Michael Cohen Pleads Guilty to Charge in Mueller Inquiry Related to Russia Business Deal

originally posted by: Deetermined

originally posted by: chr0naut

The result of his business deal isn't the issue. He colluded with the Russians and then he flat out lied (not to mention the illegally trying to influence the outcome of the 2016 elections (which was part of the charge).

Come on, people! The Trump Tower in Moscow had been in negotiations since 2013. So what if negotiations continued until Trump became the "presumptive nominee" for the Republicans? He wasn't even the "official" nominee yet. So many people falling for false narratives. This is just another case of Mueller's got nothing on anyone but supposed "lying" that didn't even amount to anything. There's nothing illegal about continuing business as usual until you know what direction you're headed.

themoscowtimes.com...

Cohen's charge wasn't about paying off people to influence an election either. Cohen was charged for creating a fake invoice stating that it was for election related services, when they were not.

Cohen has confessed to more than one thing. He is charged specifically with two counts trying to influence the 2016 election.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Propagandalf

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Propagandalf
Another victim of the fishing expedition, pleading guilty to lying, and not anything to do with what they were tasked with investigating.

Lol. Plead guilty to lying about Russian collusion into the 2018 election (you know, the thing the investigation was tasked with looking into). Sometimes I feel like people think if they deliberately remove the part of their brains responsible for logic that logic just ceases to exist.

He downplayed a deal he was working on in Moscow, a deal that was never made.

The result of his business deal isn't the issue. He colluded with the Russians and then he flat out lied (not to mention the illegally trying to influence the outcome of the 2016 elections (which was part of the charge).

I don't understand, he colluded with the Russians about a property he wasn't able to build? Could you please explain what he colluded with Russia about.

The business deal (another failed one from the 'master of the deal') is not the point.

Trump lied.

a reply to: underwerks

Who did the soliciting?

The meeting was arranged by publicist and long-time Trump acquaintance, Rob Goldstone on behalf of his client, singer-songwriter Emin Agalarov.

I don't recall either of these people being a part of Trump's campaign.

a reply to: chr0naut

Unless the deal went through it wasnt a business DEAL. a deal means you got what you wanted.

a reply to: chr0naut

The business deal (another failed one from the 'master of the deal') is not the point.

Trump lied.

What's with your reading comprehension lately?! Trump gave an approximation. You might want to go back and read the original link again.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Propagandalf

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Propagandalf
Another victim of the fishing expedition, pleading guilty to lying, and not anything to do with what they were tasked with investigating.

Lol. Plead guilty to lying about Russian collusion into the 2018 election (you know, the thing the investigation was tasked with looking into). Sometimes I feel like people think if they deliberately remove the part of their brains responsible for logic that logic just ceases to exist.

He downplayed a deal he was working on in Moscow, a deal that was never made.

The result of his business deal isn't the issue. He colluded with the Russians and then he flat out lied (not to mention the illegally trying to influence the outcome of the 2016 elections (which was part of the charge).

I don't understand, he colluded with the Russians about a property he wasn't able to build? Could you please explain what he colluded with Russia about.

The business deal (another failed one from the 'master of the deal') is not the point.

Trump lied.

No, Trump did not lie. He was interested in a deal, but no deal ever emerged. Therefore, he had no business dealings with Russia.

In an interview, Rudy Guiliani thinks Mueller was hoping to catch Trump in a perjury trap (which seems to be the only weapon Mueller has in his arsenal), but they did not provide a timeline of the discussions on the project specifically to avoid such a trap. See here:

Special Counsel Used Cohen To Try To Catch Trump In A "Perjury Trap," Giuliani Says

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: underwerks

Who did the soliciting?

The meeting was arranged by publicist and long-time Trump acquaintance, Rob Goldstone on behalf of his client, singer-songwriter Emin Agalarov.

I don't recall either of these people being a part of Trump's campaign.

so·lic·it /səˈlisit/Submit verb ask for or try to attain (something) from someone.

At least that’s Trump’s latest thought concerning a meeting at Trump Tower that his son brokered during the election. Donald Trump Jr. agreed to the meeting after being told a Russian government lawyer would hand derogatory information on Hillary Clinton to the Trump campaign.

Link

Using the literal definition which is what is used in court, Donald Trump Jr, acting on behalf of his fathers campaign did try to attain the damaging information the Russian nationals were offering. That without a doubt falls under the definition of solicit and the law I posted earlier. And you’d have a hard time trying to argue in front of a judge that it didn’t have perceived value.

There’s a reason why Kushner walked out of that meeting once he saw what it was.

a reply to: chr0naut

Cohen has confessed to more than one thing. He is charged specifically with two counts trying to influence the 2016 election.

Maybe I misunderstood your definition of "influence" since you incorrectly used the term "collusion" earlier too.

If by "influence" you mean that he made an illegal or excessive corporate contribution to Trump's campaign, then you would be correct, otherwise, you've still missed the mark.

Here's a link with the entire plea agreement attached...

www.cnn.com...

a reply to: underwerks

Using the literal definition which is what is used in court, Donald Trump Jr, acting on behalf of his fathers campaign did try to attain the damaging information the Russian nationals were offering.

You're contradicting yourself. How did Trump Jr. "solicit" information that "the Russian nationals were OFFERING"?!

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Propagandalf

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Propagandalf
Another victim of the fishing expedition, pleading guilty to lying, and not anything to do with what they were tasked with investigating.

Lol. Plead guilty to lying about Russian collusion into the 2018 election (you know, the thing the investigation was tasked with looking into). Sometimes I feel like people think if they deliberately remove the part of their brains responsible for logic that logic just ceases to exist.

He downplayed a deal he was working on in Moscow, a deal that was never made.

The result of his business deal isn't the issue. He colluded with the Russians and then he flat out lied (not to mention the illegally trying to influence the outcome of the 2016 elections (which was part of the charge).

I don't understand, he colluded with the Russians about a property he wasn't able to build? Could you please explain what he colluded with Russia about.

The business deal (another failed one from the 'master of the deal') is not the point.

Trump lied.

No, Trump did not lie. He was interested in a deal, but no deal ever emerged. Therefore, he had no business dealings with Russia.

In an interview, Rudy Guiliani thinks Mueller was hoping to catch Trump in a perjury trap (which seems to be the only weapon Mueller has in his arsenal), but they did not provide a timeline of the discussions on the project specifically to avoid such a trap. See here:

Special Counsel Used Cohen To Try To Catch Trump In A "Perjury Trap," Giuliani Says

Documents recovered in a FISA raid on Cohen's office support the Steele report which states that Cohen, on behalf of the Trump Organization, went to Prague in late August - Early September 2016 and met with the Russians (Oleg Soloduhkhin and two others operating under cover of a Russian NGO, Rossotrudnichestvo). At a meeting/s they discussed ways to make deniable cash payments to hackers who were to penetrate the computer systems used by the Hillary campaign how to cover their tracks so that there could be no 'blowback'.

Subsequent to those recovered documents, Cohen has confessed and is working with Mueller on his investigation. This does not directly implicate Trump himself but does support the investigation as having a valid purpose.

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: underwerks

Using the literal definition which is what is used in court, Donald Trump Jr, acting on behalf of his fathers campaign did try to attain the damaging information the Russian nationals were offering.

You're contradicting yourself. How did Trump Jr. "solicit" information that "the Russian nationals were OFFERING"?!

By agreeing to it. It isn’t a contradiction.

It was solicitation on Trump Jrs part when he agreed to meet with the Russian nationals who were offering the information. The literal definition of solicitation isn’t only applicable to the Russians, it’s also applicable to Trump Jr if he went into the meeting with the hopes of leaving with something of value.

He was soliciting the information the Russian nationals offered him by showing up to the meeting. We’re talking a court of law. So the literal definition is what will apply here.

How you and others know and use the word “solicit” has no bearing on this at all. Courts and lawyers are very specific about the language used when applying law.

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: chr0naut

The business deal (another failed one from the 'master of the deal') is not the point.

Trump lied.

What's with your reading comprehension lately?! Trump gave an approximation. You might want to go back and read the original link again.

He only approximately gave an approximation.

Specifically, Trump lied.

a reply to: chr0naut

Do you have a credible link for that? Everything I'm reading on this supposed meeting in Prague all say "unconfirmed reports" are stating that he went.

a reply to: chr0naut

LOL! You're laughable! If you had ownership stake in over 500 companies, I'm sure you'd remember the EXACT date that any one negotiation ended too!

a reply to: underwerks

I'm really tired of you leftists making up your own definitions for words. Agreeing to meet over information being offered IS NOT SOLICITATION! You need to go back to school.

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: underwerks

I'm really tired of you leftists making up your own definitions for words. Agreeing to meet over information being offered IS NOT SOLICITATION! You need to go back to school.

That isn’t my definition. Just google the word solicit.

And I’ve put quite a bit of research into understanding the legality of this one meeting. It’s obvious you don’t have any facts to counter my argument. Just your opinion of what the words I use mean.

So without any facts to back it up, it’s nothing more than your opinion. If you have a problem with the definition of the word solicit, take it up with Merriam-Webster.

a reply to: underwerks

I just looked up the definition and two of them start with the word "ask" as in "asking for something". Someone else asked for the meeting and Trump Jr. agreed to it. There's nothing to understand here. If you're not the original pursuer or person asking, you're not the solicitor.

Funny how you didn't provide any links to back up your definition either. You just gave me your opinion. Bolding "trying to obtain" after the word "ask" means nothing if it wasn't asked for first. Without the first, you don't have the latter.

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: chr0naut

Do you have a credible link for that? Everything I'm reading on this supposed meeting in Prague all say "unconfirmed reports" are stating that he went.

That's all I can find too: articles that are reprinting the same anonymous claim. I bet it all stems from the Steele Dossier. What we've seen of the FISA warrants suggests that circular reporting was used. They leaked claims to reporters, who wrote their stories, and then in turn the Obama-era FBI cited those reports as corroborating evidence to get the FISA warrant. It's a form of manufacturing evidence.

When will you learn? No matter what Trump does, the cult 45 on ATS will deflect, rinse and repeat.
Trump could give Alaska to Russia tomorrow and these extremists would defend him.

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Propagandalf
Another victim of the fishing expedition, pleading guilty to lying, and not anything to do with what they were tasked with investigating.

Lol. Plead guilty to lying about Russian collusion into the 2018 election (you know, the thing the investigation was tasked with looking into). Sometimes I feel like people think if they deliberately remove the part of their brains responsible for logic that logic just ceases to exist.

Erm no. He lied about the date he was negotiating a Trump Tower deal in Moscow.
Nice try, though.