Cohen meet with Schiff for more then TEN hours to prep
- Thread starter Jitss617
- Start date
White_MAGA_Man
Platinum Member
- Jan 24, 2019
- 3,238
- 1,406
- 410
Due to my White Privilege, White MAGA Man doesn't have to answer your question. Always remember that!
White_MAGA_Man
Platinum Member
- Jan 24, 2019
- 3,238
- 1,406
- 410
The only thing Trump should be charged with is pure patriotism!
iamwhatiseem
Diamond Member
Nice try, and like CNN, MSNBC you're trying to deflect.
It is indeed common practice for prosecuting investigators to have sit downs with potential witnesses...common as day.
HOWEVER, it is NOT common for such extensive meetings and direct communication right before appearing. These meetings are for determining what a potential witness knows, and whether to include them as witnesses. A series of meetings and communication leading right up to his appearance is entirely unusual and certainly concerns anyone interested in the integrity of his statements.
- Feb 12, 2007
- 59,734
- 24,699
- 2,290
It won't force him to recuse himself. The Dems have embraced the By Any Means Necessary agenda.
Y'all don't seem to understand what recusal is.
re·cus·al
Dictionary result for recusal
/riˈkyo͞ozəl/
noun
NORTH AMERICAN•SOUTH AFRICAN
the withdrawal of a judge, prosecutor, or juror from a case on the grounds that they are unqualified to perform legal duties because of a possible conflict of interest or lack of impartiality.
Dictionary result for recusal
/riˈkyo͞ozəl/
noun
NORTH AMERICAN•SOUTH AFRICAN
the withdrawal of a judge, prosecutor, or juror from a case on the grounds that they are unqualified to perform legal duties because of a possible conflict of interest or lack of impartiality.
HOW does this apply here? Aaaaaaaaaand GO.
Um... I just posted the definition, Evelyn Wood.
beautress
Always Faithful
Pogo, that's a fair question, because in America has different standards for treason based on passage of time and many American leaders demolished by criticism, some of which is true, and some based on pre-existing rancor. Almost universally in other countries, treason is merely uttering a single word against a sitting ruler, be he military, elected official, or king. Here in America, we think more in terms of Constitutional adherence, but even then, some people hate the part of the Constitution that least benefits themselves or their family. A lot of people seem allergic to too much lawyering to get some people a favorable public opinion and others a ticket to the nearest jail.
I'm sad to say "treason" as used here tends to follow party lines, which are generally gleaned from questionaires sent out to registered voters of the party a voter belongs to, if any. This concept is not easy, I've noticed, in USMB members who follow no party and are likely registered as independents. If it is treason based on loyalty to the Constitution, as it would be in the case of a military indictment, Mr. Cohen would be in the deepest mire imaginable. If it were a matter of one friend stabbing another in the back who happens to be a U. S. President, that would be a cause of poisoning the well for people of that President's party. Balanced with the opinion of the opposition party who had a use for the President's former lawyer, the only thing they can hope for is for the man to disclose just a smidgen of an opportunity to destroy his former boss.
I personally would stand against a lawyer I paid my money to, to go around the country shilling my demise to people I don't even know. In its best light, Cohen breached the ethics of disclosing details that should have been covered on lawyer-client privilege. The kind of disclosure from a Democrat Party denizen might welcome it considering who it hurts. Same disclosure would draw fire. I'm not a lawyer, and after I read article 3, this entire excerpt from recent American history is still difficult to understand what is required of people in this complex case made less pleasant by what looks like a pecking ritual against one scrawny chicken in a chicken yard delivering pecks to the victim to its death.
- Feb 12, 2007
- 59,734
- 24,699
- 2,290
It should apply. But as Schiff, as well as Nadler, has appointed himself Prosecutor, Judge and Jury, he won't.
As the Queen of Hearts once said:
“Sentence first; verdict afterwards."
Yyyyeeeahhh ummm..... Congress is not a court. It renders no "verdict". And perhaps to save time we should add that it also has no judges, prosecutors, juries, baliffs, robes, or sentences.
There isn't any Constitutional question here. This is simply a hearing to investigate what one person did/knows. Whether any of the actions he may describe amount to Constitutional threats is a question that would be addressed elsewhere.
One can't tell from the OP whether his call for "treason" refers to Cohen or Schiff but there's no basis for either one. The wording implies he's referring to Schiff but clearly he doesn't understand either of his own terms.
- Banned
- #36
The witness was supposed to appear before then, but Trump and his syndicate were threatening the witness’s family. I suppose your goal is for nobody to be able to meet with Cohen.
- Banned
- #37
Yes that is an imaginary thing you invented. Meanwhile, back in reality, investigators are allowed to interview the people they are investigating.
My favorite part in that bit was when Rump started wailing about how they should question Cohen's father-in-law..... and then doesn't even know his name.
- Banned
- #40
Largest trade deficit in a decade
Similar threads
