The Official Michael Cohen Testimony Thread


The Meadows one is BS (lobbying for foreign companies (as opposed to foreign governments) would not have e required the disclosure that Meadows harped on). Jordan is presumably going after whether Cohen "wanted" a WH position. Good luck proving that. Even if Cohen sought a position in the WH, there's enough ambiguity in the word "want" that it'd be really hard to establish perjury. For example, lots of people seek employment at McDonald's, but don't "want" to work there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hunerwadel
The Meadows one is BS (lobbying for foreign companies (as opposed to foreign governments) would not have e required the disclosure that Meadows harped on). Jordan is presumably going after whether Cohen "wanted" a WH position. Good luck proving that. Even if Cohen sought a position in the WH, there's enough ambiguity in the word "want" that it'd be really hard to establish perjury. For example, lots of people seek employment at McDonald's, but don't "want" to work there.
I trust Meadows knows more about that topic than you do, so I will stick with my original statement. Good!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Franklin Pierce
Already mentioned in the thread Cohen's opening statements sounded like Democratic talking points. Then found out Lenny Davis coached him.
Now listen to his closing statements from yesterday. More Democratic speech for him to read at the end. Lol



 
I said there was overwhelming proof that orange man bad.....in response to another poster.
If being a horrible human was an impeachable
offence, Trump wouldn't have lasted a day.

My point was that the growing body of irrefutable evidence proving Trump to be a horribly despicable human warrants continued and even increased investigation.
Probably no worse than you honestly
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
I trust Meadows knows more about that topic than you do, so I will stick with my original statement. Good!!!

Let me quote slowly from the Truth and Testimony Disclosure Form so you can wrap your head around the requirement:

"If you are a non-governmental witness, please list any contracts or payments originating with a foreign government ...."

Cohen consulted/lobbied for foreign companies, not foreign governments.

This is a political stunt by Meadows to show Trump that they're good foot soldiers.
 
Let me quote slowly from the Truth and Testimony Disclosure Form so you can wrap your head around the requirement:

"If you are a non-governmental witness, please list any contracts or payments originating with a foreign government ...."

Cohen consulted/lobbied for foreign companies, not foreign governments.

This is a political stunt by Meadows to show Trump that they're good foot soldiers.
Cool. Again I will go with Meadows. Thanks for sharing though
 
Let me quote slowly from the Truth and Testimony Disclosure Form so you can wrap your head around the requirement:

"If you are a non-governmental witness, please list any contracts or payments originating with a foreign government ...."

Cohen consulted/lobbied for foreign companies, not foreign governments.

This is a political stunt by Meadows to show Trump that they're good foot soldiers.
Yeah, I agree that Meadows seems to be heading down a path to nowhere on that one. It’s possible he just felt he had to send the referral after going off on Cohen. What was funny to me is that he was so strong in his stance he seemed to have Cohen questioning it. Even though I agree on this point, the rest of it is exactly what I knew it would be, smoke and mirrors. This whole thing was to help move the focus from collusion to other accusations and to provide the media more circumstantial evidence so they can spin it as if fact in an effort to impeach Trump. I listened to a little bit of CNN last night and every single guest that came on was asked if yesterday was enough to begin the impeachment process. The guest would skirt around it and the interviewer would keep pushing until the guest would eventually say something like not yet, or we need more, etc. CNN didn’t start with what did you think of today or do you find Cohen credible or even the softball of why you find him credible. Nope, it was can we start impeachment now? And every single guest basically said no.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanjustin
Yeah, I agree that Meadows seems to be heading down a path to nowhere on that one. It’s possible he just felt he had to send the referral after going off on Cohen. What was funny to me is that he was so strong in his stance he seemed to have Cohen questioning it. Even though I agree on this point, the rest of it is exactly what I knew it would be, smoke and mirrors. This whole thing was to help move the focus from collusion to other accusations and to provide the media more circumstantial evidence so they can spin it as if fact in an effort to impeach Trump. I listened to a little bit of CNN last night and every single guest that came on was asked if yesterday was enough to begin the impeachment process. The guest would skirt around it and the interviewer would keep pushing until the guest would eventually say something like not yet, or we need more, etc. CNN didn’t start with what did you think of today or do you find Cohen credible or even the softball of why you find him credible. Nope, it was can we start impeachment now? And every single guest basically said no.
at least they are keeping the dream alive lol
 
Yeah, I agree that Meadows seems to be heading down a path to nowhere on that one. It’s possible he just felt he had to send the referral after going off on Cohen. What was funny to me is that he was so strong in his stance he seemed to have Cohen questioning it. Even though I agree on this point, the rest of it is exactly what I knew it would be, smoke and mirrors. This whole thing was to help move the focus from collusion to other accusations and to provide the media more circumstantial evidence so they can spin it as if fact in an effort to impeach Trump. I listened to a little bit of CNN last night and every single guest that came on was asked if yesterday was enough to begin the impeachment process. The guest would skirt around it and the interviewer would keep pushing until the guest would eventually say something like not yet, or we need more, etc. CNN didn’t start with what did you think of today or do you find Cohen credible or even the softball of why you find him credible. Nope, it was can we start impeachment now? And every single guest basically said no.
Seems like relative questions and thoughtful answers by the guests. Go CNN!!!
 
His motivations for lying were much less than his motivations for telling the truth. Everyone is fully aware of what type of witness he is. Everyone is also fully aware that pretty much everything he said is probably true, even though some will never be proven. Trump is absolute scum, a horrible person. He and his circle will be proven to be such. Will there be enough provable evidence of specific crimes to impeach? Probably. The more interesting questions for me at this point is how many people will continue to support him? and why? That's the fascinating part.

You are assuming that Cohen knows the truth, the lies, and even understands the difference between them. From what we've seen of Cohen, you have far too much faith in the guy.
 
You are assuming that Cohen knows the truth, the lies, and even understands the difference between them. From what we've seen of Cohen, you have far too much faith in the guy.
I'm placing my confidence in Trump. There is no way he would hire and retain a lawyer for ten years to be his number one fixer if the guy was not able to discern between truth and lies.
 

VN Store



Back
Top