What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The Russia Investigation: Trump Pardons Flynn (15 Viewers)

Banana - I respect the effort.  But the Trump clan in this forum rarely if even engages substantively on any topic.  Just take a peak in the Great Thread this afternoon:  they are more interested in pot shots, laughing about yelling MAGA in public to get reactions, and where to get cool and knockoff Trump gear.  

I'd recommend not wasting your time.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Banana - I respect the effort.  But the Trump clan in this forum rarely if even engages substantively on any topic.  Just take a peak in the Great Thread this afternoon:  they are more interested in pot shots, laughing about yelling MAGA in public to get reactions, and where to get cool and knockoff Trump gear.  

I'd recommend not wasting your time.
Weird place to get on a soap box about substance.

All this anti Trump clan engaging "substantively" for 2300+ pages on a topic that resulted in... nothing.

A big ole 2300+ page nothing burger.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
How is that an opinion? It wouldn't be hard to verify one way or the other which is not a characteristic of an opinion. Yes/no. Right/wrong. This is the realm of facts.

I'll humor you for a minute on the off chance you actually want to know the truth and aren't just dodging the issue like everyone else. We'll know the answer soon enough. 

Let's try an experiment, you know, like science does to prove things and uncover facts. Unless you don't care about those things, which would hardly make you unusual when it come to Trump. Your choice: 5 minutes to get the facts about Trump and the right-wing media or, as I expect you to do, just dismiss it with a bad attempt at humor ("I hope this explosion made you feel better") and go on your merry way. At least then we'll know what your agenda is and how seriously to take your posts. 

Go to Fox News (or any other right-leaning site you prefer) and look at their reporting of, say, the Mueller report since we're on that subject (pick a different one if you want, it doesn't matter).

Does it talk about what's in the report or anything BUT what's in the report? Taking sentence fragments out of context like Barr did doesn't count. In fact, that's evidence the other way.

Does it talk about the 10 instances of potential obstruction in the report or just that Mueller didn't indict him (conveniently leaving out that he couldn't)?

Does it talk about the 100+ times Trump's campaign had contact with Russians or Russian affiliates or does it leave that out and simply state that nobody was indicted? If the latter, does it include that he didn't indict Don Jr. because he couldn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Don Jr. knew he was breaking the law (because he did, in fact, break the law)? Or that getting to the truth about Russia was impossible because Trump officials lied to him and destroyed evidence?

I haven't looked at Fox News and don't have to know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it'll be full Republican politicians and pundits claiming that Mueller's testimony will be good for Trump, embarrassing for Democrats, and proof that the investigation was rigged or somehow unfair to the President. 

They won't talk about about what Mueller's actually said or written or if they do it will be done in a manner such to misconstrue the obvious, original meaning of his words. 

Fair enough?

Go get 'em tiger. Surprise me. 
Honey.....The media is biased.  This isn't new news.   

 
100s of pages beyond.  And people died in Benghazi. 
And Russia did interfere in the elections.

The events happened.

Pinning them on Clinton and Trump were pure partisan endeavors clearly destined to fail from the start. Ie nothing burgers.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And Russia did interfere in the elections.

The events happened.

Pinning them on Clinton and Trump were pure partisan endeavors clearly destined to fail from the start.
Or because ot was determined the Russian efforts were to help trump...and Trump campaign  met with Russians and lied over and over about those multiple meetings?  We could easily go kn and on to shown that it wasn't nothing...but you won't ever agree .  

 
Or because ot was determined the Russian efforts were to help trump...and Trump campaign  met with Russians and lied over and over about those multiple meetings?  We could easily go kn and on to shown that it wasn't nothing...but you won't ever agree .  
There is no longer a debate.

Like Beghazi, the Mueller nothing burger has been sitting out so long it is getting cold.

Waste of time confirmed.

 
Right, so put him on ignore. He's desperately in need of attention. Please don't give him anymore. TIA
:lmao:

Someone that knows how to do so please share my posting frequency in this place alongside Bucky's.

I would be willing to bet Bucky has as many posts in this thread alone as I do in the PSF combined.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is no longer a debate.

Like Beghazi, the Mueller nothing burger has been sitting out so long it is getting cold.

Waste of time confirmed.
There was never a debate for those who believed Trump, who thought Mueller was a democrat, that it was a hoax, a witch hunt, a nohting burger, that trump had "nothing to do with Russia!", who accepted his lies at every step of the way, and now continue to do so by writing off a report they've never read, and saying it now shows there was nothing there.

 
There was never a debate for those who believed Trump, who thought Mueller was a democrat, that it was a hoax, a witch hunt, a nohting burger, that trump had "nothing to do with Russia!", who accepted his lies at every step of the way, and now continue to do so by writing off a report they've never read, and saying it now shows there was nothing there.
Please refer to my definition of nothing burger posted ad nauseam.

You seem to be talking about something else.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes...a waste of time convincing someone who won't even look at the facts.
Please see "nothing burger" again .. you seem to be hung up on rehashing all the ingredients that made the nothing burger.

That part is over.  It is out of the oven, plated.  Just sitting there.  A symbol of all the wasted time and energy.

 
Please see "nothing burger" again .. you seem to be hung up on rehashing all the ingredients that made the nothing burger.

That part is over.  It is out of the oven, plated.  Just sitting there.  A symbol of all the wasted time and energy.
Your opinion that runs contrary to the facts is noted.

 
I am curious as to whether, politically, Meuller can get away with stating flatly "The investigation found both collusion and obstruction -- it just wasn't actionable."
What do you mean? He doesn't hold a political office regardless of what some might think.
I know ... I just mean, really is there any real negative fallout or unintended negative effect if Meuller does spell it out that plainly to Congress. Just for the purpose of shutting up (or attempting to) all the "No collusion, no obstruction!" cries.

"Politically" as in "political (public relations) considerations (esp negtive ones) for anyone allied against Trump." And maybe reputationally for Meuller, too -- does he remain above reproach if he essentially adds a verbal addendum to his team's report? I'm thinking he probably does, but I don't know all the ins and outs, and I don't know where all the shoes drop. That's what I was getting at.

 
I know ... I just mean, really is there any real negative fallout or unintended negative effect if Meuller does spell it out that plainly to Congress. Just for the purpose of shutting up (or attempting to) all the "No collusion, no obstruction!" cries.

"Politically" as in "political (public relations) considerations (esp negtive ones) for anyone allied against Trump." And maybe reputationally for Meuller, too -- does he remain above reproach if he essentially adds a verbal addendum to his team's report? I'm thinking he probably does, but I don't know all the ins and outs, and I don't know where all the shoes drop. That's what I was getting at.
Given his candor and respect for the process, I can't see Mueller being so blunt.

There was plenty of collusion and the Meuller report is filled with instances of it, but collusion isn't a crime and it's a made up word that has no legal significance.  It's ugly politics, and it's taking advantage of criminally obtained information, but what legally matters is that there was no criminal conspiracy involving the Trump administration because they weren't involved in the underlying crime (i.e. the hacking).  I'd imagine much of Meuller's testimony will focus on this distinction and there will be many questions asked about Team Trump's extraordinary efforts to acquire this criminally-obtained information.

As for obstruction, I'd imagine similar questions on Trump's extraordinary efforts to suppress and hinder the investigation.  No matter how many specific instances of obstruction are raised, Mueller will testify that DOJ policy (that's all it is) forbids him from prosecuting a sitting President and the remedy, if there is one, is political.  I doubt Mueller goes so far as to say the Trump committed a crime, but he will likely be pressed with "But for the fact that he is a sitting President, did probable cause exist for charging the President with obstruction of justice?  If so, how many separate counts of obstruction were supported by that probable cause?"  I look forward to his answers.  

 
Please see "nothing burger" again .. you seem to be hung up on rehashing all the ingredients that made the nothing burger.

That part is over.  It is out of the oven, plated.  Just sitting there.  A symbol of all the wasted time and energy.
You probably should just post nothing burger a couple more times, maybe that'll help?

 
New Cohen documents reveal calls with Trump, National Enquirer publisher before payment
 

President Donald Trump and his campaign may have had prior knowledge of a deal to silence Stormy Daniels, the adult film actress who allegedly engaged in an extra-marital affair with the then-presidential candidate in the weeks leading up the 2016 election, newly-unsealed court records suggest.

In unredacted search warrant documents revealed Thursday, an FBI special agent described a series of phone calls in October of 2016 between the president’s former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, the president’s then-campaign press secretary, Hope Hicks, and Trump himself.

In between calls with Hicks and Trump – one of which was a three-way phone conversation – Cohen communicated by text and phone with two executives at American Media Inc., publisher of The National Enquirer, at times immediately afterwards. In those discussions, Cohen repeatedly invoked the name “Keith,” referring to Keith Davidson, the lawyer representing adult film-star Stormy Daniels.

The content of these communications is not made explicit by the FBI agent, but the timing suggests the group was discussing the hush-payment deal with Daniels.

In a footnote in the documents, the FBI special agent says Hicks later told investigators that “to the best of her recollection, she did not learn about the allegations made by Clifford until early November 2016. Hicks was not specifically asked about this three-way call.”

During her testimony before Congress last month, Hicks denied ever being present during conversations between Cohen and Trump about Daniels, or ever having direct knowledge of Cohen's payments to Daniels.

Two sources familiar with the probe told ABC News neither Hicks nor anyone else would be charged in the as it relates to the investigation in the Southern District of New York.

These new revelations come from a cache of documents unsealed on Thursday after the judge in Cohen's case ordered prosecutors to make public some documents related to Cohen's campaign finance violations, which he pleaded guilty to in August.

The violations to which Cohen pleaded guilty stem from the hush-money agreements which the documents released Thursday show were possibly being discussed by Cohen, Hicks and Trump.

Cohen was sentenced to 3 years in prison for his admitted crimes. He's been in ongoing cooperation with prosecutors since he entered his plea. During his plea hearing, Cohen told the court he had made payments to the women "in coordination and at the direction of a candidate for federal office" who was later identified as Trump.

These new records were unsealed by an order from U.S. Judge William Pauley, who said that "every American" should have the opportunity to "scrutinize" the materials after prosecutors signaled that they had ended their investigation into the Trump Organization's involvement in the hush money payments.

"The campaign finance violations discussed in the materials are a matter of national importance," Judge Pauley said, denying the government's request for limited redactions.

The government confirmed the conclusion of the its investigation in a letter filed Thursday.

On Wednesday, after Judge Pauley suggested that the government’s probe had concluded, the president's attorney, Jay Sekulow, said the president’s legal team was “pleased” by the news.

Cohen's attorney, Lanny Davis, however, expressed displeasure with prosecutors decision to drop the proceedings in his own statement issued Wednesday evening.

“Case closed? Why is Michael Cohen — after all his voluntary cooperation and testimony that Mr. Mueller said was credible and went to “core issues” and all the information and documents he voluntarily provided to prosecutors and to congress — the only member of the Trump company to be prosecuted and imprisoned?" Davis said in the statement. "Especially since prosecutors found that virtually all of Michael’s admitted crimes were done at the direction of and for the benefit of Donald Trump? Why?”

In a statement of his own that he made from prison on Thursday, Cohen said that "as I stated in my open testimony, I and members of The Trump Organization were directed by Mr. Trump to handle the Stormy Daniel`s matter; including making the hush money payment. The conclusion of the investigation exonerating The Trump Organization`s role should be of great concern to the American people and investigated by Congress and The Department of Justice."

During his congressional testimony in February, Cohen testified that he had "pled guilty in federal court to felonies for the benefit of, at the direction of, and in coordination with Individual #1" who is known to be Trump. Trump has denied these claims.

Cohen had previously testified before Congress, and later pleaded guilty to lying about elements of his first testimony.

 
this whole thing is a nothingurger.  @matuski  is right.  It's a northingburger because::

  • the senate is currently controlled by republicans
  • the AG has gone to bat for the president, sweeping the most damning allegations under the rug.
  • senate republicans put party over principle and protect the president.
  • republican citizens put party over the good of the country, led by a complicit quasi-state run media.
  • house democrats can't get their #### together to come up with a unified, effective strategy to deal with the problem.
There really is no other rational way to read the situation.  Hell, Nixon was well on his way to being impeached before he resigned.

The fact that it is a nothingburger says more about our current political climate than the merits of the case.

 
this whole thing is a nothingurger.  @matuski  is right.  It's a northingburger because::

  • the senate is currently controlled by republicans
  • the AG has gone to bat for the president, sweeping the most damning allegations under the rug.
  • senate republicans put party over principle and protect the president.
  • republican citizens put party over the good of the country, led by a complicit quasi-state run media.
  • house democrats can't get their #### together to come up with a unified, effective strategy to deal with the problem.
There really is no other rational way to read the situation.  Hell, Nixon was well on his way to being impeached before he resigned.

The fact that it is a nothingburger says more about our current political climate than the merits of the case.
Can't say I disagree, aside from the most glaring omission (below).  Most of this certainly went into the OBVIOUS observation from day 1 that this would utterly fall flat on its face like Benghazi.

To add:

  • Democrats put party over the good of the country as well, teaching anyone who is paying attention that left = right when it comes to partisanship.  
Nothing burger.

 
teaching anyone who is paying attention that left = right when it comes to partisanship.  
Truly the life lesson learned from this whole experience where our country somehow elected a man like Trump into the most powerful office on the planet.

Brought out the worst in everyone - and to my utter surprise the left's ugly is every bit a match for the right's ugly.  3 years ago I'd have never imagined this truth.

 
Truly the life lesson learned from this whole experience where our country somehow elected a man like Trump into the most powerful office on the planet.

Brought out the worst in everyone - and to my utter surprise the left's ugly is every bit a match for the right's ugly.  3 years ago I'd have never imagined this truth.
You have to be kidding.

 
Prosecutors weighed DOJ policy blocking indictment of a sitting president in closing Trump hush-money probe

>>Federal prosecutors' decision to end an investigation into hush money payments to women claiming affairs with Donald Trump relied at least in part on long-standing Justice Department policy that a sitting president cannot be charged with a crime, a person familiar with the matter said Thursday.

The Justice Department told a federal judge on Monday that it had "effectively concluded" its investigation into efforts to silence the women in the final months of the 2016 campaign, but did not explain why it had done so. Prosecutors have said the payoffs violated a federal law that restricts campaign donations. 

A person familiar with the case, who was not authorized to discuss it publicly, said it was unclear whether prosecutors made a determination that they had sufficient evidence to bring a case against Trump or anyone other than his former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, who pleaded guilty last year. But the Justice Department's opinion that a president cannot be indicted factored into the decision to end the probe, the person said.

Federal prosecutors had repeatedly placed Trump at the center of the effort to silence pornographic actress Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal during the chaotic run-up to the 2016 election. Last year, they alleged in a court filing that Cohen had orchestrated illegal hush-money payments "in coordination with and at the direction of" Trump. And it revealed in unsealed court records on Friday that Trump participated in phone calls about the payments to Daniels. 

The judgment by federal prosecutors in New York to take no further action in the wide-ranging inquiry tracks a decision earlier this year by former special counsel Robert Mueller, who cited the same Justice Department policy when he declined to make a determination about whether Trump's efforts to derail that investigation amounted to a crime. 

The Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel concluded in 2000 that "a sitting President is constitutionally immune from indictment and criminal prosecution." That view has never been tested in court but is binding on federal prosecutors. 

As in the Mueller inquiry, which outlined 10 instances in which Trump sought to thwart the special counsel's inquiry, documents revealed Thursday put then-candidate Trump in middle of a frantic effort to fend off damaging disclosures about his personal conduct just a month before the 2016 election.

In the documents, the FBI described a series of conversations in the days after a leaked Access Hollywood outtake showed Trump boasting about grabbing women by the genitals about preventing Daniels from airing her own claims of having had an affair with Trump years earlier. 

Authorities laid out a timeline of emails, text messages and phone calls – some involving Trump himself – that "concerned the need to prevent" Daniels from going public with her story. 

Trump denied knowledge of the payments after they became public. But the FBI told a judge it had obtained telephone records showing he participated in some of the first conversations about the scheme, which prosecutors have said violated federal campaign finance laws. 

Federal prosecutors said in court filings last year that Cohen orchestrated payments to Daniels and McDougal, "in coordination with and at the direction of" Trump. The documents unsealed Thursday offer the first clear account of the extent of Trump's involvement in that effort, as the Republican nominee's campaign floundered just weeks before the election.

Ultimately, it was Cohen – not Trump – who was charged and convicted for the scheme. He is serving a three-year sentence in federal prison related to tax evasion and the hush-money scheme that amounted to illegal campaign finance violations. He also pleaded guilty to Congress about efforts to build a Trump Tower in Moscow during the 2016 campaign.

"Cohen's commission of two campaign finance crimes on the eve of the 2016 election for president of the United States struck a blow to one of the core goals of the federal campaign finance laws: transparency," prosecutors asserted prior to Cohen's sentencing.

In the same document, however, prosecutors indicated that Cohen was acting on behalf of Trump who they then-described in gauzy law enforcement vernacular as "Individual 1." 

..."I and members of The Trump Organization were directed by Mr. Trump to handle the Stormy Daniels matter; including making the hush money payment,” Cohen said in a statement Thursday. “The conclusion of the investigation exonerating The Trump Organization's role should be of great concern to the American people and investigated by Congress and the Department of Justice.” ...<<

- USA Today.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mookie said:
I doubt Mueller goes so far as to say the Trump committed a crime, but he will likely be pressed with "But for the fact that he is a sitting President, did probable cause exist for charging the President with obstruction of justice?  If so, how many separate counts of obstruction were supported by that probable cause?"  I look forward to his answers.
Mueller explained in his report why he can't answer that question. Since Trump isn't innocent, to answer that question would be to accuse him of a crime, and it would be unfair to accuse him of a crime that he can't be charged with.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Smile
Reactions: Zow
Trump, Cohen Maintained Regular Contact While Hush Payments Were Arranged

Newly public documents describe conversations between Cohen and President Trump concerning payments to two women

***

Donald Trump and his onetime lawyer Michael Cohen were in particularly close contact while Mr. Cohen was working to arrange a hush-payment scheme before the 2016 presidential election, according to newly public documents that provide the most detailed account to date of discussions among members of Mr. Trump’s inner circle in the final weeks of the campaign.

The documents describe in detail the sequence of conversations Mr. Cohen had with Mr. Trump, National Enquirer editor Dylan Howard, American Media Inc. Chief Executive David Pecker and campaign spokeswoman Hope Hicks as he was working to arrange payments to two women who alleged affairs with Mr. Trump, including Stephanie Clifford, a former adult-film actress known professionally as Stormy Daniels. Mr. Trump has denied having the affairs.

“Based on the timing of these calls, and the content of the text messages and emails, I believe that at least some of these communications concerned the need to prevent Clifford from going public, particularly in the wake of the Access Hollywood story,” a Federal Bureau of Investigation agent wrote in an April 2018 affidavit made public Thursday, referring to a tape that was released in October 2016 showing Mr. Trump making lewd comments about women about a decade earlier.

The documents provide the most detailed look yet inside the 18-month investigation that led to the implication of a sitting president in federal crimes and sent Mr. Cohen, Mr. Trump’s lawyer for more than a decade, to prison for three years. While prosecutors said in a December court filing that Mr. Cohen arranged the hush payments at Mr. Trump’s direction, they hadn’t previously made public details of the two men’s communications during that period.

They also revealed panicked efforts to respond to a Wall Street Journal article published days before the 2016 election that made public payments from American Media, the National Enquirer’s publisher, to Karen McDougal, a former Playboy model and one of the women who alleged an affair with Mr. Trump.

Hours before the article published, Mr. Cohen wrote to Mr. Howard, “He’s pissed,” which the affidavit said was a reference to Mr. Trump.

Mr. Cohen was in unusually frequent contact with Mr. Trump as he was working on arranging the payments, routinely calling him minutes after speaking with Mr. Pecker or Mr. Howard about them, according to the agent’s affidavit. When it appeared a deal to buy the silence of Ms. Clifford was going to fall through, Mr. Cohen’s first call after speaking to Ms. Clifford’s lawyer was to Mr. Trump.

On the morning of Oct. 26, 2016, a day before sending $130,000 to Ms. Clifford, Mr. Cohen called Mr. Trump twice. Less than 30 minutes later, Mr. Cohen sent emails to the person who had incorporated the limited-liability companies through which he planned to wire the payment, asking for filing receipts.

On Oct. 28, 2016, after Mr. Cohen had finalized the transaction with Ms. Clifford’s lawyer, Mr. Cohen spoke to Mr. Trump for five minutes.

The frequency of calls between Mr. Cohen and Mr. Trump that month was a marked increase over previous months in 2016, the affidavit said. The pair spoke once a month from May through July, didn’t speak in August and spoke twice in September. In October, they spoke at least five times in three weeks, and Mr. Cohen tried to call his boss on at least another two occasions.

Mr. Trump has denied wrongdoing and has offered varying accounts of whether he was aware of the payments Mr. Cohen arranged during the 2016 election. In November 2018, the Journal published an article documenting Mr. Trump’s extensive involvement in the hush-payment scheme.

Democratic lawmakers on Thursday called for Mr. Trump to face charges for his involvement in the hush-payment scheme. Justice Department policy bars charging a sitting president.

“The inescapable conclusion from all of the public materials available now is that there was ample evidence to charge Donald Trump with the same criminal election law violations for which Michael Cohen pled guilty and is now serving time in prison,” Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Calif.), the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said Thursday.

...The committee’s chairman, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D., N.Y.), in a letter to Ms. Hicks’s attorney on Thursday evening, asked Ms. Hicks to clarify her testimony by Aug. 15.

A spokesman for American Media declined to comment. Lawyers for Mr. Howard and Ms. Hicks didn’t respond to requests for comment.

When the Journal contacted the Trump campaign for comment for the November 2016 article about American Media’s payment to Ms. McDougal, Mr. Cohen had several conversations with Ms. Hicks, Mr. Pecker and Mr. Howard and sought to have Ms. McDougal put out a statement. “We just need her to disappear,” Mr. Howard wrote in a text message to Mr. Cohen, the documents show.

“I think it’ll be ok pal. I think it’ll fade into the distance,” Mr. Howard wrote again to Mr. Cohen of the Journal article, hours before it published.

Mr. Cohen also sent a text to Mr. Pecker: “The boss just tried calling you. Are you free?”

The morning after the Journal article published, Mr. Cohen sent a text to Ms. Hicks saying that the article was “getting little to no traction.” Ms. Hicks responded: “Same. Keep praying!! It’s working!”

Mr. Pecker spoke with Mr. Trump later that morning, according to the affidavit.

U.S. District Judge William H. Pauley III ordered the previously redacted materials to be made public Wednesday, after the Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office advised the court that it had concluded the aspects of its campaign-finance investigation that justified redacting those materials. In a July 15 letter to Judge Pauley, prosecutors said they had also concluded its investigation into whether “certain individuals ... made false statements, gave false testimony or otherwise obstructed justice in connection with this investigation.”

The Journal previously reported that prosecutors were examining discrepancies between Mr. Cohen’s account and that of Allen Weisselberg, Trump Organization’s longtime chief financial officer who testified before a grand jury last summer.

Prosecutors had sought to include certain redactions in Thursday’s materials to protect the privacy of third parties in the investigation, but were rebuffed by Judge Pauley, who said the campaign-finance violations had “weighty public ramifications” and were a “matter of national importance.”

Several of the people mentioned in the documents spoke to investigators, including Ms. Hicks, Mr. Howard and Mr. Pecker, who was granted immunity for his testimony.

According to the affidavit, the FBI justified its April 2018 raid of Mr. Cohen’s home, office and hotel room in part by saying they believed that the search would turn up evidence of communications between Mr. Cohen, Mr. Trump and Trump campaign associates about the hush payments.

Mr. Cohen pleaded guilty in August 2018 to two campaign-finance violations connected to the hush-money payments to Ms. Clifford and Ms. McDougal. Mr. Cohen also pleaded guilty to tax evasion as well as making false statements to banks and to Congress, and began a three-year prison sentence in May.

In the months since his guilty plea, Manhattan federal prosecutors had continued to probe the possible involvement of others at the Trump Organization in Mr. Cohen’s campaign-finance violations. They haven’t disclosed any indictments of any executives at the company.

“The conclusion of the investigation exonerating the Trump Organization’s role should be of great concern to the American people and investigated by Congress and The Department of Justice,” Mr. Cohen said in a statement from prison Thursday.

***

 
Last edited by a moderator:
In January, one month after Cohen was sentenced to three years in prison, prosecutors requested interviews with executives at the company, CNN reported. But prosecutors never followed up on their initial request, people familiar with the matter said, and the interviews never took place.

Meanwhile, there has been no contact between the Manhattan US Attorney's office and officials at the Trump Organization in more than five months, one person familiar with the matter said.
- CNN

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top