McClatchy: Mueller has evidence Cohen was in Prague in 2016, confirming part of dossier

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DJMSN

Rather tough to travel to another country or leave your on country without your passport reflecting it so find it difficult to believe.

My passport was stamped in Amsterdam but not Paris.

Neither are Moscow. Or Russian

a reply to: theantediluvian

Just Another Example of a Corrupted F.B.I. Fake News Report . YAWN.........

a reply to: Gothmog

I've only been to the Netherlands, while changing planes to Paris.
Oh, and Mexico.

Seriously, people are seriously claiming that Mueller's legal team doesn't know there's more than one Michael Cohen?
They wouldn't have raided his house if there wasn't ample reason to believe he committed a crime.

originally posted by: Grambler
If true Cohen flat out lied under oath and should be charged

Does nothings my whatsoever to prove collusion but it raises suscpuons and Cohen should be charged to the fullest extent and pressed on the truth

We have been burned by anonymous sources before so we shall see

But it does beg the question of what was he there for then and why he felt he needed to lie about it and keep it a secret by entering the country through another European port where the crossing wouldn't be noted or recorded on his passport.

a reply to: queenofswords

Can you link? I remember they were talking about it but I didn't really follow that.
Thanks.

a reply to: Phage

I've only been to the Netherlands, while changing planes to Paris. 
Oh, and Mexico.

I've only been to Paris, while changing planes to Germany.
And Mexico.
And Canada.
It's like parallel lives lol.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Lumenari
I believe this is new info, albeit it from the dreaded anonymous source
But this is not debunked by the previous different Michael Cohen story
Again who knows if it’s true
But if it is Cohen is a liar and should be charged

I can't help but note that if the investigation had been shut down when all the Trumpkins were braying "Nothingburger", this would not have have emerged. But I guess that's just the point, eh?
The wheels of justice turn slowly, but grind exceedingly fine.

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Lumenari
I believe this is new info, albeit it from the dreaded anonymous source
But this is not debunked by the previous different Michael Cohen story
Again who knows if it’s true
But if it is Cohen is a liar and should be charged

I can't help but note that if the investigation had been shut down when all the Trumpkins were braying "Nothingburger", this would not have have emerged. But I guess that's just the point, eh?
The wheels of justice turn slowly, but grind exceedingly fine.

I have been against the never ending and ever reaching nature of the investigation, and how it only applies to one side.

Who knows what an independent counsel would find about the democrats, or other republicans, or the fbi, etc.

But nope, its just trump people that get looked at.

And agin, we have no proof this is true, only an anonymous source.

So far there has been zero proof of any trump russia collusion from the investigation.

So in short, I am fine with the investigation, and want trump charged if guilty. I just want the investigation to be fair, and for bureacrats on all sides to be held to the same standards.

originally posted by: Sillyolme

originally posted by: Grambler
If true Cohen flat out lied under oath and should be charged

Does nothings my whatsoever to prove collusion but it raises suscpuons and Cohen should be charged to the fullest extent and pressed on the truth

We have been burned by anonymous sources before so we shall see

But it does beg the question of what was he there for then and why he felt he needed to lie about it and keep it a secret by entering the country through another European port where the crossing wouldn't be noted or recorded on his passport.

If this story is true (and thats a big if)

You are absolutely right.

While this wouldnt prove trump russian collsuion, it certainly raises some pretty big questions, and that is why I would be for throwing the book at cohen in hopes of getting to the truth.

So far there has been zero proof of any trump russia collusion from the investigation.

His campaign met with Russian officials how the hell is that zero proof? Almost everyone in his cabinet has ties to RUssian oligarchs, how can you lie and say there's no evidence?

a reply to: CB328


we need forensic evidence. witnesses are un reliable.

originally posted by: CB328

So far there has been zero proof of any trump russia collusion from the investigation.

His campaign met with Russian officials how the hell is that zero proof? Almost everyone in his cabinet has ties to RUssian oligarchs, how can you lie and say there's no evidence?

Because in the real world there is no evidence of the crime that liberals are speculating on.
Ties to Russians and/or meetings with Russians is not evidence of the said crime.
Conflation does not work out well in a robust legal system.

If you have seen some evidence that anyone in the Trump campaign coordinated with the Russian Govt. to hack the DNC or plan their campaign efforts, then please do feel free to share.

This must be the NWO's latest attempt to distract from the Hillary / Huma video where they rape and fillet a child's face.

Cohen has responded to this story:



He is being specific on where he was. I'd suggest that there is a way to prove it. Flight tickets, credit card payments, etc...
I don't hold out much hope for your story to be correct OP, but you never know.

What is good about this latest round of irresponsible and unsupported reporting, being propagated by some, is that if Cohen can prove he was in LA... it does the reverse of 'verifying' the dossier... it shreds what little is left of it.

originally posted by: SKEPTEK
This must be the NWO's latest attempt to distract from the Hillary / Huma video where they rape and fillet a child's face.

you are on wrong thread, Q is where you post slander like that

originally posted by: Whereismypassword

originally posted by: SKEPTEK
This must be the NWO's latest attempt to distract from the Hillary / Huma video where they rape and fillet a child's face.

you are on wrong thread, Q is where you post slander like that

Even if it is slander, it is still more believable than what is being implied by this thread.

originally posted by: SKEPTEK

originally posted by: Whereismypassword

originally posted by: SKEPTEK
This must be the NWO's latest attempt to distract from the Hillary / Huma video where they rape and fillet a child's face.

you are on wrong thread, Q is where you post slander like that

Even if it is slander, it is still more believable than what is being implied by this thread.

Like I told you, wrong thread.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Lumenari
I believe this is new info, albeit it from the dreaded anonymous source
But this is not debunked by the previous different Michael Cohen story
Again who knows if it’s true
But if it is Cohen is a liar and should be charged

I can't help but note that if the investigation had been shut down when all the Trumpkins were braying "Nothingburger", this would not have have emerged. But I guess that's just the point, eh?
The wheels of justice turn slowly, but grind exceedingly fine.

I have been against the never ending and ever reaching nature of the investigation, and how it only applies to one side.

Who knows what an independent counsel would find about the democrats, or other republicans, or the fbi, etc.

But nope, its just trump people that get looked at.

And agin, we have no proof this is true, only an anonymous source.

So far there has been zero proof of any trump russia collusion from the investigation.

So in short, I am fine with the investigation, and want trump charged if guilty. I just want the investigation to be fair, and for bureacrats on all sides to be held to the same standards.

You don't need an "independent counsel" to investigate the democrats. The entire reason there is an "independent counsel is that Trump fired the director of the FBI for investigating him, which led Trump's OWN DOJ (Rosenstein) to appoint an "independent counsel" outside the FBI.

The FBI is free to investigate democrats all they want, and they have and do. See Anthony Weiner's fate, or Sen. Menendez who was investigated by Obama's FBI and then the prosecution began under Trump's DOJ. You don't need an "independent prosecutor" to investigate wrongdoing. If you believe Democrats have committed similar levels of crime that Trump and company have, report your evidence to your local FBI.

You say "so far there's been zero proof of Trump-Russia collusion" ... True, because so far Mueller hasn't released ANY evidence of anything regarding Trump, so of course there's no "proof" - and he's been on the job less than a year, having had to start from ground zero given that Trump fired Comey for investigating Russia.

For a Republican snowflake to complain about "only Trump people get looked at" after Bill Clinton, after the Hillary email mess, after Benghazi, it's just precious.

a reply to: Scrubdog

Comey testified that he was not investigating Trump, so there goes your premise. Oh well. It was a good try, though.

What you are left with is that a SC was appointed because Trump fired Comey (nothing to do with an investigation into Trump). The President can fire who he wants in his administration, whenever he wants, with no reason required. In other words, the SC was launched because Trump used his Presidential power and some did not like it. That would suggest SC's should be the norm. We should have a new SC every time a decision is made that the 'other side' doesn't like.