No One Refuted Cohen
"As expected, Republicans on the House Oversight and Reform Committee spent an entire day trying to expose Cohen as a liar. For example, they pointed out that he's headed to prison for lying. They reproved, in very loud and angry tones, his lack of thoroughness in completing a government questionnaire. They even displayed a large photograph of Cohen labeled "Liar, liar, pants on fire!"
To which one can only add: "hanging on a telephone wire."
In short, they tried everything to discredit Cohen's charges — except disputing them. Racist, con man, cheat. No one sputtered, "Have you no decency?" No one wept for this good man's good name. Even drug kingpins are praised for remembering widows and orphans. But Trump's alleged chiseling at his "charitable" foundation went unrefuted."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/where-does-america-find-such-sad-excuses-for-elected-leaders/2019/03/01/9a221ade-3c5a-11e9-a06c-3ec8ed509d15_story.html
-
Roughly twenty Republican congresspeople (there was one woman) interrogated Michael Cohen in a congressional hearing last Wednesday. I would like "conservatives" , Republicans, libertarians, anarchists, and independents who may read this to offer a response that indicates that the Republican members of the committee made any attempt to say that Trump was not guilty of any of Cohen's allegations because Donald Trump is a man of such honesty, decency and ethical character that he could not have done these reprehensible things, that Trump is not capable of this level of wrong doing because he is a good man.
The "defense" of Trump, virtually in it's entirety, is that Cohen is a liar.
No one disputed that Trump had used a "charity"s money to purchase a 10 foot high painting of himself.
No one disputed that Trump authorized hush money payment to porn stars on the basis that Trump would not do such a thing because he is a God fearing family man.
Not one of those 20 Republicans said that Trump is not a liar, and thus his denials should be accepted face value. Not one of them.
Not one of them questioned whether Trump was capable of racist comments about blacks.
Not one of them defended Trump when Cohen said Trump bragged about avoiding the draft. None of the 20 Republicans said "that's not the Donald Trump I know".
When Cohen had said that Trump threatened people he owed money to with the response that they should accept half payment or "sue him" , not one of the Republicans on the committee offered an argument that Trump is too good a man to do such unethical business behavior.
No one defended Donald Trump.
Maybe those Republicans are not as dumb as they looked.
Tags
Who is online
73 visitors
Far too many Americans are in denial about Trumpism and Trump. We see it on this forum every day.
How is it possible to refute Michael Cohen? Cohen either gave a first hand account or expressed opinion based on first hand information. The only way to refute Cohen's testimony would to have been present during the events recounted by Cohen. So, directly refuting Cohen's testimony would require testimony from other people that witnessed the events.
The claim that Republicans couldn't refute Cohen's testimony is accurate but is not an honest claim.
Who has defended Donald Trump since he won the Republican nomination in 2016? Many prominent Republicans have been as harsh in their criticism of Trump as have Democrats. John McCain snubbed Trump after McCain was dead.
Again the claim that Republicans did not defend Trump is accurate but is not an honest claim.
Sadly, the partisans obviously think the public is so stupid that they will believe any propaganda thrown at the wall. Of course Congressional Republicans could not refute Michael Cohen's testimony any more than Congressional Democrats could confirm that testimony. That's why the veracity of the witness needs scrutiny; no one on the committee could refute or confirm the testimony. Claiming lack of refutation or confirmation is a red herring argument.
The "defense" of Trump, virtually in it's entirety, is that Cohen is a liar.
No one disputed that Trump had used a "charity"s money to purchase a 10 foot high painting of himself.
No one disputed that Trump authorized hush money payment to porn stars on the basis that Trump would not do such a thing because he is a God fearing family man.
Not one of those 20 Republicans said that Trump is not a liar, and thus his denials should be accepted face value. Not one of them.
Not one of them questioned whether Trump was capable of racist comments about blacks.
Not one of them defended Trump when Cohen said Trump bragged about avoiding the draft. None of the 20 Republicans said "that's not the Donald Trump I know".
When Cohen had said that Trump threatened people he owed money to with the response that they should accept half payment or "sue him" , not one of the Republicans on the committee offered an argument that Trump is too good a man to do such unethical business behavior.
No one defended Donald Trump.
The Republicans barely referred to the claims that were the reason for the hearing. Michael Cohen wasn't there testifying about himself, he was there testifying about Trump.
Not one of the 20 Republicans said that Trump didnt do the things he is accused of.
All they said is that Cohen is a liar. If that is the best they can do to prove Trump's innocence, it is pretty pitiful.
Neither Republicans or Democrats confirmed any of those charges against Trump. So, the result of Michael Cohen's testimony is that nothing Cohen said could be disputed or confirmed by the Congressional committee.
Democrats inability to confirm Michael Cohen's testimony would be an accurate claim but would not be an honest claim. The underlying claims are red herring arguments relying on the gullibility of the ignorant for propaganda purposes.
It seems clear that Democrats are spreading propaganda based on red herring arguments because Democrats do not want to take responsibility for forcing Trump to testify before Congress. All of this could be resolved if Democrats would do the job they were elected to do. Don't blame Republicans because Democratic politicians are cowards.
Uncontradicted
Republicans on the House Oversight Committee impugned the integrity of Trump’s former lawyer—but failed to defend the president from his key charges.
Michael Cohen’s testimony to the House Oversight Committee was uncontradicted. The former personal attorney of the president of the United States today accused him of a litany of crimes, improprieties, immoralities, and betrayals of national security. And not one Republican member of the committee breathed one word in defense of the leader of their party.
Those Republicans have learned the hard way never to trust President Donald Trump’s denials.
Did he direct payoffs to a porn star? Trump denied it. It was true.
Was the Trump Organization pursuing a hotel project in Moscow while he was running for president? Trump denied it. That was true too.
Did his campaign meet with someone claiming to be an agent of the Russian state to seek dirt on Hillary Clinton? Denied. True.
Was there fraud at the Trump Foundation? Denied. True.
Who wants to be the member of Congress recorded for posterity rejecting Cohen’s testimony that Roger Stone informed Trump in advance of the impending WikiLeaks dump?
Who doubts that Trump helped shape Michael Cohen’s false testimony to Congress? Who wants to take the other side of the bet from Representative Ocasio-Cortez that Trump provided false financial information to insurance companies and local tax authorities? Who feels confident that Donald Trump Jr. did not lie to Congress when he denied that Trump had foreknowledge of the June 9, 2016, Trump Tower meeting?
Evidently, no Republican on the Oversight Committee.
Representative Mark Meadows did challenge the allegation that Trump regularly disparaged black Americans, by invoking the mute presence at the hearing of an African American Trump appointee to the Department of Housing and Urban Development. But considering the demeaning things Trump has said and tweeted in public, does anyone want to risk embarrassment or worse by claiming that he has not said slightly worse things in private?
The Republican case against Cohen was to reiterate over and over that Cohen is a convicted liar. As he is. As are Trump’s campaign chairman, Trump’s deputy campaign chair, and Trump’s first national security adviser. It’s bold to cite the criminality of so many of Trump’s associates—and maybe more to come—as proof of Trump’s innocence.
And obviously the Republican committee members know it. None of them would dare say that Trump is truthful in speech or honest in business. None would say it is impossible he said the things about black Americans that Cohen alleges he said. Even the allegations Cohen could not corroborate are all so hideously plausible that the most pro-Trump Republicans on the Oversight Committee shied from gainsaying them.
Cohen’s testimony may not all prove correct. But all of it is plausible—and not a word of it has been contradicted, let alone refuted.
The author is David Frum, speechwriter for George W Bush.
The bottom line is that the number of criminal individuals that Trump himself chose for his personal business, his campaign, and his commercial business shows a pattern of criminal and corrupt associates.
So Trump is either choosing these criminals who have confessed, been indicted, were part of the campaign, or that were his personal associates and appointees, because he likes and personally identifies with criminals and criminal behavior.
This isn't just a "guilt by association" scenario, this is deliberate choices by Trump, of people who are now confessing and being sentenced in criminal activity and criminal behavior.
Trump doesn't "hire the best", he doesn't choose "the best", he chooses who he believes will lie like him, who will lie for him, and will do any criminal activity to benefit him. So Trump himself is a criminal who chooses to hire criminals for everything, from his lawyers to his campaign to his appointees.
What is happening is the same thing that happened with Nixon, the Nixon apologists were out in full force until it could no longer be denied that a crime had taken place for and by Nixon. The same applies here with the apologists covering for Trump until they can no longer deny the crimes that have taken place for Trump and by Trump.
The first box Scumbag checks when he's interviewing people to work for him is do they have no ethical, moral or honest bones in their bodies. That's why the Cohens and Stones and, of course, his family loom so large in all the corruption.
As far as the Cohen testimony--it matters not a whit--the base still shrieks "Lock her up."
The real beauty and success of Trumpism is the phenom's ability to sharpen divides already in existence---and the best part is the phenom's success in dividing allies, friends and family.
Trumpism is akin to the Black Plague Pandemic---it will have to run it's course---either infecting everything or simply fading away.
The last 'political pandemic' was Nazi Germany---which took millions of tons of bombs dropped from the skies and the blood of untold millions more to eradicate---at least eradicate for a few generations---it is again rising from the slime gutters.