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.

 

Michael Cohen: Trump ex-lawyer 'happy' to aid Russia probe

page: 4
11
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Cassi3l

You should really ask yourself first if a guy like Cohen, who already breached every kind of possible CLIENT TRUST ethics, and breached all morality in renaming himself a complete JUDAS and will now attempt to destroy Trump through any kind of dirty play, why you would trust Cohen? Because you hate Trump anyways?

The entire Cohen Circus is an example of someone not to pay any attention to except to be disgusted with such a POS who would betray you in a heartbeat, most likely for a lot of fat pay checks.




posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 06:52 PM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Yeah. After all the help and support Trump gave him as the walls started closing in. How could he do such a thing?



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 07:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

There is no exception / loophole. A foreign national cannot engage with or be engaged by a person / party / US citizen regarding fiances / expenditures on office space for the campaign / party / assistance with getting out the vote / media communications etc.

You are 100% correct on the directly or indirectly.

The other way to know what Clinton / DNC did was illegal was the fact they lied on their FEC filing reports on expenditures. They hid fusiongps activites under Perkins-Coie law firm and then his what perkins-coie was doing by falsely claiming perkins-coie activity as legal services. Marc Elias was Clintons campaign lawyer and he routed the payments thru Clintons superpac who then routed the funds to perkins-coie who routed the funds to fusiongps.

What is legal under FEC laws / rules -
It is legal for a US campaign to do opposition research on an opponent.

What is NOT legal under FEC laws / rules -
* - Concealing payments in FEC reporting on campaign expenditures by reporting the expenditure as something its not - IE claiming payments to perkins-coie were for legal services when it was not.
* - Engaging with foreign nationals in order to beat your opponent.

11 CFR 110.20 Prohibition on contributions, donations, expenditures, independent expenditures, and disbursements by foreign nationals ( 52 U.S.C. 30121, 36 U.S.C. 510).

(a)Definitions. For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:

(1)Disbursement has the same meaning as in 11 CFR 300.2(d).

(2)Donation has the same meaning as in 11 CFR 300.2(e).

(3)Foreign national means -

(i) A foreign principal, as defined in 22 U.S.C. 611(b); or

(ii) An individual who is not a citizen of the United States and who is not lawfully admitted for permanent residence, as defined in 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(20); however,

(iii)Foreign national shall not include any individual who is a citizen of the United States, or who is a national of the United States as defined in 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(22).

(4)Knowingly means that a person must:

(i) Have actual knowledge that the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national;

(ii) Be aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to conclude that there is a substantial probability that the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national; or

(iii) Be aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to inquire whether the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national, but the person failed to conduct a reasonable inquiry.

(5) For purposes of paragraph (a)(4) of this section, pertinent facts include, but are not limited to:

(i) The contributor or donor uses a foreign passport or passport number for identification purposes;

(ii) The contributor or donor provides a foreign address;

(iii) The contributor or donor makes a contribution or donation by means of a check or other written instrument drawn on a foreign bank or by a wire transfer from a foreign bank; or

(iv) The contributor or donor resides abroad.

(6)Solicit has the same meaning as in 11 CFR 300.2(m).

(7)Safe Harbor. For purposes of paragraph (a)(4)(iii) of this section, a person shall be deemed to have conducted a reasonable inquiry if he or she seeks and obtains copies of current and valid U.S. passport papers for U.S. citizens who are contributors or donors described in paragraphs (a)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section. No person may rely on this safe harbor if he or she has actual knowledge that the source of the funds solicited, accepted, or received is a foreign national.

(b)Contributions and donations by foreign nationals in connection with elections. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution or a donation of money or other thing of value, or expressly or impliedly promise to make a contribution or a donation, in connection with any Federal, State, or local election.

(c)Contributions and donations by foreign nationals to political committees and organizations of political parties. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution or donation to:

(1) A political committee of a political party, including a national party committee, a national congressional campaign committee, or a State, district, or local party committee, including a non-Federal account of a State, district, or local party committee, or

(2) An organization of a political party whether or not the organization is a political committee under 11 CFR 100.5.

(d)Contributions and donations by foreign nationals for office buildings. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party for the purchase or construction of an office building. See 11 CFR 300.10 and 300.35.

(e)Disbursements by foreign nationals for electioneering communications. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make any disbursement for an electioneering communication as defined in 11 CFR 100.29.

(f)Expenditures, independent expenditures, or disbursements by foreign nationals in connection with elections. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make any expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement in connection with any Federal, State, or local election.

(g)Solicitation, acceptance, or receipt of contributions and donations from foreign nationals. No person shall knowingly solicit, accept, or receive from a foreign national any contribution or donation prohibited by paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section.

(h)Providing substantial assistance.

(1) No person shall knowingly provide substantial assistance in the solicitation, making, acceptance, or receipt of a contribution or donation prohibited by paragraphs (b) through (d), and (g) of this section.

(2) No person shall knowingly provide substantial assistance in the making of an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement prohibited by paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section.

(i)Participation by foreign nationals in decisions involving election-related activities. A foreign national shall not direct, dictate, control, or directly or indirectly participate in the decision-making process of any person, such as a corporation, labor organization, political committee, or political organization with regard to such person's Federal or non-Federal election-related activities, such as decisions concerning the making of contributions, donations, expenditures, or disbursements in connection with elections for any Federal, State, or local office or decisions concerning the administration of a political committee.

(j)Donations by foreign nationals to inaugural committees. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a donation to an inaugural committee, as defined in 11 CFR 104.21(a)(1). No person shall knowingly accept from a foreign national any donation to an inaugural committee.


Also -
36 USC 510 - Disclosure of and prohibition on certain donations


Considering Clinton / Clinton superpac / DNC and Obama superpac paid perkins-coie who in turn paid a foreign national in exchange for a dossier is a violation. Not only of the law regarding foreign involvement but also a violation of FEC reporting for hiding the payments under perkins-coie as legal services.


edit on 22-8-2018 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

I'm going to say something ridiculous - probably

I keep thinking about that story about Cohen's son's bar mitzvah, and how Trump went out of his way to hurt him. Trump is some special kind of sadistic SOB. Sometimes narcissists lean in that direction

You say Judas - because you think Trump is a good guy?

Hardly anyone is looking good in this story, but it's easy to forget that some of these people are human beings

I kinda feel for Cohen

edit on 8/22/2018 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I am not a lawyer.
But from what boomer posted....
I am interpreting the difference being in who approached who.
If the Russians have approached Don jnr et al making the offer to benefit the Trump campaign with a view to gaining a reciprocal benefit in the future then that looks like it would be illegal. A foreign entity involving themselves directly into a US election, with some hope of receiving something in return.
If Trump had just hired some contractors ( as HRC clearly did ) to gather info on his opponent and paid for their services...then it would be legal ...campaign research. Assuming that it had all been accounted for and reported as per election rules.

Like I say it is just my interpretation



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

I don't read your post as ridiculous at all.
I agree that none of them are coming out as good guys. But I did have a bit of sympathy for Cohen
( who I have no doubt is a sleaze really )
It was a few months back when DJT just dropped him like a hot brick....I had watched a report about how Cohen was being treated pretty crappily by the whole Trump clique.
After the raid and the obvious pressure that was put on him I guess the guy was worried for his family. He had no moves left to make to ensure their safety....Except flip! And sing like a Soprano ! ( see what I did there ? )



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: cosmickat

There should be no sympathy for Cohen. As a lawyer he should know what is legal and what is not.

As for Mueller charging him with the FEC violation for paying money to the woman. It is not a violation. The violation requires the person be involved in politics. The female is not a political entity.

Finally Trump paid with his own funds.



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 07:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

I'm going to say something ridiculous - probably

I keep thinking about that story about Cohen's son's bar mitzvah, and how Trump went out of his way to hurt him. Trump is some special kind of sadistic SOB. Sometimes narcissists lean in that direction

You say Judas - because you think Trump is a good guy?

Hardly anyone is looking good in this story, but it's easy to forget that some of these people are human beings

I kinda feel for Cohen


I don't necessarily think Trump is the "good guy" and never thought of that when replying. I just am calling out the betrayal by Cohen, and that there is nothing in the world that can justify the actions of a betrayer. What Cohen is doing now shows that he simply left the word "Trust" in the last toilet paper he used and flushed the entire concept of trust down his own toilet.
I know that people who hate Trump are loving every minute of this especially the MSM, and are representing Cohen as their savior, when their savior is Judas. That never works out too well for Judas's and followers of a Judas.



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 07:40 PM
link   
I was just about to post on this too. Here are some interesting quotes from an AP article that just came out.


His lawyer, Lanny Davis, on Wednesday suggested that Cohen could tell special counsel Robert Mueller that Trump knew about and encouraged Russian hacking during the 2016 campaign before it became publicly known.

“What I’m suggesting is that Mr. Cohen was an observer and was a witness to Mr. Trump’s awareness of those emails before they were dropped, and it would pertain to the hacking of the email accounts,” Davis told CNN after having hedged that point in earlier television interviews.

Nothing made public so far from Cohen’s criminal case indicates he has agreed to cooperate with prosecutors, but Davis said that was simply a “distinction without a difference.” Cohen is intent on telling the truth to whoever asks him and is “more than happy” to tell Mueller all that he knows, Davis said, calling that pledge, “the functional equivalent of cooperation.”

Cohen forged his new path amid months of scrutiny from federal investigations and a public falling-out with the president, for whom Cohen once said he would “take a bullet.” But what compelled him to take a plea deal and potentially flip on Trump?

Cohen told confidants he was disappointed and angry that Trump and his team — namely his lawyer Rudy Giuliani — had repeatedly bashed his reputation and character.

Cohen suggested that the attacks helped pave the way for his guilty plea and possible cooperation, according to a person who has spoken to the lawyer in the last 24 hours but was not authorized to discuss private conversations and spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.

Associated Press



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 07:44 PM
link   
a reply to: cosmickat

Here is a thread I did on this trying to clarify it.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here is the short version.

Boomer correctly posts that the law was amended in 2002.

However, the law I posted is in fact the post 2002 amended version.

You say thee sticking point is the russians directly giving info.

However, the law is quite clear that giving that info directly or INDIRECTLY is a crime.


(a) Prohibition

It shall be unlawful for-

(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make-

(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;


uscode.house.gov...(title:52%20section:30121%20edition:prelim)

That means going through a third party from the US does not make it legal, because it is now just INDIRECTLY recieving the info.

Hence if don jr., broke the law, hillary and the dnc did as well.



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 07:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: cosmickat

There should be no sympathy for Cohen. As a lawyer he should know what is legal and what is not.

As for Mueller charging him with the FEC violation for paying money to the woman. It is not a violation. The violation requires the person be involved in politics. The female is not a political entity.

Finally Trump paid with his own funds.


I was talking about the Russian / Trump Tower thing before...but since you bring it up...

Trump is just now saying on a Fox interview he paid with his own funds.
After first... on AF1 denying at least twice...probably more.....any knowledge of the payment whatsoever !
Even saying to the reporter.." you will have to ask Michael " !!!

Then his other sleazy lawyer ( truth is not truth ) Giuliani completely screwing up his narrative in another TV interview when he admits that " yeah..he reimbursed Cohen for dealing with the NDA payment. That was the 1st time...if I remember correctly that Trump was " outed " as having known about it.

Then the taped call is released ...and he finally has to own up to having prior knowledge.....after repeatedly denying it for months !
Also..why does he insist that it wasn't out of campaign funds ? How many times? So insistent in making that point.
What else will he finally come clean about I wonder ?
Liar....adulterer....and the rest remains to be seen



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 07:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Feel free to ad that to my thread, I think it is good info!



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 07:46 PM
link   
a reply to: cosmickat

And on the point of trump lying, this may be true.

But it wasnt under oath, and therefore it should not affect the legality of hos actions.

And lets not forget, the dnc and hillary lied for a year about paying for the steele dossier.



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

They probably did. All of them.
They are all corrupt
Just some more than others



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 07:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: cosmickat
a reply to: Grambler

They probably did. All of them.
They are all corrupt
Just some more than others


YES!!!!!

That is the point!

And not just with this law!

I would wager that if you raided every major politicians lawyer in DC tonight, you would be able to charge 95% of them with all sorts of financial crimes.

And it has been this way for years.

Everyone know washington is overrun with foriegn influence and illegal money.

So why is it only trumps team that is having the hammer brought down?

Why when we see that his direct opponent hillary broke the same laws, was she spared?

Why is opnly trumps lawyer raided?

And again I say, chuck schumer gave us all the asnwer.

If you criticze the intel community, they will take you down.

And that is a bigger problem than anything trump or hillary are accused oif.

Thats what I am concerned with. Thats why its impotrtant to call out the double standards, and the abuse by the intel community.

Because they have the power to overthrow any politican in washington.

And even if you do find a squeaky clean politician, like say bernie was (i dont think he was but for the sake of argument)

Well somewhere along the line bernie would have had to deal with someone shady even if he didnt know it.

And so the intel community can go after that person, and get them to flip on bernie.

It is literallly unelected officials controlling our government.

And yet we are told by many, even the media, to call this out hurts the country.



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 08:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12
"all the best people" eh?


At this point I think it's safe to say that Trump does not know the definition of 'best people'.

We can assume, based on who he surrounds himself with, that by 'best' he means 'those that know how to break the law and abuse public trust'.

That he thinks those people are the best is concerning. Actually, we're way past concerning.



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 08:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I get where you are coming from. I have understood your views since I first started reading your posts.

It is nothing new that there are shady govt agencies who will go to extreme lengths to infiltrate and control administrations. The popular term being kicked around is deep state ( hate buzzwords ) but there you go.
This being a conspiracy forum...then not many of the members here would deny that there are levels of shadow government that we mere mortals will never catch a glimpse of.
What their motives are is anybody's guess.
It would be comforting to believe that national security would be at the top of their " to do " list.
So ...yes there are most probably unelected players at work here. I would even go as far as to propose that they are responsible for some of the worst moments in modern history. They pursue their ends..and use whatever means.
Exactly what their motives are regarding Trump is unclear. He certainly rattled the establishment right of the bat ...Sally Yeats..Comey etc
It is probably fair to say that they don't like him much.
If they bring DJT and his administration down then it won't be pretty.

As far as Trump goes....I don't believe that even he expected to win the election. If you recall , he was making pre-emptive noises about it being rigged against him...and how he would refuse to accept the results....weeks before election night.
So it follows from that...that nobody expected DJT to win. But he did. The end.

Russian meddling has already been confirmed. But that alone ...at least imho...would hardly have swung it all the way. Who knows....maybe he just simply hit that sweet spot at the right time.

One thing Trump excels at is Brand Trump. And a whole nation bought it. But his brand is cheesy...made in China...and way overpriced.

Is he guilty of high crimes of the impeachable kind...then I would say yeah..more than likely. Can they prove it ? If he is guilty..then I hope so.
Will DJT attempt to obstruct the investigation ? Absolutely. He is as dodgy as dodgy can get.

I don't like HRC
I don't like DJT

When foreign actors and shady lobbyists are running money through the country's political hub..there are bigger things at stake than " double standards " such as DJT / HRC
That is when you might need a solid and robust justice department and an effective intelligence agency in place. The very things you mistrust atm might be the last line of defence against surreptitious foreign intrusion.

It is way bigger than Trump feeling butthurt about nobody liking him.



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 09:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Cassi3l


If Mueller needed to interview Cohen, it would have been done weeks ago...after the Cohen raids. Mueller doesn't need "permission" to interview anyone.



posted on Aug, 23 2018 @ 04:29 AM
link   

(a) Prohibition

It shall be unlawful for-

(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make-

(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;


The bolded part seems to me to be the crux of the "wrongness" of Juniors' meeting
-implied promise-
That's what pulled him in

Is it really too hard to imagine, to even entertain the idea,
that Junior, all cock-a-hoop, couldn't keep his trap shut ?

"Hey, Dadda, some russian chick has the dirties on ...her who shall not be named"
"Great job son, go get 'em"


Pure supposition on my part of course

Even so, is it really credible to believe that Senior was so far removed from the loop
that he was totally unaware, of a visit to Trump Towers, by "dirt carrying" russians...
Trump Senior would'nt have known ?!
Seriously?

I find it hard to credit

Maybe "he used to be my best friend" Michael Cohen will enlighten us



posted on Aug, 23 2018 @ 06:02 AM
link   
a reply to: cosmickat

But here is where i disagree.

You admit that probably all politicians are guilty of wht you think trump is guilty of.

You admit that the intel agencies are probably bias and only going after trump.

And yet you are willing to side with them, becuas ethey are are last line of defnse against foriegn influence?

It makes no sense.

So according to thaat logic, they oust trump, and then the next person is put in who is corrupt and has foriegn influence.

But the intel agencies will like that person, so now its all ok.

This also ignores that the intel agencies themselves a rife with foriegn influence and corruption.

You are starting from the premise that everyones corrupt, so we need to take down trump.

I am starting from the premise that everyones corrupt, and so we need a non corrupt intel and investigative agency to solve any of that.

And if those agencies are corrupt, it is far worse than anything foriegn influence into one politician or election could be.

Because as we see, a corrupt intel agency would literally be able to oust anyone politician they feel like; maaking all elections meaningless, and ensuring only politicans that support their agenda will be successful.




top topics



 
11
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join