Cohen hearing

[GMDino]

(02-28-2019, 12:28 PM)PhilHos Wrote: What are you talking about? This is a search for truth! Why else would you bring a lawyer convicted of lying to Congress before Congress?

This guy totally agrees.





Heaven knows we never had a convicted person testify before congress before. 

[Vas Deferens]

(02-28-2019, 01:00 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I thought she was the one who came out of that exchange looking bad.

understandable.  neither of them looked great by any means.  i just thought meadows reaction was a bit more telling.  

[*PhilHos*]

(02-28-2019, 01:06 PM)GMDino Wrote: This guy totally agrees.





Heaven knows we never had a convicted person testify before congress before. 

Well, at least we know that the vast majority of those who are questioning Cohen are honest, trustworthy people who have never lied before. 

[*PhilHos*]

(02-28-2019, 01:00 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Yeah, there was a HUGE uproar on the left. Just about every prominent Democrat in Virginia called for his resignation, and Democrats on the national level did, too. There are protests in Richmond on a daily basis from progressive groups calling for his resignation.

As a Democrat in Virginia, I've been in the thick of it all. It would take me a long time to pull together all the stories, tweets, and statements about it from the left.

I trust you, Matt. So if you say it's so, I'll believe you. 

[BmorePat87]

(02-28-2019, 01:00 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Yeah, there was a HUGE uproar on the left. Just about every prominent Democrat in Virginia called for his resignation, and Democrats on the national level did, too. There are protests in Richmond on a daily basis from progressive groups calling for his resignation.

As a Democrat in Virginia, I've been in the thick of it all. It would take me a long time to pull together all the stories, tweets, and statements about it from the left.

Likewise nearly every single Democratic leader in Maryland is calling for the resignation of the delegate who used the N word, including Elijah Cumming's wife who is the chair of the MD Democratic Party.

Marylanders in general are calling for it too.

[GMDino]

(02-28-2019, 01:27 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Well, at least we know that the vast majority of those who are questioning Cohen are honest, trustworthy people who have never lied before. 

Especially Jim "whoa" Jordan.

[fredtoast]

(02-28-2019, 12:54 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I did. I heard many right-wingers complain about it, but I haven't heard from any Democrats. Not to say there weren't any, but I didn't hear what I would describe as an "uproar" from the left.

That is because you live in the right wing echo chamber where the only news you ever hear is the news that agrees with your opinion.

[fredtoast]

(02-28-2019, 01:06 PM)GMDino Wrote: This guy totally agrees.





Heaven knows we never had a convicted person testify before congress before. 

I actually have to deal with this issue all the time.

Criminal usually hang around with other criminals and do business with other criminals.  So many times when one criminal gets caught the witnesses that can testify about what he was involved in are other criminals.  The people who do under cover drug buys are almost always other drug users.  People who buy stolen property testify about the people who sold the stolen property.

You can't just dismiss the testimony of a person because he has bee caught up in criminal behavior himself.  IN fact many times you need the testimony of a criminal to convict another criminal.

Also funny how no one on the right tries to explain why their Donald would ever work so closely for so long with a criminal like Cohen.  To them Cohen only became a bad guy when he turned on Trump.

[*michaelsean*]

(02-28-2019, 02:37 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I actually have to deal with this issue all the time.

Criminal usually hang around with other criminals and do business with other criminals.  So many times when one criminal gets caught the witnesses that can testify about what he was involved in are other criminals.  The people who do under cover drug buys are almost always other drug users.  People who buy stolen property testify about the people who sold the stolen property.

You can't just dismiss the testimony of a person because he has bee caught up in criminal behavior himself.  IN fact many times you need the testimony of a criminal to convict another criminal.

Also funny how no one on the right tries to explain why their Donald would ever work so closely for so long with a criminal like Cohen.  To them Cohen only became a bad guy when he turned on Trump.

But as a defense attorney would you not try to call into question the reliability of someone who is testifying as part of a plea, and has already been found guilty of perjury?

[GMDino]

One of the lowlights from yesterday was the lack of questioning of the evidence and accusations by the GOP.  Rather than try and find out if Cohen was lying (again) or if what he was saying was false they (almost to a man) just attacked Cohen.



Now I realize this is oversight and not a judiciary hearing but basically they said "Nuh-uh! You big lying fatty liar!" 

[GMDino]

(02-28-2019, 02:39 PM)michaelsean Wrote: But as a defense attorney would you not try to call into question the reliability of someone who is testifying as part of a plea, and has already been found guilty of perjury?

I'm no attorney but I'd think their testimony would be scrutinized MORE and they would be risking more jail time.

[*michaelsean*]

(02-28-2019, 02:45 PM)GMDino Wrote: One of the lowlights from yesterday was the lack of questioning of the evidence and accusations by the GOP.  Rather than try and find out if Cohen was lying (again) or if what he was saying was false they (almost to a man) just attacked Cohen.



Now I realize this is oversight and not a judiciary hearing but basically they said "Nuh-uh! You big lying fatty liar!" 

Well yeah if you discredit the man you discredit everything.  How do you question his accusations?  "I met with Trump and he said..."  There's no way to really say something against that.  

[fredtoast]

(02-28-2019, 02:39 PM)michaelsean Wrote: But as a defense attorney would you not try to call into question the reliability of someone who is testifying as part of a plea, and has already been found guilty of perjury?

Yes I do.  I was just saying that it is not as simple as people think.  It is not enough to prove he has lied before.  Instead I have to explain exactly why he would be lying now.

In this case Cohen has already pled.  His testimony has no effect con that deal.  Usually the plea deal is not done until AFTER the witness testifies.  Otherwise you run the risk of giving a guy a deal and then his memory goes bad when it is time to testify.

[*michaelsean*]

(02-28-2019, 02:47 PM)GMDino Wrote: I'm no attorney but I'd think their testimony would be scrutinized MORE and they would be risking more jail time.

It's not if they are actually lying or not, it's convincing everyone else that they can't be trusted.  I would think a defense attorney would have to hammer on that repeatedly.  

I'm not saying right or wrong, good or bad, just what seems obvious.

[GMDino]

(02-28-2019, 02:48 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Well yeah if you discredit the man you discredit everything.  How do you question his accusations?  "I met with Trump and he said..."  There's no way to really say something against that.  

What about the check? What about any other physical evidence?

One person tried to question the check until Cohen reminded him Rudy already said it was pay back.

I just didn't understand the strategy of "I know Trump is good and great and you don't even though you worked with him for a decade".  Why are members of the GOP afraid of even questioning DJT?

[fredtoast]

(02-28-2019, 02:48 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Well yeah if you discredit the man you discredit everything.  

Except with Donald Trump.

When you prove that he tells a lie his followers just say "We don't care if what he says is true.  We just like that he talks like a common man instead of a politician."

[Belsnickel]

(02-28-2019, 02:50 PM)fredtoast Wrote: In this case Cohen has already pled.  His testimony has no effect con that deal.  Usually the plea deal is not done until AFTER the witness testifies.  Otherwise you run the risk of giving a guy a deal and then his memory goes bad when it is time to testify.

Yeah, this is the part that is confusing to me about everyone saying Cohen is testifying to get a lighter sentence. This has nothing to do with that.

[BmorePat87]

(02-28-2019, 02:48 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Well yeah if you discredit the man you discredit everything.  How do you question his accusations?  "I met with Trump and he said..."  There's no way to really say something against that.  

What's funny is they're defending Trump's character even though he is a known liar while attacking Cohen for lying FOR Trump. 

[*michaelsean*]

(02-28-2019, 02:53 PM)GMDino Wrote: What about the check? What about any other physical evidence?

One person tried to question the check until Cohen reminded him Rudy already said it was pay back.

I just didn't understand the strategy of "I know Trump is good and great and you don't even though you worked with him for a decade".  Why are members of the GOP afraid of even questioning DJT?

I didn't actually watch it so I'm going just on reading things, but they may have a shit hand and this is all they've got.  Like I said earlier, I believe self-preservation is the number one priority of most of these people, and they won't hesitate to dump Trump if his remaining in office becomes worse for them than admitting they elected a ******* for President. 

[*michaelsean*]

(02-28-2019, 02:54 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: What's funny is they're defending Trump's character even though he is a known liar while attacking Cohen for lying FOR Trump. 

That's kind of how it works nowadays.  Some of my Dem friends may like this, but I don't know if five percent of the people in that room, from either party, actually care what the truth is.  Sometimes they'll happen to be aligned with the truth, but that's purely circumstantial.