What did he NOT do?

[disciple Clint]

I think you misunderstand what the charges are. The issue is that Cohen made the original payments, using a mortgage on his home to get the money to pay off Ms. Daniels. When Donald Trump paid him back, the payments were entered in the business ledgers as "legal services" -- meaning income payments to Mr. Cohen for working as a lawyer. It also meant the business paid more than what Mr. Cohen paid Ms. Daniels, as Mr. Cohen -- since it was payment for services -- had to report and pay taxes on the amount as "income" rather than repayment of a debt.

Now, normally this type of false entry would be a misdemeanor. The issue was that the payment was made to prevent Ms. Daniels from telling her story to the media (or selling the story to the media, if you prefer), so that the voters would not hear about Candidate Trump (at the time) having sex with a inappropriate content star while his wife was at home tending to their newborn son. There is allegedly an audio recording where Trump instructs Mr. Cohen to try to delay making the payment for as long as possible, that if Mr. Cohen can delay the payment until after the election that they won't need to pay her -- clearly implying the payment was solely to aid his campaign, to prevent the American people from learning about it before the election, and not to hide the alleged affair from his wife. It is possible the secondary crime, raising the crime to a felony, is that Mr. Cohen illegally made a "campaign contribution" by paying off Stormy Daniels; even though he was paid back, it still amounted to an unreported loan to the Trump campaign by an individual over the legal limit.

By Trump falsifying the business records to "hide" a second crime elevates the charges to felony counts. We'll hear more about the case, and DA Bragg's complete legal theory as to the crimes, as this case unfolds.

There is allegedly an audio recording where Trump instructs Mr. Cohen to try to delay making the payment for as long as possible, that if Mr. Cohen can delay the payment until after the election that they won't need to pay her -- clearly implying the payment was solely to aid his campaign, to prevent the American people from learning about it before the election, and not to hide the alleged affair from his wife.

This is key to establishing this as a criminal act. Can you produce this recording, how did you learn of it?

 

[Ana the Ist]

I think you misunderstand what the charges are.

Ok.

The issue is that Cohen made the original payments, using a mortgage on his home to get the money to pay off Ms. Daniels.

Ok.

When Donald Trump paid him back, the payments were entered in the business ledgers as "legal services" -- meaning income payments to Mr. Cohen for working as a lawyer.

It seems like the time he paid him back was relevant too....especially if these are supposed to be campaign funds.

It also meant the business paid more than what Mr. Cohen paid Ms. Daniels, as Mr. Cohen -- since it was payment for services -- had to report and pay taxes on the amount as "income" rather than repayment of a debt.

Ok.

Now, normally this type of false entry would be a misdemeanor. The issue was that the payment was made to prevent Ms. Daniels from telling her story to the media (or selling the story to the media, if you prefer), so that the voters would not hear about Candidate Trump (at the time) having sex with a inappropriate content star while his wife was at home tending to their newborn son.

Right. I thought I heard him saying something about buying the story rights or something....

There is allegedly an audio recording where Trump instructs Mr. Cohen to try to delay making the payment for as long as possible, that if Mr. Cohen can delay the payment until after the election that they won't need to pay her -- clearly implying the payment was solely to aid his campaign, to prevent the American people from learning about it before the election, and not to hide the alleged affair from his wife.

Oh ok....well, that certainly would be pretty damning.

It is possible the secondary crime, raising the crime to a felony, is that Mr. Cohen illegally made a "campaign contribution" by paying off Stormy Daniels; even though he was paid back, it still amounted to an unreported loan to the Trump campaign by an individual over the legal limit.

I can see why that would seem that way....especially if he paid it back through his campaign. Out of his own pocket though...there's no reason to think he simply didn't want his wife finding out.

By Trump falsifying the business records to "hide" a second crime elevates the charges to felony counts. We'll hear more about the case, and DA Bragg's complete legal theory as to the crimes, as this case unfolds.

Well ty @SimplyMe...it sounds like you've broken it down rather concisely.

 

[essentialsaltes]

This is key to establishing this as a criminal act. Can you produce this recording, how did you learn of it?

I think the delay is sourced to various emails and texts.

19. The Defendant directed Lawyer A to delay making a payment to Woman 2 as long as possible. He instructed Lawyer A that if they could delay the payment until after the election, they could avoid paying altogether, because at that point it would not matter if the story became public. As reflected in emails and text messages between and among Lawyer A, Lawyer B, and the AMI Editor-in-Chief, Lawyer A attempted to delay making payment as long as possible.

The statement of facts does refer to a recording, but it relates to the money paid to Playboy bunny Karen McDougall to effectively kill her story. [I think it's important to remember there were two unusual 'campaign contributions' in the filings.]

 

[hislegacy]

Statement from Mr. Cohens legal advisor who received permission to testify: Mr. Cohen id Defendant in this document Plaintiff is President Trump

Defendant told Mr. Costello that Defendant did not know of any criminal wrongdoing by Plaintiff in any matter, 22 even when pressed by Mr. Costello: “I said, ‘Michael, these people in the Southern District are not interested in you—You're a bump in the road. Their interest clearly is Donald Trump. So the way out of this is to cooperate if you have something to cooperate, because if it's Donald Trump you’re cooperating against, you can get in on a prosecution agreement, which means you're out of this picture at all.’ I said, ‘It's a lot better than suicide.’ And he thought and said, ‘I don't have anything against Donald Trump.’ And I must have asked him that same question. We were there for two hours, probably seven different ways, just to make sure that he kept on reiterating.​

​

And after the first time, where he simply said, ‘I don't have anything on Donald Trump,’ after that every time his response. was, ‘I swear to God, Bob, I don't have anything on Donald Trump.’” Costello also attests to the fact of how Cohen “would suddenly stop in the middle of whatever he was talking about, and turn and point his finger at us and say, ‘I want you guys to understand—I will do whatever the F I have to do. I will never spend a day in jail.’ He said that at least 10 to 20 times during that two-hour period. It was, it was a bizarre mantra, but it made it clear to us that Michael Cohen was saying, ‘I will lie, cheat, steal, shoot someone, I will never spend a day in jail.’”23 28. In particular, Defendant told Mr. Costello during the course of the meeting that he had “decided [on] his own . . . to see if he could take care of” certain “negative information” that Stephanie Clifford “wanted to put in a lawsuit against” Plaintiff.24 According to Mr. Costello, Defendant was clear that the resulting payment was his “idea.”25​

​

Found in Trump's 500 million dollar lawsuit filings Page 7 and 8 - complete with links and footnotes​

​

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.645291/gov.uscourts.flsd.645291.1.0_2.pdf

​

IMHO - The Moment Costello takes the stand in Trump's defense - the prosecution is in a really hard place to prove anything said by Cohen.

 

[Hans Blaster]

IMHO - The Moment Costello takes the stand in Trump's defense - the prosecution is in a really hard place to prove anything said by Cohen.

And the obvious counter (to which Cohen will testify to on direct examination *before* any cross-examination from Trump's defense attorneys at trial) is "I was paid by Mr. Trump to lie for him."

It will be up to a jury to decide who to believe. (Remember, co-conspirators who "flip" to the prosecution lie to detectives/FBI/etc. in their first interviews *ALL THE TIME* and the "flipped" testimony is used successfully ALL THE TIME.)

 

[essentialsaltes]

IMHO - The Moment Costello takes the stand in Trump's defense - the prosecution is in a really hard place to prove anything said by Cohen.

Was Cohen under oath when he talked to Costello?

 

[hislegacy]

Was Cohen under oath when he talked to Costello?

When you are speaking with your attorney do you go under oath?

Are ONLY statements made under oath admissible in court?

When Costello goes under oath and testifies - does that count?

 

[hislegacy]

And the obvious counter (to which Cohen will testify to on direct examination *before* any cross-examination from Trump's defense attorneys at trial) is "I was paid by Mr. Trump to lie for him."

It will be up to a jury to decide who to believe. (Remember, co-conspirators who "flip" to the prosecution lie to detectives/FBI/etc. in their first interviews *ALL THE TIME* and the "flipped" testimony is used successfully ALL THE TIME.)

The issue is - unlike congressional special committees - in court you have to show evidence.

 

[essentialsaltes]

When Costello goes under oath and testifies - does that count?

No, Costello being under oath doesn't make Cohen's statements to Costello under oath by proxy or something.

 

[hislegacy]

No, Costello being under oath doesn't make Cohen's statements to Costello under oath by proxy or something.

no clue what that means....

Costello testifying under oath flies in the face of Cohen's testimony - a man who has already served prison time for lying. That doesn't help the prosecution.

 

[SimplyMe]

no clue what that means....

Costello testifying under oath flies in the face of Cohen's testimony - a man who has already served prison time for lying. That doesn't help the prosecution.

Which, I'm sure is something Bragg is well aware of. I suspect this is why there are reports of Bragg having documents that support the important points of Cohen's testimony, he realizes Cohen won't be believed without evidence that proves what Cohen is stating under oath.

 

[hislegacy]

Which, I'm sure is something Bragg is well aware of. I suspect this is why there are reports of Bragg having documents that support the important points of Cohen's testimony, he realizes Cohen won't be believed without evidence that proves what Cohen is stating under oath.

Is that an opinion or gained from and anonymous source that did not have permission to speak publicly on the issue?

 

[essentialsaltes]

a man who has already served prison time for lying. That doesn't help the prosecution.

There, you've finally unearthed a valuable truffle. And it doesn't require any Costello.

(Given that Cohen is a habitual and convicted liar, if Costello truthfully says, "Cohen told me X," this really doesn't give us any reason to believe X is true. So the material in post #64 is not of very great value.)

 

[Say it aint so]

no clue what that means....

Costello testifying under oath flies in the face of Cohen's testimony - a man who has already served prison time for lying. That doesn't help the prosecution.

There's Cohen's word. Then there is Costello's word. And then there are the tapes. Trump was fully aware of the AMI catch and kill scheme;
The transcript

COHEN: Even after that, it’s not going to ever be opened. There’s no, there’s no purpose for it. Um, told you about Charleston. Um, I need to open up a company for the transfer of all of that info regarding our friend, David, you know, so that — I’m going to do that right away. I’ve actually come up and I’ve spoken —
TRUMP: Give it to me and [UNINTELLIGIBLE].
COHEN: And, I’ve spoken to Allen Weisselberg about how to set the whole thing up with ...
TRUMP: So, what do we got to pay for this? One-fifty?
COHEN: … funding. Yes. Um, and it’s all the stuff.
TRUMP: Yeah, I was thinking about that.
COHEN: All the stuff. Because — here, you never know where that company — you never know what he’s —
TRUMP: Maybe he gets hit by a truck.
COHEN: Correct. So, I’m all over that. And, I spoke to Allen about it, when it comes time for the financing, which will be —
TRUMP: Wait a sec, what financing?
COHEN: Well, I’ll have to pay him something.
TRUMP: [UNINTELLIGIBLE] pay with cash ...
COHEN: No, no, no, no, no. I got it.

The David here is the owner of the National Inquirer who was doing the catch and kills, and I'll say it one more time. This would have been of no issue if Trump just gave Cohen cash to reimburse the National Inquirer. But no, he goes through the same group to falsify business records. The same group where one of those, Cohen, went jail for lying about it. The other Weisselberg is sitting in Riker's Island for the same kind of business falsifying records. The third in Trump now indicted. I mean big surprise.

 

[hislegacy]

There, you've finally unearthed a valuable truffle. And it doesn't require any Costello.

(Given that Cohen is a habitual and convicted liar, if Costello truthfully says, "Cohen told me X," this really doesn't give us any reason to believe X is true. So the material in post #64 is not of very great value.)

Are you calling me a pig?

 

[hislegacy]

There's Cohen's word. Then there is Costello's word. And then there are the tapes. Trump was fully aware of the AMI catch and kill scheme;
The transcript

COHEN: Even after that, it’s not going to ever be opened. There’s no, there’s no purpose for it. Um, told you about Charleston. Um, I need to open up a company for the transfer of all of that info regarding our friend, David, you know, so that — I’m going to do that right away. I’ve actually come up and I’ve spoken —
TRUMP: Give it to me and [UNINTELLIGIBLE].
COHEN: And, I’ve spoken to Allen Weisselberg about how to set the whole thing up with ...
TRUMP: So, what do we got to pay for this? One-fifty?
COHEN: … funding. Yes. Um, and it’s all the stuff.
TRUMP: Yeah, I was thinking about that.
COHEN: All the stuff. Because — here, you never know where that company — you never know what he’s —
TRUMP: Maybe he gets hit by a truck.
COHEN: Correct. So, I’m all over that. And, I spoke to Allen about it, when it comes time for the financing, which will be —
TRUMP: Wait a sec, what financing?
COHEN: Well, I’ll have to pay him something.
TRUMP: [UNINTELLIGIBLE] pay with cash ...
COHEN: No, no, no, no, no. I got it.

The David here is the owner of the National Inquirer who was doing the catch and kills, and I'll say it one more time. This would have been of no issue if Trump just gave Cohen cash to reimburse the National Inquirer. But no, he goes through the same group to falsify business records. The same group where one of those, Cohen, went jail for lying about it. The other Weisselberg is sitting in Riker's Island for the same kind of business falsifying records. The third in Trump now indicted. I mean big surprise.

Where is payment to Stormy Daniels in that?

Where is there anything more than assumption?

You know - proof - that is what courts demand.

 

[Say it aint so]

Where is payment to Stormy Daniels in that?

Where is there anything more than assumption?

You know - proof - that is what courts demand.

What you asked prior:

How exactly does a person 'grift' an attorney when the attorney acts ON HIS OWN without his client's knowledge?​

And it is still his fault? Why do people fall for this?​

Clearly given that transcript Trump was quite aware of the catch and kill schemes and the way Cohen was going to great lengths to hide it.

​

 

[SimplyMe]

Is that an opinion or gained from and anonymous source that did not have permission to speak publicly on the issue?

So far as I know, it is based on anonymous sources -- I can't recall. I'm not worried about it because it is something we will learn as Trump's defense team gets the discovery from the DA and as the trial progresses. As you point out, if Bragg is solely relying on Cohen's testimony then he will undoubtedly lose the case -- and likely never would have made it out of the Grand Jury room.

 

[DaisyDay]

It's weird to see anyone proud of a 10,000 page omnibus bill that's been designed for the purpose of people not knowing what's in it.

It's possible it's a good thing....but these tend to get thrown together as a bunch of garbage with a few good things included, which would be lost, if you don't accept the garbage as well.

I don't see any reason to believe this omnibus any different from the previous ones.

We have legislators who spend years getting nothing done....and then suddenly, here's 10000 pages. For everything that might benefit you or anyone else....there's 100 items that help donors.

Baby/bath water.

 

[ralliann]

Statement from Mr. Cohens legal advisor who received permission to testify: Mr. Cohen id Defendant in this document Plaintiff is President Trump

Defendant told Mr. Costello that Defendant did not know of any criminal wrongdoing by Plaintiff in any matter, 22 even when pressed by Mr. Costello: “I said, ‘Michael, these people in the Southern District are not interested in you—You're a bump in the road. Their interest clearly is Donald Trump. So the way out of this is to cooperate if you have something to cooperate, because if it's Donald Trump you’re cooperating against, you can get in on a prosecution agreement, which means you're out of this picture at all.’ I said, ‘It's a lot better than suicide.’ And he thought and said, ‘I don't have anything against Donald Trump.’ And I must have asked him that same question. We were there for two hours, probably seven different ways, just to make sure that he kept on reiterating.​

​

And after the first time, where he simply said, ‘I don't have anything on Donald Trump,’ after that every time his response. was, ‘I swear to God, Bob, I don't have anything on Donald Trump.’” Costello also attests to the fact of how Cohen “would suddenly stop in the middle of whatever he was talking about, and turn and point his finger at us and say, ‘I want you guys to understand—I will do whatever the F I have to do. I will never spend a day in jail.’ He said that at least 10 to 20 times during that two-hour period. It was, it was a bizarre mantra, but it made it clear to us that Michael Cohen was saying, ‘I will lie, cheat, steal, shoot someone, I will never spend a day in jail.’”23 28. In particular, Defendant told Mr. Costello during the course of the meeting that he had “decided [on] his own . . . to see if he could take care of” certain “negative information” that Stephanie Clifford “wanted to put in a lawsuit against” Plaintiff.24 According to Mr. Costello, Defendant was clear that the resulting payment was his “idea.”25​

​

Found in Trump's 500 million dollar lawsuit filings Page 7 and 8 - complete with links and footnotes​

​

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.flsd.645291/gov.uscourts.flsd.645291.1.0_2.pdf

​

IMHO - The Moment Costello takes the stand in Trump's defense - the prosecution is in a really hard place to prove anything said by Cohen.

The same for stormy Daniels.