Yeah, it’s a weird thing for TPM to print given that TPM is the source of much of what we know about Cohen’s FIL and all the TPM stories about how Cohen likely flipped to protect the guy.
3 Likes
I had my editor’s hat on there because in the Trump era “baselessly” has come to be shorthand for “another ridiculous Trump lie made up out of whole cloth.” And what I imagine it means here is “without any evidence or reasons for suspicion offered in the insinuated accusation,” which is far from the same thing. I’d have spelled out the no-reason part rather than bend “baselessly” so far in the other direction.
6 Likes
While I don’t think much of Cohen’s lawyering skills. He DOES know how to pick them.
1 Like
Criminal Investigation of Giuliani is long overdue, however I am afraid he is going to die before they finish reading him all the charges.
5 Likes
I found it fascinating the Toadglans would single out “Cohn with an E’s” father-in-law, for a few reasons:
• Spankee appears to have an extraordinary knowledge of his former Pit Bull’s father-in-law’s business practices and, more importantly, his money;
• Cockholster can’t remember Fima Shusterman’s name, yet Shusterman’s Manhattan condo is in — wait for it — the Russian money laundering beacon known as Trump World Tower;
• Twitler’s brethren spirit Shusterman was convicted on charges related to a conspiracy to defraud the IRS case in 1993;
• Actual millionaire Shusterman has “operated” in the Ukrainian mob-affiliated taxi business in the US for decades;
• Shusterman is already under investigation for charges relating to documents uncovered in the raids on Cohen’s home, office and hotel room.
It’s almost as if Mr. Mob is trying to deflect attention from his own legal perils. Almost.
10 Likes
Okay…I am annoyed. An MSNBC reporter just said, (paraphrasing) “With all the capital police and security, the hill is an extremely safe place, so a lot of people, including Democrats, doubt Cohen’s excuse that he feels threatened.”
Ummm…I really don’t think Cohen’s concerns are about being assassinated in the chambers. Am I wrong?
13 Likes
As this point I think pretty much all bets are off.
3 Likes
Yeah I didn’t get that “baselessness” claim either. I thought it was pretty well established that Cohen married into a crime family and that’s how he got his start. I also assumed Spanky was talking from first hand involv…er…knowledge.
5 Likes
Okay 
. It just annoyed me that the reporter assumed that was the only point where Cohen might be vulnerable.
I fully expect him to get a cup of tea with a side of polonium any day now.
1 Like
That’s what I’m saying, we’ve come to see “baseless” in this context as meaning “not true,” and it’s not the right word or connotation based on what we know.
3 Likes
I’m ok with something being baseless and also turning out to be true. But this one doesn’t even meet that criterion.
ETA: I’d also add that the witness intimidation charge is made stronger if we all just recognize that there’s a plausible threat behind it – i.e., the charge is not baseless.
2 Likes
I’m thinking more along the lines of a spectacular bomb blast. You know, to send a message. (Toadglans doesn’t do subtle.)
BTW … about those “unsolved” bioterrorist attacks involving weaponized military-grade Anthrax: Is Cheney still living in Wyoming?
1 Like
Lanny Davis mis-spoke, he meant “Witless tampering”.
4 Likes
Senate Intelligence Committee just subpoenaed the blue plaid sports jacket. Cohen too.
1 Like
@lizzymom Ironically I took the other side of this argument in another thread, lol. This is one of those absolutely clear-cut cases though. I’m with you on your examples, especially the first. The second I can see as appropriate in some cases, where certain dialects use different grammatical rules. In other words, it depends on whom you’re talking to. But “between you and I” gets me every.single.time.
1 Like
Says who?
I always assumed Shusterman got a break as part of Cohen’s deal with Mueller and/or the SDNY.
2 Likes
Good Lord! Trump has me rooting for the mob now?
4 Likes
At least they didn’t say: “about him and his family’s safety…” which I see all the time. The possessive use there which is correct is dying as surely as the correct usage of number and volume - less, fewer, etc.
1 Like
Don’t forget individual-1, Lanny