Michael Cohen is supposed to testify before Congress again and THIS time he says he's going to tell the truth. Having read his prepared statement of his planned testimony, I think that for consumers this is a waste of taxpayer dollars and just another con. Here, with our non-partisan THINKING CAPS on, we go through what Michael Cohen plans to talk about.
Before he was caught, convicted, disbarred, Michael Cohen was riding high on President Trump's coattails for 11 years as his attorney. After he was caught, as CNBC reported: "Cohen pleaded guilty to tax fraud, lying to banks and violating campaign finance laws…[related] to hush money payments to porn star Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal…[as well as] to lying to Congress about an aborted deal to build a Trump Tower in Moscow," according to Dan Mangan and Kevin Breuninger on 12/12/2018, Michael Cohen is about to put on a show for his new master, the prosecutors.
Going after Trump is so important that instead of going after Cohen for the four+ years sentence they desired, Cohen got sentenced to three years, with an agreement for Cohen to re-testify before Congress, and instead of fining him a significant dollar amount for someone who had made so many millions off his misconduct settled on a fine of a little over a million, with a token fine for lying to Congress, and who instead of being charged with every charge that could have likely come to light after 11 years of such conduct, settled on these few.
To say that I'd take whatever Michael Cohen says with a grain of salt is a huge understatement, especially after his ridiculously transparent planned opening statement that paints him as a "victim" of his own ambition and President Trump's money, which I guess is his own greed, which in lieu of his actions, might also be considered a stunning understatement.
SPOILER ALERT, go to page 16 of Michael Cohen's rant: "Questions have been raised about whether I know of direct evidence that Mr. Trump or his campaign colluded with Russia. I do not."
So what the heck is Michael Cohen talking about? To me, if his "testimony" is anything like this preamble, Michael Cohen is going before Congress to assert by innuendo, even lies, and hearsay to assert as fact a lot of negative unprovens about the President, hoping to fulfill his promises to prosecutors and fool the American people in the spirit of Jonathan Gruber, President Obama's Obamacare architect who boasted that Obamacare got passed based on the stupidity of the American voter. Hopefully we're wiser.
This time before Congress Michael Cohen must stun, shine and persuade to an even greater degree than he has before as he fulfills his deal with prosecutors and promises this time to tell the truth. This time, Michael Cohen is obeying a different master, not a client, but the prosecutors who gave him a pretty sweet deal, a shorter sentence than they wanted (down from four years to three, with eligibility for 'good behavior,' credit getting him out in 30.5 months), a fine that is a fraction of his worth in the amount of a little over a million plus a token fine for lying to Congress, and a chance to put to rest his years of misconduct in one fell swoop by throwing his former client, Donald Trump, under the bus.
With our thinking caps on, it seems that a lawyer blaming a client for his, the lawyer's illegal actions is a little backwards. Did your lawyer ever say they'd do whatever you demanded or did they lecture you about the legal options available to you based on what you told them and what you needed, whether it's making a will so your assets go to your heirs or defending you in a criminal charge?
At the very outset, you have to wonder whether Cohen is telling the truth as he whines about how Donald Trump influenced and pressured him, the lawyer, to do illegal stuff. Donald Trump is not a lawyer. Donald Trump is not an accountant. So right off the bat I think we've got to call "Bullsh*t," even ignoring Michael Cohen's obvious self-interested agenda.
The "statement", remember (page 16) includes Cohen stating he has no direct evidence of collusion with Russia). You can find the full statement on a bunch of websites.
Here's what I got out of the Cohen statement:
*Cohen begins by asking for protection of his family from "Presidential threats." Ah, OK, innuendo, not fact. Same old Michael Cohen.
* Cohen promises he is "here under oath to correct the record," as if "oath" means something to him.
*Cohen claims some may "doubt and attack" his credibility. The use of the word attack is a good indicator that he's going to try to present himself as a victim throughout. In order to counteract his obvious un-believability, lack of credibility, Cohen promises that he has "documents that are irrefutable" to demonstrate his truthfulness.
*Cohen talks about his "regrets" in having worked for Donald Trump for over 11 years. Remember, he's keeping all the money except for that required to be doled out in accordance with his fine.
*After being caught, Cohen states he "accepted responsibility by pleading guilty," clearly softening the criminal consequences for himself based on his deal (see above).
*Then we get a concrete allegation form Cohen that he "chose to take part in concealing Mr. Trump's illicit acts." This means illegal, like IRS scandal illegal, like email scandal illegal, like Michael Cohen's actions, illegal. This does require proof that is "irrefutable." It also goes back to the basic issue of years of Cohen's malpractice before his current disbarment where Michael Cohen became a rich lawyer advising and helping his client break the law.
*Cohen itemizes his list of defamatory claims including that Donald Trump is a racist, a conman and a cheat and knew that WikiLeaks was going to drop Democratic National Committee emails. (This refers to WikiLeaks' drop of Hillary Clinton emails.) OK, first off, hearsay, based on what he "heard," hardly irrefutable, second off, obviously playing into the endless mantra that Donald Trump is a racist, unproven but already often believed in stunning contrast to today's outspoken anti-Semitic Democrats. For Michael Cohen and his new masters, it's obviously a cheap partisan shot, "Get in some anti-Trump bias-confirming stories."
*Now we get to the alleged "irrefutable documentation" Cohen promises. Here Cohen seems to put on his best ex-lawyer con man hat, much like Bill Clinton lying about Monica Lewinsky stating, "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is."
Cohen rolls out his evidence and then seeks to explain himself as to what it means. OK, so he's got a copy of a Donald Trump personal check made out to him for $35,000. Cohen's going to try to put that check forward as "evidence" of something. But what is it really? It's a check for $35,000 made out to him, Michael Cohen, from the President's personal account. Then Cohen asserts that the $35,000 check is a partial reimbursement to him, Cohen, for a personal check he, Cohen, wrote for $130,000 for a porn star payoff.
Sure, the check is evidence of a check, made out to Cohen for a certain amount, but without a note in memo or some other place indicating that the check is a reimbursement rather than payment, and a reimbursement for porn-star payoff money rather than for something else, etc., etc., hardly is "proven." Especially when Cohen claimed he got 11 of those checks, including the first one which he later asserts was for $70,000 which, if made out for similar amounts would amount to usurious rates being charged by Cohen for that original $130,000 payment.
*Then financial statements from 2011 to 2013. If we read later in Cohen's statement we find that he offers these to show not "illegality" of anything but that Donald Trump "inflated" or "deflated" his assets depending on business decisions. Cohen's "evidence" of this not illegal inflating and deflating includes two newspaper articles.
There is an issue with bank statements offered, if Cohen is alleging some illegality, etc. Cohen would have to accuse Trump accountants of illegality. After all the likelihood that Donald Trump a non-accountant dictated accounting procedures and practices to his hired accountants, the same way we're supposed to believe Donald Trump a non-lawyer apparently dictated legal procedures to his lawyer, Michael Cohen, seems highly unlikely and would require that the accountants breached their professional duties and perhaps committed crimes much as Cohen did and should be facing similar felony convictions and sentences.
*Then there's the claim that Donald Trump arranged for a "bidder" to purchase a Trump portrait for Trump's country club that Donald Trump ultimately reimbursed the bidder for with a check from his non-profit charitable foundation.
In my opinion, it would be outstanding if these private foundations that were misusing foundation money exposed their namesakes to liability, eg Obama Foundation, which is being sued by Chicago for its shenanigans regarding Obama's vanity-created "library," (meaning like a self-published book, the Obama Foundation is paying for it, no national authority such as for a presidential library.) eg The Clinton Foundation which is pretty much defunct indicating that donations to the foundation were pretty much made in exchange for political access (read according to every report on the Clinton Foundation). eg President Trump's Foundation paying for a portrait of Trump for one of his real estate holdings? Portrait-gate seems ridiculous in the context of the Obama and Clinton Foundation examples.
*Copies of letters that Michael Cohen wrote threatening organizations about release of President Trump's high school and college grades. Again, establishing whether Donald Trump worried about those things and whether his attorney, Michael Cohen said, "I'll take care of it," seems just as likely as Cohen's claims that Donald Trump dictated the "threats" his lawyer Michael Cohen wrote.
*Michael Cohen also confesses that Trump didn't tell him to lie to Congress, but tries to "show" that Donald Trump's hotel plans in Russia were somehow nefarious. I'm not sure anyone reads "scandal" in the fact that Donald Trump was interested in building real estate in Russia, but perhaps through innuendo and fantasy scenarios, that will turn into something because it has the word "Russia" in it.
*Then there's Michael Cohen's personal plea claiming that he's just a devoted family man. Do with it what you will.
*Then there's a lot of hearsay allegation from Mr. Cohen, supported with NO "irrefutable" documentation asserting Donald Trump's a racist, blah, blah, blah, again whining he, Cohen was a "victim," mesmerized by his ambition.
*Then many more hearsay allegations, which logically must be dismissed without supporting proof.
*Then, more hearsay about how Donald Trump doesn't care about the country, including the fact that President Trump avoided the draft. From this spot in history in our country, it's difficult to imagine what it felt like to be forced to serve in the armed forces. From the draft substitutes mentioned in the movie, "The Gangs of New York," to deliberately injuring themselves, to leaving the country, to enlisting so as to have a choice of what kind of military service they'd engage in, avoiding the draft has never been equated with hating the country, just the policy of a mandatory draft. Further, if we are to believe Cohen who has exposed his family to ridicule and shame from his illegal conduct might truly love his family as he says, certainly the same benefit of the doubt applies to those who legally OR ILLEGALLY avoided the draft and their expressed love of America.
Cohen also tries to show that Donald Trump is bad because he tried to maximize his profits, not illegally, just maximize them. Well, duh. If being greedy was a problem the list of non-American loving Americans would range from every pharmaceutical company and its employees to every other businessperson and its employees to every government public employee who milks taxpayers for their health insurance premiums and creates governmentally sanctioned superior benefits and pay increases for themselves compared to the American people at large.
*Then, Cohen, after admitting he has NO DIRECT EVIDENCE OF TRUMP COLLUSION WITH RUSSIA, goes into more hearsay about why he has his "suspicions."
*The next several pages continue Cohen's hearsay rant, faux apologies and claims that he's going to tell the truth.
If Cohen's preamble of what he's going to testify to is taken as "truth" as Cohen promises, it's a sputter not a bombshell and another colossal waste of our tax dollars. I think we should just wait to read the inevitable book.
