Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Michael Cohen's Motion to Stay Stormy Daniels Case Deferred, Cohen's Situation Pronounced Ominous
fake news
Link to tweet
Michael Cohen's Motion to Stay The Stormy Daniels Case Deferred, Cohen's Situation Pronounced Ominous
APRIL 20, 2018 BY KEN WHITE
Today, in a mood for some history, I walked half a mile to the new federal courthouse to watch United States District Court Judge James Otero hear argument on Michael Cohen's motion to stay — that is, freeze — Stephanie Clifford's aka Stormy Daniels' lawsuit. That suit seeks a ruling that her bizarre $130,000 hush-money agreement not to tell tales about the President of the United States is void and not enforceable because, among other reasons, President Trump never signed it. I've previously described what the case is about and the nature and significance of Cohen's request for a stay. Although Judge Otero took the matter under submission — promising to rule in writing — the hearing did not disappoint.
....
There were two themes to the hearing. One is that Michael Cohen's situation is grave. Judge Otero — a federal judge for 15 years, who has seen thousands of federal criminal cases — repeatedly commented that it was clear from the search of Cohen's office and subsequent proceedings before Judge Kimba Wood in New York that Cohen faced a strong probability of prosecution. "It's substantially likely some kind of criminal action will be filed," based on the nature of the search, Judge Otero said at one point. Later, based on his experience overseeing warrants, he opined "something big is going to follow."
The second theme of the hearing was that the parties' legal interests were at war with their political and public relations interests. ... Cohen is in a bind: it's clear from the search of his office that the FBI is investigating the hush-money contract he brokered between President Trump and Stormy Daniels, and it would be imbecilic to {do} anything but assert his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination in answer to all questions about that subject. But defending Stormy Daniels' case in Los Angeles would require him to answer questions to defend the validity and enforceability of the contract. If he takes the Fifth he almost certainly loses the civil suit and the contract is voided. There's a remedy for that dilemma — Judge Otero has the discretion to stay the civil case while the criminal case proceeds. Judge Otero is supposed to consider factors including the prejudice to Daniels if the case stops, the prejudice to Cohen if it moves forward, and the interests of the public.
But both Cohen's and Daniels' public interests conflict with their legal interests here. Most importantly, Cohen did not file a declaration stating that he was going to take the Fifth because he felt the questions in the Daniels case could incriminate him. He relied on his attorney's statements that he would. There was only one reason not to do that — because doing so would be an act that could be used against him in the court of public opinion, and if he didn't do it, he and his lawyers could continue to take the public stance that he hadn't decided yet — with the subtext that he probably didn't need to because he didn't do anything wrong. Judge Otero didn't like it, and repeatedly pointed out that though the record (for instance, the proceedings in New York) suggested that the criminal investigation and the Daniels case were on the same topic, there was nothing from Cohen confirming that he believed the proceedings would incriminate him — or explaining why his lawyers filed a declaration from him in the Daniels case even after the New York search (a genuine blunder). Avenatti pointed out that Cohen's failure to file a supporting declaration was purely tactical — he didn't even offer one in his reply after Avenatti called him out for it in the opposition. Ultimately Judge Otero didn't order him to file a declaration, but gave him until next Wednesday to do so, and strongly implied that doing so was necessary to win a stay.
Daniels' public behavior — and the behavior of her attorney, Avenatti — were just as adverse to their legal interests. {snip} In short, everyone's public bluster and press maneuvering detracted from their litigation interests. It is often thus.
....
APRIL 20, 2018 BY KEN WHITE
Today, in a mood for some history, I walked half a mile to the new federal courthouse to watch United States District Court Judge James Otero hear argument on Michael Cohen's motion to stay — that is, freeze — Stephanie Clifford's aka Stormy Daniels' lawsuit. That suit seeks a ruling that her bizarre $130,000 hush-money agreement not to tell tales about the President of the United States is void and not enforceable because, among other reasons, President Trump never signed it. I've previously described what the case is about and the nature and significance of Cohen's request for a stay. Although Judge Otero took the matter under submission — promising to rule in writing — the hearing did not disappoint.
....
There were two themes to the hearing. One is that Michael Cohen's situation is grave. Judge Otero — a federal judge for 15 years, who has seen thousands of federal criminal cases — repeatedly commented that it was clear from the search of Cohen's office and subsequent proceedings before Judge Kimba Wood in New York that Cohen faced a strong probability of prosecution. "It's substantially likely some kind of criminal action will be filed," based on the nature of the search, Judge Otero said at one point. Later, based on his experience overseeing warrants, he opined "something big is going to follow."
The second theme of the hearing was that the parties' legal interests were at war with their political and public relations interests. ... Cohen is in a bind: it's clear from the search of his office that the FBI is investigating the hush-money contract he brokered between President Trump and Stormy Daniels, and it would be imbecilic to {do} anything but assert his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination in answer to all questions about that subject. But defending Stormy Daniels' case in Los Angeles would require him to answer questions to defend the validity and enforceability of the contract. If he takes the Fifth he almost certainly loses the civil suit and the contract is voided. There's a remedy for that dilemma — Judge Otero has the discretion to stay the civil case while the criminal case proceeds. Judge Otero is supposed to consider factors including the prejudice to Daniels if the case stops, the prejudice to Cohen if it moves forward, and the interests of the public.
But both Cohen's and Daniels' public interests conflict with their legal interests here. Most importantly, Cohen did not file a declaration stating that he was going to take the Fifth because he felt the questions in the Daniels case could incriminate him. He relied on his attorney's statements that he would. There was only one reason not to do that — because doing so would be an act that could be used against him in the court of public opinion, and if he didn't do it, he and his lawyers could continue to take the public stance that he hadn't decided yet — with the subtext that he probably didn't need to because he didn't do anything wrong. Judge Otero didn't like it, and repeatedly pointed out that though the record (for instance, the proceedings in New York) suggested that the criminal investigation and the Daniels case were on the same topic, there was nothing from Cohen confirming that he believed the proceedings would incriminate him — or explaining why his lawyers filed a declaration from him in the Daniels case even after the New York search (a genuine blunder). Avenatti pointed out that Cohen's failure to file a supporting declaration was purely tactical — he didn't even offer one in his reply after Avenatti called him out for it in the opposition. Ultimately Judge Otero didn't order him to file a declaration, but gave him until next Wednesday to do so, and strongly implied that doing so was necessary to win a stay.
Daniels' public behavior — and the behavior of her attorney, Avenatti — were just as adverse to their legal interests. {snip} In short, everyone's public bluster and press maneuvering detracted from their litigation interests. It is often thus.
....
6 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
Fabulous. That’s pretty much how I like his situation to BE!!!
OMINOUS 
AF!!
