The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Anti-Trump Witch-Hunt Update

Posted on | August 22, 2018 | Comments Off on Anti-Trump Witch-Hunt Update

 

The headline stack on top of Drudge this morning:

IMPEACHMENT FEARS HIT DC... 
Dems worried Mueller getting fired... 
Cohen willing to tell of 'conspiracy to collude'... 
Would NOT accept pardon... 
Inside catch and kill...
PENN: Plea deal attempt to set up president... 
News fuels partisan furor over probe...
AVENATTI: I WILL NOW DEPOSE TRUMP...
Audience Boos Lanny Davis Asking for Money... 

What shall we say about all this? In 2016, Donald Trump was the target of blackmail by two women, ex-Playboy model Karen McDougal and ex-porn performer Stephanie Clifford (a/k/a, “Stormy Daniels”), who threatened to go public with tales of their prior affairs with Trump unless they were paid money. Trump’s lawyer Michael Cohen made the necessary arrangements, and then got swept up in Robert Mueller’s anti-Trump witch-hunt. Unlike Paul Manafort, who acted honorably by refusing to cooperate with Mueller, Cohen has proved himself untrustworthy. Whether or not Cohen’s conduct was ethical or legal, he was at all times free to resign his role as Trump’s personal attorney, rather than to do anything he considered wrong. How to pay hush money to bimbo blackmailers isn’t the sort of business taught in law school, and if Cohen didn’t want to do it, he could have walked away. He chose otherwise, however, and was responsible for the consequences of his choice. But his practice of law, however unethical, would likely never have come to public attention had Cohen’s client not been Donald Trump, and if Trump were not the target of Mueller’s witch-hunt.

“Shut up and lawyer up” — that’s the advice I would give to anyone who got on the wrong side of the law. It is a common error to believe that you can talk your way out of trouble, once the cops have decided you’re a bad guy. If you’re accused of being part of a criminal conspiracy, the smart thing to do is to exercise your right to remain silent, and to invoke your right to have your attorney present during questioning. Even if you’re actually guilty of something, there is a chance that the prosecutor will not be able to prove your guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt,” or that some legal technicality may result in your being set free. However, once you start running your mouth, trying to talk your way out of it, you’ll probably say something that will help the cops send you to prison.

Do you want to “roll over”? Do you suppose that you can ameliorate your guilt by ratting out your accomplices? OK, be a punk, but it’s like they say, “If you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.”

Paul Manafort was willing to go to trial and suffer whatever punishment the court inflicted on him, rather than to be a punk. It seems to have been a different story for Michael Cohen, who cleverly arranged the “catch-and-kill” of tales from Trump’s bimbo blackmailers:

[T]he chairman of a tabloid media company offered the campaign some assistance, the documents said.
The company agreed to flag for Cohen and the campaign unflattering, unpublished stories about Trump’s relationships with women “so they could be purchased and their publication avoided,” prosecutors said.
The company eventually did exactly that, allowing for Cohen throughout the campaign to arrange for stories to be bought and suppressed with the express purpose of “influencing the election.” The strategy is known in tabloid circles as “catch and kill.”
The company is not named in the court filings and neither are the women, but the description matches that of American Media Inc., the parent company of the National Enquirer, and its chairman, David Pecker, a longtime Trump friend and ally.
The timing and amount of the payments line up with those paid to porn star Stormy Daniels and Playboy Playmate Karen McDougal to buy their silence in the weeks and months leading up to the election.

The key question: Is “catch-and-kill” actually illegal?

A couple of bimbos want to cash in on Trump’s success by telling tales of their past affairs with the candidate, so Cohen strikes a deal with the publisher of the National Enquirer, and we’re told that this was a violation of federal campaign finance laws. If Cohen believed this was illegal, did he tell Trump it was illegal? If a lawyers is willing to do something shady on his client’s behalf, is this the client’s fault?

All this looks very bad for Trump, of course, but it looked very bad for him in October 2016 when the Access Hollywood tapes leaked. Anyone who wants to bet against Trump defeating his enemies should keep in mind that Trump has a habit of defying the odds against him.



 

Category: Crime, MuellerGate

Comments

Comments are closed.