The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: Emjay on July 30, 2018, 05:19:13 pm
-
George Washington University law professor and legal expert Jonathan Turley said Monday that President Trump's former personal attorney Michael Cohen flipping could mean that the president is "one witness away from a potential catastrophe."
“I think the Cohen development is very serious,†Turley, who is an opinion contributor at The Hill, said on MSNBC's "Morning Joe." “He’s one witness away from a potential catastrophe. If any of those five witnesses breaks and supports Michael Cohen, this will get real bad, real fast."
Turley made the remarks just days after CNN reported that Cohen said Trump knew of a 2016 Trump Tower meeting between his son and a Kremlin-connected lawyer ahead of time.
Turley added that "it’s not that the meeting will establish a crime of collusion, even if what Cohen is saying is true, but what it would mean is that Donald Trump Jr. would be in serious jeopardy of a criminal charge."
http://thehill.com/homenews/399489-msnbc-legal-expert-cohen-flipping-puts-trump-one-witness-away-from-catastrophe (http://thehill.com/homenews/399489-msnbc-legal-expert-cohen-flipping-puts-trump-one-witness-away-from-catastrophe)
-
Turley has been wrong on his last 100 predictions. FYI.
-
George Washington University law professor and legal expert Jonathan Turley said Monday that President Trump's former personal attorney Michael Cohen flipping could mean that the president is "one witness away from a potential catastrophe."
“I think the Cohen development is very serious,†Turley, who is an opinion contributor at The Hill, said on MSNBC's "Morning Joe." “He’s one witness away from a potential catastrophe. If any of those five witnesses breaks and supports Michael Cohen, this will get real bad, real fast."
Turley made the remarks just days after CNN reported that Cohen said Trump knew of a 2016 Trump Tower meeting between his son and a Kremlin-connected lawyer ahead of time.
Turley added that "it’s not that the meeting will establish a crime of collusion, even if what Cohen is saying is true, but what it would mean is that Donald Trump Jr. would be in serious jeopardy of a criminal charge."
http://thehill.com/homenews/399489-msnbc-legal-expert-cohen-flipping-puts-trump-one-witness-away-from-catastrophe (http://thehill.com/homenews/399489-msnbc-legal-expert-cohen-flipping-puts-trump-one-witness-away-from-catastrophe)
Real bad, real fast.... how? What criminal charge? I'm so confused. Even IF collusion could be proven re: Trump Jr....... at the risk of quoting Rudi, collusion isn't illegal. If it were, Hillary and Obama would be doubly guilty..... leftist double-standard of justice aside.
This sounds like more of the ssdd 'wishful thinking' by the "hate all things Trump" crowd.
-
Real bad, real fast.... how? What criminal charge? I'm so confused. Even IF collusion could be proven re: Trump Jr....... at the risk of quoting Rudi, collusion isn't illegal. If it were, Hillary and Obama would be doubly guilty..... leftist double-standard of justice aside.
This sounds like more of the ssdd 'wishful thinking' by the "hate all things Trump" crowd.
I think it is. I once thought Turley was a fairly even-handed guy but he has Trump Madness Fever.
-
I think it is. I once thought Turley was a fairly even-handed guy but he has Trump Madness Fever.
Yeah, that’s why he wrote an article saying Trump did not obstruct justice by firing Comey. *****rollingeyes*****
http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2018/05/31/turley-trump-did-not-obstruct-justice-by-firing-james-comey.html (http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2018/05/31/turley-trump-did-not-obstruct-justice-by-firing-james-comey.html)
-
Yeah, that’s why he wrote an article saying Trump did not obstruct justice by firing Comey. *****rollingeyes*****
http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2018/05/31/turley-trump-did-not-obstruct-justice-by-firing-james-comey.html (http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2018/05/31/turley-trump-did-not-obstruct-justice-by-firing-james-comey.html)
So, what criminal charge, exactly, would Trump Jr. be in danger of being charged with? What's he talking about?
-
Real bad, real fast.... how? What criminal charge? I'm so confused. Even IF collusion could be proven re: Trump Jr....... at the risk of quoting Rudi, collusion isn't illegal. If it were, Hillary and Obama would be doubly guilty..... leftist double-standard of justice aside.
This sounds like more of the ssdd 'wishful thinking' by the "hate all things Trump" crowd.
Andrew McCarthy explains the difference between collusion and conspiracy. This is the crux of his article, but the rest of it is worth a read.
Now, there may be all kinds of contacts between Trump people and operatives of the Russian government that can be called “collusion†with literal accuracy. But the one that would be of interest to prosecutors, under the circumstances as we understand them, is the cyber-espionage conspiracy. Patently, that kind of collusion (which I usually try to not refer to as “collusion†because of the confusion that ambiguous term causes), would be an impeachable offense.
Let’s turn to other species of collusion. There is, to my mind, undeniable evidence that the Trump campaign hoped and attempted to get dirt on Hillary Clinton — what is euphemistically known as “opposition research†— from Kremlin-connected people. I am not in the politics biz. Nor am I a babe in the woods unacquainted with the reality that many (most?) politicians are delighted to receive compromising information about their opponents and not fastidious about the source. Nevertheless, I personally believe it is reprehensible for an American political campaign knowingly to seek or accept opposition research from foreign governments, particularly hostile foreign governments.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/andrew-mccarthy-collusion-comments-fox-news-clarification/ (https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/andrew-mccarthy-collusion-comments-fox-news-clarification/)
On top of that, you have the possibility that Don Jr communicated this meeting to his father before and after it occurred. That’s important, because he gave Congressional testimony that he did not. Add to that, the dictated statement by Trump and obfuscation around that. Ultimately, that could lead to obstruction.
-
Andrew McCarthy explains the difference between collusion and conspiracy. This is the crux of his article, but the rest of it is worth a read.
Now, there may be all kinds of contacts between Trump people and operatives of the Russian government that can be called “collusion†with literal accuracy. But the one that would be of interest to prosecutors, under the circumstances as we understand them, is the cyber-espionage conspiracy. Patently, that kind of collusion (which I usually try to not refer to as “collusion†because of the confusion that ambiguous term causes), would be an impeachable offense.
Let’s turn to other species of collusion. There is, to my mind, undeniable evidence that the Trump campaign hoped and attempted to get dirt on Hillary Clinton — what is euphemistically known as “opposition research†— from Kremlin-connected people. I am not in the politics biz. Nor am I a babe in the woods unacquainted with the reality that many (most?) politicians are delighted to receive compromising information about their opponents and not fastidious about the source. Nevertheless, I personally believe it is reprehensible for an American political campaign knowingly to seek or accept opposition research from foreign governments, particularly hostile foreign governments.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/andrew-mccarthy-collusion-comments-fox-news-clarification/ (https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/andrew-mccarthy-collusion-comments-fox-news-clarification/)
Seems to me.... the main problem with that line of reasoning..... ie the one where they hope to pin "conspiracy" (vs. collusion) on Trump and/or on Trump Jr......
is that if the Trump team was guilty of conspiracy based on "opposition research" against their opponents....
that would also apply (in spades) to the Hillary team.... since it was the Hillary team that created the fake/phony dossier that kicked off this entire clusterfux in the first place.
Right?
Now, I realize that Hillary, being a DemocRat, is a "special person".... as all of her team is.... and therefore, above the law that anyone else is expected to adhere to and follow. But if the left tries to nail Trump on this... wouldn't that mean Hillary gets nailed too by osmosis? So confused here. :shrug:
-
But if the left tries to nail Trump on this... wouldn't that mean Hillary gets nailed too by osmosis? So confused here. :shrug:
It would probably depend on the material. In the case of the dossier, you have Steele compiling information (however accurate) from sources. However, if a campaign accepted a batch of hacked emails, they’re basically participating in a crime. The DNC emails were enlightening and showed how the primary process was a foregone conclusion. Nevertheless, acquiring them was a criminal act.
-
It would probably depend on the material. In the case of the dossier, you have Steele compiling information (however accurate) from sources. However, if a campaign accepted a batch of hacked emails, they’re basically participating in a crime. The DNC emails were enlightening and showed how the primary process was a foregone conclusion. Nevertheless, acquiring them was a criminal act.
Well...ok. But.... is there any proof anywhere that Trump or Trump Jr. acquired those ... or 'any'... of the DNC emails? I mean, other than by reading them on the internet....lol.
-
Well...ok. But.... is there any proof anywhere that Trump or Trump Jr. acquired those ... or 'any'... of the DNC emails? I mean, other than by reading them on the internet....lol.
I’m using emails as an example, since the missing 30K from her server was part of the campaign. In the email from Goldstone to Don Jr, ‘official documents’ were mentioned. We really don’t know what that entailed.
The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras [a Moscow-based developer who tried to partner with Trump in a hotel project] this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary [Clinton] and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/11/donald-trump-jr-emails-full-text-russia-rob-goldstone (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/11/donald-trump-jr-emails-full-text-russia-rob-goldstone)
-
Turley has been wrong on his last 100 predictions. FYI.
However I expect they have kindled anew, 100 fevers of fresh hope, for remaining #nevertrumpers, from near and far.
-
I’m using emails as an example, since the missing 30K from her server was part of the campaign. In the email from Goldstone to Don Jr, ‘official documents’ were mentioned. We really don’t know what that entailed.
The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras [a Moscow-based developer who tried to partner with Trump in a hotel project] this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary [Clinton] and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/11/donald-trump-jr-emails-full-text-russia-rob-goldstone (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/11/donald-trump-jr-emails-full-text-russia-rob-goldstone)
So, considering the ongoing obstruction and refusal to be 'transparent' by our own members of Congress and of course, by the usual suspect DemocRats.....
it would be highly ironic if they hung something on Trump Jr. over his attempt at total transparency re: these emails. Ironic and extremely unjust.
-
Well...ok. But.... is there any proof anywhere that Trump or Trump Jr. acquired those ... or 'any'... of the DNC emails? I mean, other than by reading them on the internet....lol.
Cohen has already testified under oath that he was unaware of any connection Trump had with Russian sources in the context of the election. So we're left with which Cohen to believe - the one under oath or the one having his nuts pinched by Mueller and trying to stay out of prison.
-
Cohen has already testified under oath that he was unaware of any connection Trump had with Russian sources in the context of the election. So we're left with which Cohen to believe - the one under oath or the one having his nuts pinched by Mueller and trying to stay out of prison.
You can bet your sweet bippy that "they" will choose to believe the one that has his short hairs in a firm Mueller grip.
-
You can bet your sweet bippy that "they" will choose to believe the one that has his short hairs in a firm Mueller grip.
This 'investigation' is less about preparing a case that'll measure up to any kind of real legal standard than it is about generating a steady stream of headlines suggesting wrongdoing, however likely or unlikely, in an effort to drive popular opinion & win seats for the democrats.
Which would be the next best thing for them to successfully impeaching Trump.
-
This 'investigation' is less about preparing a case that'll measure up to any kind of real legal standard than it is about generating a steady stream of headlines suggesting wrongdoing, however likely or unlikely, in an effort to drive popular opinion & win seats for the democrats.
Which would be the next best thing for them to successfully impeaching Trump.
Yep. It's the usual leftist media drip, drip, drip attempt to destroy political careers of their opposition (death by a thousand cuts style). And they figure at the very least, if not impeachment success, they might sway enough voters to pave their way (they think) for a win in 2020. Thing is... they are going the exact opposite way they would need to go in order to do that. I love it!!!
-
So, considering the ongoing obstruction and refusal to be 'transparent' by our own members of Congress and of course, by the usual suspect DemocRats.....
it would be highly ironic if they hung something on Trump Jr. over his attempt at total transparency re: these emails. Ironic and extremely unjust.
The material Veselnitskaya brought with her was a memo regarding activities of Bill Browder while in Russia. Oddly enough, those activities were part of the ‘incredible offer’ Putin discussed with Trump in Helsinki. In the time between the campaign and now, we’ve learned more about her ties to the Russian government. It’s pretty clear she was there representing Kremlin interests at the time. This was a meeting that should have never been considered, much less taken.
https://www.businessinsider.com/veselnitskaya-memo-trump-tower-russia-meeting-2017-10 (https://www.businessinsider.com/veselnitskaya-memo-trump-tower-russia-meeting-2017-10)
https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/27/emails-lawyer-who-met-trump-jr-tied-to-russian-off/ (https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/27/emails-lawyer-who-met-trump-jr-tied-to-russian-off/)
-
The material Veselnitskaya brought with her was a memo regarding activities of Bill Browder while in Russia. Oddly enough, those activities were part of the ‘incredible offer’ Putin discussed with Trump in Helsinki. In the time between the campaign and now, we’ve learned more about her ties to the Russian government. It’s pretty clear she was there representing Kremlin interests at the time. This was a meeting that should have never been considered, much less taken.
https://www.businessinsider.com/veselnitskaya-memo-trump-tower-russia-meeting-2017-10 (https://www.businessinsider.com/veselnitskaya-memo-trump-tower-russia-meeting-2017-10)
https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/27/emails-lawyer-who-met-trump-jr-tied-to-russian-off/ (https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/27/emails-lawyer-who-met-trump-jr-tied-to-russian-off/)
My impression of that Russian thing/meeting... was that, aside from it being a big nothing-burger (pardon leftie meme).... it was a 'setup' intended to trap Trump or anyone connected to him. And Trump Jr. acted appropriately, probably seeing the trap for what it was.
Nobody can convince me that Putin or "the Kremlin" wanted Trump in the WH ... or ever expected him to be. That stretches even my rather fertile imagination. It was all a "gotcha" campaign by the Hillary & Co. side. One that, thankfully, failed miserably.
-
My impression of that Russian thing/meeting... was that, aside from it being a big nothing-burger (pardon leftie meme).... it was a 'setup' intended to trap Trump or anyone connected to him. And Trump Jr. acted appropriately, probably seeing the trap for what it was.
Nobody can convince me that Putin or "the Kremlin" wanted Trump in the WH ... or ever expected him to be. That stretches even my rather fertile imagination. It was all a "gotcha" campaign by the Hillary & Co. side. One that, thankfully, failed miserably.
IMO, they had no real investment in who won, they just wanted to get involved to stir things up and cause trouble. In either case, you were going to have residual accusations of Russian involvement. In her case, it would be Uranium One. Their ultimate goal was to cause division and with two polarizing candidates, the groundwork was already there.
-
IMO, they had no real investment in who won, they just wanted to get involved to stir things up and cause trouble. In either case, you were going to have residual accusations of Russian involvement. In her case, it would be Uranium One. Their ultimate goal was to cause division and with two polarizing candidates, the groundwork was already there.
[/b]
I can agree with that. But I seem to recall something about the Russian bimbo having met with someone on Hillary's team AFTER the Trump Jr. meeting. Ergo, the "gotcha" that failed.
-
Turley has been wrong on his last 100 predictions. FYI.
Sounds a bit hyperbolic to me. :rolling:
A common trait amongst Orange Brigadiers.
-
Sounds a bit hyperbolic to me. :rolling:
A common trait amongst Orange Brigadiers.
Ya think? What if I said using Orange was not only outdated and lazy but hyperbolic as well.
Or maybe constipated.
-
My impression of that Russian thing/meeting... was that, aside from it being a big nothing-burger (pardon leftie meme).... it was a 'setup' intended to trap Trump or anyone connected to him. And Trump Jr. acted appropriately, probably seeing the trap for what it was.
Nobody can convince me that Putin or "the Kremlin" wanted Trump in the WH ... or ever expected him to be. That stretches even my rather fertile imagination. It was all a "gotcha" campaign by the Hillary & Co. side. One that, thankfully, failed miserably.
I agree. This is all over-dramatic imagination or wishful thinking. Didn't happen. Won't happen. Wake me when it's over.
-
Yep. It's the usual leftist media drip, drip, drip attempt to destroy political careers of their opposition (death by a thousand cuts style). And they figure at the very least, if not impeachment success, they might sway enough voters to pave their way (they think) for a win in 2020.
Opposition party wins, followed Impeachment attempts in 1976 and in 2000.
I believe democrats desperately want the power back, and will go all out, to get it.
The McCain-Romney-Ryan-McConnell types of "Republicans," seem inclined to accommodate.
Who on this forum, believes Trump committed "high crimes and misdemeanors," as intended by the Founders?
-
This 'investigation' is less about preparing a case that'll measure up to any kind of real legal standard than it is about generating a steady stream of headlines suggesting wrongdoing, however likely or unlikely, in an effort to drive popular opinion & win seats for the democrats.
Which would be the next best thing for them to successfully impeaching Trump.
Spot on. I’d call the comment insightful except it’s easy to see that’s exactly what’s been going on right before our eyes in slow motion and in living color.
This farcical movie is rated R (for Ridiculous)
-
Ya think? What if I said using Orange was not only outdated and lazy but hyperbolic as well.
Or maybe constipated.
Score.