Three points make a straight line

[Swerd]

I’ve been following the news stories about Michael Cohen, Trump’s personal lawyer, with some interest. You just can't make this stuff up .

Cohen was in court today concerning the files that the FBI recently seized from his office and homes. In the past year or two, he has performed legal activities for three of his ten clients. (Those other 7 clients received only legal advice and apparently are not of interest in this case.) Cohen petitioned the court to avoid revealing the identities of these three clients and details of their cases. We all know one client was Donald Trump, for whom Cohen arranged payment of $130,000 to Stormy Daniels, in an apparent effort to buy her silence shortly before the November 2016 election.

A second client was named recently by the Wall Street Journal as Elliot Broidy who hired Cohen to negotiate $1.6 million in payments to a former Playboy model who claimed Broidy had impregnated her. Broidy was the deputy chair of the Republican National Committee until he resigned Friday when the payment became public.

The third client had directed Cohen not to reveal his identity. Today in court, that third client was revealed as Sean Hannity of Fox News.

Cohen is a well-known legal fixer who apparently specializes in cases involving payoffs to women with whom his wealthy and/or famous clients have had affairs. These settlements, almost always include large payoffs, avoid admission or denial by the man (the payer) of any involvement with the woman (the payee), and also require that the woman not reveal the existence of the settlement.

If you remember high school geometry, you can draw a straight line between any two points. It suggests a direct relationship. If a third point is found along that straight line, it proves a direct relationship.

We now have a line involving Trump, Broidy, and payoffs to women with whom they had affairs. Sean Hannity may be the third point on that line. And we also have another line involving Fox News people, Roger Ailes and Bill O’Reily, and payoffs to numerous women in apparent cases of sexual harassment. Sean Hannity might now be the third point on that line as well.

 

[herbu]

I’ve been following the news stories about Michael Cohen, Trump’s personal lawyer, with some interest. You just can't make this stuff up .

Cohen was in court today concerning the files that the FBI recently seized from his office and homes. In the past year or two, he has performed legal activities for three of his ten clients. (Those other 7 clients received only legal advice and apparently are not of interest in this case.) Cohen petitioned the court to avoid revealing the identities of these three clients and details of their cases. We all know one client was Donald Trump, for whom Cohen arranged payment of $130,000 to Stormy Daniels, in an apparent effort to buy her silence shortly before the November 2016 election.

A second client was named recently by the Wall Street Journal as Elliot Broidy who hired Cohen to negotiate $1.6 million in payments to a former Playboy model who claimed Broidy had impregnated her. Broidy was the deputy chair of the Republican National Committee until he resigned Friday when the payment became public.

The third client had directed Cohen not to reveal his identity. Today in court, that third client was revealed as Sean Hannity of Fox News.

Cohen is a well-known legal fixer who apparently specializes in cases involving payoffs to women with whom his wealthy and/or famous clients have had affairs. These settlements, almost always include large payoffs, avoid admission or denial by the man (the payer) of any involvement with the woman (the payee), and also require that the woman not reveal the existence of the settlement.

If you remember high school geometry, you can draw a straight line between any two points. It suggests a direct relationship. If a third point is found along that straight line, it proves a direct relationship.

We now have a line involving Trump, Broidy, and payoffs to women with whom they had affairs. Sean Hannity may be the third point on that line. And we also have another line involving Fox News people, Roger Ailes and Bill O’Reily, and payoffs to numerous women in apparent cases of sexual harassment. Sean Hannity might now be the third point on that line as well.

Swerd,
I'm not sure I get your point.
First, you use "apparent" or "apparently" 4 times. That means the statement is claimed or alleged, but not proven. I could say, "Because Swerd has such a talent for hearing audio subtleties, he apparently has 3 ears". Saying it doesn't make it so. Saying it over and over and over, like the media, still doesn't make it so.

Secondly, let's just assume each of these guys did indeed have an affair and later paid the girl to keep quiet. Why is this "news" other than the fact these guys are conservatives? How is this girl that had a consensual affair, took the money, signed a contract then broke the contract, now a victim? How does the FBI go into a lawyer's home and office to confiscate all his records? Are we about to see a hoard of reports about other politicians or businessmen that have had affairs?

This is no more than another piece of the left's agenda to portray the people who beat them as bad guys. Do you remember Barry's speech where he said the Republicans could come along for the ride if they wanted, but they'd have to sit in the back of the bus? Well, karma's a bitch.

 

[highfigh]

If you remember high school geometry, you can draw a straight line between any two points. It suggests a direct relationship. If a third point is found along that straight line, it proves a direct relationship.

We now have a line involving Trump, Broidy, and payoffs to women with whom they had affairs. Sean Hannity may be the third point on that line. And we also have another line involving Fox News people, Roger Ailes and Bill O’Reily, and payoffs to numerous women in apparent cases of sexual harassment. Sean Hannity might now be the third point on that line as well.

They taught us that two points make a line and that a line can be an infinite number of points - the third point in the line really doesn't matter. Three non-colinear points make a plane, because the third point can connect to any point on the line to make another line that intersects with the first one.

None of this stuff happened after Trump was elected. None of this stuff makes Trump unique WRT being POTUS. None of this stuff involves national security.

Trump has nothing on Slick Willy, who did things while in office, IN the Oval Office and then, he denied it. Remember Hillary saying they were "dirt poor" when they left the White House?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/clintons-pay-off-legal-bills/

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/friends-gave-clintons-10-million-to-pay-debts-and-they-still-stiffed-lawyers-for-years

FDR had a mistress living in the WH and changed his will to include her, according to this link-

https://www.biography.com/news/fdr-and-his-women-21068973

We all know about Kennedy, Johnson had affairs and the Pentagon Papers (where he lied constantly about US involvement in SE Asia).

 

[lsiberian]

Is this honestly news to anyone? I get folks don't like Trump, but we knew this stuff about him when he started running.

 

[highfigh]

Is this honestly news to anyone? I get folks don't like Trump, but we knew this stuff about him when he started running.

When hair is on fire, what else matters?

 

[KEW]

Please re-read Swerds post.
As I read it, the post is not targeting Trump at all. Trump (and Broidy) are only mentioned in the context of being two of Cohen's 3 clients and the nature of the services Cohen has provided them.
To me, it seems focused on looking at the pattern of Cohen's legal activities and connecting the dots to indicate Sean Hannity may be involved in a similar sex scandal/payoff.

 

[highfigh]

Please re-read Swerds post.
As I read it, the post is not targeting Trump at all. Trump (and Broidy) are only mentioned in the context of being two of Cohen's 3 clients and the nature of the services Cohen has provided them.
To me, it seems focused on looking at the pattern of Cohen's legal activities and connecting the dots to indicate Sean Hannity may be involved in a similar sex scandal/payoff.

Maybe Cohen is the pimp.

 

[KEW]

Maybe Cohen is the pimp.

Pretty good business model!
Gets his money coming and going!

 

[lsiberian]

Please re-read Swerds post.
As I read it, the post is not targeting Trump at all. Trump (and Broidy) are only mentioned in the context of being two of Cohen's 3 clients and the nature of the services Cohen has provided them.
To me, it seems focused on looking at the pattern of Cohen's legal activities and connecting the dots to indicate Sean Hannity may be involved in a similar sex scandal/payoff.

I've heard stories about Sean that don't paint him in a good light from my buddy in the media. I definitely wouldn't be surprised.

 

[shadyJ]

The point of Swerd's post is, for those poor fools who still entrusted Hannity with any kind of integrity, this really should be the last straw (it won't, but it should). Hannity had Cohen on his show supposedly discussing the story in an impartial manner before this all blew up. Hannity never disclosed that he had a business relationship with Cohen, not that you can blame Hannity since Cohen is really just a bagman for crooked people in power rather than a normal lawyer, but if he had the slightest iota of integrity, he would never have had Cohen on his show, in fact, he should never have even dealt with any of that story since he isn't able to be impartial. So Hannity is going on day in and day out covering for Trump and that whole crooked lot when in fact he had a stake in all of this and was covering his own ass.

More broadly speaking, all of it matters since we don't want people in power who are so compromised, who are susceptible to blackmail. This goes for anyone in positions of high power, Clinton or Trump, neither are morally fit for high office. Clinton is no saint, but Trump, however, is far more corrupt. Whatever Russia has on Trump, they are leveraging it against him and are getting away with murder.

 

[lovinthehd]

I assume the angle with Cohen and the raid is that he may have used campaign funds to effect the fixer payments for at least Trump, or other involvement with campaign funds fuckery. The shining examples of how family oriented/churchy these men can be is pretty amusing, too. Hannity is such a turd, would love to see some karma there.

I really enjoyed the interview where Hannity thought Alan Dershowitz was just going to agree with him, but instead kept inserting that Hannity should have revealed the relationship....

 

[KEW]

This goes for anyone in positions of high power, Clinton or Trump, neither are morally fit for high office.

Why stop there?

Noam Chomsky used to provide political commentary on network TV fairly often, but he has since been banned from network TV because he is too direct (and well informed) with his criticisms!

 

[herbu]

The point of Swerd's post is, for those poor fools who still entrusted Hannity with any kind of integrity, this really should be the last straw (it won't, but it should). Hannity had Cohen on his show supposedly discussing the story in an impartial manner before this all blew up. Hannity never disclosed that he had a business relationship with Cohen, not that you can blame Hannity since Cohen is really just a bagman for crooked people in power rather than a normal lawyer, but if he had the slightest iota of integrity, he would never have had Cohen on his show, in fact, he should never have even dealt with any of that story since he isn't able to be impartial. So Hannity is going on day in and day out covering for Trump and that whole crooked lot when in fact he had a stake in all of this and was covering his own ass.

More broadly speaking, all of it matters since we don't want people in power who are so compromised, who are susceptible to blackmail. This goes for anyone in positions of high power, Clinton or Trump, neither are morally fit for high office. Clinton is no saint, but Trump, however, is far more corrupt. Whatever Russia has on Trump, they are leveraging it against him and are getting away with murder.

It's no wonder the left hates Hannity, in spite of their crusade for tolerance. Here he talks about Hillary's corruption.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=937353006413255

But Trump is "far more corrupt". Funny. And funny how the discussion always seems to be about people instead of issues.

 

[shadyJ]

It's no wonder the left hates Hannity, in spite of their crusade for tolerance. Here he talks about Hillary's corruption.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=937353006413255

But Trump is "far more corrupt". Funny. And funny how the discussion always seems to be about people instead of issues.

I don't hate Hannity. Previously he was just a zero-personality talking head who could only recite republican talking points, but lately he has become more unhinged and has gone into the crazier conspiracy-end of the right-wing, and at least that has given him some more character. Hell I liked Glenn Beck, didn't agree with anything he said, but at least he had personality, and it was comical. Hannity was just a standard issue republican drone, but now that republicans have lost their center, he has been cut adrift and is floating toward Alex Jones infowars territory. It'll only get better as he gets more desperate.

 

[panteragstk]

Why stop there?

Noam Chomsky used to provide political commentary on network TV fairly often, but he has since been banned from network TV because he is too direct (and well informed) with his criticisms!

Good ole Noam. Very interesting to listen to. I wonder how the rest of the country would feel about our government if Noam were more widely known?

 

[MrBoat]

These things usually become a gun that the left ends up shooting themselves in the foot with.

 

[Ponzio]

This obsession with politician’s sex lives is totally irrelevant to me. As long it doesn’t involve blackmail to gain influence or our country’s intelligence secrets, who cares?

The straight line is easy to understand though if Cohen facilitated the payment of $130K to silence Stephanie A. Gregory Clifford, aka Stormy Daniels, a month before the election in November 2016 from Republican or Trump funds, then it’s a whole new ball game. That’s election tampering which is illegal and a crime, unlike the Russian collusion claim which may be a red herring.

Follow the money.

 

[MrBoat]

This was over an encounter that happened a decade before. Basically looks nothing more than a hooker sitting on a blackmail card.

Now says she was threatened with physical harm, as if any of these players at this level would leave any real evidence of this. These are all slimy, subliminal lawyer tricks.

I am no fan of Trump, or any politician for that matter. I'm from the "show me first" school of thought before I give any credit. Still, the further this goes and the more it becomes this predictably staged, lawyer gimmick fest, the further this accuser's limited 'credibility' slips away.