Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

The Russia Investigation: Trump Pardons Flynn


whoknew

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, ren hoek said:

https://twitter.com/ChuckRossDC/status/1087074169026736130

There is an interesting out for Buzzfeed here.  The thinking is that they were briefed on Cohen's testimony from the first meeting, but not the subsequent meetings where he was found 'credible'.  Perhaps Cohen led with big theatrics about incriminating stuff on Trump before dialing it back in later meets.  This pattern fits with Lanny Davis' backpedaling on Cohen's testimony too.  

While their reporting on Cohen/TrumpOrg documents appears to be a huge mischaracterization- their nonexplanation of the conflict in sourcing is an embarrassment- it seems like a plausible explanation for why Buzzfeed was willing to doubledown on it.  :tinfoilhat:

 

How do you know that? I think the vagueness of Mueller's statement makes it very difficult for Buzzfeed to defend itself. What, exactly, is Mueller saying BF got wrong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Don't Noonan said:

Buzzfeed. 

This is where we are, post BF report:

You can leave BF entirely out of all that because all that is from Giuliani or the NYT and WaPo. 

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Apparently Trump did talk to Cohen about his testimony.

See - this is where I wonder how it plays out - did Cohen speak to Trump - or anyone at the White House - about his testimony regarding the Trump Moscow project?

I am assuming he sent his written testimony to the White House - did they have a duty to correct patently false testimony?  At best, it seems they allowed Cohen's testimony to go unchecked - despite knowing it was false - thereby allowing Congress to be misled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cohen statement to Senate Intel Committee:  

"I assume we will discuss the rejected proposal to build a Trump property in Moscow that was terminated in January of 2016; which occurred before the Iowa caucus and months before the very first primary. This was solely a real estate deal and nothing more. I was doing my job. I would ask that the two-page statement about the Moscow proposal that I sent to the Committee in August be incorporated into and attached to this transcript."

 

Still efforting to find the original "two-page statement" on the Moscow proposal.

 

ETA - Full letter to Committee

Edited by Sinn Fein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Piecing together relevant wording from the charges against Cohen - this appears to be from the "two-page statement":

 

4 . In the letter to SSCI and HP SCI , COHEN knowingly and deliberately made the following false representations :

a . The Moscow Project ended in January 2016 and was not discussed extensively with others in the Company. " The proposal was under consideration at the [Company] from September 2015 until the end of January 2016 . By the end of January 2016 , I determined that the proposal was not feasible for a variety of business reasons and should not be pursued further. Based on my business determinations, the [Company] abandoned the [Moscow Project] proposal . To the best of my knowledge , [Individual l] was never in contact with anyone about this proposal other than me on three occasions . I did not ask or brief [Individual 2 l] , or any of his family , before I made the decision to terminate further work on the proposal ."

b . COHEN never agreed to travel to Russia in connection with the Moscow Project and "never considered" asking Individual 1 to travel for the project. "I primarily communicated with the Moscow- based development company  through a U. S . citizen third- party intermediary , [Individual 2] . [ Individual 2] constantly asked me to travel to Moscow as part of his efforts to push forward the discussion of the proposal  I ultimately determined that the proposal was not feasible and never agreed to make a trip to Russia . Despite overtures by [Individual 2] , I never considered asking [Individual l] to travel to Russia in connection with this proposal ."

c . COHEN did not recall any Russian government response or contact about the Moscow Project. " In mid- January 2016 , [Individual 2] suggested that I send an email to [Russian Official l] , the Press Secretary for the President of Russia , since the proposal would require approvals within the Russian government that had not been issued . Those permissions were never provided . I decided to abandon the proposal less than two weeks 3 later for business reasons and do not recall any response to my email , nor any other contacts by me with [Russian Official l] or other Russian government officials about the proposal ."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Mr. Giuliani also acknowledged that Mr. Trump might have talked to Mr. Cohen before his congressional testimony but he said his client had never instructed Mr. Cohen to lie. Mr. Trump acknowledged discussing the Moscow project with Mr. Cohen in written responses that the president gave Mr. Mueller’s investigators days before they revealed that Mr. Cohen had pleaded guilty to lying to Congress.

“There was no question that he was asked by the special counsel a question that said, ‘Did you talk to him before he testified?’” Mr. Giuliani said.

“There were questions like, ‘Did you talk about the Moscow project with Michael Cohen?’ to which we answered yes.”

Later in the day, Mr. Giuliani said he was merely allowing for the possibility that the president and Mr. Cohen could have discussed the Moscow project through the election but that no notes or call logs indicated specific conversations about Russia.

“We’re at Cohen’s mercy for the dates,” Mr. Giuliani said, adding that the president “doesn’t remember the dates. He does remember conversations about Moscow. He does remember the letter of intent. He does remember, after that, fleeting conversations.”

He added that he was trying to keep Mr. Trump from legal exposure if prosecutors uncover evidence of a conversation that the president has said he does not recall.

NYT

- This sounds a lot like the BF report, the main difference being Trump didn't have to tell Cohen to lie as he already knew he would be lying.

 

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

NYT

- This sounds a lot like the BF report.

 

Right. Everyone is ####ting on BF now - I get that. But I think in the end we are going to see that BF's report was pretty darn accurate. 

Now clearly not 100%. Which (obviously) is a problem. But I suspect it should not be getting all the crap it is getting now.

Edited by whoknew
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/8/2018 at 3:56 PM, SaintsInDome2006 said:

The full Telegraph story on the Skripal attempted murder.

>>The Telegraph understands that Col Skripal moved to Salisbury in 2010 in a spy swap and became close to a security consultant employed by Christopher Steele, who compiled the Trump dossier. 

The British security consultant, according to a LinkedIn social network account that was removed from the internet in the past few days, is also based in Salisbury.

On the same LinkedIn account, the man listed consultancy work with Orbis Business Intelligence, according to reports.<<

>>If the Kremlin believed that Col Skripal might have helped with the compilation of the dossier, it could explain the motive for the assassination attempt in Salisbury town centre. Col Skripal’s daughter is also in intensive care, along with a police officer who rushed to help them after they were attacked with nerve agent.

Counter-terrorism police, along with MI5, are trying to establish why Col Skripal was targeted seven years after being released from a Russian penal colony. He was sentenced to 13 years for being a traitor in 2006, but sent to the UK in a swap for Russian spies including Anna Chapman, a British citizen who had been caught spying in the US.<<

- It's maybe just interesting to connect Skripal to the dossier, but purely speculative, I don't know, but I do think that Steele used intermediaries to spy on his key sources.

Update on this - the future Mrs. plorfu tweeted this out:

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1087368999632027648

Link to telegraph article - subscription needed

Quote

Russian intelligence created a false trail linking the double agent Sergei Skripal to the former MI6 officer behind the Trump dossier before carrying out the Salisbury nerve agent attack, the Telegraph has been told.

Well-placed sources now believe that the plot to kill Col Skripal may have included a ‘black ops’ attempt to sow doubt on the veracity of the explosive dossier that claims Donald Trump received Kremlin backing.

The year before the attempted assassination of Col Skripal, a mysterious post on LinkedIn suggested his MI6 handler, who is not being named, worked as a “senior analyst” at Orbis Business Intelligence, the firm that produced the Trump dossier.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, whoknew said:

 

How do you know that? I think the vagueness of Mueller's statement makes it very difficult for Buzzfeed to defend itself. What, exactly, is Mueller saying BF got wrong?

Also, Rachel Maddow was mentioning how Cohen was later charged with an additional count of lying to Congress, but he did not receive any additional sentencing time. The additional filing report mentioned that Mueller had corroborating evidence with which to charge Cohen for lying to Congress. The timing was weird. Cohen had already been sentenced for his illegal payments. So what was the point of this? Her theory... did Mueller charge Cohen with lying to Congress in order to lay the groundwork for Trump's obstruction of justice?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tom Skerritt said:

Also, Rachel Maddow was mentioning how Cohen was later charged with an additional count of lying to Congress, but he did not receive any additional sentencing time. The additional filing report mentioned that Mueller had corroborating evidence with which to charge Cohen for lying to Congress. The timing was weird. Cohen had already been sentenced for his illegal payments. So what was the point of this? Her theory... did Mueller charge Cohen with lying to Congress in order to lay the groundwork for Trump's obstruction of justice?

It's a predicate, like a lot of the other indictments/pleas/convictions, anyone found to have been in conspiracy with the persons doing any one of those things is also chargeable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

I don't think it makes sense that Cohen started out being more incriminating of Trump than where he ended up. Most likely Cohen started out protecting Trump then ended up getting squeezed subsequently.

- eta - I do think it's fair to say that Cohen has gone through a massive emotional and mental transformation and his story likely did change over the seven different proffers described there.

I just remember Lanny Davis coming out gangbusters talking about what might be revealed about Russia.  Then feeding the ‘Cohen willing to testify Trump knew about Trump tower meet’ to media, admitting he was a source for the story, the story falling apart, and then finally settling in on Cohen never going to Prague at all.  He’s denied it emphatically ever since and they’ve maintained this testimony with SCO and senate intel committee. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

I just remember Lanny Davis coming out gangbusters talking about what might be revealed about Russia.  Then feeding the ‘Cohen willing to testify Trump knew about Trump tower meet’ to media, admitting he was a source for the story, the story falling apart, and then finally settling in on Cohen never going to Prague at all.  He’s denied it emphatically ever since and they’ve maintained this testimony with SCO and senate intel committee. 

Kinda couple separate issues here. I don't think Davis is a real lawyer for Cohen, in fact Davis himself has said he's not even on the legal team anymore but even when he was he was a tv spinmeister just like he was for Hillary and Clinton. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Kinda couple separate issues here. I don't think Davis is a real lawyer for Cohen, in fact Davis himself has said he's not even on the legal team anymore but even when he was he was a tv spinmeister just like he was for Hillary and Clinton. 

They both (Trump Tower testimony, Prague) represent significant walkbacks in the collusion angle they were suggesting originally.  Then Cohen blowing up the Prague theory on twitter (Link Link Link Link Link).  Make of that what you like but the tone definitely shifted away from the collusion narrative.  I dunno, it’s an interesting observation about the first vs second->onward sco meetings.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

They both (Trump Tower testimony, Prague) represent significant walkbacks in the collusion angle they were suggesting originally.  Then Cohen blowing up the Prague theory on twitter (Link Link Link Link Link).  Make of that what you like but the tone definitely shifted away from the collusion narrative.  I dunno, it’s an interesting observation about the first vs second->onward sco meetings.  

It’s a fair point. Stories have been promoted by people with different agendas and with different motives. And ‘sources’ can mean a variety of things, how they’re described in a news story is very different, and indeed the reporting on the BF report is itself couched in sources. 

However the Trump Moscow hotel project is definitely a collusion touchpoint. A presidential candidate and then elected president to be was in a $300 million deal with a foreign power, an adversary at that. We still really don’t even know if it ended or if so when.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

MSNBC always qualified after the initial story broke up until the Mueller office statement, with the disclaimer that NBC was not able to independently verify the Buzzfeed sources, nor had any other news outlet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a lawyer but maybe one of you who are can answer my question.  Cohen lied to Congress about the Moscow deal.  Trump obviously had to know he lied unless he's gonna claim he wasn't aware what Cohen said when he testified to Congress.  is there anything incumbent on the President to come forward if he is aware someone is lying to congress on his behalf?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Kinda couple separate issues here. I don't think Davis is a real lawyer for Cohen, in fact Davis himself has said he's not even on the legal team anymore but even when he was he was a tv spinmeister just like he was for Hillary and Clinton. 

I think - Lanny is back on the team - but you are overall correct that Lanny is not really representing him in the criminal cases.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, boots11234 said:

So I see you are all still depressed that the BF story was BS. Don’t worrry though I’m sure another “guaranteed he’s getting impeached “ story will be along shortly. 

Quote

 

Donald J. Trump✔@realDonaldTrump

Are you allowed to impeach a president for gross incompetence?

4:23 AM - Jun 4, 2014

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, boots11234 said:

So I see you are all still depressed that the BF story was BS. Don’t worrry though I’m sure another “guaranteed he’s getting impeached “ story will be along shortly. 

It was all BS?  Link?  Because that isn’t what Mueller said 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, squistion said:

MSNBC always qualified after the initial story broke up until the Mueller office statement, with the disclaimer that NBC was not able to independently verify the Buzzfeed sources, nor had any other news outlet.

Yet there they went, spending all day musing about impeachment proceedings if true.  Even if you set aside this Buzzfeed story there has been so much false reporting, and it happens over and over again.  Newspapers publishing false clickbait, trying to run down the next Trump breadcrumbs. This from the same people who howl the loudest about Trump’s attacks on “fake news.”  Does it even matter anymore?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:yes: Griffin raises some good questions.

Kyle Griffin‏Verified account @kylegriffin1 22m22 minutes ago

Rudy Giuliani has extended the timeline for Trump's discussions on a Trump Tower Moscow project to the election. Is there any evidence that those talks actually stopped then? Is there a reason to take Giulaini's word that those talks stopped when Trump was elected?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, squistion said:

:yes: Griffin raises some good questions.

Kyle Griffin‏Verified account @kylegriffin1 22m22 minutes ago

Rudy Giuliani has extended the timeline for Trump's discussions on a Trump Tower Moscow project to the election. Is there any evidence that those talks actually stopped then? Is there a reason to take Giulaini's word that those talks stopped when Trump was elected?

I bet it did stop but it’s probably part of the quid pro quo. Lose the election, we continue with Trump Tower Moscow. Win the election, you get the tower when you leave office as long as you do what we want during the presidency.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, boots11234 said:

So I see you are all still depressed that the BF story was BS. Don’t worrry though I’m sure another “guaranteed he’s getting impeached “ story will be along shortly. 

Didn't see much depression in here about it. A lot of condemnation by and large from people who generally would seem to be ones who wish it were true. Can you point out any of that "depression"? Or is your post just fake news?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Biff84 said:

I bet it did stop but it’s probably part of the quid pro quo. Lose the election, we continue with Trump Tower Moscow. Win the election, you get the tower when you leave office as long as you do what we want during the presidency.

Probably accurate.  I bet it went something like this....HIT IT!

Trump: By "do what we want" you don't mean allow you to take over the United States right?

Putin: Oh no comrade!  We just need you to undo a few unfair laws implemented by (derogatory terms) Obama. You're so handsome , rich and smart so you know you can trust me!

Trump: Sounds good!  I hate (derogatory terms) Obama too!

Edited by Sheriff Bart
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, boots11234 said:

So I see you are all still depressed that the BF story was BS. Don’t worrry though I’m sure another “guaranteed he’s getting impeached “ story will be along shortly. 

Nothingberder, amirite.

If I had a nickle for every time someone in here guaranteed he'd be impeached, I'd be a nickleaire by now.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I, for one, am shocked.


Russian Oligarch and Allies Could Benefit From Sanctions Deal, Document Shows

WASHINGTON — When the Trump administration announced last month that it was lifting sanctions against a trio of companies controlled by an influential Russian oligarch, it cast the move as tough on Russia and on the oligarch, arguing that he had to make painful concessions to get the sanctions lifted.

But a binding confidential document signed by both sides suggests that the agreement the administration negotiated with the companies controlled by the oligarch, Oleg V. Deripaska, may have been less punitive than advertised.

The deal contains provisions that free him from hundreds of millions of dollars in debt while leaving him and his allies with majority ownership of his most important company, the document shows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

This is where we are, post BF report:

You can leave BF entirely out of all that because all that is from Giuliani or the NYT and WaPo. 

I listened to the Giuliani interview and that is not my take at all.  He basically said he wasn't Trump's attorney at the time and the CNN guy kept asking him and Giuliani laughed and said Trump could have talked to Cohen and it wouldn't be illegal.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

I listened to the Giuliani interview and that is not my take at all.  He basically said he wasn't Trump's attorney at the time and the CNN guy kept asking him and Giuliani laughed and said Trump could have talked to Cohen and it wouldn't be illegal.  

Quote

“There was no question that he was asked by the special counsel a question that said, ‘Did you talk to him before he testified?’” Mr. Giuliani said.

- NYT, posted above.

- You think Giuliani doesn't know the answer to this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:mellow:

Rudy Giuliani to New Yorker:

"I am afraid it will be on my gravestone: 'Rudy Giuliani: He lied for Trump.' Somehow, I don't think that will be it. But if it is, so what do I care? I'll be dead. I figure I can explain it to St. Peter."

https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-new-yorker-interview/even-if-he-did-do-it-it-wouldnt-be-a-crime-rudy-giuliani-donald-trump-robert-mueller-moscow-buzzfeed

Edited by squistion
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, squistion said:

:mellow:

Rudy Giuliani to New Yorker:

"I am afraid it will be on my gravestone: 'Rudy Giuliani: He lied for Trump.' Somehow, I don't think that will be it. But if it is, so what do I care? I'll be dead. I figure I can explain it to St. Peter."

https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-new-yorker-interview/even-if-he-did-do-it-it-wouldnt-be-a-crime-rudy-giuliani-donald-trump-robert-mueller-moscow-buzzfeed

This is real? This appears real. I know New Yorker has that funny mock reporter style column it does, but I had to check. 

Quote

 

Did you talk to President Trump about that?

If I talked to President Trump about it, of course I can’t tell you. I’m his lawyer. I can’t tell you what I talked to my client about.

O.K., so how do you know this?

Well, you have to figure out how I know it. Right? I can’t tell you what I talked to my client about.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

This is real? This appears real. I know New Yorker has that funny mock reporter style column it does, but I had to check. 

I am telling you that their investigation is so ridiculous that, even if he did do it, it wouldn’t be a crime. Now, would the American people be interested in it? Of course. There’s a big difference between what the American people would be interested in and what’s a crime. The American people can be interested in a lot of things people conceal that aren’t crimes.

I’m a criminal lawyer. I am not an ethicist. And I defend people against unfair criminal charges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know we can't discount that Giuliani is suffering from dementia, incompetent, lacks judgement, et al.

But how many times has there been a crazy Rudy interview followed by 2-3 clumsy attempts to walk back what he seems to have just admitted to about his client?

I'm almost starting think he's doing this on purpose just to wear down the public and keep the masses confused & befuddled.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BobbyLayne said:

I know we can't discount that Giuliani is suffering from dementia, incompetent, lacks judgement, et al.

But how many times has there been a crazy Rudy interview followed by 2-3 clumsy attempts to walk back what he seems to have just admitted to about his client?

I'm almost starting think he's doing this on purpose just to wear down the public and keep the masses confused & befuddled.

Yup. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BobbyLayne said:

I know we can't discount that Giuliani is suffering from dementia, incompetent, lacks judgement, et al.

But how many times has there been a crazy Rudy interview followed by 2-3 clumsy attempts to walk back what he seems to have just admitted to about his client?

I'm almost starting think he's doing this on purpose just to wear down the public and keep the masses confused & befuddled.

Preparing the base mentally so it won't matter to them when the shoe drops, perhaps

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, msommer said:

Preparing the base mentally so it won't matter to them when the shoe drops, perhaps

He's clearly not doing any legal work, it's strictly PR - rough hewn, NYC style PR.

I don't get Giuliani's motivation, they don't really have much history together around here, but Rudy has a bunch of trips / consulting work to Russia in his past, so there you go.

If you go back and look up when he took the gig, he's doing it pro bono, and he told Trump that he's winning the legal battle but losing the public battle. So that presumably is his role, to help 45's public persona. I'd say Rudy is about as good at that as Donald is at negotiating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BobbyLayne said:

He's clearly not doing any legal work, it's strictly PR - rough hewn, NYC style PR.

I don't get Giuliani's motivation, they don't really have much history together around here, but Rudy has a bunch of trips / consulting work to Russia in his past, so there you go.

If you go back and look up when he took the gig, he's doing it pro bono, and he told Trump that he's winning the legal battle but losing the public battle. So that presumably is his role, to help 45's public persona. I'd say Rudy is about as good at that as Donald is at negotiating.

You and I are probably not in the target audience

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BobbyLayne said:

I know we can't discount that Giuliani is suffering from dementia, incompetent, lacks judgement, et al.

But how many times has there been a crazy Rudy interview followed by 2-3 clumsy attempts to walk back what he seems to have just admitted to about his client?

I'm almost starting think he's doing this on purpose just to wear down the public and keep the masses confused & befuddled.

He’s surely sent out to muddy the waters, but much like Trump who projects everything, I also think he can’t keep his lies straight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, sending 70+ year old men out to think on their feet and adjust their lies talking points quickly isn't a great idea.  Many of them can be great, scripted orators. Many of them can be excellent writers, crafting logical arguments with artful prose.  

But it's well known in scientific studies that the brain slows down from age 35 onward, so these old dudes aren't doing their sides any favors.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jamny said:

He's not helping. Should have stuck to the security business. I loved Rudy as mayor but it's painful to watch him now.

Remember recently when he had commercials about being the best cyber security guy, then couldn't figure out his Twitter type could be made into an address? That was gold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BobbyLayne said:

I know we can't discount that Giuliani is suffering from dementia, incompetent, lacks judgement, et al.

But how many times has there been a crazy Rudy interview followed by 2-3 clumsy attempts to walk back what he seems to have just admitted to about his client?

I'm almost starting think he's doing this on purpose just to wear down the public and keep the masses confused & befuddled.

If you can't dazzle them with brilliant then baffle them with bull####. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BobbyLayne said:

I know we can't discount that Giuliani is suffering from dementia, incompetent, lacks judgement, et al.

But how many times has there been a crazy Rudy interview followed by 2-3 clumsy attempts to walk back what he seems to have just admitted to about his client?

I'm almost starting think he's doing this on purpose just to wear down the public and keep the masses confused & befuddled.

And the walk backs usually make it worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...