and they STILL got it wrong...
Posted on 04/20/2019 8:39:39 PM PDT by TigersEye
How We Characterized Michael Cohen’s Testimony April 18, 2019
and they STILL got it wrong...
Well, BuzzFeed got its info from the FBI. When a liar quotes a liar...
Well, I read the linked story.
And I don’t see either the conclusion, the headline, nor the logic of the story.
Did Cohen lie? Absolutely.
Did he lie (exaggerate) about the implications of his original lie? Obviously, else Trump’s use of what the story calls “codewords” is unimportant and meaningless.
But the “conclusion” that Trump told Cohen to lie is the Mass Media’s construction of lies based on Cohen’s lies to Mueller.
This thread isn’t about Cohen or Trump.
The lead article here is about the FBI giving their notes to the media.
Did you use the Conservative Treehouse link or the secondary link from post #1?
100%
One thing about Hannity that ticks me off is his “99.9% of FBI being honest” line. I was listening to his show Friday and finally heard two guests call BS on his take. I believe one was Peter Schweitzer. Both put the figure at 20% in the tank for DS/democrats. I think 20% compromised would probably be about right.
I know what you mean. I wish the other 80% would get a little more pro-active about defending the integrity of the FBI. That will take more than just keeping themselves clean.
Um...we KNOW that leaks were pervasive over the prior 2 years or more. All this exposes is the need for another investigation.
As either the FBI provided Buzzfeed a fabricated 302 form...
...or Ben Smith fabricated the whole story to report that Trump told Cohen to lie.
One little problem. Per the Mueller Report, page 365:
“...Cohen said that he and the President did not explicitly discuss whether Cohen ‘s testimony about the Trump Tower Moscow project would be or was false, and the President did not direct him to provide false testimony. Cohen also said he did not tell the President about the specifics of his planned testimony.”
Yes, we knew there were leaks but here you have one of the recipients of the leaks openly stating it with specifics. Unless I missed it that’s a first.
Again, either the FBI provided fabricated 302s, or Ben Smith fabricated a story.
THAT’s the real news, IMHO (i.e. the answer to the question):
“Who lied?”
The “two senior law enforcement sources” and on their 302s, or Ben Smith?
IMO the takeaway from this is not who lied. Normally a reporter falls back on the 1st A. and refuses to name sources so bringing Ben Smith in for questioning would be a futile fishing expedition. He just solved that problem for the DoJ by publishing his sources.
Now they can question him without that issue in the way. It’s still a crime even if the FBI provided false notes to Smith but according to Smith they were real 302s which had their false impressions in them. That makes them real FBI notes as far as the law is concerned.
PING
“I think 20% compromised would probably be about right.”
I’d go 30-40% based on nothing more than my knowledge of human nature.
I too get nauseated by Hannity’s “99’9%” claim which is wishful thinking; thinking not being one of Hannity’s strong talents.
Bill clinton’s team coached Monica Lewinsky to lie under oath on Bill’s behalf to support his own perjury and she was bought off with a job from Ronald Perelman.
But we were told that Blowgate didn’t rise to the level of impeachment.
And this was not a lone occurrence in Bill Clinton’s scandals. Just ask Vernon Jordan.
In two instances recently, Perelman, who runs Revlon and a couple of dozen other companies, has offered employment to acquaintances of the president.
Twice in the last two months, Vernon E. Jordan Jr., a close friend of Clinton’s and longtime Revlon board member, telephoned Perelman directly to cadge a $40,000-a-year job for Monica Lewinsky, the former White House intern. One of those calls, sources say, came 24 hours after Lewinsky swore out an affidavit in which she denied having sex with the president. (Jordan’s wife, Ann, is a board member at another Perelman company.)
Lewinsky’s Revlon career didn’t last long. The day that word of the job offer became public, Revlon dropped her.
Clinton friend Webster Hubbell lasted a bit longer. In April 1994, Perelman’s parent company, MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings Inc., signed a $100,000 consulting contract with Hubbell, just weeks after he had been indicted and resigned from the Justice Department. When word of that “public relations” contract became known last summer, a spokesman for Perelman declined to say who arranged for Hubbell’s hiring or what Hubbell did for his money.
Perelman terminated Hubbell’s contract in December 1994, when the former associate attorney general pleaded guilty to making false statements in a federal probe. He served 18 months in prison.
This is a crime, a felony, because their notes would be “classified investigative materials” and not subject ot public scrutiny until a lot of “permissions” were given after being reviewed.
The Sen. Judiciary Committee has some jurisdiction over the FBI. Wake up Sen. Graham and say to him ‘Ghostbusters’ style, “We’ve got one”!
Loss of job is not punishment enough.
20 points is consistent with the Pareto Optimal rule. Certainly that 20 might be 10 or 8, but it is not a tiny fraction of a percent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.