Feds probing how Stormy lawyer got Cohen’s banking info

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: bulwarkz

Using your logic he is a complete idiot.

Actually, I think he's quite bright.
Certainly not stupid enough to publicly disseminate illegally obtained information.

And now we wait.
Genius or dupe. He has no middle ground, that is for sure.
For me it wrecks the idea stormy is a Trump plant from the get go though. I have a hard time thinking she can put it over the lawyers for this long. But the intitrumpers can be so rabid they might be too busy making it up to recognize she is making it up. They might not care at all and suspect she made it all up.

a reply to: bulwarkz

Yea...


They are different people and that is why att, exc have all admitted to giving him money instead of saying “wrong Cohen” lol:

a reply to: Phage

It seems illegal to me for him to release unconnected data gotten as part of the investigation into Daniels..


That is why I am thinking avanetti is a middleman.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: burntheships

1% inaccurate and 99% accurate. So let's focus on the 1%

Where did you get your figure from, Avenati who is lying and caught
disseminating fake and inaccurate information?

More like 66% inaccuruate. Oh, there is that 66 number, so it must
be more like 666. This means Avenatti is associated with Satan.

Well, in any case, what difference does any of this make? Because
the Angry Democrats lost and now engage in hate jumping.

Anyone associated with Trump - Bad....

LOL, what a way to live your life!?

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Keep a list of your targets and see how far you have strayed
from the original. The msm keeps moving your goal posts
and you guys follow them like sheep.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

It seems illegal to me for him to release unconnected data gotten as part of the investigation into Daniels..

The Supreme Court ruled in 1976 that bank deposit records are not subject to privacy rules.

(b) There is no legitimate "expectation of privacy" in the contents of the original checks and deposit slips, since the checks are not confidential communications, but negotiable instruments to be used in commercial transactions, and all the documents obtained contain only information voluntarily conveyed to the banks and exposed to their employees in the ordinary course of business.

supreme.justia.com...


The banks might have reason to complain. Cohen, it seems, not so much. And all he's done is said, "Not everything on that list is right."

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: bulwarkz

Yea...


They are different people and that is why att, exc have all admitted to giving him money instead of saying “wrong Cohen” lol:

I do not think you are aware it is admitted there are 2 different Michael Cohen bank records involved.
Unless you are saying ATT is named Michael Cohen too.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Oh.

Never mind. (Said in my very best Emily Litella impersonation)

Looking more and more like this guy Michael Avenatti is a real piece of work.

Big ties to Democrat operations and what not.

Who is paying Michael Avenatti?

😀

a reply to: xuenchen

An Op-ed? Is that supposed to be news?

a reply to: xuenchen

You know who else has big ties to democrat operations and what not?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: xuenchen

You know who else has big ties to democrat operations and what not?

Maybe YOU do eh?

😀

So who was in Prague?

Was that Page?

Lot of people with the same names hanging around.

Will the real Michael Cohen please stand up!

originally posted by: xuenchen
Looking more and more like this guy Michael Avenatti is a real piece of work.

Big ties to Democrat operations and what not.

Who is paying Michael Avenatti?

😀

Lets see his list of "clients" too. Maybe he is having nookie nookie
with the Daniels er um...lady? Shady lady?

The evidence it appears was acquired legally by Mueller. Just because Avenati leaked it does not mean it cannot be used as evidence in a trial. if they were able seat a jury with OJ they can seat a jury here as well, although I expect Cohen will plea.

originally posted by: sligtlyskeptical
The evidence it appears was acquired legally by Mueller. Just because Avenati leaked it does not mean it cannot be used as evidence in a trial. if they were able seat a jury with OJ they can seat a jury here as well, although I expect Cohen will plea.

Absolutely no chance!
No way Muellar leaked bank info for 2 Michael Cohens intimating they were the same person.

I am betting it being NYPD/DA. It happened recent enough for the info to not to have been vetted.

a reply to: bulwarkz

Or a third party subpoena from Avanatti.

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: xuenchen
Looking more and more like this guy Michael Avenatti is a real piece of work.

Big ties to Democrat operations and what not.

Who is paying Michael Avenatti?

Lets see his list of "clients" too. Maybe he is having nookie nookie
with the Daniels er um...lady? Shady lady?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: bulwarkz

Or a third party subpoena from Avanatti.

Again, how would this subpoena get info from multiple banks, some of which provided info all the wrong Michael cohens?

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?

That seem very highly improbable.

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?