So I’m sure you’ve all heard by now that the longtime personal attorney and “fixer” for Donald Trump, Michael Cohen, was sentenced to three years in jail today, for a host of crimes, ranging from wire and tax fraud, to lying to Congress.
It sounds like it was a pretty bad day for the man who “knows where all the bodies are buried.”
If anyone could be said to be having a worse day, it would be President Trump.
Certainly, given Trump’s social media attacks against Cohen, you would think this would be a banner day for Trump and his devotees.
Cohen is going away for a long time. He’ll be out of Trump’s hair for the next election, so that’s good news, right?
Fox News legal analyst Andrew Napolitano broke down exactly what went on in the courtroom, and why it was not a win for Donald Trump.
“Career prosecutors here in New York have evidence that the president of the United States committed a felony by ordering and paying Michael Cohen to break the law,” Napolitano said while speaking on Fox News. “How do we know that? They told that to the federal judge. Under the rules, they can’t tell that to the federal judge unless they actually have that hardcore evidence. Under the rules, they can’t tell that to the federal judge unless they intend to do something with that evidence.”
I wonder what they’re going to do? I’m guessing it doesn’t involve giving Trump a medal.
Prosecutors in the Southern District of New York have said that Trump directed Cohen to make the payments. Assistant U.S. Attorney Nicolas Roos stated in court Wednesday that Cohen “eroded faith in the electoral process” by committing the crimes.
“The felony is paying Michael Cohen to commit a felony. It’s pretty basic,” Napolitano said. “You pay someone to commit a crime, they commit the crime. You are liable, criminally liable for the commission of that crime. That’s what the prosecutors told the federal judge.”
But doesn’t intent come into play here? Couldn’t the president say he didn’t mean to break any laws, or that he didn’t understand the terms of the agreement Cohen made to buy off his mistresses?
Besides, Michael Cohen isn’t the most reliable witness, is he? He’s an admitted liar. We can’t just take his word, alone.
David Pecker, for those who need their memories refreshed, is the CEO of AMI, the parent company of The National Enquirer.
He’s also a longtime, very close friend of Donald Trump’s.
Pecker and his organization were prime operators, when it came to hiding the illicit activities of Trump, as well as other celebrities or powerful players.
They did it through a process called “catch and kill.”
This entailed buying exclusive rights to troublesome stories that were about to leak – such as Donald Trump’s affairs – then burying them so they never go public.
This is what Pecker and The Enquirer allegedly did for Trump, in regards to Karen McDougal.
While Michael Cohen was getting his comeuppance, federal prosecutors were spilling on what has been gleaned from the cooperation of David Pecker.
That’s right – there’s a non-prosecution agreement in place, so Pecker and his company got really comfortable.
“It has previously reached a non-prosecution agreement with AMI, in connection with AMI’s role in making the above-described $150,000 payment before the 2016 presidential election,” the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York said in a statement. In 2016, AMI paid McDougal—who alleged she had an affair with President Trump—$150,000 in a “catch-and-kill” agreement to gain exclusive rights to her story and then bury it.
“As a part of the agreement, AMI admitted that it made the $150,000 payment in concert with a candidate’s presidential campaign, and in order to ensure that the woman did not publicize damaging allegations about the candidate before the 2016 presidential election,” prosecutors said. They added that AMI is cooperating with their investigation.
In concert with a candidate’s presidential campaign…
So who do you think they’re talking about?
Let’s keep in mind that none of this has to do with what special counsel Robert Mueller is working on. This is a completely separate investigation, and President Trump has been implicated.
There have been a lot of questions regarding whether a sitting president can be indicted.
I’m not sure, but it would seem that there are only so many scandals a president can be credibly attached to before the dam breaks.