Jump to content

Michael Cohen says he inflated assets to ‘whatever number Trump told us to’


Recommended Posts

Posted
22 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

LOL 
 

image.png.346c18bafa4b650110282785b2d577d5.png

 

 

8 USC § 793(e) deals with the unauthorized possession of sensitive materials with reason to believe it could injure the United States and willfully disclosing to unauthorized person. This statute applies to any person who has unauthorized possession of any information or material that the government has determined to be “related to the national defense.” This includes any information or material that could be used to harm the United States or its interests. If an individual is found guilty of violating this statute, they can be punished with fines, imprisonment, or both.

image.png.426baaf8e71922edee7ec49ee2ef46d7.png

1. Bidens were "secured" in his car.  Hillary Clintons in a bathroom.  Trump in Mar Largo surrounded by secret service agents

2. Trump did not destroy any documents.  Sandy Berger and Hillary Clinton did. 

3. Trump has the power while in office to declassfy documents.  Hillary Clinton did not. 

4. Trump was negotiating with the GSA over the possession of documents.  Neither Biden, or Hillary were.  

5. Trump did not share access to the classified documents.  Biden gave access to the garage to at least his son.  Hillary gave complete and unfettered access to those handling her computer server, Huma Abedin her assistant and Cheryl Mills her attorney.  Huma Abedin in turn transferred the contents of the computer to her then husband Anthony Weiner.  


THE FBI GAVE COMPLETE IMMUNITY TO ABEDIN AND MILLS.  

And you really want to tell me this is not biased.  

 




 

image.png

The quote in the image is characterising you quite accurately. Good choice!

  • Agree 2
Posted
17 minutes ago, candide said:

The quote in the image is characterising you quite accurately. Good choice!

No not at all,  Perhaps Trump is guilty however 

1. name one just one other person the state of NY has gone after for fabricating or inflating assets in a loan application where the bank has not filed a complaint. 

2. name one just one where the attorney general has even investigated a person or company without a complaint. 

If you can't see the difference, it is you that sees the truth but your hatred of Trump says that government can in fact weaponize itself against political opponents and not apply equal treatment and justice. 

The fact you had Biden, Clinton, and Berger all committ more aggregious violations of mishandling classified docuemnts but not being prosecuted with only Berger who not only stole the material but shredding it being given a misdomener.  

You liberals like to beat the mantra that No One Is Above The Law but you should put an asterisk by it, that the law does not apply to anyone who similarly is a liberal. 

Martha Stewart was accused of securities fraud but found not guilty.  She was however found guilty of .  two counts of lying to federal investigators (a securities fraud charge was dismissed) on March 5, 2004.  Who was the prosecuter.  James Comey the same James Comey that said no reasonable prosecutor would bring a charge against Hillary despite lying under oath. 

With liberals the laws are for Thee not for Me. 

 

  • Confused 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Longwood50 said:

LOL 
 

image.png.346c18bafa4b650110282785b2d577d5.png

 

 

8 USC § 793(e) deals with the unauthorized possession of sensitive materials with reason to believe it could injure the United States and willfully disclosing to unauthorized person. This statute applies to any person who has unauthorized possession of any information or material that the government has determined to be “related to the national defense.” This includes any information or material that could be used to harm the United States or its interests. If an individual is found guilty of violating this statute, they can be punished with fines, imprisonment, or both.

image.png.426baaf8e71922edee7ec49ee2ef46d7.png

1. Bidens were "secured" in his car.  Hillary Clintons in a bathroom.  Trump in Mar Largo surrounded by secret service agents

2. Trump did not destroy any documents.  Sandy Berger and Hillary Clinton did. 

3. Trump has the power while in office to declassfy documents.  Hillary Clinton did not. 

4. Trump was negotiating with the GSA over the possession of documents.  Neither Biden, or Hillary were.  

5. Trump did not share access to the classified documents.  Biden gave access to the garage to at least his son.  Hillary gave complete and unfettered access to those handling her computer server, Huma Abedin her assistant and Cheryl Mills her attorney.  Huma Abedin in turn transferred the contents of the computer to her then husband Anthony Weiner.  


THE FBI GAVE COMPLETE IMMUNITY TO ABEDIN AND MILLS.  

And you really want to tell me this is not biased.  

 




 

image.png

You are simply wrong.

 

Joe Biden had a few classified documents mixed in the boxes of unclassified documents. As soon as they were discovered, they were turned over to the government.

 

Trump took huge amounts of classified documents. When the government notified Trump, he declined to hand them over.

 

No, they were not "guarded " by the Secret Service. They didn't even know they were there.

 

Trump did eventually hand some over, but claimed he had no more. Lie. He had plenty more, including some in his desk.

 

And Trump never went through the declassification process with these documents.

 

You are parroting defenses that Trump won't use.

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Agree 1
Posted

Actually, ONLY the AFFIDAVIT for the Mar-a-Lago search was based on the non-crime of PRA classified docs in Trumps possession, it was the only way the DOJ could get a warrant in search of a crime, and then refused to release the AFFIDAVIT until Trump appealed and the judge ordered a redacted version to be released.

How many times is the PRA mentioned in the affidavit or indictment? The majority of the charges in the Mar-a-lago case are based on the espionage act of 1917, (31/37 counts), and obstruction, false statements. The PRA is not a criminal statute and the FPOTUS cannot be charged for possessing presidential records classified or otherwise. A senator or VP can though and should, unless your name is Biden. The DOJ counsel requested Trump securely store docs at Mar-a-Lago until further notice. (see attahed jpg)

 

DOJBrattlettertoTrumpattorney.thumb.jpg.a2a577f0d99c03a9800ef83466847ad8.jpg

Affidavit

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/22267188/mar-a-lago-affidavit.pdf

  • Confused 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, illisdean said:

Yes, PRA is mentioned in the affidavit the DOJ wanted buried, BUT not in the indictment and there are ZERO indictments concerning classified docs. Right, you get it now?

Actually, while in the original indictment there was no mention of violations concerning classified document, in the superseding indictment there were.

  • A new indictment was filed today in connection with the ongoing prosecution by special counsel Jack Smith of Trump and a top aide, adding charges against the former president for his handling of classified documents after he left the White House. The new, or superseding, indictment also charges Carlos De Oliveira, a maintenance worker at Mar-a-Lago who helped move boxes in of classified documents.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/live-blog/trump-grand-jury-indictment-rcna96233

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Posted
10 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

there is a declassification procedure that Trump never followed regarding the classified documents he stole.

Again you keep missing the point.  Lets say Trump is guilty of everything you say he is.  

MY POINT SEE IF YOU CAN UNDERSTAND THIS.  

 

ONLY HE IS BEING SINGLED OUT FOR PROSECUTION

I have challenged you on several occasions. I will do it again.  Name 1 just 1 other person or company that the NY attorney generals office has gone to a bank, subpoened records and then charged them with inflating the value of supporting documents given to the bank, when the bank did not complain. 

You talk about Trump and the classified documents.  OK lets say he should not have had them.  NEITHER SHOULD BIDEN.  THEY WERE STORED IN HIS CORVETTE.  AT LEAST TRUMPS WERE IN MAR LARGO WHICH WAS SECURED BY THE SECRET SERVCIE.  So who who was the most guilty Biden or Trump in mishandling the documents

With Hillary, she not only had classified material BUT SHE SHARED IT WITH HUMA ABEDIN AND CHERYL MILLS.  Trump did not share the documents so again who is more guilty and who is being prosecuted

If you only use the government and its agencies to go against your polticial enemies.  

THAT IS WEAPONIZING. AND THAT SIR IS WHAT IS BEING DONE HERE. 

This has been a strategy from the very beginning.  Keep prosecuting him, for whatever offenses you can find or dream up like Russia Gate.  Make him expend his energy and money fighting the government at every turn. 

 

  • Confused 2
Posted
On 11/28/2023 at 10:29 PM, Longwood50 said:

Again you keep missing the point.  Lets say Trump is guilty of everything you say he is.  

MY POINT SEE IF YOU CAN UNDERSTAND THIS.  

 

ONLY HE IS BEING SINGLED OUT FOR PROSECUTION

I have challenged you on several occasions. I will do it again.  Name 1 just 1 other person or company that the NY attorney generals office has gone to a bank, subpoened records and then charged them with inflating the value of supporting documents given to the bank, when the bank did not complain. 

You talk about Trump and the classified documents.  OK lets say he should not have had them.  NEITHER SHOULD BIDEN.  THEY WERE STORED IN HIS CORVETTE.  AT LEAST TRUMPS WERE IN MAR LARGO WHICH WAS SECURED BY THE SECRET SERVCIE.  So who who was the most guilty Biden or Trump in mishandling the documents

With Hillary, she not only had classified material BUT SHE SHARED IT WITH HUMA ABEDIN AND CHERYL MILLS.  Trump did not share the documents so again who is more guilty and who is being prosecuted

If you only use the government and its agencies to go against your polticial enemies.  

THAT IS WEAPONIZING. AND THAT SIR IS WHAT IS BEING DONE HERE. 

This has been a strategy from the very beginning.  Keep prosecuting him, for whatever offenses you can find or dream up like Russia Gate.  Make him expend his energy and money fighting the government at every turn. 

 

Let's assume for a moment that Trump is being targeted for prosecution just because he seeks the highest elected office in America.  Good.  People seeking such office should be scrutinized diligently, and if such scrutiny shows they committed crimes they should be made an example of through aggressive prosecution.  That would let ambitious criminals know that if they want to keep their affairs secret they should not seek public office. 

 

It's for the good of the nation.  Don't you agree?

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
On 11/28/2023 at 4:50 PM, illisdean said:

The PRA is not a criminal statute and the FPOTUS cannot be charged for possessing presidential records classified or otherwise. 

You are correct, the PRA has no criminal penalties. But it explicitly states that an exPresident cannot retain records from their previous administration.

 

The FBI appropriately raided Trump's club when they learned that Trump violated the PRA by retaining presidential records. Once the FBI determined that some of the illegally held records contained defense information, Trump was indicted.

  • Like 1
Posted
On 12/1/2023 at 9:28 AM, Danderman123 said:

Please explain why your legal knowledge is greater than Trumps lawyers?

You continue to deflect.  Tell me why Biden should not then be prosecuted also.  

My point and I keep repeating it and you keep ignoring it is not that crimes may or may not have been committed. 

Tell me specifically why Hillary Clinton was not prosecuted for sharing classified inforamation with those without security clearance.

Tell me why Biden is not being prosecuted for keeping classified information in his corvette in an unguarded garage with access open to his son and others. 

That sir is weaponizing when you only go after your political opponents and let your friends go off scott free.

I will await your repsonse. But I expect more deflection. 

Since you are such a big one one prosecuting the guilty.  Tell me when the trials for the White House Press Secretary begin.  She was warned of the violation of the Hatch Act but chose to ignore it. 

Oh wait.  No trial.  It says the office chose to not take any disciplinary action. 

While Jean-Pierre and Bates acted “contrary” to the OSC’s warning and guidance, the office decided against any disciplinary action, Hatch Act Unit Chief Ana Galindo‐Marrone said in a letter sent in October. Galindo‐Marrone said Jean-Pierre and Bates had not appeared to use “MAGA” in an official capacity since their June infractions but that the OSC would keep watch for future violations.
image.png.324e382fe35c6fac9f5db2a856fa69b4.png
Gosh, I wonder what they would do if they didn't take the law and upholding the Hatch Act seriously.  Give them a bonus? 

  • Haha 1
Posted
On 11/30/2023 at 6:42 PM, heybruce said:

It's for the good of the nation.  Don't you agree?

I started my post by saying this was political targeting.  Weaponizing government to go after only your political opponents and letting your friends go free. 

I would tell you that the ATF going after Hunter Biden for a gun application permit crime was "politically motivated"  Few if any are ever charged with lying on the ATF form.  Most prosecuted tend to be people with felony convictions who know they are not supposed to have a firearm.

With Trump, 

1. Name one just one company or individual that the New York Attorney Generals Office went to a bank without the bank filing a complaint and sought out specifically that person, or company to examine the records. 

2. Name one just one company or individual that the New York Attorney Generals Office has brought charges for inflating financial net worth when applying for a loan. 

If Trump was, and I believe it to be true THE ONLY PERSON the NY Attorney General sought any information on, that is weaponizing. 

Not any different than if the police say they are stopping drunk driving but only stop your car and not one elses. 

  • Haha 2
Posted

Banks value every asset themselves and they believe nobody elses numbers.

 

So any information provided is quite literally meaningless

 

What's worth 50 million to one person might be valued at 10 million by the bank and they go with their own internal figures.

 

This is why the case will go nowhere, because it's complete nonsense.

  • Haha 2
Posted
1 hour ago, Longwood50 said:

You continue to deflect.  Tell me why Biden should not then be prosecuted also.  

 

Biden's handful of classified documents were intermingled with many other unclassified documents. When discovered by Biden's lawyers, the classified documents were returned immediately.

 

Trump took hundreds of classified documents, retained them after the government demanded they be returned, much later gave back some, and then claimed he had no more, which was a lie.

 

Lying about retention of classified documents is a big no-no, don't you agree?

  • Thumbs Up 2

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...