Donald Fires FBI Director who's investigating Russian Election Hacking

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by The Thriller, May 9, 2017.

  1. babe

    babe Well-Known Member

    9,852
    738
    203
    Dec 7, 2010
    I think the raids on Cohen's home, office and hotel are more than shady ladies. It's a legal issue, maybe finance.... maybe a campaign finance issue. I think criminal charges will be made.

    Still, the difficult thing I don't think the dumpTrumpers will understand, is that Americans won't care. Well, say 70% won't care.

    "Arrogance of Power" has been such a defining characteristic of Obama, the Bushes, the Clintons for so long, all people will see is that the dirty fingers pointing at Trump are a worse deal than even Trump, no matter what he's done.

    "Arrogance of Power" is the kind of power tyrants always insist on making a show of. It consists of all the little songs and dances.....literally sheer defiance of law right in front of the public gaze.... that demonstrates that the tyrant is above the law.

    So because others have been doing it, and everybody knows it already... why make a fuss about Trump. People will figure that the accusers are out to steal their vote, and they will choke on that. No way. This will be where the Left loses the public entirely.
     
  2. babe

    babe Well-Known Member

    9,852
    738
    203
    Dec 7, 2010
    It'll be a mistake if Trump does fire him. Just let the show go on, whatever. What I'm seeing is people turning on the agenda wholesale. Trump approval rates rising faster every day this goes on.
     
  3. Harambe

    Harambe Well-Known Member Contributor

    5,649
    516
    198
    May 26, 2010
  4. Bulletproof

    Bulletproof All-Jazzfanz First Team! Contributor 2018 Award Winner

    3,803
    2,086
    243
    Feb 17, 2017
  5. Joe Bagadonuts

    Joe Bagadonuts Well-Known Member

    9,493
    1,169
    228
    Aug 23, 2010
    babe likes this.
  6. Harambe

    Harambe Well-Known Member Contributor

    5,649
    516
    198
    May 26, 2010
  7. colton

    colton All Around Nice Guy Staff Member

    11,253
    1,394
    233
    May 25, 2010
    Yeah, that's pretty shameful. Maybe it's time for me to remove myself from the GOP.

    In other news, https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...d6345a-3e89-11e8-912d-16c9e9b37800_story.html

    Trump’s allies worry that federal investigators may have seized recordings made by his attorney

    By Ashley Parker, Carol D. Leonnig, Josh Dawsey and Tom Hamburger April 12 at 7:29 PM Email the author
    President Trump’s personal attorney Michael D. Cohen sometimes taped conversations with associates, according to three people familiar with his practice, and allies of the president are worried that the recordings were seized by federal investigators in a raid of Cohen’s office and residences this week.

    Cohen, who served for a decade as a lawyer at the Trump Organization and is a close confidant of Trump, was known to store the conversations using digital files and then replay them for colleagues, according to people who have interacted with him.

    “We heard he had some proclivity to make tapes,” said one Trump adviser, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation. “Now we are wondering, who did he tape? Did he store those someplace where they were actually seized? . . . Did they find his recordings?”

    Cohen did not respond to requests for comment. Stephen Ryan, an attorney for Cohen, declined to comment. A White House spokeswoman referred a request for comment to Cohen and his attorney.

    On Monday, FBI agents seized Cohen’s computers and phones as they executed a search warrant that sought, among other records, all communications between the lawyer and Trump and campaign aides about “potential sources of negative publicity” in the lead-up to the 2016 election, The Washington Post reported.

    Investigators were also looking for any records related to adult-film star Stormy Daniels and ex-Playboy model Karen McDougal, who both received payments after alleged affairs with Trump.

    It is unknown whether Cohen taped conversations between himself and Trump. But two people familiar with Cohen’s practices said he recorded both business and political conversations. One associate said Trump knew of Cohen’s practice because the attorney would often play him recordings Cohen had made of his conversations with other top Trump advisers.

    “It was his standard practice to do it,” this person said.

    Legal experts said Cohen’s taped conversations would be viewed by prosecutors as highly valuable.

    “If you are looking for evidence, you can’t do any better than people talking on tape,” said Nick Akerman, a former Watergate prosecutor.

    Such recordings “would be considered a gold mine,” said Stephen Gillers, a law professor at New York University who specializes in legal ethics.

    “The significance is 9.5 to 10 on a 10-point scale,” he added, noting that investigators know “that when people speak on the phone, they are not guarded. They don’t imagine that the conversation will surface.”

    Federal investigators would not automatically get access to any tapes that might have been seized in the raids. First, the recordings would be reviewed by a separate Justice Department team and possibly by a federal judge. The review is designed to protect lawyer-client privilege and to be sure that the conversations turned over are within the terms of the search warrant, legal experts said.

    They noted that the privilege accorded to attorney-client communications does not apply if the conversation was conducted to further commission of a crime or fraud.

    Cohen wanted his business calls on tape so he could use them later as leverage, one person said. He frequently noted that under New York law, only one party had to consent to the taping of a conversation, this person added.

    During the 2016 race, Cohen — who did not have a formal role on the campaign — had a reputation among campaign staff as someone to avoid, in part because he was believed to be secretly taping conversations.

    In one instance, Cohen played a recording of a conversation he had with someone else to a Trump campaign official to demonstrate that he was in a position to challenge that person’s veracity if necessary, an associate recalled.

    Cohen indicated that he had something to use against the person he had taped, the associate said.

    One outside Trump adviser said Cohen may have begun recording his conversations in an attempt to emulate his boss, who has long boasted — often with no evidence — about secretly taping private conversations.

    In May, for instance, a report appeared in the New York Times detailing fired FBI director James B. Comey’s account of a one-on-one dinner he had with the president, during which he said Trump asked him to pledge his loyalty to the president and he declined. Shortly after, Trump took to Twitter to cast doubt on Comey’s version of events, seeming to imply that he had secretly recorded their encounter.

    “James Comey better hope that there are no ‘tapes’ of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!” Trump wrote.

    At the time, it was unclear whether Trump truly possessed tapes of his conversation with Comey or was simply trying to intimidate him. And ultimately, just over a month later, Trump cleared up the mystery by admitting in a duo of tweets that he had not, in fact, recorded Comey.

    “With all of the recently reported electronic surveillance, intercepts, unmasking and illegal leaking of information, I have no idea whether there are ‘tapes’ or recordings of my conversations with James Comey, but I did not make, and do not have, any such recordings,” he wrote.

    Tim O’Brien, a Trump biographer and executive editor of Bloomberg View, wrote a column in the wake of Trump’s taping claim saying that Comey likely had little reason to worry. In the piece, O’Brien recounted that Trump frequently made a similar boast to him.

    “Back in the early 2000s, Trump used to tell me all the time that he was recording me when I covered him as reporter for the New York Times,” O’Brien wrote. “He also said the same thing when I was writing a biography of him, ‘Trump Nation.’ I never thought he was, but who could be sure?”

    But after Trump sued him for libel shortly after his biography came out, O’Brien’s lawyers deposed Trump in December 2007 — during which Trump admitted he had not, in fact, clandestinely taped O’Brien.

    “I’m not equipped to tape-record,” Trump said in the deposition. “I may have said it once or twice to him just to — on the telephone, because everything I said to him he’d write incorrectly; so just to try and keep it honest.”

    Robert Costa contributed to this report.
     
  8. Red

    Red Well-Known Member

    2,137
    321
    118
    Mar 17, 2015
    And now, further validation of the Steele Dossier.

    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/white-house/article208870264.html

    "The dossier alleges that Cohen, two Russians and several Eastern European hackers met at the Prague office of a Russian government-backed social and cultural organization, Rossotrudnichestvo. The location was selected to provide an alternative explanation in case the rendezvous was exposed, according to Steele’s Kremlin sources, cultivated during 20 years of spying on Russia. It said that Oleg Solodukhin, the deputy chief of Rossotrudnichestvo’s operation in the Czech Republic, attended the meeting, too.


    Further, it alleges that Cohen, Kosachev and other attendees discussed “how deniable cash payments were to be made to hackers in Europe who had worked under Kremlin direction against the Clinton campaign......."

    ......"If Cohen met with Russians and hackers in Prague as described in the dossier, it would provide perhaps the most compelling evidence to date that the Russians and Trump campaign aides were collaborating. Mueller’s office also has focused on two meetings in the spring of 2016 when Russians offered to provide Trump campaign aides with “dirt” on Clinton – thousands of emails in one of the offers."
     
  9. The Thriller

    The Thriller Well-Known Member

    13,128
    1,107
    228
    Jun 8, 2010
    What in the dossier hasn't been confirmed other than the golden showers? Seems to me that the dossier has been correct in every way.

    Furthermore, Cohen lied about going to Prague. At one point last year he took a picture of his passport to show that he had never been to the Czech. Now it appears that he did go to the Czech, just not directly. He first went to Germany by air and then traveled by train to Prague.

    Well gee, why would he lie about this? Why would he try and mislead us?

    This is almost game over imo. It's pretty ****ing clear that the Donald Trump organization was colluding with Russians. From Sessions, Flynn, Manafort, to his own son and son in law at Trump Tower, to his own "fixer", Michael Cohen. To his firing of Comey and to his persistent attacks on Mueller.

    What more evidence do we need of collusion?
     
  10. Bulletproof

    Bulletproof All-Jazzfanz First Team! Contributor 2018 Award Winner

    3,803
    2,086
    243
    Feb 17, 2017
    Well, the actual evidence for starters.

    I am waiting for Mueller to produce the actual evidence. The kind that holds up in a court of law, not the reality TV type, or the facebook type, or the reporter has a confidential source type.

    Evidence is a real thing that has to meet certain standards to actually be considered evidence.
     
    Joe Bagadonuts, babe and colton like this.
  11. The Thriller

    The Thriller Well-Known Member

    13,128
    1,107
    228
    Jun 8, 2010
    Evidence like 19 indictments and 5 guilty pleas?
     
    Mission Accomplished likes this.
  12. Bulletproof

    Bulletproof All-Jazzfanz First Team! Contributor 2018 Award Winner

    3,803
    2,086
    243
    Feb 17, 2017
    Trump has been indicted and pled guilty 19 and 5 times?

    And indictments are not evidence in and of themselves.

    Listen I tell it to the Trump supporters and I'm telling it to you, evidence has an actual definition. The kind of evidence that matters in a trial must meet certain standards. That's the kind of evidence I want, the kind that will force Trump out of office. I think it is coming, but it isn't here yet. We're seeing the foundation laid upon which Trump will, or will not, be proven to be a criminal, but NOTHING has been proven yet. Nothing.

    And that's okay, because that's the way this thing works. Mueller is an absolute badass (to anyone who doesn't know that, look him up). What he shows when he's ready to show it in regard to Trump is what I will accept as the best truth we're gonna get. We're not there yet.
     
    gandalfe likes this.
  13. The Thriller

    The Thriller Well-Known Member

    13,128
    1,107
    228
    Jun 8, 2010
    It's not just the 19 indictments and 5 guilty pleas, it's his lawyer, it's his family, and it's his own personal conduct.

    Look, his lawyer lied about going to Prague and meeting with Russian officials to collude.
    His own family admitted to meeting with Russians to collude in Trump Tower.
    His conduct? He admitted on national tv with Lester Holt to have fired FBI Director James Comey in order to stop this investigation. Could a guilty person act more guilty?

    I have no doubt in a court of law Trump would be buried. Right now. Already. He could be prosecuted and buried.

    The challenge for us is far greater than a typical courtroom. He carries with it a presidential shield. He cannot be prosecuted without first being impeached. The challenge is in convincing brainwashed republicans and republicans fearful of being primaried that he deserves to be impeached (and imprisoned).

    I have no doubt that we will soon get there. Either through democrats retaking the Congress or through continued bombshells which force the likes of even Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell to force him out of the White House.
     
  14. Red

    Red Well-Known Member

    2,137
    321
    118
    Mar 17, 2015
    My understanding is that Mueller is going to issue a series of reports, and that the first report will be on obstruction of justice. It will be delivered to Rosenstein, assuming Rosenstein is still in business, which may be doubtful at this point, but here's hoping. It will be up to Rosenstein to decide if that initial report will be made public. The obstruction of justice report should be ready sooner then later, now that it is likely Trump will not be interviewed, and Mueller will not supeana Trump. Assuming he does not force a Trump interview, it will be because he has enough evidence and can say "I gave the President a chance to reply, he chose not to".

    As far as the Cohen in Prague business, Mueller needs to also establish who he met with, and what was discussed. It's encouraging that he can place him in Prague. I've no doubt the Steele Dossier got that part right, but we have to confirm it to Mueller's satisfaction. I assume that would lend itself to collusion, but we really don't know yet. My guess is the Steele Dossier is largely accurate, but establishing evidence from the Moscow side of things might be tough.
     
  15. Bulletproof

    Bulletproof All-Jazzfanz First Team! Contributor 2018 Award Winner

    3,803
    2,086
    243
    Feb 17, 2017
    So lay out what you consider the evidence to be.

    Is it circumstantial? Is it hearsay? What is it?

    Evidence matters. And let me be clear on this, Thriller. The trump supporters are suggesting that Mueller is biased. That Mueller has an agenda. That the things he's saying, the things he's doing prove nothing other than the "deep state" trying to undo a democratically elected President.

    Don't play their stupid games. Don't accept their rules.

    Evidence is a thing. It is solid, it is real, it can be corroborated. It is the definition of truth.

    It makes no difference if Mueller has an agenda. It makes no difference if Mueller is personally biased.

    Evidence is what matters. Real evidence.

    That's how real thinking people will become informed. That's how the court of law will make decisions.

    There is bias on both side in every trial. Evidence is what nullifies bias. Evidence is what settles facts. The truth is a thing. Facts exist. Evidence is what tells what those are.

    Don't play the stupid game that you always play. It cheapens this process. It gives ammo to the idiots on the other side. You all end up distracted by your faux evidence and rhetoric and seem to be blind to what real evidence is.

    Mueller will ultimately provide whatever evidence he has uncovered. He hasn't done that yet. When he does we'll have the best truth we can hope for at the time. I'm going to base my opinion on that. Until then, I wait.
     
    colton and gandalfe like this.
  16. colton

    colton All Around Nice Guy Staff Member

    11,253
    1,394
    233
    May 25, 2010
    The Prague thing hasn't been verified, correct? As near as I was able to tell it's a claim by a single reporter I've never heard of before, with all other news organizations supplying disclaimers along with their reports. But I agree, if Mueller actually has the evidence this reporter claims, its huge.
     
  17. babe

    babe Well-Known Member

    9,852
    738
    203
    Dec 7, 2010
    I still don't get it.

    All this hyper interest in Trump. All the stuff we actually know about Hillary. It's not sane to ignore the problem with Hillary. Taking classified info home to a private server hacked by the Russians no doubt. On purpose. For cash.
    And by a Marxist.

    I started out in 2016 noting that Trump contributed heavily to Hillary/Clinton causes when he needed their blind eye, and wondering if Trump was Hillary's dutiful Perot. OK, who doesn't know about 1992 when Bill Clinton was literally booted into the White House because a Texan who hated the Bushes.... Ross Perot.... split the Republican vote.

    We know the Russians funded actual candidates for the US Presidency throughout Stalin's time in at a minimum The Communist Party USA. We know Ted Kennedy discussed the problem of the Ronald Reagan presidency, and asked for Russian cooperation to help defeat Reagan.

    Is there anyone who has heard about the "New World Order" who doesn't think all kinds of nations are active in efforts to secure advantages in any elections anywhere?

    I think this campaign to dump Trump, Colton included, is sheer nonsense. There is a new psychiatric clinical diagnosis on the books called ODD. It stands for Obsessive Defiance Disorder. Sure the loony Psych crowd is gonna use it to help dislodge guns from crackpot hands still warm enough for re-education, and it might help pack the camps during civil disorder events..... but still.

    This wholesale refusal to accept legitimate election results is pretty serious. It strikes at the root of our nation's mechanism for peaceful transfers of power through electoral process. Be good sports and accept the results. Don't be ODD.

    Sure Trump needs to be watched. Not for the political ideal of a progressive utopian world run by "The Right People", but for restoring real human liberty to mankind. He is definitely a man without Constitutional beliefs, a dealmaker. We would do a lot better scrutinizing the deals he's making.......
     
  18. Red

    Red Well-Known Member

    2,137
    321
    118
    Mar 17, 2015
    It's likely most of the opposition to Trump, on this board, and in society in general, is not the result of ODD...

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/conditions/oppositional-defiant-disorder

    "Oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) is a disruptive behavior disorder in children and teenagers characterized by patterns of unruly and argumentative behavior and hostile attitudes toward authority figures. Some parents may find it difficult to recognize ODD, thinking they simply have a stubborn, emotional, or strong-willed child. The behavior of a child with ODD is much more extreme and disruptive than normal, however, and occurs much more frequently than the type of childhood stubbornness, whininess, and rebellion that often occurs at different stages of a child’s development."
     
  19. Joe Bagadonuts

    Joe Bagadonuts Well-Known Member

    9,493
    1,169
    228
    Aug 23, 2010
    Bulletproof acting reasonable and methodically has me worried for Trump. Previously his hatred was irrational and uncontrolled. He was the ultimate advocate of removing Trump by any means possible. Suddenly he is okay with making the decision based upon verifiable facts. Does he know something I don't? I'm thinking yes, or at the very least he believes he does. Nothing else could explain going from lunatic hatred to rule of law.

    I'm for rule of law as well. I agree with those who consider Trump to be a despicable person, but that part of who he is is who the citizens elected. I did not vote for him is because I find him repulsive, despite agreeing with many of his policies. This negative opinion of him is not grounds for overthrowing an election. If it is proven that he colluded then he will deserve his fate. If it is not proven I hope we can somehow move forward. Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure that if he somehow beats the collusion charge that those who hate him so vehemently will simply move on to another tactic for removing him. Hopefully a couple of them will maintain the same sort of rule of law standard that Bulletproof has recently adopted.
     
    babe likes this.
  20. Red

    Red Well-Known Member

    2,137
    321
    118
    Mar 17, 2015
    Pertinent to the title of this long lasting thread, Comey's promotional book tour kicks off tonight at 10:00 PM eastern time on ABC's 20/20. It's a one hour distillation of a 5 hour interview. There has been ferocious pushback, including, as expected, from Trump, who unleashed one heck of a tweetstorm today:

    https://www.voanews.com/a/trump-fbi-chief-he-fired-should-be-jailed/4348977.html

    Although the book has not been released as yet, from what I have heard, the media having obtained advance copies, I am personally disappointed at the pettieness and shallow vindictiveness of some of Comey's observations. I don't believe it serves him well at all, and just does not help one bit. Comparing Trump to a mob boss seems apropos enough. When the truth finally comes out concerning his connections in Russia, it will likely seem even more appropriate. And certainly Trump is, as Comey states, "untethered from the truth". But his petty shots detract, and some of those have been highlighted, as is bound to be the case in a society that thrives on being titillated. As one Washington Post correspondent put it, "Donald Trump has turned Comey into Donald Trump".

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...mey-into-donald-trump/?utm_term=.7b8a8d08dbcb
     

Share This Page