同情特朗普

  • 主题发起人 主题发起人 ccc
  • 开始时间 开始时间
upload_2018-3-17_22-0-42.png


Paul Callan is a CNN legal analyst, a former New York homicide prosecutor and current counsel at the New York law firm of Edelman & Edelman PC, focusing on wrongful conviction and civil rights cases. Follow him on Twitter @paulcallan. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his own.

(CNN) Stormy Daniels' attorney, Michael Avenatti, has a talent for stirring the publicity pot relating to his controversial porn star client. He dropped his latest morsels Friday during a drive-by of CNN and MSNBC's morning shows. In an interview with Chris Cuomo of CNN's "New Day," he said six additional women had come forward alleging sexual relationships with President Donald Trump and that his office was in the "early stages of vetting those stories." Avenatti also claimed two of the women have nondisclosure agreements.

Avenatti also told Cuomo that Daniels has faced physical threats, saying she'll disclose more details in an upcoming "60 Minutes" interview later this month. He would not answer whether or not it was someone close to the President who threatened her, and later told CNN he couldn't answer a question about whether he or Daniels filed a police report.

If Avenatti's statements are true, the interviews suggest that it may be time for Robert Mueller to meet Stormy Daniels. His investigation should focus on possible election law violations relating to the $130,000 hush money payment given to her.

The purchase of the silence of Ms. Daniels or possibly other women may be viewed by the Mueller team as unreported "in-kind" campaign contributions if the payoff was made to advance the Trump presidential candidacy. Such activity might be viewed as either a civil or criminal offense depending upon the facts of the case.

A threat of "physical harm" to prevent a potential witness from providing relevant information to criminal investigators would constitute a clear-cut obstruction of justice and might violate other state and federal criminal statutes, as well.

The President's personal, self-described "pit bull" lawyer, Michael Cohen, admits to setting up a Delaware corporation, Essential Consultants, LLC to pay the porn star $130,000 in hush money to never speak of sexual encounters he claims the President "vehemently denies."

Stranger still, the agreement in excruciating detail requires that Ms. Daniels must deliver to the President "every existing copy of all ... video images, still images, email messages, ... or any other type of creation by DD" (the President). (See Section 3.1 of the Settlement Agreement.)

Later, the agreement defines "confidential information" as "all intangible information pertaining to DD" (the President) ... "including but not limited to ... any of his alleged sexual partners, alleged sexual actions or alleged sexual conduct or related matters." (See Settlement Agreement 4.1(a).)

To cut through the legalese, it would seem that the President's personal lawyer was seeking Stormy Daniels' silence as well as copies of -- and non-disclosure of -- images, photographs and video of the President engaging in sexual conduct that he says never happened. This would appear to be a great deal for Ms. Daniels who, if Mr. Cohen is believed, is getting $130,000 to turn over nothing since the President never had an affair with her.

Nonetheless, she has hired lawyers to get her out of the agreement.

She may well believe that she can earn a lot more than $130,000 if she markets her story of an affair with the President, and, of course, the sky is the limit on income if she has Mr. Trump on videotape.

Attorney Cohen adds yet another curious detail stating he has paid the entire $130,000 Stormy silence fee personally, obtaining the money through a home equity line of credit on his home. Neither the Trump campaign nor the "Trump Organization" was involved, he says.

Cohen will presumably assert that he didn't personally violate federal election campaign laws because he was acting as a personal friend of Donald Trump's, protecting his friend's reputation -- which mimics the successful defense in the John Edwards' criminal prosecution. Friends of Edwards had contributed nearly $1 million to hide the candidate's pregnant mistress while Edwards ran for president.

Edwards obtained a partial acquittal -- on the charge that he violated campaign laws -- at trial and prosecutors declined to prosecute on the remaining criminal charges upon which the jury had been unable to reach a verdict.

If Stormy Daniels reveals in her "60 Minutes" interview the details of her alleged sexual encounters with the President, she may well face a claim for damages as high as $20 million under the terms of her NDA agreement with EEC,LLC . That agreement has yet to be ruled illegal by any court.

The real question, though, is whether Robert Mueller will view the agreement as a criminal violation of US election laws. If he does, the NDA may have an impact on Mr. Trump similar to the impact that a very famous blue dress had on Bill Clinton.
 
浏览附件744626

Paul Callan is a CNN legal analyst, a former New York homicide prosecutor and current counsel at the New York law firm of Edelman & Edelman PC, focusing on wrongful conviction and civil rights cases. Follow him on Twitter @paulcallan. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his own.

(CNN) Stormy Daniels' attorney, Michael Avenatti, has a talent for stirring the publicity pot relating to his controversial porn star client. He dropped his latest morsels Friday during a drive-by of CNN and MSNBC's morning shows. In an interview with Chris Cuomo of CNN's "New Day," he said six additional women had come forward alleging sexual relationships with President Donald Trump and that his office was in the "early stages of vetting those stories." Avenatti also claimed two of the women have nondisclosure agreements.

Avenatti also told Cuomo that Daniels has faced physical threats, saying she'll disclose more details in an upcoming "60 Minutes" interview later this month. He would not answer whether or not it was someone close to the President who threatened her, and later told CNN he couldn't answer a question about whether he or Daniels filed a police report.

If Avenatti's statements are true, the interviews suggest that it may be time for Robert Mueller to meet Stormy Daniels. His investigation should focus on possible election law violations relating to the $130,000 hush money payment given to her.

The purchase of the silence of Ms. Daniels or possibly other women may be viewed by the Mueller team as unreported "in-kind" campaign contributions if the payoff was made to advance the Trump presidential candidacy. Such activity might be viewed as either a civil or criminal offense depending upon the facts of the case.

A threat of "physical harm" to prevent a potential witness from providing relevant information to criminal investigators would constitute a clear-cut obstruction of justice and might violate other state and federal criminal statutes, as well.

The President's personal, self-described "pit bull" lawyer, Michael Cohen, admits to setting up a Delaware corporation, Essential Consultants, LLC to pay the porn star $130,000 in hush money to never speak of sexual encounters he claims the President "vehemently denies."

Stranger still, the agreement in excruciating detail requires that Ms. Daniels must deliver to the President "every existing copy of all ... video images, still images, email messages, ... or any other type of creation by DD" (the President). (See Section 3.1 of the Settlement Agreement.)

Later, the agreement defines "confidential information" as "all intangible information pertaining to DD" (the President) ... "including but not limited to ... any of his alleged sexual partners, alleged sexual actions or alleged sexual conduct or related matters." (See Settlement Agreement 4.1(a).)

To cut through the legalese, it would seem that the President's personal lawyer was seeking Stormy Daniels' silence as well as copies of -- and non-disclosure of -- images, photographs and video of the President engaging in sexual conduct that he says never happened. This would appear to be a great deal for Ms. Daniels who, if Mr. Cohen is believed, is getting $130,000 to turn over nothing since the President never had an affair with her.

Nonetheless, she has hired lawyers to get her out of the agreement.

She may well believe that she can earn a lot more than $130,000 if she markets her story of an affair with the President, and, of course, the sky is the limit on income if she has Mr. Trump on videotape.

Attorney Cohen adds yet another curious detail stating he has paid the entire $130,000 Stormy silence fee personally, obtaining the money through a home equity line of credit on his home. Neither the Trump campaign nor the "Trump Organization" was involved, he says.

Cohen will presumably assert that he didn't personally violate federal election campaign laws because he was acting as a personal friend of Donald Trump's, protecting his friend's reputation -- which mimics the successful defense in the John Edwards' criminal prosecution. Friends of Edwards had contributed nearly $1 million to hide the candidate's pregnant mistress while Edwards ran for president.

Edwards obtained a partial acquittal -- on the charge that he violated campaign laws -- at trial and prosecutors declined to prosecute on the remaining criminal charges upon which the jury had been unable to reach a verdict.

If Stormy Daniels reveals in her "60 Minutes" interview the details of her alleged sexual encounters with the President, she may well face a claim for damages as high as $20 million under the terms of her NDA agreement with EEC,LLC . That agreement has yet to be ruled illegal by any court.

The real question, though, is whether Robert Mueller will view the agreement as a criminal violation of US election laws. If he does, the NDA may have an impact on Mr. Trump similar to the impact that a very famous blue dress had on Bill Clinton.


她到底是干什么的?
舞女还是妓女?
 
你抬杠水平不断下降。
川普在2017年解除了科米的职务,科米也保留了他和川普谈话的记录,对川普有什么伤害吗?
 
看来是美国媒体趁混水摸鱼,搞得美国新闻胡来,不去管美国经济如何。以美国总统作对,大家看热闹,媒体攒钱。到头来,人们遭殃。
 
看来是美国媒体趁混水摸鱼,搞得美国新闻胡来,不去管美国经济如何。以美国总统作对,大家看热闹,媒体攒钱。到头来,人们遭殃。
大家看热闹挺好的。遭殃的只是被解雇的那几个而已。
 
upload_2018-3-19_10-51-3.png


Washington (CNN) President Donald Trump on Monday continued his Twitter attack on special counsel Robert Mueller, calling the ongoing investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election a "witch hunt."

upload_2018-3-19_10-53-10.png


"A total WITCH HUNT with massive conflicts of interest!" Trump tweeted. He has frequently slammed the probe as a "witch hunt," dismissing it as a frivolous investigation launched by his political enemies seeking to delegitimize his election victory.

Trump lashed out at Mueller's team over the weekend, as well as former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and former FBI Director James Comey, raising fresh speculation that the President could seek to fire Mueller. The White House publicly denied Sunday that Trump would do so.

Trump has previously accused Mueller's investigative team as being politically biased, pointing to some of the lawyers who have donated to Democrats over the years. Over the weekend, he said the team has "13 hardened Democrats, some big Crooked Hillary supporters, and Zero Republicans."

Trump spent the weekend alternating between boasting about the Friday night firing of McCabe and fuming about the special counsel's investigation, sources familiar with how the President spent his time said.

As he phoned his outside advisers and allies, Trump's growing irritation with Mueller overshadowed his delight over McCabe's dismissal. Though Trump was pleased that Attorney General Jeff Sessions fired McCabe, a source familiar with his thinking said they are doubtful that this will change his overall frustration with Sessions over his recusal in the Russia investigation.

CNN, citing a person familiar with the matter, reported in January that Trump called for Mueller's firing last June. Trump has denied calling for the special counsel's ouster.

Trump's weekend attack on Mueller came after his personal lawyer, John Dowd, called for an end to the special counsel's probe into Russian election meddling.

Dowd told CNN he was speaking on his own behalf, although he had earlier told the Daily Beast, which first reported the statement, that he was speaking on behalf of the President. Dowd's comment wasn't authorized by the President, a person close to Trump told CNN.
 
大家看热闹挺好的。遭殃的只是被解雇的那几个而已。

upload_2018-3-19_13-3-5.png


upload_2018-3-19_13-4-35.png


Napolitano: There Are Really Two 'Highly Politicized' House Intel Committees

Judge Nap on Seychelles Meeting: Another 'Rabbit Hole' That Mueller Must Go Down

Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano explained Monday why he believes the firing of FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe could be viewed as "obstruction of justice."

McCabe was fired Friday, two days before he was set to officially retire and receive pension benefits. The FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility made the recommendation to Attorney General Jeff Sessions to terminate McCabe, accusing him of a "lack of candor" under oath.

Napolitano said he sees the firing as "reckless" and "vindictive" because McCabe is "more likely than not to be a witness" against Sessions' boss, President Trump.

"Firing him in that environment could very well be interpreted as an effort to diminish his effectiveness as a witness. What's that called? Obstruction of justice," said Napolitano, adding he's unsure if Special Counsel Robert Mueller will pursue such a case.

Napolitano said on "America's Newsroom" that McCabe's memos about his interactions with Trump could bolster his credibility, but are "unremarkable" because such note-taking is standard procedure by FBI officials.

upload_2018-3-19_13-6-41.png


upload_2018-3-19_13-7-12.png


upload_2018-3-19_13-7-44.png
 
浏览附件745001

浏览附件745003

Napolitano: There Are Really Two 'Highly Politicized' House Intel Committees

Judge Nap on Seychelles Meeting: Another 'Rabbit Hole' That Mueller Must Go Down

Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano explained Monday why he believes the firing of FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe could be viewed as "obstruction of justice."

McCabe was fired Friday, two days before he was set to officially retire and receive pension benefits. The FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility made the recommendation to Attorney General Jeff Sessions to terminate McCabe, accusing him of a "lack of candor" under oath.

Napolitano said he sees the firing as "reckless" and "vindictive" because McCabe is "more likely than not to be a witness" against Sessions' boss, President Trump.

"Firing him in that environment could very well be interpreted as an effort to diminish his effectiveness as a witness. What's that called? Obstruction of justice," said Napolitano, adding he's unsure if Special Counsel Robert Mueller will pursue such a case.

Napolitano said on "America's Newsroom" that McCabe's memos about his interactions with Trump could bolster his credibility, but are "unremarkable" because such note-taking is standard procedure by FBI officials.

浏览附件745004

浏览附件745005

浏览附件745006


一个法官可以在新闻节目里胡乱发表观点?

美国真是烂了。
 
一个法官可以在新闻节目里胡乱发表观点?

美国真是烂了。

upload_2018-3-19_14-50-35.png


MANCHESTER, N.H. — President Trump hired the longtime Washington lawyer Joseph E. diGenova on Monday, adding an aggressive voice to his legal team who has pushed the theory on television that the F.B.I. and Justice Department framed Mr. Trump.

Mr. diGenova, a former United States attorney, is not expected to take a lead role. But he will serve as an outspoken player for the president as Mr. Trump has increased his attacks on the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III. Mr. Trump broke over the weekend from the longstanding advice of some of his lawyers that he refrain from directly criticizing Mr. Mueller, a sign of his growing unease with the investigation.

“Former U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia Joe DiGenova will be joining our legal team later this week,” said Jay Sekulow, one of the president’s personal lawyers. “I have worked with Joe for many years and have full confidence that he will be a great asset in our representation of the President.”

Mr. diGenova has endorsed the notion that a secretive group of F.B.I. agents concocted the Russia investigation as a way to keep Mr. Trump from becoming president. “There was a brazen plot to illegally exonerate Hillary Clinton and, if she didn’t win the election, to then frame Donald Trump with a falsely created crime,” he said on Fox News in January. He added, “Make no mistake about it: A group of F.B.I. and D.O.J. people were trying to frame Donald Trump of a falsely created crime.”

Little evidence has emerged to support that theory.

Mr. Trump’s legal team has been in tumult in recent weeks. On Saturday, Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, John Dowd, called on the Justice Department to end the special counsel investigation. Mr. Dowd said at the time that he was speaking for the president but later backtracked. According to two people briefed on the matter, he was in fact acting at the president’s urging to call for an end to the inquiry.

Earlier this month, Mr. Trump did not tell his lawyers that he was in discussions with another Washington lawyer, Emmet T. Flood, about representing him. Mr. Flood represented former President Bill Clinton during his impeachment proceedings.

Mr. diGenova did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Mr. diGenova is law partners with his wife, Victoria Toensing. Ms. Toensing has also represented Sam Clovis, the former Trump campaign co-chairman, and Erik Prince, the founder of the security contractor Blackwater and an informal adviser to Mr. Trump. Mr. Prince attended a meeting in January 2017 with a Russian investor in the Seychelles that the special counsel is investigating.

Ms. Toensing also represents Mark Corallo, the former spokesman for the Trump legal team who has accused one of the president’s advisers of potentially planning to obstruct justice with a statement related to a 2016 meeting between Donald Trump Jr. and a Russian lawyer who supposedly had damaging information Hillary Clinton.

Mr. diGenova has worked in Washington legal circles for decades. He is a former Republican-appointed United States attorney for the District of Columbia. And he has served as an independent counsel in government waste, fraud and abuse investigations, notably a three-year criminal inquiry into whether officials in the George H.W. Bush administration broke any laws in their search for damaging information about then-presidential candidate Bill Clinton.

In 1995, Mr. diGenova declared the investigation he led was “unnecessary.” And, he said, “a Kafkaesque journey for a group of innocent Americans comes to an end.”

Mr. diGenova was one of several former independent counsels who, in the late 1990s, argued that the role of the independent counsel — as defined in the aftermath of the Watergate scandal — ought to be narrowed.

Drawing on his own experience, Mr. diGenova said in 1998 that the law, the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, should not be renewed. He argued that once the independent counsel law was invoked, the prosecutors were forced into bringing “an unnatural degree of targeted attention” to the case. In 1999, the United States Congress let the independent counsel portions of the law expire.
 
upload_2018-3-19_15-22-13.png

180312-trump-senators-meeting-al-1117_4d364bab2eab287ff34274dccc5404bd.focal-1000x500.jpg

Flanked by Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) President Donald Trump meets with bi-partisan members of Congress to discuss school and community safety in the wake of the Florida school shootings at the White House in Washington on Feb. 28, 2018.

WASHINGTON — Over the weekend, President Trump made his most direct — and explicit — criticism of special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation with this tweet: “The Mueller probe should never have been started in that there was no collusion and there was no crime. It was based on fraudulent activities and a Fake Dossier paid for by Crooked Hillary and the DNC, and improperly used in FISA COURT for surveillance of my campaign. WITCH HUNT!”

Yet that one tweet contained at least five inaccuracies or distortions.
  1. The probe started after Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, who had testified before Congress two months earlier that his agency had been investigating allegations that Trump's 2016 campaign might have contacts with Russian entities. Mueller was appointed as special counsel by the No. 2 official in Trump’s Justice Department, Rod Rosenstein.

  2. While Trump said there “was no crime,” the Mueller probe has charged 19 different individuals with crimes, including Trump’s 2016 campaign chairman (Paul Manafort) and 13 Russian nationals. In addition, five individuals have pleaded guilty, including Trump’s former national security adviser (Michael Flynn), a former top Trump campaign and transition official (Rick Gates) and a former Trump foreign-policy adviser (George Papadopoulos).

  3. Although Trump says there was “no collusion,” that’s not exactly what Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee concluded. “What we said … is that we found no evidence of it,” Rep. Michael Conaway said on “Meet the Press” yesterday, explaining that saying “no evidence of collusion” is different than saying there was “no collusion.” Conaway also admitted that Democrats on the committee have a different opinion on collusion. “The collusion issue, we found no evidence of it. The Democrats think they have. They've not shared that with us,” he said.

  4. While Trump said that the Russian investigation was based on “a fake dossier,” both Democrats and Republicans have admitted the original inquiry began with George Papadopoulos’ conversation with an Australian diplomat that Russia had dirt on Hillary Clinton. “The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Peter Strzok,” February’s memo by Rep. Devin Nunes’ staff said.

  5. And although Trump says the FISA wiretap of former Trump adviser Carter Page was surveillance of his campaign, the FISA court order to begin surveillance on Page took place after Page LEFT THE CAMPAIGN, the Washington Post writes.
A reminder of Team Trump’s known and reported contacts with Russians and WikiLeaks during the ’16 campaign
By the way, here’s a reminder of the known and reported contacts that Team Trump had with Russians, their supposed emissaries and WikiLeaks during the 2016 campaign:
  • The June 9, 2016 Trump Tower meeting: After publicist Rob Goldstone emailed Donald Trump Jr. saying that the Russian government has dirt on Hillary Clinton ( Trump Jr. responds, "Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I just speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and if it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer." Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort eventually meet with Kremlin-connected lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya on June 9, 2016.
  • Papadopoulos learns Russia has dirt on Hillary Clinton: “On or about April 26, 2016, defendant PAPADOPOULOS met the Professor for breakfast at a London hotel. During this meeting, the Professor told defendant PAPADOPOULOS that he had just returned from a trip to Moscow where he had met with highlevel Russian government officials. The Professor told defendant PAPADOPOULOS that on that trip he (the Professor) learned that the Russians had obtained "dirt" on then-candidate Clinton,” according to Mueller’s statement of offense against Papadopoulos.
  • Trump Jr.’s direct messages with WikiLeaks: Last November, the Atlantic reported on direct messages that Donald Trump Jr. had with WikiLeaks.
  • Roger Stone’s reported contacts with WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange: Last week, the Washington Post wrote about how Roger Stone, an informal political adviser to Trump, had claimed contact with Julian Assange in 2016, according to two associates. Stone later said he was joking when he made a reference to Assange.
Some Republicans have criticized Trump’s attacks on Mueller. Others have stayed silent
The New York Times: “[Trump’s attack on Mr. Mueller, a longtime Republican and former F.B.I. director appointed by a Republican president, George W. Bush, drew immediate rebukes from some members of the party who expressed concern that it might presage an effort to fire the special counsel. Such a move, they warned, would give the appearance of a corrupt attempt to short-circuit the investigation and set off a bipartisan backlash. ‘If he tried to do that, that would be the beginning of the end of his presidency, because we’re a rule-of-law nation,’ Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, an ally of the president, said on ‘State of the Union’ on CNN.”

“Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona, a sharp critic of Mr. Trump, [added]: ‘People see that as a massive red line that can’t be crossed,’ he said. He urged Mr. Trump’s advisers to prevail on him not to fire Mr. Mueller. ‘We have confidence in Mueller.’ Representative Trey Gowdy, Republican of South Carolina, said if the president was innocent, he should ‘act like it’ and leave Mr. Mueller alone, warning of dire repercussions if the president tried to fire the special counsel.”

“The House speaker, Paul D. Ryan, Republican of Wisconsin, issued a statement likewise warning Mr. Trump to back off. “As the speaker has always said, Mr. Mueller and his team should be able to do their job,” said AshLee Strong, a spokeswoman. His counterpart, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, had no comment, as did a number of other top Senate Republicans.”

NBC/WSJ poll: Democrats hold a double-digit lead for the 2018 midterms, even as Trump’s job rating ticks up
As one of us wrote over the weekend, “Democrats enjoy a 10-point advantage over Republicans in congressional preference for the 2018 midterm elections, even as President Donald Trump's job approval rating has ticked up, the latest national NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds. Fifty percent of registered voters say they prefer a Democratic-controlled Congress, while 40 percent want a GOP-controlled one.”

“That double-digit lead — typically a sign of strong Democratic performance for the upcoming election — is up from the party's 6-point edge in January's NBC/WSJ poll, which was 49 percent to 43 percent, though the change is within the poll's margin of error.”

“Meanwhile, the NBC/WSJ polls finds that Trump's approval rating stands at 43 percent among all Americans — up four points from January. Fifty-three percent of adults say they disapprove of the president’s job, down from 57 percent two months ago. The improvement for Trump comes from Republican respondents (who went from 78 percent approve in January to 84 percent this month), white men (52 percent to 59 percent) and independents (33 percent to 45 percent).”

FBI, Planned Parenthood, and Mueller are the most popular political figures/institutions in the NBC/WSJ poll
Here are the favorable/unfavorable numbers in the new NBC/WSJ poll

net_positive_ratings2c_by_organization-individual_net_positive_rating_chartbuilder_2ab9f15afa2fc8f78d2219a78124bdb8.fit-600w.png


 
一个法官可以在新闻节目里胡乱发表观点?

美国真是烂了。
不许乱说,那是美国总统认可的唯一的real news!


你再看看Judge Jeanine Pirro的节目。
 
后退
顶部