LANNY DAVIS: COHEN NEVER WENT TO PRAGUE AS STEELE DOSSIER CLAIMS-DOSSIER IS FALSE

How do you know what McCabe said behind closed doors
George may have been drunk but what he said was still true lol

 

You do know that false and unverified are not synonyms, yes?

I'm not twisting a thing. I watched Lanny Davis' interview more than once. Here's what was said…

Now, show me where Davis explicitly said there was never a meeting. You can't because he didn't say it. He said "never, never in Prague," and "never, ever in Prague." He emphasized "in Prague." It would have been very easy to just answer no, but he didn't. Every time he specifically mentioned Prague. Every. Time.

Someone may ask him if there ever was a meeting in another city besides Prague, and he may answer it, but until that happens, we simply don't know. We only know that Lanny Davis is adamant that Cohen didn't go to Prague.

 

… but you leave out the fact that Papadopolous took a plea deal, even though that is off topic in this thread on Cohen.

I was devastated to realize, as a high school senior, that Nixon actually was a crook. He got us out of Vietnam, and that made him a hero to me. He claimed that he had done nothing wrong and pulled all the same stuff that Trump is pulling, tried to discredit the investigators and the media. Fired people. Constantly proclaimed his innocence… right up to the point that the Supreme Court said he had to turn over the tapes. Then he resigned, in disgrace.

This is the way I see things with the dossier, Cohen, etc… either there is evidence to prove wrongdoing or there isn't. When the FBI was doing counterintelligence, the dossier may have helped them know which direction to look for more evidence and clues as to what happened. It was only used to get a warrant, and as far as I know, Carter Page hasn't been charged with a thing, yet. So, the dossier hasn't hurt him. He was already known to be compromised by the Russians.

Cohen has confessed and pleaded guilty. He has evidence for the claims he's made. His lawyer says he has more to say and will truthfully answer questions about what he's done for Trump. He either has the receipts or he doesn't. Arguing about the dossier is old news. Nunes investigated, got it unredacted, and proved the FBI did what they were supposed to do, despite trying to misrepresent what it said. Let's just let the evidence come out and let the chips fall where they may.

 

You realize the FBI was investigating Russians infiltrating our election process, yes? At the time, we had no idea how deep things went. I'm not sure we know now, since we're still being attacked. Any information that helped the FBI get Russia out of our elections and government would be helpful, especially coming from a former Russian expert MI6 agent.

If the information you think is so discredited named Clinton instead of Trump, would you feel the same way about using it?

Maybe the information in the dossier is wrong about Cohen. Shouldn't that make you happy that something has been disproven? Lanny Davis says, no Prague. I just want to know if he only meant Cohen didn't go to Prague, or if the meeting mentioned in the dossier happened, just not in Prague. The question wasn't asked and it wasn't answered, so we don't know for sure.

 

Especially when the FBI swore a false oath, in each application and renewal that it was verified.

 

best you go read the forth amendment against unreasonable search and seizure
what the hell has happened to you liberals you were all for civil liberties against government overreach as in violating the forth amendment or was that just bull crap only applying to your side the other side can have their rights crapped on

 

Google.com

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/03/us/politics/trump-campaign-page-russian.html

 

Schiff said it was in his “memo”. He said it was used norrowly. It was corroborated. The FISA court, like any other court needs more than one source, or they require evidence to support the accusation. Just because you don’t know what that evidence or corroborating evidence was, does not mean it doesnt exist.

You keep throwing out the accusation that everything was “tainted” with no evidence to support the accusation. And you keep leaving out that the entire FISA court, ALL 11 JUDGES, would have to be compliant in this “conspiracy”.

 

I don't now, nor ever expect you to believe anything I say. 90% of the time when I'm debating someone one here, my responses are less for the individual i'm debating (unless the individual in question has a proven track record of ever listening) and more for the people reading.

Yes. I don't know them. I hate what they did and if I met them, I doubt I'd like them very much, but hate is a very strong word and if I hate someone, it means I'm actively thinking about them and focusing energy into that. I'm way to disconnected from those (and Trump) to think about them beyond a reactionary response to hearing about them.

I'm the kind of person who tends to live in the now (sometimes to my detriment) so people who have wronged me in the past are simply removed from my life and not really considered ever again unless they affect me in some direct fashion.

I'm sure you give the same lee-way to mob bosses. 'Well they didn't directly do anything that can be connected directly to them, so they must be innocent and simply have terrible taste in associates who constantly seem to get caught lying and breaking the law"

That compilation shows an excess amount of smoke for their not to be a fire. And considering that smoke seems to swirl all around Trump like a hurricane, the supposition that Trump is involved has a high percentage to be true.

What? He broke the law. He said he did so under the direction of the candidate. I'm confused as to what is so murky about this? If what he says is true, then that statement can be used as evidence to prove that Trump violated the law by lying on this disclosure form
https://extapps2.oge.gov/201/Presiden.nsf/PAS+Index/12DAC79CC95F849085258142002703CA/$FILE/Trump, Donald J. final278.pdf
which is a felony.

Again, I'm not a lawyer. Neither are you. Neither one of use have the full scope of evidence in the hands of Mueller so neither of us have any idea as to what is actually on deck.

It is evidence that Trump failed to properly disclose the payment on his disclosure form. Which is felony.

RIght. Because if this was all fake then it wouldn't still be running with more and more indictments, guilty pleas, etc..

Your basically sitting in your smoke filled house saying 'this is fine' because you can't see the fire.

 

First, I'm not a liberal. Some people need to understand that the majority of the country is moderate, is not interested in partisan bickering, and this is NOT a situation of law versus politics. This is a situation of legal/illegal. You either believe that the Unites States is a country of laws and no one is above the law, or you don't. When a known Russian target starts working with a presidential campaign and then travels back to Russia, in the midst of other nefarious Russians involving themselves with the campaign, the FBI would have been negligent, if they had not investigated further.

Second, there was no unreasonable search and seizure. The FISA process is very complex and an incredible amount of documentation goes into each one, ensuring that the 4th amendment isn't violated. The FISA on Page has been investigated thoroughly and was found to be done properly.

The only reason people continue to harp on the Page FISA is because they hope to cast doubt on the investigation. If the investigation can be discredited, perhaps the investigated goes free. That's not how things are supposed to work in this country, which is based on the rule of law. So far, the investigation has been done by the book and has successfully discovered, indicted, and prosecuted crimes.

 

Schiff is a bald face liar and has never produced any evidence to support his claims.

What was the evidence that corroborated the dossier? And no the dossier was presented to the FISA court as corroborated and confirmed evidence.

 

The Dossier is complete made up nonsense and no evidence Page was compromised. This idea that anyone who ever had a converstation or even a business deal with a Russian is compromised is total folly. And you run people into financial ruin to get a plea deal on a process crime, what a wonderful way to run our system of justice. And what Cohen claims is not against the law. And now you want to run away from the dossier that started it all...............that is why this should have been stopped a long time ago.

 

Any evidence produced by those warrants can be thrown out.

 

And Davis now says Cohen did NOT testify Trump knew about the TT meeting beforehand as has been reported from anonymous sources

 

You'd think, but we have some squirrelly ass judges. Maybe once this all gets to SCOTUS, assuming they get Kavanaugh confirmed.

 

Yes I would say that too if I couldn't give a straight answer to a simple question. Your high brow mentality fails under scrutiny of your arguments.

Yes you are one of those people who pretend evil doesn't exist so you pretend you are better than others who see and condemn evil for what it is because you refuse to take a position on those who commit evil acts.

I am proud to say I hate Stalin, Hitler, Mao and a slew of other mass murders who killed millions by the truckload because I cannot dismiss the lives they took with the undercurrent of an egotistical self righteous attitude that pretends if I did not know them I cannot hate them for the millions they slaughtered.

Another baseless accusation but hardly a surprise.

No Cubed. There is no evidence he committed a crime. You can't point to any law he broke yet you are giddy about the possibility of a crime being committed because of your emotional hatred for the man that you refuse to admit you have.

Only someone so emotionally invested in the downfall of another can pretend an accusation is a conviction for a crime that doesn't exist.

Would you please for the love of God keep up. His statement was tied to no crime he was convicted of. Do you understand that Cubed? A simple yes or know will suffice.

LOL No Cubed it cannot because he has no evidence for this phony crime. That's why he was never convicted of a specific crime related to that statement. Please please please pay attention. Its sad how many times I have to repeat the facts for you.

I know a statement made about a crime a person was never convicted of is as worthless as it gets but its clear you do not understand his statement was tied to no crime he was convicted of but you lapped it up because you are emotionally involved in hating Trump and hoping for his downfall you cannot pay attention to the reality that no evidence of a crime exists.

Admitting to a crime that you have not been charged or convicted of is not evidence. Its amazing how the most basic evidence has to be explained to you over and over again.

If you are right then name the indictment against Trump. Your phony claims always fall short when its time to back your claims up with evidence. None of these convictions had anything to do with Trump yet you keep lumping them in because in your dishonesty and emotional hatred for the man you cannot simply look at the facts and admit you have no evidence of a crime.

 

SO your defining truth on what you want to be true. Nunes version is true because it supports your ideological bent, and Schiff is all lies because hes a democrat....ok...got it. In the meantime you will bviously be able to show the proof that Nunes was right and Schiff was wrong. Go ahead, I’ll wait.

And you absolutly know it was presented as all true, and not just narrowly used by claiming Page met with the Russian government (which was proven) ?

 

Just where do you see me running away from the dossier? You don't, because I'm not. It's evidence. I even spelled out the things in the dossier that have been corroborated in this thread. I said to consider the possibility that the Trump campaign could walk and chew gum at the same time- IOW, collude with Russia AND violate campaign financing laws. It's possible to do both, and its looking more and more like they did.

Lanny Davis said Cohen didn't go to Prague, and I'm fine with that. Someone told Steele that Cohen met with Russians in Prague. Maybe they meant a different city. Words were misspelled in the dossier. Errors were made, but he was right about lots of things. Even Steele said the dossier was 70-90 percent accurate. It was raw intel.

Explain to me how Cohen can plead guilty to a crime that isn't a crime. Just because Giuliani says it isn't a crime, that doesn't make it so. Cohen is going to prison. Do you honestly think he chose to plead guilty, knowing he was going to prison, over something that isn't a crime, and the SDNY and FBI would let him? Getouttahere with that nonsense.

Now that complete immunity has been given to Weisselberg, he's going to admit every single crime that he participated in with Trump… and that's going to matter.

 

So the idea is that Steele's ears knew of the meeting, but got the location wrong? That's a flimsy hat to hang on, and I think even you know it.(Hence you're saying "we don't know.")

And you know, you're right there's the off-chance that could occur. But what we do know for now, is that it puts a real big damper in the 'dossier' and should not have been used in the court of law. Yet it was used.

The Trump financial situation is distinctly separate from this, so I'm still very upset that the FBI did not verify information it received and put it into a US Court.

 

Except Page didn't meet with the people the dossier said he met, and he didn't meet regarding the crime the dossier alleges him to commit! Schiff might think lowering the goal posts is acceptable, but it's not under a court of law. If a court knew, what we know now, the dossier gets thrown back in their face and they'd be lucky not to be held in contempt.

You can't submit false evidence in the court of law. You just can't. It's either contempt or perjury. And if we let this slide, another American would be targeted like this in the not-so-distant future.

The proof that even the DOJ knows it can't get away with it anymore is that it stopped after Rosenstein signed and was made aware after the fact of its true origins. Because even he's not stupid enough to try and deceive a US Court.

It's tainted 'evidence'. It was never true, and never should have been submitted.

 

truth isn't truth.

 

I'm not hanging my hat on it. I watched and rewatched Lanny Davis adamantly deny Cohen went to Prague, but he never denied a meeting with Russians. The dossier said Cohen met with Russians in Prague. He easily could have denied the meeting, and maybe it was an oversight that he didn't, but in the days since he said it, Davis still hasn't denied the meeting. It's something that caught my attention, as soon as he said it. I know that sometimes what is said is what's important, but other times, what is NOT said is what's important. My spidey-senses kicked in when he denied Prague and not the meeting. Maybe it matters, maybe not, but we'll eventually find out.

The dossier was used as part of a FISA request on one person, Carter Page. Let's not pretend someone went to jail because of it, or that Trump's problems come from the dossier. They don't. Trump's problems with Russia come from Don Jr, Manafort, and Kushner. No one has even been charged with anything in the dossier, and it would have been negligent for the FBI not to watch a known Russian target, once he joined a presidential campaign.

 

Except Page wasn't really a Russian target. He was a double-agent, helping the FBI in its investigation. And not a year later after it closed, to claim that same double-agent was committing crimes for Russia against America? Ridiculous. We both know its ridiculous, but because the case remotely involves Trump, people would like to justify it.

The remote involvement of Trump isn't relevant to the greater point, that this is a national security oversight. It's also a fraud on the Court. And we cannot excuse that fraud with 'It would've been negligent for the FBI not to watch him'. Then get a search warrant(but given that none of the Page-related information was remotely accurate, and given that a search unlike a FISA warrant can actually be contested, I doubt very much they would've went that route.)

What they did was wrong, cheap and it was sloppy work. It was also criminal(lying to the Courts again, is a crime. You and I would be sentenced for it.) If the DOJ is going to let the agents who signed on it slip, then we need to demand stronger verifications that will not enable deceit to enter an American Courtroom. Either that, or grant the defense the right to hear its charges in a FISA Court.

 

Don Jr's emails are evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. The meeting is evidence of collusion. Wikileaks released emails were stolen by Russians. The Russians offered emails to Papadopolous and Don Jr/ Manafort/Kushner. Trump injects in a speech, "Russia, if you're listening, see if you can find the 30 thousand emails." Trump's secretary and Steve Bannon both have said Trump was always involved in the details of every deal. Are we to suddenly believe that Trump would allow Don Jr to make a big deal with Russians and him not know any of the details? Cohen says he was in the room when Trump and Don Jr discussed it. There is NO remote involvement of Trump. The involvement was up close and personal.

Continue to believe the FBI didn't follow protocols, went rogue, and violated people's right to privacy, if you like. Nunes investigated it and tried to mislead people, but the FBI was vindicated.

Seriously, if you still think Trump is an innocent victim, illegally pursued by a rogue FBI/DOJ, you should prepare yourself mentally and emotionally for some big disappointments in the coming days. The handwriting is on the wall for Trump. It always has been. Even Giuliani noted that this whole thing was about impeachment, and he was playing to the court of public opinion, so the midterms don't flip Congress.

 

Why should I consider things I have no evidence of, that seems a total waste of time. And yes you insert elements of truth so that people like you will say SEE there are elements of truth so it's OK to use it in a FISA warrant even thought those are unimportant truths while the core claims are fallacious. The ENTIRE dossier had to be corroboration and verified to be use as evidence for a FISA warrant else it not be submitted or the uncorroborated and unverified information redacted. They didn't do that. They submitted false information to the FISA court I don't know why you are struggling on that point.

You explain to me how Cohen can plead guilty to something that isn't a crime and especially why his lawyer would advise him to do so. WHY" Is a different matter, to get an lessor sentence and Mueller is desperate to find SOMETHING, ANYTHING on which to try and remove Trump from office.

You are making a statement of fact that Weisselberg committed a crime. Please fill me in on the details.