Criminal law, Lawyering, Politics, Uncategorized

Michael Cohen, The Ultimate Red Shirt Defendant Takes A Plea

images-1.jpgThe appearance of Michael Cohen in court as a self-confessed felon was as riveting as predictable as scene in this unfolding drama. Indeed, if this is ever made into a movie, it would seem all too formulaic. Cohen is the ultimate red-shirt defendant. In the film industry, “red shirts” are characters in a movie plot that inevitably die (like those red shirted security officers in Star Trek that always seem to face demise by the end of an episode). You can often spot a red shirt in that character who is so over-the-top in reading letters from home or over compensating in the face of a pending battles. They are dead men walking.  If you play back the last year, there is one guy who stands out in the red shirt, the guy who has to implode and flip. It is Michael Cohen.

For years, Cohen stood out among sycophants and hanger-ons for his public proclamations of absolute loyalty and love for Trump. He called himself Trump’s fix man and said he would take a bullet for the man. Yup, red shirt. He is inevitably the guy who flips for the government.

Cohen pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations and tax and bank fraud in New York. He will go to jail for up to three years.

The most important charges clearly involve campaign finance violations. When the payments to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal were first disclosed, some of us immediately said that the payments looked like campaign finance violations. It was that obvious. Yet, like so much of his representation, Cohen seemed to blissfully steer himself and his client into the worst possible path in dealing with threats.

Cohen’s implication of Trump in open court yesterday left the President in the position of an unindicted co-conspirator.  If the government believes Cohen and believes that this is a crime (as it must to file this material), it must also believe that President Trump participated in same crime with Cohen as well as other individuals referenced in the indictment.  While campaign finance charges are rarely prosecuted as crimes, they are crimes and Cohen just confessed to committing them — allegedly with the man who is now President of the United States.

That does not mean that Trump is without defenses.  This is difficult crime to prove as shown in the John Edwards trial and Cohen is a dreadful fact witness.  If what Cohen said today is true,  then what he has said for the last year are lies.  That hardly makes for a compelling fact witness.  Yet, for the first time, a plea has tied the President directly to an alleged criminal act — and that is always a serious matter.

246 thoughts on “Michael Cohen, The Ultimate Red Shirt Defendant Takes A Plea”

  1. I think the John Edwards prosecution was phony, but Trump may be liable in a way that Edwards wasn’t. I don’t think that Trump even knows how much money he has, or where it is. He appoints people to open accounts for him all over the world, and he doesn’t seem to care what goes in them. He may be a money launderer without even knowing it. If Cohen paid from an account with Russian money, or, more likely, if the campaign reimbursed him with an account with Russian money, Trump could be liable for election law fraud. It seems the public is learning things about Trump’s money that he doesn’t know himself.

  2. Cohen is asking for donations in the sum of $500,000.00. Davis’s big payday.

  3. REPUBLICAN MIDTERM PROSPECTS CLOUDED BY DEVELOPMENTS

    TRUMP’S LEGAL STATUS TO BECOME ANNOYING CAMPAIGN ISSUE

    Having taken total ownership of the Trump presidency, Republicans now find themselves in an awkward spot. Labor Day is less than 2 weeks away, then the fall campaign begins for crucial midterm elections.

    Republican candidates face the inevitable prospect of having to answer, repeatedly, questions regarding Trump’s legal status. These questions shall have the effect of keeping Republicans constantly on defense; the worst possible position to be in. And one can bet that Donald Trump will aggravate this situation by acting more unhinged than ever.

    Can Republicans possibly express full support for Trump? Such assurances would only invite more questions yet. Video clips of candidates expressing full support will invariably be featured in attack ads by opponents.

    Instead Republicans will have to answer for Trump with guarded statements that leave plenty of wiggle room. But even these statements could be featured in attack ads contrasted with earlier expressions of full support. Either way Republicans are sure to look either deluded or uncertain.

    As this fall campaign unfolds, the term “Buyers Remorse” is sure to haunt Republicans. Buyers Remorse for a party that took full ownership of a doomed president.

    1. Due to the numbers of Republican seats to be filled and based on history it is likely the Republicans may lose and not retain the House. If the Democrats lose, that is a big loss. Trump will survive either way especially since he hasn’t had a lot of support from his own party. Very gradually Americans are learning. Look at how Trump packs the stadiums everytime he speaks.

      Take note how Ocasia has to keep the press out of her townhalls because she doesn’t know what she is talking about. Take note how the Democratic Party would like Maxine Waters to shut up. Take note how the Democratic Party is telling its members not to talk about things like impeachment. Most of all take note how the Democratic Party seems to have no policy at all.

    2. doomed? lol. a couple guys took a fall. in ten years every president will be dogged by crap like this. regardless of party. be careful what you wish for. thats what they said to Repubs after Clinton. indeed.

      there is an aspect of Bill Clinton’s revenge about this. both on his harridan wife and on the Republicans. i find that amusing

  4. “Over the past several decades, the Clinton family has had no more loyal friend than Lanny J. Davis. A Washington lawyer and lobbyist, Davis once served as special counsel to Bill Clinton, and became well-known for defending him on television; meanwhile, he once wrote to Hillary Clinton that “The honest to goodness truth is … aside from Carolyn, my four children, and my immediate family, I consider you to be the best friend and the best person I have met in my long life.” To say that Davis is fanatically committed to all things Clinton would probably be considered a compliment by the man himself.” Slate 2/2018. Is Lanny trying to finish the job Hillary’s dossier couldn’t accomplish? Looks like Cohen was made the fall guy since the pleas he made on the campaign finance issue are not a crime according to many lawyers this morning. Obama’s campaign in 2008 paid one of the largest fines ever for campaign violations and we didn’t see him criminally charged.

  5. Here’s another question. If the payments to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal were instead made through the law firm Perkins Coie, would that be a campaign finance violation?

    1. TBob – excellent question. In fact, the two women would have ended up destroyed not paid off.

      1. I’m just trying to understand how $100k in ‘hush’ money paid directly is a campaign finance violation? But Clinton campaign expenditures (in the millions) laundered through Perkins Coie…to pay Fusion GPS and Christopher Steele to do work for the campaign in order to ‘influence an election’ is not? What am I missing?

        1. The payment to Perkins Coie was for legal services. Payments made by vendors to sub-vendors like Fusion GPS are not required to be reported to the FEC.

          The law firm and the Clinton campaign didn’t break the law here. The Trump administration would have prosecuted them if they had.

          2. It’s sort of like the difference between getting nailed for “lying to the FBI” as they did to General Flynn, but then when Hillary Clinton sat in her FBI interview and said she “didn’t remember or didn’t recall” in response to over 40 questions — that wasn’t lying? Nope, Hillary didn’t lie to federal agents. But General Flynn did. Please.

            1. TBob – if she said she did not recall or did not remember, she was clearly lying to the FBI. She is the “smartest woman in the United States.” remember?

              1. Would anyone really want someone with as poor a memory as Hillary has sitting in the Oval Office as POTUS?

                She said “I don’t remember” to about 40 questions. But that’s not technically “lying” to the feds.

                Just like laundering payments for campaign expenditures to Russian spies through a law firm is not technically a campaign finance violation.

          3. A complaint has been filed with the FEC on reporting violations involving the Hillary campaign.
            The complaint states that “by law, campaigns must disclose the reason the money is spent, and the recipient”.
            In lumping in, and burying, opposition research expentitures ( The Steele Russian Dossier) as “legal fees”, the complaint alleges that there was improper concealment of the true purpose of the opposition research spending.
            This is not likely to be anything that the Special Counsel is interested in pursuing.
            The Huber/ Horowitz investigations have been ongoing, as a team, since Nov. 2017.
            If there is an investigation involving the alleged violation(s), or any action taken against the Hillary campaign and the DNC, it would likely arise out of U.S. Attorney Huber’s investigation.

        2. “What am I missing?” The truth but you know that. Clinton spent money on OPPO standard campaign expense; paying off skanks is not standard procedure – see John Edwards.

          1. YNOT,..
            You are missing the nature of the complaint to the FEC, which was stated clearly enough.

          2. YNOT, Remember when Obama tried to pay off Jeremiah Wright for his silence because he would hurt the campaign?

            ——–
            “Who sent the e-mail?” I asked Wright.

            “It was from one of Barack’s closest friends.”

            “He offered you money?”

            “Not directly,” Wright said. “He sent the offer to one of the members of the church, who sent it to me.”

            “How much money did he offer you?”

            “One hundred and fifty thousand dollars,” Wright said.

            “Did Obama himself ever make an effort to see you?”

            “Yes,” Wright said.
            ———–

            https://nypost.com/2012/05/13/the-bribe-to-silence-wright/

        3. TBob – what you are missing is what is good for Trump is not good for Hillary.

  6. I’m old enough to remember when Obama was fined $375,000 for a campaign fund violation.
    But, that was then, and this is now.

      1. Looks like tweets don’t post as they used to. What Ron Coleman’s tweet said:

        “Largest FEC fine ever imposed for Obama’s systematic gaming of election regulations – not mere make-work technicalities but rules enacted to ensure fairness in elections – is magically wiped away… with a cloth:”

        in response to Nick Confessore’s tweet:

        “Obama’s campaign, not Obama personally, paid a fine for what was essentially late or accidentally erroneous paperwork on a large number of small contributions.
        Cohen and the president personally engaged in a deliberate scheme to hide a payoff and lie about it.”

  7. Let’s see now. Most of Meullers crack investigators are Democrats who contributed to Hilary’s campaign. And Cohens lead attorney was a Clinton advisor. Hmmmm.

    1. Keep in mind that the moderator is an inveterate defender of the prerogatives of the legal profession. You just don’t notice that sort of thing or it brings the profession into disrepute. Also, for many lawyers, if there’s no conflict, there’s no interest.

    2. Cohen’s choice of Davis as his lawyer doesn’t make sense to me. I can’t get past Lanny Davis being a Clinton inner circle guy. Why would Cohen choose him to be his lawyer?

      There is little doubt that Lanny Davis would find great personal satisfaction in helping to bring down Trump to avenge Clinton’s loss — Davis is that much of a Clinton insider. So when I read this all I can see is a Clinton operator/insider (Lanny Davis) posing as a lawyer working on behalf of his “client” Cohen. I don’t buy it.

      1. And thus another conspiracy is born; when things don’t go your way, it must be somebody else’s fault. The loony get loonier.

        1. How about this one: Is it unethical to “collude with the prosecution” against the interests of your own client?

        2. Let me add this as well….do you know that Lanny Davis was actually “grief-stricken” when one of his oldest, dearest friends (Hillary) lost the election? He despises Trump and then literally wrote a book called, “The Unmaking of the President 2016” (see the chapter called “Impeachment”) and then tell me why it makes any sense at all to you that Cohen would choose Lanny Davis to be his attorney.

        3. “The Democratic Party, in November 2018, will be roaring back, and will take back the House, and be ready to start impeachment proceedings against Donald Trump.” – Lanny Davis

  8. Someday maybe a movie will be made. For those Americans who have not lost their minds over the loss of an election it is a very sad time in American history. In all my years I would never have thought the democrat party would become what it is today. Maybe that movie will be : “The Russia Setup”, Director-H Clinton, Producer-DNC, Special Effects-MSM, Script-C Steele, Technical Assistance-Fusion GPS. Who knows Hollywood may give it an Oscar.

    1. I shows that the Trump tax cuts have left a lot of cash in people’s hands and they don’t know what to do with it.

  11. “The most important charges clearly involve campaign finance violations.” Important how? Surely the more serious charges consist of Cohen’s years long tax evasion on millions of dollars?

    Second, if the Democrats win back the house in November, the President will be impeached. If they don’t, he won’t. Either way the petty (and dubious) accusation by Cohen that the President knowingly violated campaign finance laws by paying Stormy Daniels $130,000 to not speak publicly about her claim that Trump cheated on his pregnant wife ten years before the election may or may not someday ripen into a criminal charge against Trump whenever it is that he leaves office, but it is highly unlikely.

    Third, the certainty that Trump will be impeached if the Republicans lose the house in November is highly likely to cause registered Republicans (95% of whom support the President) to turn out to vote in November. Blue wave? Forget about it.

  12. It would be interesting if, in the lawsuit, he withdrew his accusations against the President. Just a thought. 😉

  13. Seems to me the Prez has been implicated in a campaign finance law violation. The court accepted as fact that, at the very least, “A Candidate” knew about the payments prior to the payments being made. Certainly the man pleading guilty has “truth” issues. As does the Prez and his favorite public law face, Guiliani. Seems to me that after the Prez said he new nothing of paying Stormy, Guiliani said that he did know and paid him back using the installment plan. The truth accepted by the court seems entirely plausible or shall I say, beyond a reasonable doubt.

    So what happens now? Supporters of the Prez keep moving the goal post, now they want nothing short of a piece of the puppet string with DNA from Trump and Putin on it to prove that Russia is controlling Trump.

    So maybe Trump is right, he could kill a person in plain sight and not be charged.

    To those on the right, Clinton committed an impeachable offence because he lied in a court of law about what could arguably be called consensual sex (yes there is the power differential that complicates the consensualness of it). Trump appears to purposefully have violated campaign finance laws and the right plugs their ears.

    Sad, a truly sad time in history we are living.

    1. i never cared about the blowjob from Monica or him giving evasive answers about it. I mean sex, what do you mean by sex? sex in some contexts only means intercourse, so, a BJ may be oral sex but it’s not sex. I cut Slick Willy some slack on that.

      and his alleged rapes such as against Juanita Broderick,. only occurred when he was governor so that wasnt a presidential issue.

      I felt however that coddling Chinese communist spies and PLA officers in the white house, and taking donations from them, may have had something to do with lettering the W88 warhead designs slip into their hands

      that was too complicated, lies about a blowjob were more interesting

      https://www.nytimes.com/1999/03/06/world/breach-los-alamos-special-report-china-stole-nuclear-secrets-for-bombs-us-aides.html

      1. The Presidents Clinton could’ve been impeached on any of a dozen scandals but those were evidently considered too complicated or too threatening to the Swamp and business as usual. They needed something simple and personal, that would not expose the systemic rot. Monica and the stain on the blue dress fit the, uh, bill.
        .

          1. “Name one?”

            You are not a serious player. Anytime one responds to one of your questions you run away like a coward. If you were shot on the battlefield the only place they could have hit you was on the back.

            I’ll quote Louis Freeh FBI director: “The problem was with Bill Clinton, the scandals and rumored scandals, the incubating ones and the dying ones never ended. Whatever moral compass the president was consulting was leading him in the wrong direction. His closets were full of skeletons just waiting to burst out.”

  14. NB, the Los Angeles Times editors were never prosecuted for sitting on the Rashid Khalidi tape The employees of NBC who broadcast the Stormy Daniels tape were never prosecuted, Christopher Steele isn’t going to be prosecuted, nor will anyone who hired him. A jury wouldn’t accede to charges against John Edwards and the prosecutors never went after his donors. These charges are political vendettas.

    1. BUT…BUT…BUT…. I seen a guy jaywalk, people smoke within 8 feet of a door, I seen someone throw a cigarette out a car window….The Hindenburg Blimp….BUT…BUT….

      1. Why not explain to me what counts as an ‘in-kind’ contribution and what doesn’t. When you’re mother gets home from work, she might help you answer.

  15. Yeah, well what about Clinton? And, Hillary; she wiped off Monica’s chin and clipped the cigars. In the end, Americans want a King and maybe someday a Queen, someone who is above them. In a parliamentary system the Prime Minister is not elected by any others than those of his or her constituency. If a PM screws up, the party in power replaces it.

    Our system, plus the fact that it is an oligarchy, provides us with a god like position that protects its occupant with its own set of laws. Trump grew up protected by a set of laws bought and paid for with infinite monies. The best of the best do not make it to the ballot box and rarely if ever to office. Trump is anything but the self made American ideal that he presents himself as. Trump has slipped in between the lines all his life, paying off, not paying, suing, papering the truth, etc. Along the way he worked with those who would provide the grease and defend him. Cohen and Manafort are the types that work for and are ‘loyal’ to a sort like Trump. They are there to take the fall and polish Trump’s shoes. No wonder they are as arrogant and stupid as they are. Cohen is screwed because he wanted to run in the same circles as Trump and needed money; thus the fraud etc. Cohen is screwed because Trump made sure Cohen was attached to the crimes. The same with Manafort. Trump is probably still protected as President until the next election when America will truly expose itself.

    Hopefully, more like Cohen and Manafort will come forward and ‘take the fall’ for this disgusting sack of lying ……. that inhabited the White House. An impeachment would be nice but unfortunately with Trump’s ability to lie like a rug and America’s penchant for royalty, it looks like it’s this until 2020. We can only hope that he doesn’t do too much damage.

    2. Isaac-
      Good points. It’s not so much “America’s penchant for royalty” as the tendency of voters to favor those candidates who are similar to themselves. US elections are an excellent measure the level of depravity among the US public. Somewhat less than half of the US voting public is grossly depraved.

      1. Somewhat less than half of the US voting public is grossly depraved.

        Rather unkind thing to say about the Hillary! electorate.

        1. Spastic, you’ve been playing Sergeant Schultz on this thread; the know-it-all who knows nothing with regards to Trump’s wrongdoings. Are you still committed to that character?

          1. you play the scolding schoolmarm. that’s a lot more annoying than a know it all.

          2. In case you hadn’t noticed, Peter Shill, Donald Trump is not Paul Manafort’s accountant. He’s not Michael Cohen’s accountant, either. He’s not applying for loans on behalf of Michael Cohen or Paul Manafort. He’s not in the influence peddling business. He’s not in the taxi medallion business either. And the election law charges are humbug.

            1. Trump’s ‘not in the influence peddling business’..?? Excuse me but there happens to be a Trump Hotel two blocks from The White House.

              1. It actually existed some years before Trump decided to run for President. You should really get up to date on these things.

                  1. I think he actually took the hotel property over in 2013 and I don’t know how much of it is owned by him.

              2. you’re out of touch.

                the billionaire IS the influence that others seek to peddle.

  16. John Turley Hype Machine lists campaign finance first when it actuality is least important and lastly stated item in charging docs (big deal is tax evasion and bank fraud): “Cohen pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations and tax and bank fraud in New York.” Cohen asserted the payments were for election purposes for which Trump has huge amount of plausible deniability i.e. protect his personal life and business, and 15+ other bimbos and Access Hollywood tape in cooperation with NBC was already out there for public consumption. But the lefty loons customer base needs to be fed by left media, and John Turley Hype Machine needs to maintain its click numbers. So it goes.

    1. Have you heard the one about The President who said that he could take over the special counsel’s investigation and run it if he wanted to?

    3. The moderator has been a big disappointment re Cohen, as his whole shtick has been to trash him (the moderator has never practiced law in New York, btw) while assiduously looking the other way in re the depredations of his pal Michael Avanetti.

    1. The government extorted from him an admission to a criminal charge that is in substance humbug. Very few people are criminally prosecuted for campaign finance violations (Dinesh D’Souza was, which tells you something about the Obama Justice Department) and defining a payment to a blackmailer as a ‘campaign contribution’ is the legal equivalent of Enron’s accounting (and a case federal prosecutors failed to make contra John Edwards). The only purpose of the plea is as a conduit to the President. One thing we’ve learned is that the lawyers in the Department of Justice are liberally salted with enemies of both the President and of popular electoral choice.

      1. Yep, campaign finance items might have been tossed in by Cohen to get on good side of the Southern District Brown Shirts. Lanny Boy Davis bragged about inclusion of the campaign finance items in post-pleading interview. This ploy is so transparent that even a cave man could figure it out and maybe even a lefty loon after coming down from media heroin they were just fed.

        1. Special Prosecutor’s Charge:
          Go investigate Russian collusion, Robert, and, by any means possible, whatever other stuff you can find to depose this President.

          1. Mespo, This looks like WWE staging: Muler catches fringe bad guy Manafort and gets conviction. Trump pardons – catch and release, everybody saves face. Cohen throws in two campaign items and pleads to avoid trial. Muler can claim he did his job with referral to Southern District and campaign finance goes nowhere with Trump. Both sides putting on a show knowing full well they will never face each other in the ring. Both are positioned to save face and avoid mutually assured destruction.

            1. Bill:

              It does have that kabuki theater feel to it. Remember when great men did great things instead of running down their contemporaries for specious and overtly political reasons?

              1. mespo – you don’t suppose Cohen is composing, do you? 😉 He really has no moral compass and would do anything to CHA.

                1. My take on Cohen is that he has no abstract and impersonal set of moral principles. He does however, have a concentric set of loyalties. He’ll take a bullet for Trump, until the point when interests of someone closer in would be injured. The law doesn’t matter to him. It’s a set of conventions you respect in order to avoid injury to your material interests, and the degree of respect you give those conventions is subject to actuarial calculation. He cares about people palpable to him (and you’ll notice he’s had only one wife and the smart money says she’s never had to share him), but he’s not conscientious or scrupulous.

                2. “you don’t suppose Cohen is composing”

                  Of course he is composing. I think he is playing for a few less years in jail and more free time before the end when he starts decomposing. 🙂

          2. Have all those authorizing documents regarding “scope” and all, even been fully released?

        2. Lanny’s voice is very femme on the radio, and Lanny is one of those names like “Pat.”
          Is it a boy or a girl?

          1. Lanny is a HRC loving lefty liberal, so he/she likely channels inner female based on how he/she acts. Lanny is exacted revenge on behalf of his/her gal pal HRC.

      1. hollywood – just for the sake of argument, let’s assume that Trump thinks that NDA with Stormy Daniels is in effect. What can he say?

        1. An unwarranted assumption. I think he tried to have David Dennison try to enforce it through arbitration, and failed.
          He seems to be trying a similar ploy re Omorosa.

  18. Cohen might make a terrible witness but it is likely the FBI found documentation of the conspiracy to violate campaign law to force him to flip.

    It’s elementary as Sherlock Holmes would say.

  19. You are forgetting to mention the payments were financial transactions, which usually leave a paper trail. Plus, Cohen recorded many of his conversations with the president.

    The FBI must have incriminating evidence of the crimes charged or else Cohen would have gone to trial rather than admitting guilt.

    1. Cohen at the urging of Lanny Boy Davis might have voluntarily thrown in hyped campaign finance items to curry favor with the persecutors.

      1. Cohen wouldn’t admit to campaign finance charges unless the FBI found proof of them. That means more jail time for him.

        1. No Ms. Marry Poppins, Campaign finance items were obvious brown-nose add-ons that persecutors wanted him to throw in so that they could cast shadow on the president. Take a step back and think about it.

          1. If he added statements to his plea that were contradicted by evidence, the court or the prosecution would charge him with perjury. It would void any agreement with prosecutors to get that lighter sentence.

            Who in their right mind would plead guilty to a crime for the sole purpose of incriminating someone else of the same crime?

            They all agree. Cohen paid the money. And Trump paid him back in ‘legal fees’. Rudy even said they added to it to cover the tax. Which is a cover up in itself because there is no tax on a loan repayment. The Trump camp just wanted to make it look like legal fees. And the affairs happened years ago. So its just a coincidence that Cohen sent the money right before the election? No reasonable person would believe that Cohen paid them off…with Trump knowing (which he now admits)… for Trump’s peace of mind. And then on his own (Cohen) decides, you know what. I’ll just incriminate myself and say it was criminal for the heck of it.

            1. It seems that the less knowledge you have the smarter you think you are.

              You realize of course (probably not) that Trump paying Stormy to keep quiet is not a crime.

        2. MAMAT, your screen name.shows you are either dangerously delusional from life confined within the bubble, strongly bigoted, or both.

        3. Admission of campaign violations by Cohen are what would give him less jail time not more. It is the embellishment of campaign funding that likely drove much of the deal that was made. You do realize that it was legal for the President to pay Stormy money to keep quiet?

  20. IANAL. But I think this means that Stormy Daniels’ lawsuit against Michael Cohen can now proceed and that The POTUS, Trump, can be deposed . . . in that lawsuit.

    [Yes. As a matter of fact I have been waiting for a chance to type the words The POTUS Trump can be deposed.]

    1. What an asinine comment, channeling Madonna. The rest of us are now thinking yes, we do believe you’re an idiot.
      And according to the legal analyses that I’ve read, this changes nothing regarding the Daniels lawsuit

      1. Actually, an asinine comment that channels Madonna would have been that the payment through Pecker to MacDougal was a pecker payment.

      2. Wally, Stop being such a misogynist by taking easy jabs at a delusional Late4Yoga and washed up old broad Madonna. These broads have enough self-inflicted issues to deal with without you roughing them up.

    2. what does “ianal” mean. i have seen you type that several times.
      You like, or what? sorry i dont know this acronym

    3. “can now proceed and that The POTUS, Trump, can be deposed . . . in that lawsuit.”

      Nothing has legally changed, but you wouldn’t know that because you are fact challenged.

      1. The case–including discovery–was stayed pending indictment. Now, there’s a guilty plea so the stay can be lifted.

Comments are closed.