General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCohen's new apartment...I'm just sayin, this mobby mofo has more money than the law allows grrrrrrrr
Michael Cohen bought a $6,700,000 apartment inApril in a new Manhattan skyscraper that is being developed
by two of Trumps longtime friends, people familiar with
the transaction tell WSJ. https://www.wsj.com/articles/
michael-cohen-purchases-new-york-city-apartment-for-6-7-million-1531410460
Link to tweet
From April 27:
Cohen And His Father-In-Law Loaned $26M To Taxi Mogul In Marijuana Biz
NEW YORK (AP)
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/cohen-and-father-in-law-taxi-mogul-loan-marijuana-business
(my emphasis)
kentuck
(111,094 posts)I thought he was almost broke??
Two friends of Trump developed an apartment in a skyscraper, and Cohen purchased one in April?
Leghorn21
(13,524 posts)and when 45 took office there was all this delicious lobbying cash from Vecklesberg (sp), AT&T,
Novartis ETC - - and those are just the entities that we KNOW of who vied for Spankys favors.
Now, I had to google bc I FORGOT, but Cohen was raided on April 9, which means that he made this transaction just before or after his bust.
Edit - he appears to have bought this April 3 (I cant read the article, will take a tweeters word for it!!)
Also, someone noted
We are seeing Cohen/Trump/Qatari $1.2 billion bribe getting laundered in real time.
Link to tweet
...me, I dont know nuttin
msongs
(67,405 posts)TexasTowelie
(112,170 posts)His future accommodations won't be as elegant.
lapfog_1
(29,204 posts)too bad the taxpayers won't get our money out of it ( probably he overpaid ).
former9thward
(32,005 posts)I will be interested to see what you come up with.
lapfog_1
(29,204 posts)but I suspect there are charges of money laundering, influence peddling, conspiracy, etc.
former9thward
(32,005 posts)Assets are not seized because of a "conspiracy" conviction. Depending on what money and how much, assets can be seized in a money laundering conviction. I don't know what "etc." laws are. Why progressives cheer lead authoritarian asset seizing I don't know. 99% of the time it is used against people who can't afford legal representation and the authority seizes a car to auction off so they can have more toys.
lapfog_1
(29,204 posts)perhaps forfeited is the better term...
And I forgot the favorite crime of the Trump criminal enterprise... tax evasion.
I would prefer to see the assets frozen instead of seized...until conviction. I understand the government's interest in not having assets sold off by the defendant to either move offshore or disbursed to other individuals which would make it harder to collect upon conviction.. I do not support the government in seizing assets of people on suspicion of criminal activity (sometimes even before a charge is made).
In any event... If Mr. Cohen is convicted of one or more crimes... then yes, his assets should be forfeit.
As for influence peddling... it is a crime if he is operating at the behest of a foreign entity and has not registered so with the government. As for domestic attempts, it may be bribery.
former9thward
(32,005 posts)There are tens if not hundreds of thousands of attempts to influence political officials every single day. It is not illegal. People are creating crimes out of thin air and rumors and internet fake news in this investigation. I have posted before that people will be very disappointed at the end.
lapfog_1
(29,204 posts)Section 201 of Title 18 is entitled "Bribery of public officials and witnesses." The statute comprises two distinct offenses, however, and in common parlance only the first of these is true "bribery."
The first offense, codified in section 201(b), prohibits the giving or accepting of anything of value to or by a public official, if the thing is given "with intent to influence" an official act, or if it is received by the official "in return for being influenced."
The second offense, codified in section 201(c), concerns what are commonly known as "gratuities," although that word does not appear anywhere in the statute. Section 201(c) prohibits that same public official from accepting the same thing of value, if he does so "for or because of" any official act, and prohibits anyone from giving any such thing to him for such a reason.
The specific subsections of the statute are:
Bribery
a. § 201(b)(1): offering a bribe to a public official
b. § 201(b)(2): acceptance of a bribe by a public official
Gratuities
a. § 201(c)(1)(A): offering a gratuity to a public official
b. § 201(c)(1)(B): acceptance of a gratuity by a public official.
The two offenses differ in several respects. The most important of these differences concerns how close a connection there is between the giving (or receiving) of the thing of value, on the one hand, and the doing of the official act, on the other. If the connection is causally direct - if money was given essentially to purchase or ensure an official act, as a "quid pro quo" then the crime is bribery. If the connection is looser - if money was given after the fact, as "thanks" for an act but not in exchange for it, or if it was given with a nonspecific intent to "curry favor" with the public official to whom it was given -then it is a gratuity. The distinction is sometimes hard to see, but the statute makes it critical: a § 201(b) "bribe" conviction is punishable by up to 15 years in prison, while a § 201(c) "gratuity" conviction permits only a maximum 2-year sentence. In addition, with a "bribe" the payment may go to anyone or to anything and may include campaign contributions, while with a "gratuity" the payment must inure to the personal benefit of the public official and cannot include campaign contributions.
----
IF Cohen accepted money from corporations or individuals promising them certain political favors by the President of the United States, a jury may find that this constitutes bribery under the US Code... depending on the determination of the "quid pro quo" and the determined "casually direct"
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)The father-in-law may be sending the money through his daughter. $6 million is peanuts for the FIL.
Leghorn21
(13,524 posts)From link in OP:
NEW YORK (AP) President Donald Trumps personal attorney, whose business dealings are being investigated by the FBI, and the lawyers father-in-law have lent $26 million in recent years to a taxi mogul who is shifting into the legalized marijuana industry, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.
Semyon Sam Shtayner, a longtime business associate of Michael Cohens father-in-law, created Nevada-based Cannaboss LLC the day before the 2016 election. A few months later, he took a majority position in a company that is provisionally licensed to cultivate medicinal marijuana and produce edibles, the records show.
-The articles Ive seen on Cohens father-in-law, Fima Shusterman, only mention his taxi business - but google reveals that he also runs, or ran, a real estate business...there are no dates connected to these links, and virtually no info (grrrr) ...the outfit is simply called Shusterman Fima...
https://www.corpdetails.com/us/new-york/816952-new-york/shusterman-fima
https://www.bizexposed.com/New_York-USA/B/Shusterman__Fima-New_York.php
He is also mentioned in the Steele Dossier (4th bullet point down, sorry for fuzzy screenshot)
I do hope to find out someday if Cohens and Manaforts wives have lent a hand in helping their husbands prosper so magnificently....
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)But tracing it must be very difficult. The Russian mob is good at hiding money and connections, and Putin may be helping the either overtly or covertly.