Below is my column in USA Today on recent disclosure of Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer, received hundreds of thousands of dollars from companies like AT&T seeking access to Trump. Accounts indicate that Cohen actively sold himself as a conduit to Trump to companies seeking influence. Cohen is only the latest in a long line of sleaze winding its way through Washington.
Caught red-handed in influence peddling, AT&T reportedly fired the Vice President responsible for the Cohen contract and called it a “big mistake.”
Here is the column:
The payment of hundreds of thousands of dollars from AT&T and other companies to Trump’s personal lawyer Michael Cohen is only the latest example of companies “reaching out to touch someone” in Washington. He was not alone.
As Trump pledged to drain the swamp that is Washington, his closest aides were offering virtual swamp tours for companies seeking access. Cohen’s sleazy practices have now ensnared law firms, companies, and the administration itself. It is hardly unique.
The Clinton and Obama administrations yielded millions for insiders cashing in on influence. What is different in this case is that Cohen, who has no appreciable legal skills or particular business acumen, seemed to be selling only access. He is not a lobbyist and barely acknowledged as a lawyer. Like so much of Cohen’s record, it was raw, crude, and unabashedly corrupt. Absent some new evidence, it was also perfectly legal.
Washington’s currency has always been access. Access means influence and influence means profits. The term “lobbyist” comes from favor-seekers who would hang around in the lobby of the Willard Hotel where President Ulysses S. Grant would often conduct meetings. Location, location, location is not just a mantra in real estate.
In politics, where you stand in relation to a president dictates what you are worth. Proximity is power and those with access have long sold their services to the highest bidder. During Clinton’s terms there was even an acronym that meant millions for those who could use it: FOB or Friends of Bill.
Trump ran on ending this corrupt practice in rightfully denouncing the Clintons for tens of millions in speaking fees for themselves and contributions to their foundation in exchange for access. Even The Washington Post concluded “There can be little doubt that Russians who donated to the Clinton Foundation were trying to curry favor with the secretary of State.” Trump promised change in denouncing how “Access and favors were sold for cash. It’s called Pay-For-Play.”
Trump however had not even taken his oath before his closest associates bellied up to the bar to sell their influence. Former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, Cohen, and others have reportedly raked in millions by immediately cashing in on their relationship to Trump.
As always, Cohen was the bluntest tool. His pitch, described by a Republican strategist, was as subtle as a shakedown: “I don’t know who’s been representing you, but you should fire them all. I’m the guy you should hire. I’m closest to the President. I’m his personal lawyer.”
AT&T and others have business before the government and lined up to line Cohen’s pockets with retainer money. They were not alone. In addition to Columbus Nova, Korea Aerospace Industries, and Novartis, the white-shoe firm Squire Patton Boggs brought Cohen into its New York office. Cohen was well known to have the legal skills of a wombat but this legal and lobbying firm wanted him close. Novartis actually explained its $1.2 million payment to Cohen to get his advice on “health care” despite the lack of any evidence that Cohen’s knowledge of the field went beyond his personal HMO plan.
Of course, Cohen went about cashing in with his signature reckless abandon. He used the same company, Essential Consulting LLC, to collect this money that he used to pay out the hush money to former porn star Stormy Daniels. That has allowed questions to be raised about the possible use of this company as a “slush fund” for Trump and the payments as corrupt efforts to influence Trump, including money from a company associated with Russian oligarch Viktor Vekselberg.
Cohen notably seemed to dispense with the pretense of most for influence peddlers who dress up this corrupt practice as “lobbying.” Cohen was selling his own remaining asset: access to Trump. There is no registration needed for influence peddlers. Of course, if you engage in lobbying, legal problems can arise. However, Cohen was offering his “knowledge” of Trump — a murky area where someone offers insights and framing advice. The assumption is that Trump would know who was taking care of his friend when actual lobbyists from AT&T or Novartis came knocking.
There really is no way to prohibit the selling of knowledge or associations. The law focuses on specific acts like lobbying or lawyering for regulation. Moreover, these companies and law firms will emerge unscathed from this scandal. No one is likely to cancel their AT&T subscription because of the company’s s;eazy tactics — any more than customers responded to AT&T spending huge amounts to kill net neutrality.
Whatever may come out of this scandal, one thing will not emerge: reform.
I have written about influence peddling in Washington for decades. Nothing has changed. Virtually all of the Democrats expressing shock over Cohen’s profiteering were conspicuously silent when the Clintons and their aides gathered hundreds of millions of dollars from the same influence game.
Trying to bar the selling access in Washington is like trying to ban corn sales in Iowa. It is the only indigenous crop of the Beltway. Only two things are certain: first, Cohen is a sleazy influence peddler and, second, he found a perfect home in Washington.
Jonathan Turley, a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributors, is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University, where he teaches constitutional and tort law. Follow him on Twitter: @JonathanTurley.
Avenatti always struck me as at least as ethically challenged as Cohen is reputed to be. Here’s a little blurb from those who know the CNN darling the best:
“Those who have worked with Avenatti describe an individual obsessed with fame and willing to use unethical methods to win a case.
“He honestly believes he can get up and say or do anything he wants and there’s no repercussions — largely there’s not,” said one individual who has worked with Avenatti in the past.
“I know this guy; he doesn’t care about anybody but himself. He loves the attention. It’s his whole lifestyle.”
An individual who worked with Avenatti pointed to his work in a number of high-profile cases like going up against Jim Carey and Paris Hilton as examples of his strategy of garnering as much attention as possible.”
Oh, and that 41 large judgment against KPMG he always brags about was reversed. He curiously omits that little fact.
http://dailycaller.com/2018/05/13/michael-avenatti-past-history/
Seems Avenatti is getting a little testy with the Daily Caller after the story broke:
http://dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Michael-Avenatti-Email-Threatening-Lawsuit-Daily-Caller-News-Foundation.jpg
Now let’s see if Avenatti sues to vindicate his name like Judge Moore recently did.
Now we hear that Avenatti’s named firm is in bankruptcy, he’s a solo lawyer having been bounced around after losing the KPMG case and he owed a supplier $160,000.00 that put his coffee business out of business. Still a shining star as compared to Cohen?
Mespo,
If I were to be feeling great I could do some really dark humor with a total creep & BS story like this. But I’ve someone very special to this family for health reasons I’m more concerned with, yet attempting to step aside a minute, I have to ask the question of why are they throwing so much of this type garbage at us? What is of such importance they’d try to throw us off their criminal scent with these type nothing burgers?
Obfuscation is the name of the game. The reasons are always the same — money and power.
Oky1, what’s the Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Infowars take on all this?
The Illuminati again?
That’s an awful low bar, isn’t it?
I don’t know if he’s more ethical than Cohen, or even if that term should be applied to either of them, but Avenatti comes across as a whole lot smarter.
You gotta compare something to something and Cohen has had his share of comparisons to the ideal on the blog. Just thought I’d give some perspective by direct comparison of the antagonists.
PROFESSOR TURLEY LINKS COHEN TO DANIELS.. ‘AND’ OLIGARCH..!
“Cohen used the same company, Essential Consulting LLC, to collect this money that he used to pay out the hush money to former porn star Stormy Daniels. That has allowed questions to be raised about the possible use of this company as a “slush fund” for Trump and the payments as corrupt efforts to influence Trump, including money from a company associated with Russian oligarch Viktor Vekselberg.
So here we have one identifiable source of Russian money paying-in to a fund controlled by Trump’s personal lawyer while another payment goes out to the former porn star. As Professor Turley notes, this is a political “slush find”. Donors contribute for reasons not entirely clear, then money gets paid-out for reasons not entirely clear.
AT THE VERY LEAST WE KNOW TRUMP IS TAKING RUSSIAN MONEY
WHAT DO THEY EXPECT IN RETURN??
Peter Hill – we know that allegedly Trump’s attorney is getting money from Russian firms. There is no evidence of money going to Trump.
Trump was Cohen’s only client (except Sean Hannity, perhaps).
Yes, there is no evidence, that is known of, to us anyway. That’s the point of using cutouts and “slush funds” to hide connections, to hide evidence. Investigations are a way of identifying said evidence, or confirming there is none and no basis to pursue charges, continue litigation, either directly or by implication (circumstantial evidence). This is why we have investigations.
It would be so cool if we could all use that “no evidence” argument for anything. Especially, say, serial killers who bury people in their basement. Hey, if the standard for getting a warrant is having evidence, no warrants get issued. John Wayne Gacey would have died a happy man. In a very smelly house. (cuz, you see, he buried his victims under his house. Sometimes just stuffed them under the floorboards.) However, a smelly house is not going to be sufficient to give a search warrant, if the standard is that evidence must exist before an investigation is undertaken.
Investigations are a way of identifying said evidence, or confirming there is none and no basis to pursue charges, continue litigation, either directly or by implication (circumstantial evidence). This is why we have investigations.
Sounds reasonable.
So when Robert Mueller is invited to a dinner party at Jeffrey Dahmer’s house to discuss evidence of Gacy’s crimes, he shouldn’t ignore the naked guy running out the front door or what’s on the menu.
That makes sense. Trump could not afford the $130k so he had Cohen form Essential Consulting LLC so for Cohen to find a Russian oligarch to pay for the one night hook-up.
Excerpted from the article linked above:
NEW YORK — After more than a quarter of a century of fighting with him about his taxes, the federal government filed suit Thursday against Roy M. Cohn to collect almost $7 million the Internal Revenue Service says it is owed.
The civil suit seeks to seize and sell Cohn’s Manhattan town house and his Connecticut estate, charging that the controversial lawyer and some of his law partners concealed his true ownership of the properties so tax liens couldn’t be collected.
“A lot of money is owed to the U.S. government, and we will go about collecting it,” said Rudolph W. Giuliani, the U.S. attorney in Manhattan, whose office filed the civil action against Cohn and seven of his associates.
Wait a second. Did I read that right? Rudolph W. Giuliani sued Roy Cohn for taxes owed to Uncle Sam way back in 1986? Yep. That’s what the article says. Whoa.
Linked above at the bottom of the page.
Stay away from the reply button at the bottom of the page.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_jumping_bean
Late: Nobody reads the articles you post here. original thoughts please – short to the point.
Bill, if L4D’s (Annie/Inga) motive was truly to provide substance, she wouldn’t need to rack up the frequent poster miles. She’s after the miles; substance be damned.
Bill Martin – few people read them when she posted the links when she was originally Annie/Inga. She is a serial linker.
Don de Drain May 14, 2018 at 3:03 AM
Going after the messenger because you don’t like his message. That won’t solve Trump’s problems.
Are you old enough to remember Roy Cohn’s problems with the tax authorities? The same Roy Cohn who did work for Trump.
Michael Aarethun May 14, 2018 at 7:52 AM
Since the answer is no enlighten us just a tad.
Late4Dinner May 14, 2018 at 8:23 AM
Here’s a link for you, Michael Aarethun.
http://articles.latimes.com/1986-04-04/news/mn-24457_1_roy-m-cohn
Bill Martin May 14, 2018 at 10:11 AM
Late: Nobody reads the articles you post here. original thoughts please – short to the point.
Bill Martin does not read anything anybody posts here.
Bill Martin would not recognize an original thought if it poked him in his eye with a sharp stick.
Bill Martin is a poster child for the proprietary impulse running amok in the world.
“Bill Martin is a poster child for the proprietary impulse running amok in the world.” – Finally an original thought coming from Ms. Late vs. lefty liberal loss-soothing delusional “journalistic” articles.
AT&T once known as the long distance communciation giant went into the cell phone business and was bought out by Verizon was it? Who immediately screwed the customer base, got caught and then changed their name to back to AT&T. One of the corporations which like United Airlines and Bank America are on the stay a long away away from them list.
Million a Year in salary and perks. Well worth dragging out what should have been a one second exercise in honesty. “The answer to your question is ‘collusion’ is not a crime’.” Then asked the mission statement be corrected to something like “Investigate any activities that may or may not show any connection between either of the candidates with any foreign nation or……”
Instead of one second of honesty we get a collision with personal moral values.
“Cohen is only the latest in a long line of sleaze winding its way through Washington.”
“Cohen’s sleazy practices have now ensnared law firms, companies, and the administration itself.”
(…)
“What is different in this case is that Cohen, who has no appreciable legal skills or particular business acumen, seemed to be selling only access. He is not a lobbyist and barely acknowledged as a lawyer. Like so much of Cohen’s record, it was raw, crude, and unabashedly corrupt.”
(…)
“Cohen was well known to have the legal skills of a wombat but this legal and lobbying firm wanted him close. Novartis actually explained its $1.2 million payment to Cohen to get his advice on “health care” despite the lack of any evidence that Cohen’s knowledge of the field went beyond his personal HMO plan.”
(…)
“Of course, Cohen went about cashing in with his signature reckless abandon.”
(…)
“Only two things are certain: first, Cohen is a sleazy influence peddler and, second, he found a perfect home in Washington.”
*******************
Guess Cohen if off JT’s Christmas card list this year. In ten years of reading the blog, I’ve never seen him go after somebody like he does with Cohen or for as long. And we’ve talked about mass murderers on the blog! Yeesh.
I will not remind you of “that thing” I said before.
That’s as politely as I can not say it.
Piles of … chatter, to be polite.
If you left a pile of Mexican jumping beans out in the sun . . .
. . . would they sound like . . . the common room at . . .
The Mainstream Media, Drudge Report, Alex Jones’ Infowars, etc. are Zionist Nazi Propagandists..
They are War Criminals as chief propagandist for the Nazis, Joseph Goebbels.
If your news doesn’t point to Zionist corruption destroying America, you are getting the wrong news.
BUSH, OBAMA, TRUMP, NETANYAHU, THEIR ADMINISTRATIONS & CO-CONSPIRATORS ARE ZIONIST NAZI CRIMINALS, MASS MURDERERS.
http://buenavistamall.com/zionistsnazis.jpg
The last of he WWII losing side and the joke of the blog.
NOTICE PATRIOT’S POST..??
It illustrates the danger of promoting wild conspiracies. There are a certain number of “patriots” out there with fantastic delusions concerning the larger world.
Yet Donald Trump plays to people like this when he says “Obama wiretapped Trump Tower” or “Millions of illegals voted for Hillary”. Trump knows that millions of ‘patriots’ will consume wild conspiracies and share them through social media.
NOTICE PATRIOT’S POST..??
Notice? Yes. Read them? No.
Trump knows that millions of ‘patriots’ will consume wild conspiracies and share them through social media.
This is news to you? In our post-truth world, the consumption and distribution of information confirming a particular bias is just a mouse-click away. I’m not concerned so much that information is so readily available. My concern is that we have such a large percentage of our population lacking the critical-thinking skill necessary to determine fact from fiction. This supposed legal blog is a perfect example of that condition.
What..?? Jonathan Turley is on the same level as Patriot..??! What an over-the-top comparison!
My concern is that we have such a large percentage of our population lacking the critical-thinking skill necessary to determine fact from fiction.
And enter Peter Hill as Exhibit A from the Turley blog.
Olly, how snarky of you. Somehow I’m supposed to believe that I ‘lack critical thinking skills’ because I think the professor is a credible legal analyst? But somehow you’re wiser than that..??
Your comments here illustrate the acrobatics Trump supporters must perform on a daily basis. Every person or publication reporting Trump’s legal problems is ‘part of the deep state conspiracy’. And readers like me who recognize these problems ‘lack critical thinking skills’. Yet people subscribing to deep state conspiracies are wise, critical thinkers.
But in reality, of course, subscribers of deep state conspiracies inhabit a vacuum of critical thought.
The professor isn’t a working lawyer nor does he publish in the realm of criminal law.
Presumably you voted for Trump despite the fact that he never held an elected office of any kind. Yet you quibble about Professor’s Turley’s expertise on law..??
Presumably you voted for Trump despite the fact that he never held an elected office of any kind.
He’s actually run a business and devoted his whole life to activities which had operational measures of competence.
You’re enamored of Barack Obama, who drew a salary from the University of Chicago for twelve years (but never published one scholarly paper), who practiced law for all of three years (and ended his career as an associate), who sat in legislatures for 12 years while establishing himself as an expert in no area of policy, and whose brush with being an executive involved running the Chicago Annenberg Challenge into the ground. (And published two memoirs ‘ere his 45th birthday).
Competence? Very nice. Please post more of this type of material.
this is to “iffin they rich, theyuns must be smarty” nutty sufferer
I left out: President Barack HUSSEIN Obama was the greatest President of the United States and Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces since Harry Truman. Moreover, prior to his marriage, he undoubtedly had “access” to the white women.
this is to “AND, the new guy is white” nutty sufferer
I left out: President Barack HUSSEIN Obama was the greatest President of the United States and Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces since Harry Truman. Moreover, prior to his marriage, he undoubtedly had “access” to the white women.
Saying absurd things does not make those things true. See Ken Rogers and Willestina
Obama had no notable accomplishments whatsoever as ‘commander in chief’ and presided over several debacles. He knew nothing of banking legislation, which was written by lobbyists in Barney Frank’s office. The ‘stimulus’ plan was assembled by Pelosi and Reid from extant wish-lists. They treated his babble over the phone as white noise. His signature medical insurance plan succeeded in wrecking the market for household insurance in one jurisdiction after another. He also provided a facility for the Democratic Party to do its dirty work, hence the impunity for abusive officials in the Department of Justice, in the IRS, in the Department of Education, &c. And then there are displays of near treasonous behavior like the Bowe Bergdahl deal, the Iran deal, and the Bradley Manning pardon. And wasn’t it a sweet gesture during the Benghazi disaster – goes to bed early and jets off to a fundraiser the next day. There’s never been such an empty suit in the White House.
I apologize Peter. I gave you far more credit than you deserved. I’ll try to be more clear:
The professor has a blog that he will use to post stories and once posted, the subscribers to his blog will comment. It was to the subscribers (such as yourself) that my comment was directed, not JT.
PH,
Chant “Lawfare” ten times and Olly will forgive you.
Don’t you know that only Olly, Allan, and NII can think?
Don’t you know that only Olly, Allan, and NII can think?
I appreciate the shout out. That’s good company to keep. 🙂
Cohen was well known to have the legal skills of a wombat
It would be more honest if Mr. Avenetti would sign his posts and not appropriate your byline.
Where the money comes from is only part of the story. Where the money goes to is the other part of the story. For instance, if any of Trump’s record-setting $107 million in auguration money ended up in the hands of Oleg Deripaska, then the story would go well beyond mere influence-peddling. Likewise, if any of the consulting fees paid to Michael D. Cohen’s Essential Consulting LLC ended up back in the hands of Viktor Vekselberg, then that story, too, would go well beyond mere influence-peddling. Stay Tuned.
http://www.newsweek.com/trump-inauguration-money-still-missing-783934
Excerptd from the article linked above:
Trump’s inauguration committee raised a record-breaking $107 million as his administration prepared to assume the White House last year, but very little has been disclosed about where the remaining money was allocated. [sentence deleted]
During Trump’s transition period, the organizing committee led by billionaire investor Thomas Barrack doubled the funds raised by any previous U.S. president. The money raised eyebrows among political operatives because there was nothing about the celebration that indicated it would exceed a more traditional price tag, according to Public Citizen, a liberal-leaning consumer rights advocacy group.
Paul Manafort’s protégé, Rick Gates, served on Trump’s transition team and Trump’s inaugural committee. Manafort is alleged to be in debt to Oleg Deripaska to the tune of $19 million.
I’ve wondered for some time if President Trump’s failings to reign in his cabinet and advisors has similar elements to the problems that President Grant had with his.
Did you mean “rein in,” or was that a Freudian slip re the imperial presidency?
Just to be fair, what skeletons are in Michael Avenatti’s closet?
In 1999, he earned a Juris Doctor from George Washington University Law School in Washington, D.C., where he worked with Professor Jonathan Turley on constitutional issues relating to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
One of Avenatti’s former law school professors witnessed his ambition up close. “He is an adrenaline junkie,” Jonathan Turley, who taught Avenatti at GW Law, told The Washington Post. “I think he needs that adrenaline rush. He lives his life aggressively. In both litigation and in life he shows a certain aggressive style.”
So exactly who is paying Michael Avenatti? And is he a lawyer, an opposition researcher, a journalist, or a campaign operative? Avenatti clams it’s a Go fund me “CrowdJustice” paying him. I get that.
Who is paying into “CrowdJustice”? Michael?
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/387135-avenatti-says-donations-pay-his-fees
Not swamp anymore, cess pool now.
We get it. Michael Cohen exposed as sleazy lobbyist in addition to Trump bimbo fixer – old news. Professor Turley loves to pile on easy target Cohen but still does not dare to have a critical word for another sleazeball – his former pet pupil Michael Avennatti who Turley is “proud of”.
Hey, Bill. I’m new to this blog. My first day in fact. But, since you bring up “piling on”, where’s your response to the anti-semitic nutcase who put a looong post about, well, that zionists are Nazis.
Short, to the point.
Just the facts, ma’am.
I must have missed your condescending comments to that guy.
Or is that the point, L4D is believed by your clique to be a woman, so you dictate to her, but you’re afraid to speak up to the crazy anti-semite?
Got it.
Who’m I kidding, the more I read the comments on here, the more I feel like I’m reading the message boards on Bitter Lawyer. Incestuous little group pretending to disagree with each other. Closed system.
There is no here, here.
Byyy-eeeee.
I’m new to this blog. My first day in fact.
Well done Edward. Yeah, why waste all that time getting to know the subjects of your condescending remark when you can use single data point management instead. At least your efficient.
Mr. Milner, You seem to have misguided anger management issues. Not sure which zionist comments you are referring to but your anger might be put to better use if you aimed it at the author of the objectionable post you reference above.
He’s referring to ‘Patriot’, most likely. Possibly Ken Rogers.
Edward, half the commenters here are genuine deplorables. Their cynicism knows no bounds. If Professor Turley writes a column suggesting that James Comey may have jeopardized Robert Mueller’s case, these commenters will exult like their team won the Super Bowl.
But if Professor Turley writes a column suggesting that Michael Cohen is a shameless political fixer, these commenters will hiss that Turley is ‘out of line’ and possibly part of the ‘deep state conspiracy’. Then furiously they’ll post a series of memes shrieking, “What about Hillary??”
These patterns play out every week with eerie predictability. So it’s hardly surprising that someone like Patriot can post an insanely delusional meme and draw no notice from the Trumpers. In the world of Trumpers, no meme is crazy enough.
In the world of Trumpers, no meme is crazy enough.
The insanely delusional posts are simply ignored. The routinely delusional posts might get a response; which is why I bothered commenting to you at all. Perhaps I need to reevaluate your delusional status.
Your welcome!
Edward Milner – sometimes we agree, sometimes we disagree. Depends on the subject. There are people I almost never agree with but do on occasion when the right thread comes up.
Edward Milner asked, “where’s your response to the anti-Semitic nutcase who put a looong post about, well, that Zionists are Nazis.”
Mr. Milner, welcome to Bedlam. The anti-Semitic nutcase at issue, Patriot (@musicman27103), never engages in cross-examination with any commenter who replies to him. Instead, Patriot just posts more and more hit-and-run, drive-by, anti-Semitic defamation. That is why the denizens of Bedlam (c/o Dr. Benson) do not often reply to Patriot (@musicman27103).
Seeya.
the above was to eddies farewell missive.
“That has allowed questions to be raised about the possible use of this company as a “slush fund”……”
LOL. Hey Professor Turley, this is a conflagration, not someone lighting a match. The chances of further indictments and convictions have increased yuuuugely.
Reblogged this on Truth Troubles.
Excellent article Sir, I very much enjoyed your thoughts on this issue so I am going to reblog this article for you. I hope that you are able to have a great week ahead.
Meet the new swamp, same as the old swamp.
Reblogged this on What i found intersting today….
I like a guy who comes right to the point. 😉
https://twitter.com/Barnes_Law/status/995746938086543360
Going after the messenger because you don’t like his message. That won’t solve Trump’s problems.
Are you old enough to remember Roy Cohn’s problems with the tax authorities? The same Roy Cohn who did work for Trump.
Actually, while it isn’t my intent to post my own comments here any longer, because Turley’s “Civility Rules” are as fraudulent as he is, the point of posting that information was merely to mention something that, to my knowledge, Turley has remained silent about while repeatedly hammering Cohen — which is that Turley’s prized pupil, whom Turley has made at least one public appearance with, is a truly shady lawyer, even by shady-lawyer standards — and Turley hasn’t mentioned anything about it.
I don’t believe in Guilt by Association (though it seems Turley does), however it is reasonable to be Suspicious by Association, especially when someone is clearly hyping one side of an issue and remaining silent about the other side.
Cohen will have to sink or swim based upon the fact and law at issue. I don’t see where Trump has any problems, and if you do I’d suggest you locate a source of information other than whatever it is you’re consuming.
Personally, I find a total absence of lawful jurisdiction under 28 CRF 600.1 and 600.4 related to the Mueller investigation, so however it goes in the lower courts, I think a higher court will eventually inform Mueller that he and Rosenstein have been involved in gross misconduct.
But I find it more than a little odd that Turley has, to my knowledge, had nothing to say about conduct by his buddy, Avenatti, that appears to clearly be criminal, and criminal on a scale beyond criminal allegations against Cohen. Withhold taxes from employees and not using the money withheld to actually pay the taxes is a particularly serious offense, setting aside all of the people who lost their jobs due to Avenatti’s shady dealings.
In the same vein, I find it odd that, for all of Turley’s apparent psychological-puritan fixation on the Stormy-slut scandal (preceding revelations concerning Cohen), that he has yet to mention anything about the NY Attorney General apparently being a VIOLENT sex offender while championing the #MeToo movement.
Calling one of the women Schneiderman abused his “brown slave” would seem to be a sleaze issue right in Turley’s wheelhouse. It’s the sort of thing that Turley really goes for in this blog, yet I’ve not noticed any mention of it. Maybe I missed it.
So, in summary, it seems to me that Turley is only interested in lawyerly misconduct on one side of the political fence while on the other side there are violent sex crimes, a “brown slave” of the NY Attorney General, tax evasion, suspicious funding, and felonies related to stolen Treasury Department documents being disseminated and used (in furtherance of the theft crime) instead of having been reported to the authorities — which mysteriously fail to interest Turley.
To my mind, it all makes this “legal” blog a really sick joke. And I say that regardless of what Cohen did or didn’t do.
That’s why I posted the information I posted. I hope that helps you understand, though I’m fairly certain that you’re not seeking understanding.
And in case he reads this — Hi, Paul.
> I think a higher court will eventually inform Mueller that he and Rosenstein have been involved in gross misconduct
Their published behaviour seems to conform to the special counsel regulations. At worst, Mueller will have to outsource some of the prosecutions to other jurisdictions — something he’s already done.
For those who complain that Mueller has looked at more than Russia and obstruction, it’s not his fault that in his investigation he uncovered a vast and crass array of corrupt behaviour by Trump’s people. If the cops get a tip that you are growing pot in your backyard, you can’t cry “overreach” if they also find headless torsos in your composter.
Federal regulation 28 CFR 600.1 specifically identifies authority to appoint as special counsel as being related to conducting a “criminal” investigation/prosecution. There is no authority to appoint a special counsel to conduct a counterintelligence investigation, yet Comey testified that it was a counterintelligence investigation that was being conducted, and Mueller’s team reasserted that it was, in fact, conducting a counterintelligence investigation during the May 4, 2018, hearing concerning Manafort’s Motion to Dismiss the Superseding Indictment.
https://www.scribd.com/document/378289155/U-S-Special-Counsel-Mueller-Vs-Paul-Manafort-Judge-TS-Ellis-III-Presiding-May-4-2017#fullscreen&from_embed
Without lawful authority to appoint a special counsel to conduct a counterintelligence investigation, Mueller’s “investigation” is more than a little irregular, as is his reaching back more than a decade and opening up prior cases that had been investigated by the FBI and concerning which prosecution was declined. As Judge Ellis stated during the aforementioned hearing, those cases did not “arise” out of the special counsel’s investigation, so it would appear that Mueller exceeded his mandate under the language of the 28 CFR 600.4 “specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated” which Rosenstein provided Mueller while establishing “original jurisdiction.”
And I believe there’s another hearing coming up in that case on May 28, 2018 (I believe the date is) regarding Manafort’s Motion for Hearing Regarding Government Leaks. That Motion is supplemented with a Memorandum detailing a number of specific leaks to the media that could have only originated with Mueller’s team — including leaks of grand jury information in gross violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6, and including leaks of falsified information which appear to have been intended to falsify reasons to appoint a special counsel.
While not directly related to Manafort’s issues, the sudden disclosure of stolen Treasury Department documents — which it seems can only have been disclosed by someone in the Treasury Department or someone on Mueller’s team who obtained access to those Treasury Department documents — strengthens Manafort’s contention that Mueller’s “investigation” is wildly out of control and perpetrating some very serious crimes.
There’s a point, I think, where the court will decide that enough is enough — or as Yogi Berra might have said, enough is too much — and that this is NOT how criminal justice is supposed to work in the USA.
Otherwise, your characterization of what Mueller has found is amusing but hardly accurate, and nonetheless doesn’t authorize ignoring the requirements of federal regulations 28 CFR 600.1 or 600.4. Rosenstein can put whatever he wants in his secret and belated statement of 28 CFR 600.4 “original jurisdiction,” but that doesn’t mean that it conforms to the requirements of the regulation.
Those are only a fraction of the issue that, I believe, will sink Mueller’s unlawful investigation.
William Bayer – I want to know why the FBI had a mole in the Trump campaign and how active that mole was. Supposedly the IG report exposes the name of the mole.
I’m not sure the mole was “in” the Trump campaign as many have been speculating. There are two possibilities. There WAS one guy who was in the Trump organization dating back many years who’s one of the suspects, and there’s the other guy who mysteriously contacted both Popadopoulis (I’m not gonna look up how to spell that) and Carter Page, who appears to be the one that raised the subject to both of them concerning Hillary’s emails having been obtained by Russians.
But that’s another likely fail point for Mueller which I hope the IG zeroes in on.
William Bayer – I really look forward to the IG report.
I finally remembered where I read this a little over two months ago, in an article titled “Russian-Born Businessman Linked To Trump Claims To Have Been US Spy” — about Felix Sater, a longtime Trump organization employee.
http://dailycaller.com/2018…
This is the guy I was thinking of. If you read the article, it sounds exactly like the guy that would’ve been spying on Trump. He already was an FBI/CIA spy, and he already was in the Trump organization, and he had an office in Trump Tower. The other guy some people are thinking was the spy, Stefan Halper, doesn’t appear to have been located in the US and doesn’t appear to have had a position in either the Trump campaign or the Trump organization. He’s a Cambridge professor living in England, though he does have CIA and MI6 ties.
My money’s on Sater.
William Bayer – yours is a reasonable conclusion. However, now they are speculating there were two moles. 😉
Paul C Schulte said, “I want to know why the FBI had a mole in the Trump campaign and how active that mole was.”
The alt-right media are claiming that the mole is Stefan Halper. There’s not telling yet if that’s true. But you might want to see what Wikipedia has to say about Halper.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Halper
Excerpted from the Wikipedia article linked above:
Stefan Halper (born 1944) is a foreign policy scholar. He served as a White House official in the Nixon, Ford, and Reagan administrations and is currently the Director of American Studies at the Department of Politics, University of Cambridge. He is also a Life Fellow at Magdalene College, Cambridge.
Excerpted from emptywheel:
Halper first met Carter Page at conference on July 11 and 12 in London (the meeting would have been on the way back from his trip to Moscow), then remained in contact thereafter.
Halper met campaign foreign policy adviser Carter Page at a July 2016 symposium held at Cambridge regarding the upcoming election, Page told TheDCNF. The pair remained in contact for several months.
Halper met with the third, unnamed campaign advisor on August 31 or September 1, though did not mention Papadopoulos at the meeting.
Halper also requested and attended a one-on-one meeting with another senior campaign official, TheDCNF learned. That meeting was held a day or two before Halper reached out to Papadopoulos. Halper offered to help the campaign but did not bring up Papadopoulos, even though he would reach out to the campaign aide a day or two later.
Halper first reached out to George Papadopoulos on September 2, then met with him over several days in London in mid-September.
P. S. DCNF stands for The Daily Caller News Foundation.
Annie/Inga – I will wait for official confirmation.
Excellent choice.
William,
I thought you might find this article supportive.
http://thefederalist.com/2018/05/14/record-proves-robert-mueller-clown-prince-federal-law-enforcement/?utm_source=The+Federalist+List&utm_campaign=54fc4ad923-RSS_The_Federalist_Daily_Updates_w_Transom&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-54fc4ad923-79248369
Terry the Ironist – considering that Mueller has charged a corporation that did not exist at the time he says it did, I would say some of the work is a little sloppy. And he expected the two corporations to be undefended when suddenly lawyers popped up for the one that was in existence. Not going as planned.
Assumed facts not in evidence. The lawyer for Concord Management and Consulting, Dubelier, claims that Concord Catering did not exist at the time of the conspiracy alleged in the indictment. Dubelier offered no specifics about when Concord Catering came into existence. Don’t be surprised if turns out that Dubelier was just engaging in a little bit of “lawyer talk.”
Now here’s some “lawyer talk” for you, Caviler: Concord Catering existed in Russia since 1996. Nobody yet knows exactly when, nor even if, Concord Catering began operations in The US. So much for your proverbial ham sandwich, Schulteacher. Don’t be surprised if your supposed FBI mole goes the same way as your supposedly non-existent catering company that actually existed since 1996.
Annie/Inga – they were charged as a US company I think. However, the lawyers left a door open saying that if the government could prove that the company existed during the conspiracy, they would probably be defending them.
Lawyer talk equals CIPA trial. Enjoy your ham sandwich, Paul.
Annie/Inga – it is not my ham sandwich, it is the government’s and they have to deal with it.
Concord Catering probably offers salmon sandwiches on fried rye bread topped with caviar and radishes. But would they get to cater their own jury trial? Can anyone impanel twelve citizens of The District of Columbia willing to eat borscht for lunch every day?
Annie/Inga – the government has been put on notice. The Russians are not going to roll over and play dead. 😉
The Russians’ lawyer, Eric Dubelier, is rapidly talking his client into a CIPA trial. (Oh boy. Oh boy.)
Annie/Inga – just because you have learned a new term does not mean you should overuse it. 😉
CIPA for Concord. CIPA for Manafort in EDVA. CIPA for Manafort in D. C. CIPA for everything. CIPA, CIPA, CIPA, CIPA, CIPA. (Joe Biden was a legislative genius.)
William Bayer – you should be sending this directly to JT at his gw address. Although most of us have things we wish he would cover and he doesn’t, some of us start doing it as off the topic OT. Sometimes it appears as a thread the next day sometimes never. It is like working with students. You can lead them to knowledge, but you cannot make them think. 😉
BTW, don’t stop commenting. 😛
Paul
Well, truthfully, I miss corresponding with you and squeaking and Ollie (or is it Olly) and a few others, but I don’t have any desire to expose myself to another instance of defamation as happened one morning a few days before I stopped commenting here.
Meanwhile, I doubt that Turley needs me to tell him that Schneiderman calling one of his violent sex crime victims his “brown slave” (LOL) is something that would have caught Turley’s attention if someone as lowly as a municipal court bailiff had done it — so I just automatically assume that that subject and Avenatti’s well-documented dirtbaggishness are among the subjects that Turley as no intention of mentioning.
And you can always find me elsewhere. At the moment I have a number of comment/replies posted in relation other articles at other websites (always using my real name and the same icon as here), such as at this article:
http://dailycaller.com/2018/05/13/meghan-mccain-white-house-apology/
Generally speaking, I’m pretty easy to locate on the web. If I don’t talk to you here again, I see no reason why we couldn’t communicate somewhere else, and you may pass that along to the others.
And I DO hope you stumble across that George Szell/Cleveland Orchestra recording of Ludwig van What’s-his-name’s 9th. The second movement is my favorite. I once did an animation to that movement using that recording. If I wanted to torture people, I could probably post it here.
Have fun — or as the Maharishi used to say, “Feel the joy.”
I’ll notify the Times and the Post to hold their presses so your opinion regarding legal ethics can be included. Oh, wait, your ilk believe reputable newspapers are in on the conspiracy, too; nevermind.
This is to “it just sucks when real-world facts obliterate my fantasies” willie
Mark M., Thursday May 17th, 2018, will be the one-year anniversary of the appointment of he who will not be deterred, Robert Swan Mueller The Third.
To my mind, it all makes this “legal” blog a really sick joke.
William,
That has been my observation as well. This is a lawfare blog. There are very few contributors on this blog interested in objective truth. Your posts are a reliable breath of fresh air to this blog and if you’re being attacked personally, then you know you have the facts correct. Keep up the great work!
Since the answer is no enlighten us just a tad.
Here’s a link for you, Michael Aarethun.
http://articles.latimes.com/1986-04-04/news/mn-24457_1_roy-m-cohn