Dia on 27/2/2019 at 13:06
@dema: Whoa!! I'd heard that Cohen had admitted and submitted evidence to Congress that Trump was well aware of the whole Wikileaks thing, but Cohen's testimony is so damning it makes my head spin. In a good way, of course. One statement he made, imo, pretty much summed up Trump's presidency:
'Donald Trump is a man who ran for office to make his brand great, not to make our country great. He had no desire or intention to lead this nation - only to market himself and to build his wealth and power. Mr. Trump would often say, this campaign was going to be the "greatest infomercial in political history". He never expected to win the primary. He never expected to win the general election. The campaign - for him - was always a marketing opportunity.'
Obviously. *smh*
rachel on 27/2/2019 at 14:05
Holy smokes that's a savage intro...
Trance on 27/2/2019 at 16:09
Trump is probably gonna be gasping for a spot of good news to bring back. And North Korea's got to be picking up on that. I predict they're going to give Trump that temporary reprieve from the very bad news by offering some kind of low-effort or duplicitous concession that he can play up to his base. He'll get to say he saved the Korean Peninsula at long last (until it's revealed that he's once again been taken advantage of by NK), and NK can wring more legitimacy and who knows what else from a desperate Trump.
demagogue on 27/2/2019 at 17:20
These hearings are something else. Here's the [url=https://www.facebook.com/ABC7/videos/316065598928540/?hc_ref=ARQR-Z6Q-Z3HQPog8e_FKPWlJuifwd6TH2NGynYKQvJZx3FrTVWZw8SQA5s0-2ekzIw&__xts__[0]=68.ARCRBgvrWuOOTV2A4S3sdglctRGrG8MLFCLyTNYyRTCGo_RJqEh6TSMF23Ka7F6cntyAOuvME997hGpugsKTFtv0X-n-EHVHV5QSjHYDEeTKjGA8FOcC5sbHNo_egOsPd6M45fxUQ0P8XFSPnqxwGxslGvAK1ZtJy_YXT3n5MIf8dUcuCUa5a15oe393cZyz 0RHGhPoszh5czCcb3ds0P3B2xXzS80OvaxnnhWc_UULILQCN672l2_32qZQxWLDyZfMHqH6Xk1IU7OjbMp_g4HtgZ_sHDqwZA1Aq cek7ZUn3hzVdue8tRHsP6-TkQVTIMo3_m-iSxhWWbkb0YxVsfYeakMW2ImXM8mNqX7YdLZ8zSHIF1Na3o9sGXqvq&__tn__=FC-R]live feed if you weren't already watching.
Renzatic on 27/2/2019 at 21:31
Yeah, that was entertaining.
demagogue on 27/2/2019 at 23:36
What I found interesting is that on a lot of occasions he didn't give the Dems helpful answers at all when he could have. They were speculating about all kinds of things Trump might have done or even about things that are already in the public record so there's no risk in mentioning them, and Cohen would still say he didn't know.
Another amazing moment was one GOP congressman actually took a big risk, you could almost tell he had a debate with himself and decided to listen to his conscious, and he asked Cohen "I don't know if anyone will believe you, but what's the lie that Trump is most afraid of?" I think he was tired of the entire charade and just wanted some kind of smoking gun to take the Pres down, which is the only way rank & file members like him can get out of their conundrum. (He also asked about Cohen's personal transformation in order to build his credibility. The guy was obviously breaking rank and probably at great risk to his career.)
But amazingly, Cohen could have said anything damaging, and he just answered "I don't know. I can't answer a question like that." Then I remember the guy's face when he was let down, like he'd just taken a huge risk his constituency is going to slam him for, and he didn't get any useful answer at all.
Things like that made Cohen more credible for me. He let so many good chances pass with "I don't know", if his goal were really to lie just for personal gain or for some vendetta. Probably most directly, it was clear he wanted to take time off his sentence & didn't want to get more time by lying, so if anything his incentive was to be super conservative and only answer what he knew 100% true, and he'd say "I don't know" even for really low hanging fruit they were giving him, like events everyone knows happened but he didn't personally see, etc. His "self interest" made it easier to think he was hewing tightly to the truth than the opposite.
Aside from the fact the GOP kept hammering on his "self interest", which kept raising that implication, some of their questions had awful implications for POTUS... Like "if you behaved like a criminal lawyer, why did Trump keep you around"? Or "why did you do so many unlawful things on Trump's behalf"? Uh, lol, why do you think? So many questions had to directly assume the President was some kind of crimelord for their purpose to even make sense (hurting Cohen's credibility).
Edit: Oh, yeah, and the part about lying on the clearance form -- "have you done work for a foreign government or governmental entity in the last 2 years"? Cohen wrote no. He later said under oath he'd done work for some foreign companies. Then shitforbrains gets all worked up and asks in a hysterical fit "Well which are you lying on?! The form or when you said you did work for foreign companies?" Uh lol. They can't even understand their own form.
Edit2: Here's some (
https://www.newyorker.com/news/current/michael-cohens-anger-at-his-republican-antagonists) commentary on it to summarize it if you missed it. History in the making.
Renzatic on 28/2/2019 at 00:13
Cohen obviously can't answer every question, considering that a goodly bit of previous testimonies are tied up in still ongoing investigations, both by New York state, and the Mueller probe.
It's kind of obvious that the only thing they have to counter Cohen are to question his already shaky reputation, and even then, they were mostly spinning their wheels on the issue. There was one lady, can't remember who, who asked why we were wasting our time on this obvious witch hunt against one of our presidents closest advisers when we still have children separated from their families by our presidents overactive application of a single law to return. They're all just trying to do enough to make it look like they're being proactive, hoping they do enough to save their jobs come 2020.
Nicker on 28/2/2019 at 03:20
Arizona Republican Congressman, Paul Gosar, used the following prop while he assailed Cohen's character at the hearing. “You're a pathological liar. You don't know truth from falsehood.”
Inline Image:
https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/brownsvilleherald.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/3/78/37847254-f587-557f-9039-b65f6c1748c3/5c76e56f150f1.image.jpg?resize=760%2C428Firstly, this smacks of witness intimidation.
Secondly, it's a Catch 22 - The GOP uses Cohen's testimony exonerating Trump, at his first hearing, as evidence that Cohen is a pathological liar. Cohen's testimony this time directly contradicts his former testimony. Regardless of Cohen's actual character, one of the accounts must be truthful.
If the first account was true then Cohen is not a liar in this matter and the charge of serial dissembling is unfounded. Therefore his present testimony must be considered without prejudice.
If the first account was a lie then Cohen is untrustworthy but to assert this the GOP is forced to admit that Donald J. Trump is a criminal.
Renzatic on 28/2/2019 at 05:37
You're thinking too deeply about it.
It's more about what acts as the most convenient excuse to his base. What he lied about, and the complications that arise from it don't matter. That he lied is really all that matters. Context is an distant aside. Since he lied before, he's entirely untrustworthy. What did he lie about before exactly? Who cares! All we know is we can't believe him now.