Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Umm. Ken Starr started out with a real estate investigation and ended up with a blue dress.
Tell me ~ what was the fallout? None.
You're comparing an investigation that implies collusion with the Russians to one over Real Estate Investments? The investigations have drastically differing implications and therefore differing political tones and effects. If you are equating the two situations on even terms, then fair enough. However, I don't remember such strong institutional open anti-Clinton bias. That which exists for Trump reads as a larger threat with larger implications for Trump than what Clinton endured.
I suppose that the ultimate difference will be the relative impact on POTUS. Clinton's major penalty that sort of effected him in a practical manner was the suspension of his law license. That wasn't a big deal in the larger scheme of things.
If Trump is actually removed from office, which is the conveyed tone given the size of the anti-Trump contingent, then we are speaking about two different matters. If he suffers in a manner roughly equivalent to Clinton, then I agree with your assessment.
Was that a substantive answer? Because all I see is a mis-characterization of my answer followed by a paragraph full of over-emotional verbal vomit rooted in an ad-hominem attack. Nice work. You seem to be well suited to the argument.
You stated that the raid was "a worse move" orchestrated by Mueller, who according to you "exists only as an unprecedented institutionalized general threat to legitimately elected power, from the enemies of POTUS" and who was "wander[ing] outside of his lane in order to bring down POTUS."
That premise falls apart when you recognize the obvious truth that this raid was not conducted by Mueller. That is not an ad hominem attack. It is a fact.
The only one who is getting emotional here is you. I am posting simple, verifiable, and unimpeachable truths. I'm sorry that you don't like them.
Berman apparently recused himself from signing off on this because of HIS ties to Trump
It was another attorney in the office hierarchy who did
But Berman KNEW it was an ongoing investigation in the SDNY and apparently kept quiet, didn't leak to his former head partner Guilianni or anyone else on Trump's team...
Do you have a cite for that? Although, in the end, same thing. He didn't stop it and could have. Cohen was apparently being investigated for this for weeks.
PS - Why is this thread (the President's personal attorney raided by the FBI!) not a sticky, but a whiny attack on a kid who was in a school when a gunman mowed down a bunch of his classmates is?
PPS - Oh, wait. Never mind. Makes perfect sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maciesmom
I've wondered the same thing.
This thread: 600+ responses in 18 hours. Potential for far-reaching criminal/political actions and responses that could be discussed for decades.
That thread: 9 responses in past 18 hours (including posts questioning sticky status). No real implication or importance for the future other than the status of a teen's college acceptance or of a tv entertainment show. Yawn.
Add me to the list of people who think that sticky about David Hogg needs to go and a sticky needs to be added to this thread.
I don't think it relates to "Rusher." That's why Mueller didn't do this, but a NY district did. (It was Trump's appointee who got and executed the search warrant, after Mueller referred into on Cohen to him, in accordance with normal investigation practice. Mueller didn't act on it, because this isn't within the Mueller mandate.)
I think it's related to the $130k "donation" and other money things.
This had to be approved by a lot of people....to search and seize a President's lawyer (any lawyer, actually). HIgh levels at DOJ had to have approved it. Maybe that's why Trump was railing against Sessions yesterday. He thinks Sessions knew about it, I guess.
1--Trump's appointee Berman was not the one to sign-off on this
He is an appointee and his power runs out fairly soon
He might have thought the case would need someone who could follow it all the way through
2--Or he might have recused himself because of his connection to Guilianni and Trump and wanted to prevent any claim by Cohen going forward that he "interfered" in any aspect of the investigation
And I think we need to consider a wider dimension
Most people are thinking this is ONLY about the Daniels payoff and its ties to campaign violation
And it very well could be
BUT I will remind people again that Michael Cohen was one of 3 assistant national finance chairs for the RNC in 2016
He was a bag-man for Trump's money
Read the bios for him and the other two men who have a much more professional and qualified history
Cohen's claim to fame was being a Trump VP and being on boards for Trump's kids' charities--
Nothing in the real world of big money like the other 2 guys who had prior experience with the RNC
Cohen COULD have ties to many campaigns run by the RNC where there were illegal campaign finance acts
1--Trump's appointee Berman was not the one to sign-off on this
He is an appointee and his power runs out fairly soon
He might have thought the case would need someone who could follow it all the way through
2--Or he might have recused himself because of his connection to Guilianni and Trump and wanted to prevent any claim by Cohen going forward that he "interfered" in any aspect of the investigation
And I think we need to consider a wider dimension
Most people are thinking this is ONLY about the Daniels payoff and its ties to campaign violation
And it very well could be
BUT I will remind people again that Michael Cohen was one of 3 assistant national finance chairs for the RNC in 2016
He was a bag-man for Trump's money
Read the bios for him and the other two men who have a much more professional and qualified history
Cohen's claim to fame was being a Trump VP and being on boards for Trump's kids' charities--
Nothing in the real world of big money like the other 2 guys who had prior experience with the RNC
Cohen COULD have ties to many campaigns run by the RNC where there were illegal campaign finance acts
I agree with this. I bet this raid is only tangentially related to POTUS and much more likely to relate to massive illegality related to campaign finance and the RNC.
I can't think of a worse move in the most controversial investigation of our lifetimes then for a special investigator to wander outside of his lane in order to bring down POTUS.
There is no defending against the witch hunt accusation now. Mueller exists only as an unprecedented institutionalized general threat to legitimately elected power, from the enemies of POTUS. Mueller can bring charges, but there will be little practical political defense against anything substantive that could be brought against Trump that results from this raid.
It looks justifiably aggressive to those who would see POTUS brought down under any circumstances. The reality is that its desperately aggressive to do something that looks so bad in that it further makes this look like a desperate and buthurt partisan witch hunt over an election loss.
After such a unvarnished coup, do the Dems really think that they can have their free and fair elections? The conservatie base won't be so agreeable after this abuse of the system. The Dems have us steeped in banana republic style anti-democratic political strong arming, and are marching us toward a total breakdown of the system.
But bring it. This was likely inevitable. I'm actually happy that the Dems will shoulder the blame for the initial act. Charge away, and lets move your myopic short term political plans into gear as fast as possible. No need to drag this out. I hope that you are prepared.
You might want to get the facts first.
This wasn't a search and seizure, or investigation, by the Mueller team. Mueller ran across info re Cohen, which he then got approval from Rosenstein to refer to the appropriate authorities, which is the normal procedure for investigations.
Mueller then referred that info to the Southern District of New York, who took it and got and executed a search warrant. High levels at the DOJ and a judge had to approve this. It's unusual to search and seize an attorney's office.
The head of the SD of NY that did the search & seizure is Geoffrey Berman, a Trump appointee, a Republican.
Rosenstein, a Republican, approved the referral. Others at the DOJ would have known about it. No one stopped it. That means the evidence must be strong, and there was strong indication that Cohen would not produce the docs voluntarily or might destroy them.
This is not a witch hunt. This is the rule of law being executed in a normal way for the crime being investigated (again...this isn't the Russia investigation by Mueller...that's why Mueller referred it; it's not part of his mandate for his investigation).
No one is above the law. The law is king here. We are a nation of laws. Cohen is being investigated for bank fraud and wire fraud, it seems. Blame the criminal for his crimes, not the law.
This shows that our legal system is working, in the face of mobster-like pushing against it. If Cohen is not guilty, there will be no evidence of guilt. (But to do such a search & seizure, yu can take it to the bank that there's something there, or they wouldn't have done this.)
Also...the FBI didn't "break into" Cohen's office and temp residence, as Trump says. It was a legal search and seizure. No breaking and entering involved. The atty-client privilege is waived for the seizing of items, but they will have procedures in place to protect attorney-client privilege not related to what's being investigated. BUT there is no atty-client privilege, if they're involved in criminal activities, of course.
This is not an end to democracy. This IS democracy. The departments of the govt do not work for any one person. They are supposed to be loyal to the law. Trump does not like that. He thinks the AG is his personal lawyer. He's not.
The question is: Who is Trump going to fire in his temper tantrum over this? Or will he wag the dog and bomb Syria, as a diversion?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
