Michael Cohen

User avatar
woodworker
Posts: 2648
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 2:54 pm

Re: Michael Cohen

#701

Post by woodworker » Thu Apr 19, 2018 1:24 pm

Suranis wrote:
Thu Apr 19, 2018 6:43 am
Interesting Article in Rolling Stone. Seems our neighborhood friendly Fake Laywer has been up to his neck in Russian mob money for years, so he has done a bit more than pay off the life support machines for tits in rich peoples lives.

Don't be so subtle about your feelings towards Ms. Cliffords.


Pence / Haley -- 2020 "I Won't Call Her Mother" and "We Will Be The Best Team Ever, But Never Alone Together"

User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 7318
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:31 pm

Re: Michael Cohen

#702

Post by RVInit » Thu Apr 19, 2018 1:27 pm

NMgirl wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 10:51 pm
Maybenaut wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 9:23 pm
:snippity:
I think this is Trump throwing Cohen under the bus.
Goldberg gave a two-hour interview to the press about trump and the Cohen case. It's inconceivable to me that an attorney would do such a thing unless he was expressly given permission, even urged, to blabbity-blab, blab, blab by trump and/or trump's current attorneys. So yeah, I think you must be correct about Cohen being thrown under the bus. Thoughts and prayers, Michael.
Yes, I have no doubt Trump wants to put this out there and it's meant as a threat to Cohen. Trump's minions are now focused, locked and loaded, on Cohen. His life will be absolute hell if (probably when) it comes to light that he is cooperating.


"I know that human being and fish can coexist peacefully"
--- George W Bush

ImageImage

User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 15074
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Michael Cohen

#703

Post by Reality Check » Thu Apr 19, 2018 1:33 pm



"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016

User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 15932
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

Re: Michael Cohen

#704

Post by Suranis » Thu Apr 19, 2018 2:47 pm

woodworker wrote:
Thu Apr 19, 2018 1:24 pm
Don't be so subtle about your feelings towards Ms. Cliffords.
Actually that was a dig at the attitudes of the men who hired Mr Cohen and men like him to make them go away. I admit I may have been unclear on the fact that its not my attitude, but Mr Cohen's clients.


Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes.

User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43902
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

Re: Michael Cohen

#705

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Thu Apr 19, 2018 3:03 pm

woodworker wrote:
Thu Apr 19, 2018 1:21 pm
Sterngard Friegen wrote:
Wed Apr 18, 2018 8:20 pm
Mr. Trump made the call seeking advice from Jay Goldberg, who represented Mr. Trump in the 1990s and early 2000s. Mr. Goldberg said he cautioned the president not to trust Mr. Cohen. On a scale of 100 to 1, where 100 is fully protecting the president, Mr. Cohen “isn’t even a 1,” he said he told Mr. Trump.
So Trump himself blabbed the legal advice he got? Or someone is shitstirring Trump.

I for one don't think Cohen will flip.
I do. Double or nothing on the pastrami?
You're on.
Off Topic
Get your Bruin ass down here so we can fress already.



User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 7318
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:31 pm

Re: Michael Cohen

#706

Post by RVInit » Thu Apr 19, 2018 3:40 pm

I don't know what they have on him, but, if it's enough to put him away for a significant amount of time, and ends up being charged in a state court instead of federal, I believe he will flip. As long as he's charged in federal court I have no doubt Trump will pardon him and I think Cohen knows it. Trump has shown without a doubt that he has no respect whatsoever for the rule of law. He has no moral compass whatsoever and all of his actions are based purely on his own personal interests.


"I know that human being and fish can coexist peacefully"
--- George W Bush

ImageImage

User avatar
Kendra
Posts: 10650
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 7:53 am

Re: Michael Cohen

#707

Post by Kendra » Thu Apr 19, 2018 7:42 pm


FBI Tells Michael Cohen He Will Need Better-fitting Jacket to Wear a Wire



User avatar
woodworker
Posts: 2648
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 2:54 pm

Re: Michael Cohen

#708

Post by woodworker » Thu Apr 19, 2018 11:40 pm

New Lou Dobbs poll:

Is it time for prosecutors in charge of the failed Witch Hunts to admit they've found absolutely no evidence of wrongdoing by the President and stop wasting the American people's time and money?



https://twitter.com/hashtag/LDTPoll?src ... wsrc%5Etfw

He is making the open polls time shorter in order to not give sane people a chance to vote.

Cross posted to Mueller thread.


Pence / Haley -- 2020 "I Won't Call Her Mother" and "We Will Be The Best Team Ever, But Never Alone Together"

User avatar
NMgirl
Posts: 3878
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 12:02 am

Re: Michael Cohen

#709

Post by NMgirl » Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:18 am

RVInit wrote:
Thu Apr 19, 2018 3:40 pm
I don't know what they have on him, but, if it's enough to put him away for a significant amount of time, and ends up being charged in a state court instead of federal, I believe he will flip. As long as he's charged in federal court I have no doubt Trump will pardon him and I think Cohen knows it. Trump has shown without a doubt that he has no respect whatsoever for the rule of law. He has no moral compass whatsoever and all of his actions are based purely on his own personal interests.
IAALs: Of course the Fed prosecutors are well aware that Cohen is likely to be pardoned by trump. Under what circumstances might the SDNY decide to hand the investigation/prosecution (should there be one), over to Schneiderman :?: Realistically, is this a possibility :?:


Stern: Come back. My posts are becoming sloppy and ill-thought out.

tjh
Posts: 2929
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 4:18 pm

Re: Michael Cohen

#710

Post by tjh » Fri Apr 20, 2018 3:11 pm

Michael Cohen Has Said He Would Take a Bullet for Trump. Maybe Not Anymore.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/20/us/p ... cohen.html



TexasFilly
Posts: 17964
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm

Re: Michael Cohen

#711

Post by TexasFilly » Fri Apr 20, 2018 4:22 pm

tjh wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 3:11 pm
Michael Cohen Has Said He Would Take a Bullet for Trump. Maybe Not Anymore.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/20/us/p ... cohen.html
Interesting article. It's clear that certain factions are pushing the narrative that Cohen will flip on Trump and lie in the process. Lawrence O'Donnell did an interview yesterday with Jay Goldberg (who kept insisting that his quotes in the WSJ article were O'Donnell "twisting" what he said). Goldberg, a dotard (and a former AUSA) went on and on about how Cohen would "glean" from the prosecutors what they wanted him to say and how there were countless innocent people sitting in prison as a result of flipped witnesses. Enter Alan Dershowitz on MSNBC today, pushing the same lines. These guys don't even make an attempt to hide their planned attacks.

Because yeah, when you have a low life like Cohen, you will put him on the stand with no corroborating evidence.

Has Rudy struck a deal with Mueller to end his investigation yet?


I love the poorly educated!!!

I believe Anita Hill! I believe Dr. Ford!

User avatar
SLQ
Posts: 2290
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 12:33 am

Re: Michael Cohen

#712

Post by SLQ » Fri Apr 20, 2018 4:24 pm

TexasFilly wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 4:22 pm
Has Rudy struck a deal with Mueller to end his investigation yet?
Also, Rudy's statement keeps playing in my head. In a criminal case, wouldn't that be called a plea bargain???


"Try not. Do or do not. There is no try."
-- Yoda

User avatar
Dr. Caligari
Posts: 1043
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2010 6:22 pm

Re: Michael Cohen

#713

Post by Dr. Caligari » Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:01 pm

NMgirl wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:18 am
IAALs: Of course the Fed prosecutors are well aware that Cohen is likely to be pardoned by trump. Under what circumstances might the SDNY decide to hand the investigation/prosecution (should there be one), over to Schneiderman :?: Realistically, is this a possibility :?:
Not unless New York law is changed. New York has a very pro-defendant double jeopardy law that will bar prosecution on state charges after a federal prosecution or pardon.


J.D., Miskatonic University School of Law

User avatar
much ado
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:56 am
Location: The Left Coast

Re: Michael Cohen

#714

Post by much ado » Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:06 pm

Dr. Caligari wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:01 pm
NMgirl wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 12:18 am
IAALs: Of course the Fed prosecutors are well aware that Cohen is likely to be pardoned by trump. Under what circumstances might the SDNY decide to hand the investigation/prosecution (should there be one), over to Schneiderman :?: Realistically, is this a possibility :?:
Not unless New York law is changed. New York has a very pro-defendant double jeopardy law that will bar prosecution on state charges after a federal prosecution or pardon.
Yabbut, what if the investigation information is handed by the FBI to the AG of New York before any indictments have been made? There would then be no double jeopardy, right? And there could be no pardon by Trump, only by the governor of New York.



User avatar
Dolly
Posts: 12462
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2012 7:32 pm

Re: Michael Cohen

#715

Post by Dolly » Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:09 pm

04/18/18 04:27 PM EDT
New York seeks authority to prosecute despite presidential pardons

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman (D) on Wednesday asked state lawmakers to amend the law so that prosecutors can charge individuals who have benefitted from a presidential pardon.

New York’s existing law states that if an individual pleads guilty or is convicted of a federal crime and then is pardoned by the president, prosecutors cannot bring charges for violating state laws because of a double-jeopardy rule that stipulates a person cannot be tried for the same crime twice.

Schneiderman wrote to Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) and leaders of the state legislature to argued that as a result of the current policy, a “strategically-timed pardon” could protect individuals who have violated New York state laws.

As a result, Schneiderman is asking that state lawmakers change the New York statute so that double-jeopardy protections do not apply to cases involving presidential pardons.
“New York’s statutory protections could result in the unintended and unjust consequence of insulating someone pardoned for serious federal crimes from subsequent prosecution for state crimes — even if that person was never tried or convicted in federal court, and never served a single day in federal prison,” Schneiderman wrote.
< SNIPPED Schneiderman tweets>

In explaining the need for the change, Schneiderman cited recent reports that President Trump may be considering pardons that could impede criminal investigations. The Supreme Court has ruled the president cannot pardon an individual for state crimes. <SNIP>
http://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch ... al-pardons

I am still way behind in reading some threads and don't know if this has been posted elsewhere. But since it was mentioned on this thread...... I remembered this article.


Avatar by Tal Peleg Art of Makeup https://www.facebook.com/TalPelegMakeUp

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24936
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Michael Cohen

#716

Post by bob » Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:11 pm

much ado wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:06 pm
Yabbut, what if the investigation information is handed by the FBI to the AG of New York before any indictments have been made? There would then be no double jeopardy, right?
A halfway decent lawyer would argue that such co-ordination by the feds and New York effectively would make New York an agent of the feds.

Of course, the president doesn't employ halfway decent lawyers.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
Kendra
Posts: 10650
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 7:53 am

Re: Michael Cohen

#717

Post by Kendra » Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:14 pm

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... n-nyc-cabs
Taxicab companies owned by Michael Cohen or family members just got hit with nearly $80,000 in new claims for unpaid taxes, according to records filed in New York.

The bills show the declining fortunes of some companies linked to Cohen, the longtime personal lawyer to President Donald Trump. Cohen is under a federal criminal investigation into his business and financial dealings that broke into the open this month with FBI raids on his office and residences. All the parties involved are now jostling over how that evidence will be used.

New York state filed tax liens in Manhattan this week against five companies owned by Cohen and members of his family, including Mad Dog Cab Corp., Martha Cab Corp., LAF Hacking Corp. and NY Funky Taxi Corp. The Cohens own medallions for 32 taxis in New York City through 16 companies. Most of those companies are now encumbered by liens: State tax authorities are seeking about $174,000 in all in taxes from Cohen family taxi companies, including the latest claims.



User avatar
much ado
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:56 am
Location: The Left Coast

Re: Michael Cohen

#718

Post by much ado » Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:15 pm

bob wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:11 pm
much ado wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:06 pm
Yabbut, what if the investigation information is handed by the FBI to the AG of New York before any indictments have been made? There would then be no double jeopardy, right?
A halfway decent lawyer would argue that such co-ordination by the feds and New York effectively made New York an agent of the feds.

Of course, the president doesn't employ halfway decent lawyers.
But what does that have to do with double jeopardy if no Federal indictment has been made? What else needs to be considered? I thought that there is no "first" jeopardy until an indictment has been made. That is to say, an investigation does not constitute jeopardy.



User avatar
Dan1100
Posts: 2795
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:41 pm

Re: Michael Cohen

#719

Post by Dan1100 » Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:21 pm

much ado wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:15 pm
bob wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:11 pm
much ado wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:06 pm
Yabbut, what if the investigation information is handed by the FBI to the AG of New York before any indictments have been made? There would then be no double jeopardy, right?
A halfway decent lawyer would argue that such co-ordination by the feds and New York effectively made New York an agent of the feds.

Of course, the president doesn't employ halfway decent lawyers.
But what does that have to do with double jeopardy if no Federal indictment has been made? What else needs to be considered? I thought that there is no "first" jeopardy until an indictment has been made. That is to say, an investigation does not constitute jeopardy.
Actually, I thought that there was no "first jeopardy" until the trial started (i.e. the jury was sworn).

I vaguely remember not understanding in law school the silver platter doctrine and reverse silver platter doctrine that had something to do with all of this. :bag:


"Terror must be maintained or the Empire is doomed."

-Evil Spock

User avatar
bob
Posts: 24936
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Michael Cohen

#720

Post by bob » Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:31 pm

much ado wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:15 pm
But what does that have to do with double jeopardy if no Federal indictment has been made?
I meant the scenario in which the feds hand off the case to New York, New York indicts (and jeopardy eventually attaches), and then the feds later indict.

* * *
Dan1100 wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:21 pm
I vaguely remember not understanding in law school the silver platter doctrine and reverse silver platter doctrine that had something to do with all of this.
The exclusionary rule, i.e., the feds may not rely on evidence that was illegally obtained by a state government.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

User avatar
much ado
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:56 am
Location: The Left Coast

Re: Michael Cohen

#721

Post by much ado » Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:40 pm

bob wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:31 pm
much ado wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:15 pm
But what does that have to do with double jeopardy if no Federal indictment has been made?
I meant the scenario in which the feds hand off the case to New York, New York indicts (and jeopardy eventually attaches), and then the feds later indict.
:snippity:
Is it double jeopardy at the Federal level if the same crimes have previously been included in an indictment at the state level?

And why would a subsequent Federal indictment raise an issue of double jeopardy in the state court?



User avatar
bob
Posts: 24936
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 12:22 pm

Re: Michael Cohen

#722

Post by bob » Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:46 pm

much ado wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:40 pm
Is it double jeopardy at the Federal level if the same crimes have previously been included in an indictment at the state level?
No; an indictment doesn't cause jeopardy to attach.
And why would a subsequent Federal indictment raise an issue of double jeopardy in the state court?
It would be an argument to make in federal court (that the state law and the prosecutors' co-ordination were end run around the Double Jeopardy clause).

If the feds go first, and carve out crimes they anticipate to be covered by the state law barring double jeopardy, the argument in the later state case would be that the carved-out crimes would have been included in the federal indictment, but for the prosecutors' co-ordination.


Imagex6 Imagex2 Imagex4 Imagex2

noblepa
Posts: 1003
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2013 5:54 pm
Location: Bay Village, Ohio
Occupation: Network Engineer

Re: Michael Cohen

#723

Post by noblepa » Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:49 pm

much ado wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:40 pm
bob wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:31 pm
much ado wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:15 pm
But what does that have to do with double jeopardy if no Federal indictment has been made?
I meant the scenario in which the feds hand off the case to New York, New York indicts (and jeopardy eventually attaches), and then the feds later indict.
:snippity:
Is it double jeopardy at the Federal level if the same crimes have previously been included in an indictment at the state level?

And why would a subsequent Federal indictment raise an issue of double jeopardy in the state court?
IANAL, but I believe that the answer is no. Back in the sixties, there were several cases in which police were acquitted of killing black protesters, but were later indicted and convicted of violating Federal Civil Rights laws. In both case, the charges were based on the same actions.

AFAIK, the SCOTUS eventually held that this does not constitute double jeopardy.



User avatar
much ado
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:56 am
Location: The Left Coast

Re: Michael Cohen

#724

Post by much ado » Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:57 pm

bob wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:46 pm
much ado wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:40 pm
Is it double jeopardy at the Federal level if the same crimes have previously been included in an indictment at the state level?
No; an indictment doesn't cause jeopardy to attach.
And why would a subsequent Federal indictment raise an issue of double jeopardy in the state court?
It would be an argument to make in federal court (that the state law and the prosecutors' co-ordination were end run around the Double Jeopardy clause).

If the feds go first, and carve out crimes they anticipate to be covered by the state law barring double jeopardy, the argument in the later state case would be that the carved-out crimes would have been included in the federal indictment, but for the prosecutors' co-ordination.
Is there any case law on this issue?



User avatar
much ado
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:56 am
Location: The Left Coast

Re: Michael Cohen

#725

Post by much ado » Fri Apr 20, 2018 6:02 pm

much ado wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:57 pm
bob wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:46 pm
much ado wrote:
Fri Apr 20, 2018 5:40 pm
Is it double jeopardy at the Federal level if the same crimes have previously been included in an indictment at the state level?
No; an indictment doesn't cause jeopardy to attach.
And why would a subsequent Federal indictment raise an issue of double jeopardy in the state court?
It would be an argument to make in federal court (that the state law and the prosecutors' co-ordination were end run around the Double Jeopardy clause).

If the feds go first, and carve out crimes they anticipate to be covered by the state law barring double jeopardy, the argument in the later state case would be that the carved-out crimes would have been included in the federal indictment, but for the prosecutors' co-ordination.
Is there any case law on this issue?
And why is it a problem for prosecutors to coordinate? Is there a statute that prohibits it?



Post Reply

Return to “Trump Administration”