10% of the SAR threshold.

And if Mueller leaked them to Avenatti... why is Mueller collecting financial records on the wrong Michael Cohen?

TheRedneck



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: bulwarkz

Why are you making a big deal out of a couple of records that didn't belong there?



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Yeah I'm married to one.



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 10:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: bulwarkz

Why are you making a big deal out of a couple of records that didn't belong there?



Are you being sarcastic?



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 11:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: bulwarkz

Why are you making a big deal out of a couple of records that didn't belong there?



Are you being sarcastic?

Nope, she is serious.
It's Silly!



posted on May, 12 2018 @ 11:06 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join