Trump's lawyer, Michael Cohen, has been pen tapped

[knapplc]

EDIT - A LOT OF WHAT'S WRITTEN IN THE OP MISSES THE MARK BECAUSE NBC AMENDED THEIR REPORT TO STATE THAT THIS WAS  A PEN TAP,  NOT A WIRETAP.  PEN TAPS ALLOW INVESTIGATORS ACCESS TO NUMBERS THAT CONTACTED THE SUBJECT UNDER SURVEILLANCE, WHILE  A WIRETAP ALLOWS INVESTIGATORS TO LISTEN TO ACTUAL CONVERSATIONS.  THESE ARE VERY DIFFERENT SETS OF INFORMATION. 

 

I'M LEAVING THE OP HERE BECAUSE 20+ POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE BASED OFF OF WHAT WE WERE TOLD AT THE TIME.

 

---

 

 

Quote

 

Feds tapped Trump lawyer Michael Cohen's phones

 

Federal investigators have wiretapped the phone lines of Michael Cohen, the longtime personal lawyer for President Donald Trump who is under investigation for a payment he made to an adult film star who alleged she had an affair with Trump, according to two people with knowledge of the legal proceedings involving Cohen.

 

It is not clear how long the wiretap has been authorized, but NBC News has learned it was in place in the weeks leading up to the raids on Cohen's offices, hotel room, and home in early April, according to one person with direct knowledge.

 

At least one phone call between a phone line associated with Cohen and the White House was intercepted, the person said.

 

Previously, federal prosecutors in New York have said in court filings that they have conducted covert searches on multiple e-mail accounts maintained by Cohen.

 

After the raid, members of Trump's legal team advised the president not to speak to Cohen, according to a person familiar with the discussion.

 

Two sources close to Trump's newest attorney, Rudolph Giuliani, say he learned that days after the raid the president had made a call to Cohen, and told Trump never to call again out of concern the call was being recorded by prosecutors.

 

Giuliani told Fox News Wednesday night that Trump repaid Cohen the $130,000 he used to keep the adult film star, Stormy Daniels, from going public with allegations about her affair with Trump.

 

Giuliani is also described as having warned Trump that Cohen is likely to flip on him, something Trump pushed back on, telling Giuliani that he has known Cohen for years and expects him to be loyal, according to two sources with direct knowledge of the conversations.

 

 

 

 

[Moiraine]

lol

[NUance]

I guess I haven't been following this Stormy Daniels thing.  What was illegal about Trump having an affair with her?  And why would anyone care whether Trump paid her $150k to not go public with it?  (Assuming it was Trump's own money and not gov't funds, that is.)

[knapplc]

4 minutes ago, NUance said:

I guess I haven't been following this Stormy Daniels thing.  What was illegal about Trump having an affair with her?  And why would anyone care whether Trump paid her $150k to not go public with it?  (Assuming it was Trump's own money and not gov't funds, that is.)

 

 

 

 

Quote

 

Why the Stormy Daniels-Donald Trump story matters

Mr Cohen's $130,000 payment to Ms Daniels just before the 2016 election could count as an illegal contribution to President Trump's campaign.

 

Trevor Potter, president of the Campaign Legal Center, said if Mr Cohen did this on Mr Trump's behalf, "that is a co-ordinated, illegal, in-kind contribution by Cohen for the purpose of influencing the election".

 

Democrats Ted Lieu and Kathleen Rice, representatives for California and New York respectively, have asked the FBI to investigate Mr Cohen's payment to Ms Daniels.

 

More importantly, the fact there was a payment made at all by Mr Cohen has not been fully explained. Asked whether the affair is important, Ms Daniels' lawyers said: "This is about the cover-up.

 

"This is about the extent that Mr Cohen and the president have gone to intimidate this woman, to silence her, to threaten her, and to put her under their thumb," said Mr Avenatti.

 

One of the few Republicans to comment, South Carolina congressman Mark Sanford, told the Washington Post the claims were "deeply troubling".

 

"If it was a Democratic president and hush money had been paid in the campaign, would there be a series of hearings going on?" Mr Sanford asked. "I think you could probably point to a fair number of indicators that suggest there would be."

 

 

 

[knapplc]

 

[Danny Bateman]

41 minutes ago, NUance said:

I guess I haven't been following this Stormy Daniels thing.  What was illegal about Trump having an affair with her?  And why would anyone care whether Trump paid her $150k to not go public with it?  (Assuming it was Trump's own money and not gov't funds, that is.)

 

Beyond what Knapp posted, the whole "president is an unrepentant serial liar" thing is really starting to grate on me.

 

This particular matter? Not so significant. But he lies about pretty much everything, pretty much all the time. If he's lying about inconsequential stuff, who knows what important stuff he's lying to us about?

[Moiraine]

10 minutes ago, Clifford Franklin said:

 

Beyond what Knapp posted, the whole "president is an unrepentant serial liar" thing is really starting to grate on me.

 

This particular matter? Not so significant. But he lies about pretty much everything, pretty much all the time. If he's lying about inconsequential stuff, who knows what important stuff he's lying to us about?

 

 

Almost all of it. And when he's not lying he's exaggerating or boasting about things he had little to do with.

[Moiraine]

Has Guiliani always been this way or is he losing his mental faculties? I've been reading some of his comments and he's almost as bad as Trump.

[NUance]

To me this smacks of the Monica Lewinsky investigation of Bill Clinton.  In both cases I think the investigation itself does far greater damage to our country than the purported infraction in their personal life.    Why can't the losing party just acknowledge defeat and let the candidate who won serve in his office?  This applies equally to both parties.  The most zealous people in both parties seem like sore losers to me.  

 

And just for the record, I did not vote for Donald Trump.  I think he's a buffoon.  But he's the buffoon who won the election.  So we should quit prying into his personal life and dragging his name through the mud to make a political end run against his presidency. 

 

/gets off soapbox.  Pours drink. 

[NUance]

6 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

Has Guiliani always been this way or is he losing his mental faculties? I've been reading some of his comments and he's almost as bad as Trump.

 

I met him once.  He seemed like a nice guy.  Or at least he seemed nice during the one second it took to look him in the eye and shake his hand.  lulz 

[BigRedBuster]

1 minute ago, NUance said:

To me this smacks of the Monica Lewinsky investigation of Bill Clinton.  In both cases I think the investigation itself does far greater damage to our country than the purported infraction in their personal life.    Why can't the losing party just acknowledge defeat and let the candidate who won serve in his office?  This applies equally to both parties.  The most zealous people in both parties seem like sore losers to me.  

 

Trump having sex with a porn star and paying her off and lying about it, is pretty dang far down on the list of things he is being investigated about and the importance to the country.

However, when there have been 19 guilty pleas and 5 of those being from people on his campaign with at least one pleading guilty of "Conspiracy against the United States of America".....I'm perfectly fine supporting further investigations into how much of a slime ball crook this guy is.

[Moiraine]

10 minutes ago, NUance said:

To me this smacks of the Monica Lewinsky investigation of Bill Clinton.  In both cases I think the investigation itself does far greater damage to our country than the purported infraction in their personal life.    Why can't the losing party just acknowledge defeat and let the candidate who won serve in his office?  This applies equally to both parties.  The most zealous people in both parties seem like sore losers to me.  

 

And just for the record, I did not vote for Donald Trump.  I think he's a buffoon.  But he's the buffoon who won the election.  So we should quit prying into his personal life and dragging his name through the mud to make a political end run against his presidency. 

 

/gets off soapbox.  Pours drink. 

 

 

Why do you think this has anything to do with losing the election? The FBI is conducting the investigation. The GOP holds the majority in both the House and Senate. The justice department, which I believe signed off on the raid of Cohen, is run by a GOP Trump appointee. Rosenstein is also a Republican.

 

IMO, it does suck when the details of the investigations are leaked before the invetigation is concluded.

 

Also, I find it highly unlikely the only illegally activity by Cohen here is related to Stormy Daniels.

[NUance]

Just now, Moiraine said:

 

 

Why do you think this has anything to do with losing the election? The FBI is conducting the investigation. The GOP holds the majority in both the House and Senate.

 

IMO, it does suck when the details of the investigations are leaked before the invetigation is concluded.

 

So you're saying this same investigation would be going on if Trump had lost?    

[Moiraine]

6 minutes ago, NUance said:

So you're saying this same investigation would be going on if Trump had lost?    

 

 

I'm not saying either way. But that isn't what your post was about. It was saying/implying that this whole thing is about sore losers. Me saying it's not about sore losers doesn't mean I have to think everything would be the same if he had lost.

 

What I am saying is the investigation is not occuring because the Democrats are bitter. I've added to my previous post. The major players involved in the investigation are Republicans.

 

Also, Clinton was being investigated when she was unemployed, so I'm not sure why you think it's solely because Trump is president. His being on the radar definitely makes it easier to find out anything shady he might be up to, though.

 

As to whether it would be happening if he wasn't president, it may depend some on whether Stormy Daniels would have still come forward with the allegstions. She may have let it go if he hadn't won. I think overall that part is a small story but could trip him up just like Bill Clinton's version.

[BigRedBuster]

4 minutes ago, NUance said:

So you're saying this same investigation would be going on if Trump had lost? 

 

I would HOPE that it would be since every single US intelligence organization has said (even before the November 2016) that Russia was attempting to and actively meddling in our election.

 

THAT needs to be investigated to it's fullest.  Now, It's not the Democrat's fault that Trump's campaign met with the Russians during the campaign and Trump said idiotic things at rallies that lead people to believe they were working in some way with the Russians during the election.

 

Like Moiraine has pointed out.   Pretty much every part of government that has had anything to do with this is being ran and managed by Republicans....some of them being Trump appointees.  Mueller himself is a life long Republican.   In fact, I would be interested in someone pointing out what part the Democrats have had in this entire investigation?