• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge puts Stormy Daniels case on hold for 90 days, citing likelihood Michael Cohen will be indicted

Rogue Valley

Lead or get out of the way
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
94,329
Reaction score
82,720
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Judge puts Stormy Daniels case on hold for 90 days, citing likelihood Michael Cohen will be indicted

stormy-daniels-michael-cohen-trump.jpg

The scandal triangle - President Donald Trump, lawyer Micheal Cohen, and prostitute Stormy Daniels

4/27/18

A federal judge on Friday granted Michael Cohen’s request for a delay in a lawsuit brought against him by porn star Stormy Daniels, saying it appeared likely Cohen will be indicted in a related criminal investigation. Judge S. James Otero’s order for a 90-day stay comes two days after Cohen, President Trump’s personal attorney, said he would invoke his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself in the lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court of the Central District of California. Cohen’s declaration cited the investigation by federal prosecutors in New York, who are examining his role in quashing embarrassing stories about Trump during the 2016 campaign, according to a person familiar with the matter. Otero said Friday that the issues in the civil dispute with Daniels overlap with the criminal probe into Cohen. The lawyer’s Manhattan office and home were raided on April 9.

“This is no simple criminal investigation; it is an investigation into the personal attorney of a sitting President regarding documents that might be subject to the attorney client privilege,” Otero wrote. “Whether or not an indictment is forthcoming, and the Court thinks it likely based on these facts alone, these unique circumstances counsel in favor of stay.” Daniels’s attorney, Michael Avenatti, said he planned to file an appeal early next week. “While we certainly respect Judge Otero’s 90-day stay order based on Mr. Cohen’s pleading of the 5th, we do not agree with it,” he wrote on Twitter. Trump, who previously denied knowing anything about the $130,000 arranged by Cohen, acknowledged Cohen’s efforts on Thursday for the first time. “Michael represents me, like with this crazy Stormy Daniels deal, he represented me,” Trump said in an interview with Fox News.

Donald Trump / 30 September 2016 said:
“The mob takes the Fifth Amendment. If you’re innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?”
 
President Donald Trump, lawyer Micheal Cohen, and prostitute Stormy Daniels

Wrong headline.

Prostitutes President Donald Trump and lawyer Micheal Cohen, and free enterpriser, Stormy Daniels
 
So a judge goes on the public record and states that one of the parties is likely to be indicted. Is that bad for Cohen? Because that sounds bad.

I wonder if that was the reason for the rambling call to Foxy Friends the other day. Trump has not been a good friend to Cohen.....and Cohen may be returning the favor in the future.
 
I wonder if that was the reason for the rambling call to Foxy Friends the other day. Trump has not been a good friend to Cohen.....and Cohen may be returning the favor in the future.

The reason for the rambling is that never in his life has he had this many microscopes shoved up his butt at the same time. That feeling he's experiencing for the first time in his life is accountability, and he doesn't like it one bit. And if Democrats take over the House in November that sense accountability is going to quadruple.
 
Last edited:
So a judge goes on the public record and states that one of the parties is likely to be indicted. Is that bad for Cohen? Because that sounds bad.

When the Feds raid your home, your office and take all your files, I'd say the likelihood of an indictment is pretty high.
 
When the Feds raid your home, your office and take all your files, I'd say the likelihood of an indictment is pretty high.

It's not an unfair assumption.
 
The reason for the rambling is that never in his life has he had this many microscopes shoved up his butt at the same time. What he's experiencing for the first time in his life is accountability, and he doesn't like it one bit. And if Democrats take over the House in November that sense accountability is going to quadruple.

You are dreaming again. Nothing Mueller has found lays a glove on Trump and there is no evidence that anything i the Cohen mess will either. And if the dems take back the House, they will not impeach Trump, Pelosi will see to that. She isnt nearly as dumb as her lunatic base.
 
The reason for the rambling is that never in his life has he had this many microscopes shoved up his butt at the same time. What he's experiencing for the first time in his life is accountability, and he doesn't like it one bit. And if Democrats take over the House in November that sense accountability is going to quadruple.

All those microscopes and still no crime, I would be tired of it too wouldn’t you.
So what if he paid a prostitute, how is that our business, and it’s not a crime.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
When the Feds raid your home, your office and take all your files, I'd say the likelihood of an indictment is pretty high.

Only if you're a moron who thought he was above the law because Donald "The Don" Trump is his BFF and can issue pardons.
 
When the Feds raid your home, your office and take all your files, I'd say the likelihood of an indictment is pretty high.

That makes no sense. You do understand what "evidence" is and what it means, right? And also that evidence can be incriminating and not incriminating?
 
Only if you're a moron who thought he was above the law because Donald "The Don" Trump is his BFF and can issue pardons.

I am willing to bet you right now that anything Cohen is indicted for took place long before the election of Trump and had nothing whatsoever to do with Trump
 
You are dreaming again. Nothing Mueller has found lays a glove on Trump and there is no evidence that anything i the Cohen mess will either. And if the dems take back the House, they will not impeach Trump, Pelosi will see to that. She isnt nearly as dumb as her lunatic base.

I guess Mueller and all the rest of the experts can pack up and go home. Fletch has spoken.
 
That makes no sense. You do understand what "evidence" is and what it means, right? And also that evidence can be incriminating and not incriminating?

And...?
 
I am willing to bet you right now that anything Cohen is indicted for took place long before the election of Trump and had nothing whatsoever to do with Trump

You should probably consider taking the Fifth instead of continuing. You are convicting yourself, all by yourself, of being a rabid partisan who is not thinking clearly.
 
If you can't figure it out when it has been spelled out to you no amount of explanation will help.

In other words, you cant explain it but rather than admit that fact, you attack me for asking. Fair enough.
 
In other words, you cant explain it but rather than admit that fact, you attack me for asking. Fair enough.

So you don't understand what "evidence" is and what it means. Nor do you seem to know that evidence can be incriminating and not incriminating.
 
So you don't understand what "evidence" is and what it means. Nor do you seem to know that evidence can be incriminating and not incriminating.

I understand perfectly. The confusion is around how that relates to my post.
 
I understand perfectly. The confusion is around how that relates to my post.

You wrote: "When the Feds raid your home, your office and take all your files, I'd say the likelihood of an indictment is pretty high."

If the Feds raided Fletch's home would the likelihood of an indictment be pretty high?

I suspect the same for a lot of folks. Is it becoming any clearer?
 
Back
Top Bottom