FBI Raids Office of Trump Lawyer Michael Cohen

[Coach Tuesday]

37 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

It is. And there's mountains of evidence to support it's reality.

 

Ok - so let me make sure I have this right - a cabal of liberal elites, furious that “Crooked Hillary” lost the election to a political outsider - have co-opted the DOJ, the FBI, the mainstream media, and - best of all - the Trump-appointed (and Trump-interviewed, a Presidential first) U.S. Attorney in New York, AND a sitting SDNY magistrate judge - in order to pursue an overbroad, illegal warrant against Trump’s personal lawyer - who broke no laws - with the aim of turning up something they might be able to use to obtain some vague leverage over the President.

 

Do I got that right, nutbag?

[snafu]

28 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

You're both wrong.  What they can take depends on the scope of the warrant.

 

What they can end up using is a different matter, of course...

 

Well this point was buried in my first post in this thread on the third page.  The warrant application AND the warrant should be specific. If it was, then only those materials should be taken. Seems, though, they took it all.

 

Sorting and vetting in this particular case looks like it is ripe for abuse. 

 

And for someone to argue that the materials were likely to be destroyed, I doubt Cohen would have opened himself up to prosecution for obstruction -- let alone the likelihood that he'd be disbarred. 

[Coach Tuesday]

2 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

Well this point was buried in my first post in this thread on the third page.  The warrant application AND the warrant should be specific. If it was, then only those materials should be taken. Seems, though, they took it all.

 

Sorting and vetting in this particular case looks like it is ripe for abuse. 

 

And for someone to argue that the materials were likely to be destroyed, I doubt Cohen would have opened himself up to prosecution for obstruction -- let alone the likelihood that he'd be disbarred. 

 

I doubt even more that the judicial officers - knowing how politically sensitive this would all end up being - would risk failing to dot every “i” and cross every “t” in connection with executing this search and seizure.  The risk of blowback would be far too great.

[Koko78]

6 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:

 

Ok - so let me make sure I have this right - a cabal of liberal elites, furious that “Crooked Hillary” lost the election to a political outsider - have co-opted the DOJ, the FBI, the mainstream media, and - best of all - the Trump-appointed (and Trump-interviewed, a Presidential first) U.S. Attorney in New York, AND a sitting SDNY magistrate judge - in order to pursue an overbroad, illegal warrant against Trump’s personal lawyer - who broke no laws - with the aim of turning up something they might be able to use to obtain some vague leverage over the President.

 

Do I got that right, nutbag?

 

Not even close.

[Juror#8]

Fun exercise: go through the Trump threads and count how many people who almost pathologically try to exculpate Trump for any and everything, but who also wanted a fiftieth investigation (forty-fifth by Repubs) into Benghazi. 

 

Start with people who who have posted in the last two pages. 

 

Report back while I sip whiskey. 

Edited April 11, 2018 by Juror#8

[Deranged Rhino]

9 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:

 

Ok - so let me make sure I have this right - a cabal of liberal elites, furious that “Crooked Hillary” lost the election to a political outsider - have co-opted the DOJ, the FBI, the mainstream media, and - best of all - the Trump-appointed (and Trump-interviewed, a Presidential first) U.S. Attorney in New York, AND a sitting SDNY magistrate judge - in order to pursue an overbroad, illegal warrant against Trump’s personal lawyer - who broke no laws - with the aim of turning up something they might be able to use to obtain some vague leverage over the President.

 

Do I got that right, nutbag?

 

Not at all.

Start here: https://www.scribd.com/document/349542716/Top-Secret-FISA-Court-Order-President-Obama-Spying-on-Political-Enemies

Edited April 11, 2018 by Deranged Rhino

[snafu]

3 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:

 

I doubt even more that the judicial officers - knowing how politically sensitive this would all end up being - would risk failing to dot every “i” and cross every “t” in connection with executing this search and seizure.  The risk of blowback would be far too great.

 

Time will tell on that one. There's likely to be challenges coming I would imagine. 

[Coach Tuesday]

19 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Not at all.

Start here: https://www.scribd.com/document/349542716/Top-Secret-FISA-Court-Order-President-Obama-Spying-on-Political-Enemies

 

I’m sorry - if you think this is some Obama-backed hit job, with all of the intervening causal links that would need to be accounted for - you’re mouth-breathing insane.

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Coach Tuesday said:

 

I’m sorry - if you think this is some Obama-backed hit job, with all of the intervening causal links that would need to be accounted for - you’re mouth-breathing insane.

 

Also not my thesis... you'd save yourself time by reading rather than speculating.

[boyst]

5 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:

 

I’m sorry - if you think this is some Obama-backed hit job, with all of the intervening causal links that would need to be accounted for - you’re mouth-breathing insane.

Seriously, ease up a little and listen to him. They're fun ideas he offers if not true.  But he also links some factual info and sourced material

 

I used to think he was insane but he is showing some sanity. He is still a trannygreg, thiugh

[Coach Tuesday]

12 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Also not my thesis... you'd save yourself time by reading rather than speculating.

 

The warrant issued yesterday had to have been approved by multiple Trump appointees.

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, Coach Tuesday said:

 

The warrant issued yesterday had to have been approved by multiple Trump appointees.

 

We are having two different conversations. 

 

I haven't weighed in on yesterday with any conclusion or opinion outside of the connection between Cohen and Sater. I made a comment that there exists a very real possibility of overreach with this action - based on the full context of what we have learned over the past year. As a matter of principle, blindly assuming that everything was done by the book is a much more naive assumption than speculating that some on the team might not have pure motives. 

 

The document I linked is a FISC opinion you should read. It's the starting point of my thesis, which I'm more than happy to discuss rationally. Not if you're going to blindly leap to conclusions about it (as you've been doing) thus far though.

[Coach Tuesday]

33 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

We are having two different conversations. 

 

I haven't weighed in on yesterday with any conclusion or opinion outside of the connection between Cohen and Sater. I made a comment that there exists a very real possibility of overreach with this action - based on the full context of what we have learned over the past year. As a matter of principle, blindly assuming that everything was done by the book is a much more naive assumption than speculating that some on the team might not have pure motives. 

 

The document I linked is a FISC opinion you should read. It's the starting point of my thesis, which I'm more than happy to discuss rationally. Not if you're going to blindly leap to conclusions about it (as you've been doing) thus far though.

 

I don’t need to read a 100-page opinion to know that prosecutors overreach at times.  But I’m not making “blind leaps” in my skepticism here - I’ve had substantial experience with SDNY judges and magistrates in my legal career and I’ve seen how seriously they take their jobs.  And circumstantially, here, as I said - with all of the scrutiny that this search and seizure was bound to elicit, it would be SUICIDAL not to get it absolutely correct for everyone involved.

 

Can we agree on this: either the DOJ has nothing on Trump and this is one desperate last-ditch Hail Mary attempt to dig up something (in which case it likely will backfire in spectacular fashion), or Mueller already thinks he has “the nuts” on Trump, and yesterday’s raid was a sharp tightening of the noose... 

 

I honestly don’t know which one it is - but I know how I’d bet if someone put a gun to my head.

Edited April 11, 2018 by Coach Tuesday

[TH3]

33 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

We are having two different conversations. 

 

I haven't weighed in on yesterday with any conclusion or opinion outside of the connection between Cohen and Sater. I made a comment that there exists a very real possibility of overreach with this action - based on the full context of what we have learned over the past year. As a matter of principle, blindly assuming that everything was done by the book is a much more naive assumption than speculating that some on the team might not have pure motives. 

 

The document I linked is a FISC opinion you should read. It's the starting point of my thesis, which I'm more than happy to discuss rationally. Not if you're going to blindly leap to conclusions about it (as you've been doing) thus far though.

I am pretty sure the Feds got a ride to Cohens office in a Lamborghini they borrowed from that sheriff from Florida and Ellen Degeneres was driving!

 

Dude...you are freaking out of your mind....you know that right?

[Deranged Rhino]

2 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:

 

I don’t need to read a 100-page opinion to know that prosecutors overreach at times.  But I’m not making “blind leaps” in my skepticism here - I’ve had substantial experience with SDNY judges and magistrates in my legal career and I’ve seen how seriously they take their jobs.  And circumstantially, here, as I said - with all of the scrutiny that this search and seizure was bound to elicit, it would be SUICIDAL not to get it absolutely correct for everyone involved.

 

Can we agree on this: either the DOJ has nothing on Trump and this is one desperate last-ditch Hail Mary attempt to dig up something (in which case it likely will backfire in spectacular fashion), or Mueller already thinks he has “the nuts” on Trump, and yesterday’s raid was a sharp tightening of the noose... 

 

I honestly don’t know which one it is - but I know how I’d bet if someone put a gun to my head.

 

I linked the opinion because of your knowledge of the law. It's an easy read for people with that skillset/vocabulary. It's also eye opening and (essentially) the starting point for a conspiracy in the truest sense of the word. One backed by actual, first hand, primary source evidence to support it. Mountains of it.

 

There are more options available than the two you listed, so I can't agree it's one or the other. There are many more moving pieces to consider. 

[B-Man]

JONAH GOLDBERG: The Cohen Raid: Mueller had better be right. 

 

“I’ve talked to several lawyers with DOJ experience. There are serious and strict guidelines against doing anything like this at the DOJ and FBI, particularly when the subject/target has been cooperating.

 

They — and a judge — must have seen something significant to go ahead with this. Back on the first hand, I think Hugh Hewitt is right that this is a politically unprecedented move to go after the president’s lawyer and, by extension, the president’s private papers. Which means that whatever warranted this had better be big enough and clear enough to the public to justify such a move, or a lot of people are going to have egg on their faces.”

 

The problem is, many, many people won’t believe claims that nonpartisan officials using meticulous procedures are acting fairly. There’s been too much egg on too many faces already. But the potential consequences here go beyond embarrassment. There can’t even be a shadow of a possibility that someone is overturning an election via bureaucratic war, or there will be hell to pay, and I don’t just mean embarrassment for a few top bureaucrats.

 

 

UPDATE: Confirmed: Rod Rosenstein signed off on the Michael Cohen raid.

[Coach Tuesday]

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I linked the opinion because of your knowledge of the law. It's an easy read for people with that skillset/vocabulary. It's also eye opening and (essentially) the starting point for a conspiracy in the truest sense of the word. One backed by actual, first hand, primary source evidence to support it. Mountains of it.

 

There are more options available than the two you listed, so I can't agree it's one or the other. There are many more moving pieces to consider. 

 

Then I am biased - fundamentally, I don’t believe the government is capable of executing a conspiracy.  Pulling it off would require a level of competence that our government cannot achieve.  That’s my viewpoint but I’m open to being proven wrong.

1 minute ago, B-Man said:

JONAH GOLDBERG: The Cohen Raid: Mueller had better be right. 

 

“I’ve talked to several lawyers with DOJ experience. There are serious and strict guidelines against doing anything like this at the DOJ and FBI, particularly when the subject/target has been cooperating.

 

They — and a judge — must have seen something significant to go ahead with this. Back on the first hand, I think Hugh Hewitt is right that this is a politically unprecedented move to go after the president’s lawyer and, by extension, the president’s private papers. Which means that whatever warranted this had better be big enough and clear enough to the public to justify such a move, or a lot of people are going to have egg on their faces.”

 

The problem is, many, many people won’t believe claims that nonpartisan officials using meticulous procedures are acting fairly. There’s been too much egg on too many faces already. But the potential consequences here go beyond embarrassment. There can’t even be a shadow of a possibility that someone is overturning an election via bureaucratic war, or there will be hell to pay, and I don’t just mean embarrassment for a few top bureaucrats.

 

 

UPDATE: Confirmed: Rod Rosenstein signed off on the Michael Cohen raid.

 

That is exactly what I have been saying.  Getting this wrong would be LUNACY.

Edited April 11, 2018 by Coach Tuesday

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, Coach Tuesday said:

 

Then I am biased - fundamentally, I don’t believe the government is capable of executing a conspiracy.  Pulling it off would require a level of competence that this government cannot achieve.  That’s my viewpoint but I’m open to being proven wrong.

 

Hence why I'm linking you a FISC opinion from a judge that's catered to your skill set and strengths - not an op-ed or political piece, or wild first hand account of what one guy told another guy who told me once said.

 

It lays out, in (redacted) detail, exactly how serious abuses of the constitutional rights of unknown thousands of Americans were permitted to happen by a handful of people within the FBI Counterintelligence Unit. Specifically how subcontractors were able to access raw NSA intelligence on Americans (702 data) without oversight or a warrant. This went on for an unknown period of time (years) for the purposes of political blackmail, extortion, and suppression of citizens' 1st amendment rights. Not just under 44, but across the political spectrum. 

 

That's not speculation - that's what this opinion lays out with evidence... and it's just the starting point of the biggest scandal in political history. 

 

If you read and understand what this document lays out - the next question to grapple with is why then Admiral Mike Rogers, head of NSA, broke rank and protocol to meet with the incoming POTUS elect at Trump Tower immediately after the election despite the objections of 44... and why, less than 24 hours later, the entire transition team moved out of Trump Tower and to New Jersey.

https://www.npr.org/2016/11/22/502980006/reports-suggest-nsa-director-mike-rogers-is-on-his-way-out

 

Again, not speculation. These are hard facts. 

[DC Tom]

1 hour ago, Coach Tuesday said:

 

I doubt even more that the judicial officers - knowing how politically sensitive this would all end up being - would risk failing to dot every “i” and cross every “t” in connection with executing this search and seizure.  The risk of blowback would be far too great.

 

Normally I'd completely agree.  In the current political climate...there's far too much "us vs. them" bull **** flying around for me to just automatically assume that's the case right now.  Though the fact that Mueller didn't seize the records as part of his own investigation, but gave it to SDNY to institute a separate investigation, should encourage anyone to ignore Trump's puerile, narcissistic, persecution-complex-fueled rants. 

[Coach Tuesday]

8 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

Hence why I'm linking you a FISC opinion from a judge that's catered to your skill set and strengths - not an op-ed or political piece, or wild first hand account of what one guy told another guy who told me once said.

 

It lays out, in (redacted) detail, exactly how serious abuses of the constitutional rights of unknown thousands of Americans were permitted to happen by a handful of people within the FBI Counterintelligence Unit. Specifically how subcontractors were able to access raw NSA intelligence on Americans (702 data) without oversight or a warrant. This went on for an unknown period of time (years) for the purposes of political blackmail, extortion, and suppression of citizens' 1st amendment rights. Not just under 44, but across the political spectrum. 

 

That's not speculation - that's what this opinion lays out with evidence... and it's just the starting point of the biggest scandal in political history. 

 

If you read and understand what this document lays out - the next question to grapple with is why then Admiral Mike Rogers, head of NSA, broke rank and protocol to meet with the incoming POTUS elect at Trump Tower immediately after the election despite the objections of 44... and why, less than 24 hours later, the entire transition team moved out of Trump Tower and to New Jersey.

https://www.npr.org/2016/11/22/502980006/reports-suggest-nsa-director-mike-rogers-is-on-his-way-out

 

Again, not speculation. These are hard facts. 

 

I will finish reading it, probably tomorrow.