Friday, May 04, 2018


Did Giuliani give up the goods on Stormy?


"On Wednesday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s “Hannity,” Rudy Giuliani, a member of President Trump’s legal team, stated that President Trump reimbursed Michael Cohen for the $130,000 that Cohen paid to Stormy Daniels and that while, to his knowledge, the president didn’t know about the “specifics” of the deal, he knew a “general arrangement” that Cohen would take care of things like that.

Giuliani said, “That money was not campaign money. Sorry, I’m giving you a fact now that you don’t know. It’s not campaign money. No campaign finance violation.”

He added that the money was “funneled through the law firm and the president repaid it.”

Anchor Sean Hannity asked, “But, do you know the president didn’t know about this?”

Giuliani answered, “He didn’t know about the specifics of it, as far as I know. But he did know about the general arrangement that Michael would take care of things like this, like I take care of things like this for my clients. I don’t burden them with every single thing that comes along.”

In another segment, Giuliani said he hadn’t “investigated” whether Cohen asked the president before making the payment, but that there was no reason to doubt Cohen’s recollection of events."

Of course Trump had previous denied knowing about the payment, but this - in a twist - could have been just a denial of the specifics?

A possible explanation here.

Another although less palatable explanation comes from Trump's Tweet, but it gives hint to where the strategy is going.

"...very common among celebrities and people of wealth. In this case it is in full force and effect and will be used in Arbitration for damages against Ms. Clifford (Daniels). The agreement was used to stop the false and extortionist accusations made by her about an affair,......"

Which I would imagine is very true. I'll bet a lot of celebrities have the same problem as Trump having people come forward and accusing them of different things and the standard it to pay them off and get rid of them. In the long run - with legal cost - it's likely the cheaper way. Trump is now taking Daniels to court saying she violated her NDA, although she is saying otherwise.

Nevertheless it would appear - if no other discosures are made - that no crime has been committed, but the optics could prove bad in the long run.

Subscribe by Email

Follow Updates Articles from This Blog via Email

No Comments


Go here.
Powered by Blogger.


Total Pageviews

Search This Blog

Blog Archive


Macsmind - Official Blog of The MacRanger Show on Blog Talk Radio

Support our Vets!