Monday, December 2, 2019
Ritaruby
What do you all think of this? Of course it's not a good development for us as Avanetti has been coming out publicly with all kinds of damning evidence against Cohen/Trump and implying there are more women who will come forward. Do you think this public lawsuit has damaged his credibility to the point that he can not help Stormy Daniels and other women, as well as we the People by getting the "goods" on Michael Cohen? Your thoughts?
Quote 0 0
droberts
I wouldn't count Avenatti out just yet. We don't know the whole story on the situation with his former partner. It's a drop in a bucket when you compare it to what Trump and Cohen have done. Avenatti's problem doesn't concern our national security, possible treason or of criminal actions or intent. I think he will still prove to be a thorn in Trump's side..
"Where law ends tyranny begins"  John Locke
Locke defines tyranny as "the exercise of power beyond right." A just leader is bound by the laws of the legislative and works for the people, whereas a tyrant breaks the laws and acts on his own behalf

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men (and women) to do nothing."  Edmund Burke
Quote 0 0
Ritaruby
I hope you are right about Avenatti, droberts. I just read recently that he is bringing up the question of reviewing Rudy Gulliani's finances, challenging journalists and prosecutors to look into this..so you know he must know something dirty about Rudy's finances that we don't. I admire him for keeping the "chipping away" at Trump. Ari Melber on MSNBC asked him about the 10 million payback thing and he said this was an incident that was blown out of proportion to discredit him and he did not want to get into the particulars of it -and besides (as you mention) he believes it will not affect his case as he is not the one on trial nor the one being defended. Fingers crossed he continues to persist and that the other woman he says he is now "vetting" decide also to join with Stormy Daniels and become his client.
Quote 0 0
Ballhawk
It seems to me (and I have not followed it closely) that there are two factors at work regarding the Stormy Daniels matter: (1) that some voters may be put off by Trump having had that affair around the time Melania was about to have, or recently did have, childbirth, (2) that the $130,000 payoff to Stormy by Cohen, which Trump now says was reimbursed some way, might have involved illegal (unreported) processing of money just prior to the election.  In my mind the Stormy Daniels issue has always been a sideshow to the larger issues of the Trump presidency.  The Stormy Daniels matter is not an impeachable offense.  The only things that really matter to me are issues related to potential evidence of and proof of unlawful acts that could lead to impeachment and evidence of and proof of indictable violations of law at state or federal level during and after the Trump administration.  It is possible that Legislators, if considering a bill of impeachment, might take into account the totality of Trump's outrageous acts (including lying at first about the reimbursement of Cohen) in a general sense, but it still would be a minor part of the picture. 
Quote 0 0
Ritaruby
Ballhawk, here, perhaps for the first time, I respectfully disagree with you about the Stormy Daniels matter being a sideshow to the other larger matters - and here is why - sorry, this again is just from watching MSNBC, CNN, doing some reading on line and following Avenetti and his case with Daniels from the beginning. This case appears to most to be at best a distraction or another one of Trump's - well, immoral acts with women - but in reality the "big dea" about it - and why Avenetti is being so public about this, other than wanting Stormy released from her Non Disclosure Agreement and compensated for Trump calling her a liar publicly, etc. is twofold: First, Avenetti is implying that more women are talking to him and may come forward, but perhaps to your point in the more general sense, Avenetti has somehow been able to obtain some very specific and damaging further evidence on Michael Cohen which also involves Trump...they say at times he is more worried about the Stormy Daniels issue than Mueller's investigation, especially since the raid on Cohen's office. A judge put a temporary stop on this case simply because Michael Cohen-and Trump though since most of that was done via back channels it has not all played out - Cohen here is in serious CRIMINAL jeopardy-beyond the criminality of such things as the man who was obviously sent to give the personal threat to Stormy Daniels - "Leave Trump alone...pretty girl, would be too bad if she did not have her mother" or words to that effect. So Avenitti, despite whatever prior legal issues he may or may not have - which do not have to do with this case-is making public information that perhaps Mueller have but the American public does not. I've heard he is checking with Mueller before presenting information and plans to continue to do so....that's why it is, in my opinion more than a sideshow, though appearances make it look otherwise.
Quote 0 0
Ballhawk
Ritaruby you make some good points and I think the key ones are that the Stormy Daniels matter could hurt Trump in ways I did not mention:  (1) that the physical threat to Stormy, that something could happen to her if she talks, might be traceable via Cohen to Trump, and (2) that the apparently massive lawbreaking by Cohen, with data contributed by Stormy's lawyer, could be used as part of the leverage against Cohen to force Cohen to "flip" and tell all he knows about Trump.  The second item is particularly significant I think.  I still think, however, that the Stormy Daniels matter, along with her lawyer's revelations, pale in comparison to the larger potential charges against the Trump presidency.  The title of this site refers to impeachment of Trump, and that is the most important focus. The potential charges against Trump which are already evident are obstruction of justice, violation of the emoluments clause, collusion with Russians toward swinging the election of 2016, money laundering, violation of election laws, abuse of power. and possibly others, all of which could affect the creation of a bill of impeachment in the House.  In addition to potential violation of federal laws we have the state level violations and possible indictments.  
 
Quote 0 0
Ritaruby
Ballhawk, I don't differ in opinion with you about the larger and more ominous charges against Trump in comparison to his I feel confirmed-payments to a porn star for what was really not completely consensual sex anyway-he offered her a spot on the apprentice than withdrew the offer when she would not serve his needs, shall we say, anymore. And you are correct to my points here...but the big picture point which is important to your last listing of all Trump's abuses of power and offenses-we'd be here a year just listing them!- do connect with Avenettti and Stormy Daniels...and many are saying that if somehow Trump manages to "weasel out" of some of these more obvious serious charges, other charges - such as Stormy Daniels' suit as well as charges with the Prosecutors in NY, DC and Virginia-could end up being what ends his presidency. You are correct that this site is for the Trump Impeachment...but that being said I think we all know that impeachment may not be possible unless or until the Democrats take over the house and the Senate and then it would take them time to put the paper pieces together-to by that time perhaps revive Mueller's report if it has come out. I believe he should be impeached - and imprisoned - for everything he did, don't get me wrong, but would be happy to see him out of office by other means such as resignation or prosecution over any of the number of legal cases facing him. The Stormy Daniels case for multiple reasons ties directly into Cohen's corruption and Avenetti, whatever people may think of him - is exposing Cohen to the public and possibly aiding Mueller-through this law suit by his client who works as a porn star. Someone ordered by likely both Trump and Cohen threatened her-and likely others too. This is my main point. I have been closely following  the cases against Trump and again of course he faces larger liabilities - but this case could aid in his ouster and so for that reason I am paying attention. Respectfully. not completely disagreeing with you about  the need for impeachment or the seriousness of any of his multiple crimes for which he is currently not paying any price. I do want to see him impeached.And in prison too.
Quote 0 0
Ballhawk
Among the offenses listed in the Constitution as grounds for impeachment is the word "bribery."  Ritaruby, to take your side of the discussion, what if the Stormy Daniels matter is part of forcing Cohen to flip and then the flip process proves that Trump did knowingly reimburse $130,000 to Cohen for the explicit purpose of paying off Daniels to keep her quiet before the election.  It seems to me that chain of events, if proved, would be bribery.......paying off somebody in exchange for silence about something.  In that sense the Daniels/Cohen/Avenatti matter could be a significant contributor.  Consider however that the larger bases for impeachment such as money laundering, obstruction of justice, and collusion with Russians are more likely to be substantiated by evidence than bribery of a porn queen.  Mueller's staff has the top expert in prosecuting money laundering, for example.  Colluson with Russians who, with direction from Putin, seek to undermine the democratic process in the US and throw an election, is a much larger issue.  The nation and the Congress are going to be more incensed about treason than about paying off a porn queen. Remember impeachment is a political process.......to begin it requires enough votes in the House to pass a bill of impeachment. Bill Clinton lied under oath in the Lewinsky matter, which created impeachment of Clinton, but there were not enough votes in the Senate to convict him.  My point:  While lying under oath is a serious matter, Congress is unlikely to toss a president out of office based on something related to sex.  Bill Clinton did not collude with a foreign government, did not attack the press as an enemy, did not practice obstruction in the Nixonian sense, did not get charged with money laundering, and he survived the impeachment process and remained in office.  With Trump there is much higher potential for proof of major crimes against the nation. 
Quote 0 0
Ritaruby
Ballhawk, you are obviously very intelligent. Your post as always is interesting and I do agree with you in regards to "the big picture." The point you make from my viewpoint is a valid one as is the rest of your post about Trump's "higher crimes" being most important...where I think you are perhaps missing part of my point is (and it IS true that Avenetti wants to "depose (?) Trump under oath - which if they ever let him do that at all could take a very long time) that the Stormy Daniels suite (sp?) against Cohen and I believe Trump as well, due to Avenetti's aggressive "digging" or researching - has blow up into more than most thought it would be (or, sadly is even now) becoming so intertwined with the other " mob boss like crimes" - I don't know what else to call them - of Cohen, his Associate and Trump-that now her complaints with Cohen and Trump about her NDA agreement have been given a "stay" - or delay by a judge - because Cohen is pretty much going to be tried as a criminal and they deem his other crimes more important...so my point here is not even Cohen or Trump lying under oath in Stormy's case, but that what initially appeared to be a lawsuit for a woman's right to get out of an NDA and locate/punish the person who threatened her and whoever ordered that threat-had to be either Trump or Cohen or someone connected to them - has now become more important because it has and is exposing other "high crimes and misdemeanors." If other women do come on board with Avenetti and Stormy the same thing can happen. It looks like Avenetti is out to expose as much horrid dirt about Cohen and Trump in the process and not only get his client released from her NDA and find out who threatened her and why and make them pay. That is my broader point. As to impeachment your assessment is logical and I believe correct, the problem is that with Clinton and Nixon I believe in both cases there was not an all Republican Senate and Congress, all or most of whom, let's face it-are "sitting on their hands" concerning holding Trump accountable. This is a large part of the problem and I believe that both Mueller and Avenetti are trying to bring this to the light of day and to the public. But a civil suit (sp?) either Stormy's or one in the Southern District of New York, for instance, can prosecute easier than Mueller can. I hope this helps. I am always up for discussion though.
Quote 0 0