Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

User avatar
maydijo
Posts: 2764
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:23 pm
Location: where women glow and men plunder
Occupation: harassing marsupials

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#926

Post by maydijo » Mon Apr 16, 2018 7:41 pm

much ado wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 7:14 pm
gupwalla wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 7:06 pm
bob wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 7:01 pm

It was several payments that equaled $129,999.72, but here you go.
PEDANTIC MATH NERD ALERT - PEDANTIC MATH NERD ALERT

$129,999.72 is not equal to $130,000.00.
This suggests that Cohen fronted $0.28.
And what's the bet Trump STILL hasn't paid him back?



User avatar
Foggy
Posts: 27142
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#927

Post by Foggy » Mon Apr 16, 2018 7:43 pm

Yeah, didn't Cohen complain to his buddies that he never was paid back? If so, that $129,999.72 might not have gone to him.

But Mueller knows. :mrgreen:


Mr. William L. Bryan is the root of a great deal of criminal mischief.
And yet, Mr. Bryan remains at large. :mrgreen:

User avatar
maydijo
Posts: 2764
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2016 10:23 pm
Location: where women glow and men plunder
Occupation: harassing marsupials

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#928

Post by maydijo » Mon Apr 16, 2018 7:44 pm

(I was just talking about the 28 cents, not the $130,000 . . . .)



User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 18080
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#929

Post by RTH10260 » Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:28 pm

gupwalla wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 7:06 pm
bob wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 7:01 pm
YaYa wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 6:53 pm
I can't find the post where the deposits made into the LLC equaled the 130k payment. Can someone help me find it. I searched to no avail. Or did I just imagine that?
It was several payments that equaled $129,999.72, but here you go.
PEDANTIC MATH NERD ALERT - PEDANTIC MATH NERD ALERT

$129,999.72 is not equal to $130,000.00.
Soros had to snip some small change so that various obots TFB posters would be able to enter their 0.02 into the discussion ;)



tjh
Posts: 2936
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 4:18 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#930

Post by tjh » Mon Apr 16, 2018 8:32 pm

But he had some spare change available : Hannity said he might have “handed him 10 bucks” for advice but none of those discussions “ever, ever involved a matter between me and a third party”.



tjh
Posts: 2936
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 4:18 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#931

Post by tjh » Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:00 pm

Image

Security screening :
Off Topic
So ... is her dress Pink or Lavender?



User avatar
Lani
Posts: 4099
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2012 4:01 pm
Location: Some island in the Pacific

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#932

Post by Lani » Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:06 pm

tjh wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:00 pm
Image

Security screening :
Off Topic
So ... is her dress Pink or Lavender?
It's mauve.


Insert signature here: ____________________________________________________

User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 7571
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 2:56 pm
Location: Animal Planet
Occupation: Permanent probationary slave to 2 dogs, 1 cat, and 1 horse

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#933

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer » Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:08 pm

In the outdoor photo after the hearing it was lavender. In the courthouse it was pink. Stormy's own special indoor/outdoor fabric.


"The people must know before they can act, and there is no educator to compare with the press." - Ida B. Wells-Barnett, journalist, newspaper editor, suffragist, feminist and founder with others of NAACP.

User avatar
June bug
Posts: 6099
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:29 pm
Location: Northern San Diego County

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#934

Post by June bug » Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:45 pm

Tiredretiredlawyer wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:08 pm
In the outdoor photo after the hearing it was lavender. In the courthouse it was pink. Stormy's own special indoor/outdoor fabric.
It's Stormy's own version of The Dress:
Image



User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 7571
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 2:56 pm
Location: Animal Planet
Occupation: Permanent probationary slave to 2 dogs, 1 cat, and 1 horse

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#935

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer » Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:48 pm

:rotflmao: :like:


"The people must know before they can act, and there is no educator to compare with the press." - Ida B. Wells-Barnett, journalist, newspaper editor, suffragist, feminist and founder with others of NAACP.

User avatar
Dan1100
Posts: 2899
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:41 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#936

Post by Dan1100 » Tue Apr 17, 2018 1:22 am

Stormy and the Chin™ will be on The View tomorrow, 11 a.m. Eastern Time. :clap:


“I don’t look to the teachings of Jesus for what my political beliefs should be.”

-Jerry Falwell, Jr.

User avatar
Jim
Posts: 3130
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 4:05 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#937

Post by Jim » Tue Apr 17, 2018 1:58 am

Lani wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:06 pm
tjh wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:00 pm
Image

Security screening :
Off Topic
So ... is her dress Pink or Lavender?
It's mauve.
I'm so embarrassed...first thing I noticed was it was zipped up. :oops:



User avatar
Lani
Posts: 4099
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2012 4:01 pm
Location: Some island in the Pacific

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#938

Post by Lani » Tue Apr 17, 2018 2:55 am

Jim wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 1:58 am
I'm so embarrassed...first thing I noticed was it was zipped up. :oops:
Could be worse. At first I thought she was mimicking an infamous scene from Basic Instincts. Talk about :oops: !


Insert signature here: ____________________________________________________

Mr Brolin
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 4:03 am

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#939

Post by Mr Brolin » Tue Apr 17, 2018 4:29 am

much ado wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 7:09 pm
bob wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 7:01 pm
YaYa wrote:
Mon Apr 16, 2018 6:53 pm
I can't find the post where the deposits made into the LLC equaled the 130k payment. Can someone help me find it. I searched to no avail. Or did I just imagine that?
It was several payments that equaled $129,999.72, but here you go.
It was Trump properties that were paid. I don't think that the link from the Trump properties to the LLC has been made. Perhaps the First Republic Bank suspicious transaction report might provide the missing link. But that is speculation...
Any Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) is going to be both highly confidential AND unlikely to have been raised in this case.

SAR overview

https://www.ffiec.gov/bsa_aml_infobase/ ... LM_015.htm

As you can see from the SAR workflow a simple triggering event does not by itself a SAR generate

https://www.ffiec.gov/bsa_aml_infobase/ ... LM_119.htm

The key phrasing below

Banks, bank holding companies, and their subsidiaries are required by federal regulations53 to file a SAR with respect to:

  • Criminal violations involving insider abuse in any amount.
    Criminal violations aggregating $5,000 or more when a suspect can be identified.
    Criminal violations aggregating $25,000 or more regardless of a potential suspect.
    Transactions conducted or attempted by, at, or through the bank (or an affiliate) and aggregating $5,000 or more, if the bank or affiliate knows, suspects, or has reason to suspect that the transaction:
  • May involve potential money laundering or other illegal activity (e.g., terrorism financing).54
    Is designed to evade the BSA or its implementing regulations.55
    Has no business or apparent lawful purpose or is not the type of transaction that the particular customer would normally be expected to engage in, and the bank knows of no reasonable explanation for the transaction after examining the available facts, including the background and possible purpose of the transaction.


Alas, an apparent reimbursement of funds for apparently legitimate expenditure by an allegedly legitimate political organisation is unlikely to trigger SAR reporting.

Now, the FEC should, IMHO, have raised concerns about how funds being transacted in this manner as they certainly have the stench of personal enrichment however they seem about as disengaged as Gwyneth Paltrow and her "conscious uncoupling" divorce announcement of old....



User avatar
Sugar Magnolia
Posts: 9638
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2012 6:44 am

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#940

Post by Sugar Magnolia » Tue Apr 17, 2018 5:14 am

Mr Brolin wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 4:29 am

Any Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) is going to be both highly confidential AND unlikely to have been raised in this case.

Alas, an apparent reimbursement of funds for apparently legitimate expenditure by an allegedly legitimate political organisation is unlikely to trigger SAR reporting.
Apparently there is a SAR report, at least according to Avenatti and the WSJ, unless I'm completely misreading your post.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/g5310ztlxcfss ... 9.pdf?dl=0



User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 4816
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#941

Post by Maybenaut » Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:35 am

Sugar Magnolia wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 5:14 am
Mr Brolin wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 4:29 am

Any Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) is going to be both highly confidential AND unlikely to have been raised in this case.

Alas, an apparent reimbursement of funds for apparently legitimate expenditure by an allegedly legitimate political organisation is unlikely to trigger SAR reporting.
Apparently there is a SAR report, at least according to Avenatti and the WSJ, unless I'm completely misreading your post.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/g5310ztlxcfss ... 9.pdf?dl=0
We discussed this a few days ago. There’s an SAR. Avenatti wants it, and filed a FOIA request. It’ll be denied. There will be public gnashing of teeth. He might take the Office of the Commissioner of the Curremcy to court, where he’ll lose.



Jcolvin2
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2017 12:40 am

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#942

Post by Jcolvin2 » Tue Apr 17, 2018 8:38 am

Maybenaut wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:35 am
We discussed this a few days ago. There’s an SAR. Avenatti wants it, and filed a FOIA request. It’ll be denied. There will be public gnashing of teeth. He might take the Office of the Commissioner of the Curremcy to court, where he’ll lose.
I think the agency which received the SAR (to which any FOIA should be directed) is the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) rather than the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). I agree that it will not be released, and any judicial action under FOIA will be borderline frivolous because of FOIA exemption (b)(7), which shields agencies from having to turn over law enforcement related materials.



User avatar
Tiredretiredlawyer
Posts: 7571
Joined: Tue May 10, 2016 2:56 pm
Location: Animal Planet
Occupation: Permanent probationary slave to 2 dogs, 1 cat, and 1 horse

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#943

Post by Tiredretiredlawyer » Tue Apr 17, 2018 8:41 am

:rotflmao:
Lani wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 2:55 am
Jim wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 1:58 am
I'm so embarrassed...first thing I noticed was it was zipped up. :oops:
Could be worse. At first I thought she was mimicking an infamous scene from Basic Instincts. Talk about :oops: !
:rotflmao:


"The people must know before they can act, and there is no educator to compare with the press." - Ida B. Wells-Barnett, journalist, newspaper editor, suffragist, feminist and founder with others of NAACP.

User avatar
mighty dawg
Posts: 1572
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 10:27 am
Location: Pacific NW
Occupation: Professional Bureaucrat

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#944

Post by mighty dawg » Tue Apr 17, 2018 8:55 am

So, following yesterday's bizarre disclosure by Mr. Cohen that Sean Hannity is his "third client," and, following Sean Hannity's denial that is the case, is there any doubt that the incompetent Mr. Cohen is single-handedly taking down the faux President? The irony of all of this is a mile deep. With there being evidence that Mr. Cohen visited with Russian contacts in Prague, could there truly be a hotel tape:

Lordy, Is There a Tape?
"While in Moscow for the Miss Universe pageant in 2013, Trump reserved the Ritz-Carlton’s presidential suite, where Barack and Michelle Obama had stayed previously. Citing multiple anonymous sources, Steele reported that Trump had prostitutes defile the bed where the Obamas slept by urinating on it, and that the Kremlin had recordings."


"A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be" - Albert Einstein

Mr Brolin
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2018 4:03 am

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#945

Post by Mr Brolin » Tue Apr 17, 2018 9:49 am

Maybenaut wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:35 am
Sugar Magnolia wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 5:14 am
Mr Brolin wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 4:29 am

Any Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) is going to be both highly confidential AND unlikely to have been raised in this case.

Alas, an apparent reimbursement of funds for apparently legitimate expenditure by an allegedly legitimate political organisation is unlikely to trigger SAR reporting.
Apparently there is a SAR report, at least according to Avenatti and the WSJ, unless I'm completely misreading your post.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/g5310ztlxcfss ... 9.pdf?dl=0
We discussed this a few days ago. There’s an SAR. Avenatti wants it, and filed a FOIA request. It’ll be denied. There will be public gnashing of teeth. He might take the Office of the Commissioner of the Curremcy to court, where he’ll lose.
Inquiring minds wonder......was said SAR raised at the time or some time post activity.....? The actual payments are (superficially) normal business process for payments for goods and services.

Now, in the day, one spent rather more time than one wanted with KYC/AML systems, one that still gives me the night shudders being Actimize only beaten by Fiserv's nasty AML Manager. As such, I can speak with a degree of familiarity around the process and technology.

Whilsts there is much sales blather around "advanced heuristics", "intelligent machine learning" and "holistic deviance monitoring" (I jest not, actual sales spiel) the systems are basically mildly complicated inquiry and alerting rules engines not greatly removed from basic logic gates.

Automated alerts to generate a SAR will come out of items such as being based on, in no particular order (and not exhaustively)

The type of transaction,
Sizes of transaction
Shortness or length of transfer/transaction path
Period of establishment for the recipient
Business of the recipient
Business activity type of the payment generator
Frequency of transfers or transactions
History of probable frequency of transfer
Transacting financial institution
And so forth

As such, I find it.....interesting.... and a touch unusual that an SAR alert could or would have been generated at all AND a SAR itself raised in isolation, based on the noted information, absent some driver such as a 314(a).

That however would take one into the realms of arrant speculation as to what and why such a triggering event or driver could be........



User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 4816
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:58 am
Location: Maybelot

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#946

Post by Maybenaut » Tue Apr 17, 2018 9:56 am

Jcolvin2 wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 8:38 am
Maybenaut wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:35 am
We discussed this a few days ago. There’s an SAR. Avenatti wants it, and filed a FOIA request. It’ll be denied. There will be public gnashing of teeth. He might take the Office of the Commissioner of the Curremcy to court, where he’ll lose.
I think the agency which received the SAR (to which any FOIA should be directed) is the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) rather than the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). I agree that it will not be released, and any judicial action under FOIA will be borderline frivolous because of FOIA exemption (b)(7), which shields agencies from having to turn over law enforcement related materials.
You’re right. I don’t know why I said that.



User avatar
bob
Posts: 25294
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#947

Post by bob » Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:00 am

The SAR was for Cohen's payment to EC. Which, unlike the campaign's disbursements, was not a normal payment for goods and services.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Orlylicious
Posts: 8162
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:02 pm
Location: DHS Psy-Ops HQ

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#948

Post by Orlylicious » Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:15 am

As Dan mentioned, Stormy and Michael have arrived at the ABC studio for her appearance on The View (11am EDT in most markets on ABC affiliates). They are going to reveal the artist sketch of the guy who threatened her in the parking lot in 2011.


Avatar Photo: Michael "Who Says?" Cohen. Says SDNY & Mueller. What it's like at the prison in Otisville where Michael Cohen may go? https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/12/us/micha ... index.html

User avatar
kate520
Posts: 15220
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:02 pm
Location: Dark side of the Moon
Occupation: servant of cats, chicken wrangler
Contact:

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#949

Post by kate520 » Tue Apr 17, 2018 10:38 am

Maybenaut wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 9:56 am
Jcolvin2 wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 8:38 am
Maybenaut wrote:
Tue Apr 17, 2018 7:35 am
We discussed this a few days ago. There’s an SAR. Avenatti wants it, and filed a FOIA request. It’ll be denied. There will be public gnashing of teeth. He might take the Office of the Commissioner of the Curremcy to court, where he’ll lose.
I think the agency which received the SAR (to which any FOIA should be directed) is the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) rather than the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). I agree that it will not be released, and any judicial action under FOIA will be borderline frivolous because of FOIA exemption (b)(7), which shields agencies from having to turn over law enforcement related materials.
You’re right. I don’t know why I said that.
This jogs a memory loose. Didn’t Trump appoint someone with Russian criminal connection to FinCEN last year? Or was that another oversight agency? :cantlook:


DEFEND DEMOCRACY

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43903
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels v Donald J. Trump aka David Dennison, U.S. District Court, Central California

#950

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Tue Apr 17, 2018 11:45 am

The sketch is out and much of it bears a strong resemblance to the Chin. Especially the lower jaw.

Can we credibly believe the sktech is just bullshit? I do.

Image



Post Reply

Return to “Trump Administration”