General Discussion

highplainsdem

(49,006 posts) Thu Jul 9, 2020, 11:00 AM Jul 2020

Lanny Davis tweets about Michael Cohen's importance in Manhattan DA ruling, & DoJ unfairness to him

Remember, Davis is Cohen's lawyer, so this reaction is what he's already heard from Cohen:

Link to tweet

1/5 @MichaelCohen212 is pleased that the Supreme court has finally forced @realDonaldTrump to release his tax returns

Link to tweet

2/5 It is clear to me that without @MichaelCohen212 cooperation with DA Vance during several interviews at Otisville, there would’ve been no 7-2 Supreme Court decision humiliating @realDonaldTrump and preventing him from continuing cover up of his tax returns

Link to tweet

3/5 Please don’t forget @MichaelCohen212 published financial statements from @realDonaldTrump proving that he fraudulently inflated his assets to get bank loans and deflated the same assets to reduce his taxes. Everyone saw those financial statements thanks to @MichaelCohen212

Link to tweet

4/5 Has anyone answered the question why only @MichaelCohen212 was targeted and incarcerated almost entirely for conduct directed by and for the benefit of @realDonaldTrump

Link to tweet

5/5 Before his passing Chairman @RepCummings wrote extensive letter to the Deputy U.S. Attorney and asked her to investigate political influence from Washington, asking whether the Justice Department was the reason only @MichaelCohen212 went to jail

6 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Lanny Davis tweets about Michael Cohen's importance in Manhattan DA ruling, & DoJ unfairness to him (Original Post) highplainsdem Jul 2020 OP

# 4/5 ScratchCat Jul 2020 #1

THIS 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻 LenaBaby61 Jul 2020 #2

If you think about it... ScratchCat Jul 2020 #4

An interesting analysis. LastDemocratInSC Jul 2020 #5

That raises an interesting question PRETZEL Jul 2020 #6

bump RT Atlanta Jul 2020 #3

ScratchCat

(1,993 posts)

1. # 4/5

Reply to highplainsdem (Original post)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 11:05 AM

Jul 2020

They both know there is likely a sealed indictment for Trump. Mark my word.

LenaBaby61

(6,976 posts)

2. THIS 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻

Reply to ScratchCat (Reply #1)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 11:13 AM

Jul 2020

ScratchCat

(1,993 posts)

4. If you think about it...

Reply to LenaBaby61 (Reply #2)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 11:29 AM

Jul 2020

Cohen was involved in a cooperation agreement with SDNY. If you are involved in such an agreement, you obviously know what you are "cooperating" with. What possible reason would there be to a)indict Cohen for campaign finance fraud and b)note Donald Trump as "Individual 1" in the charging documents if Michael Cohen wasn't cooperating in this investigation and if Donald Trump wasn't the subject of a separate indictment? There would be no such reason.

My theory is: Before Trump officially sacked Sessions, those in charge at DOJ discussed and agreed behind closed doors that it was completely in compliance with Doj Policy and the OLC letter to seal an indictment for Trump and it would not be indicting a sitting POTUS. This was their "Trump Card". I believe Barr found out about the existence when he took over, but he can't do anything about it because it is a sealed indictment(he can't even mention it). This explains that episode where Trump blew up on Barr in the Oval Office and why he keeps tweeting about "crimes" supposedly committed by everyone involved in the investigation. This is why he keeps pushing Barr to indict former administration officials because he knows he is being indicted the minute he isn't POTUS.

LastDemocratInSC

(3,647 posts)

5. An interesting analysis.

Reply to ScratchCat (Reply #4)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 01:14 PM

Jul 2020

PRETZEL

(3,245 posts)

6. That raises an interesting question

Reply to ScratchCat (Reply #4)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 01:22 PM

Jul 2020

not sure which ruling, but it seems the Court was very clear as to "official" vs. "unofficial" acts that would be immune from prosecution.

This would definately qualify as an "unofficial" act.

Would this still be considered immune from prosecution?

RT Atlanta

(2,517 posts)

3. bump

Reply to highplainsdem (Original post)

Thu Jul 9, 2020, 11:17 AM

Jul 2020

n/t

Reply to this discussion