Toronto Escorts

Networks Punt on Lanny Davis Blowing Huge Hole in CNN’s Trump Tower Collusion Story

b4u

Active member
Jul 23, 2010
1,790
10
38
Networks Punt on Lanny Davis Blowing Huge Hole in CNN’s Trump Tower Collusion Story

On Thursday, the “big three” morning and evening network newscasts of ABC, CBS, and NBC failed to inform their viewers that Michael Cohen did not actually know whether then-candidate Donald Trump had a heads-up on the infamous Trump Tower when media reports starting on July 26 originally claimed otherwise.

This massive correction by Cohen lawyer Lanny Davis was ignored on the networks despite the fact that the original claim fetched 28 minutes and 29 seconds of coverage on their July 27 morning and evening newscasts.


While it spread quickly to other outlets, CNN’s Carl Bernstein, Marshall Cohen, and Jim Sciutto appeared on the July 26 Cuomo PrimeTime to drop the bombshell claim that Michael Cohen would tell federal investigators that President Trump knew of the infamous Trump Tower meeting before it took place.

Of course, the CNN.com story has not been updated, even though an Axios piece and Davis’s appearance on Wednesday’s AC360 both obliterated the story that sent CNN and fellow Resistance-types (including Brian Stelter) into a giddy mood.

Host Anderson Cooper seem perplexed with Davis’s claim that Cohen had “testified truthfully to the Senate Intelligence Committee and, according to the chair and vice chair of the committee, he told them that he had no knowledge of the meeting until he saw it in the press” because “[e]ither he knew about the meeting or he didn't know about the meeting.”

Davis shot back by declaring the media to have gotten their reporting “mixed up in the course of a criminal investigation,” adding that “[w]e were not the source of the story and in the course of a criminal investigation, the advice we were given — those of us dealing with the media is that we could not do anything other than stay silent.”

Cooper then asked an elongated follow-up and Davis responded (click “expand” for more):

DAVIS: Senator Burr and Senator Warner read the answer to the question about his testimony, which is that he said he was not aware ahead of time and did not hear anything to the contrary and that was the testimony before the Senate as well as the House Intelligence Committees and he said that that testimony was accurate.

COOPER: So, Michael Cohen does not have information that President Trump knew about the Trump Tower meeting with the Russians beforehand or even after?

DAVIS: No, there’s not.


Davis doubled down on those comments when he told Axios’s Jonathan Swan: “It was painful. We were not the source, we could not confirm, and we could not correct. We had to be silent because of the sensitivity needed in the middle of a criminal investigation.”

Here’s the lede graphs from that much-celebrated CNN.com scoop that’s now in tatters (click “expand” for more):

Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump's former personal attorney, claims that then-candidate Trump knew in advance about the June 2016 meeting in Trump Tower in which Russians were expected to offer his campaign dirt on Hillary Clinton, sources with knowledge tell CNN. Cohen is willing to make that assertion to special counsel Robert Mueller, the sources said.

Cohen's claim would contradict repeated denials by Trump, Donald Trump Jr., their lawyers and other administration officials who have said that the President knew nothing about the Trump Tower meeting until he was approached about it by The New York Times in July 2017.

Cohen alleges that he was present, along with several others, when Trump was informed of the Russians' offer by Trump Jr. By Cohen's account, Trump approved going ahead with the meeting with the Russians, according to sources.




All the joy this story gave the left lmao they were sure(once again) that they had Trump and the end for him is near. enjoy your witch hunt! 30 minutes of coverage for the LIE and seconds of coverage on the correction and no correction at all from some. weird how this seems to happen on a regular basis.
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,673
6,836
113
Can't go after Lanny. He's the Clinton fixer.
 

LT56

Banned
Feb 16, 2013
1,604
1
0
Lanny Davis: I have no idea if that story I confirmed about the Trump Tower meeting is true or not


by Becket Adams | August 24, 2018 04:51 PM
On July 27, CNN published what looked like a major scoop. President Trump’s former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, claimed that candidate Trump knew “in advance about the June 2016 meeting in Trump Tower in which Russians were expected to offer his campaign dirt on Hillary Clinton.” This was attributed to “sources with knowledge.”

Moreover, CNN’s sources said Cohen is willing to “make that assertion to special counsel Robert Mueller,” who is investigating Russia’s reported interference in the 2016 presidential election.

The New York Post later confirmed the CNN report with an anonymous source of its own. The Cohen scoop was a media sensation for as long as these things normally are in the Trump era.

But guess what: It may all be bunk.

Cohen testified before Congress last year that he had no idea “whether then-candidate Donald Trump had foreknowledge of the 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Russians,” according to Axios. Cohen’s attorney, Lanny Davis (yes, that Lanny Davis), also said this week that the stories from July were total nonsense.

“It was painful,” he told Axios’ Jonathan Swan after being asked why he and Cohen didn’t do more to dispute CNN’s reporting. “We were not the source, we could not confirm, and we could not correct. We had to be silent because of the sensitivity needed in the middle of a criminal investigation."

It’s possible that Cohen was lying then and is telling the truth now, or vice versa. Just because you testify one way doesn't mean you're telling the truth. But now have a look at the New York Post's follow-up report this week on its original Trump Tower meeting coverage.

When The Post called Cohen’s lawyer, Lanny Davis, at the time to confirm the report, he said as an anonymous source that it was accurate.

But Thursday, Davis, speaking on the record, apologized for confirming something he did not know to be true.

“I regret that I wasn’t clear enough to The Post. I should have been more clear. I could not independently confirm the information in the CNN story,” he said.

“I’m sorry that I left that impression. I wasn’t at the meeting. The only person who could confirm that information is my client.”


In other words, Davis confirmed a story for the Post, despite having no idea whether it was true or not. He actively participated in a major narrative he claims now was “painful” to watch.

He didn’t follow-up with the Post until now, only after newsrooms are reporting the initial July reports may be inaccurate.

Boy, if you can’t trust a longtime Clinton ally, then who can you trust?
So...Davis initially confirmed the Trump Tower story anonymously and then subsequently recanted his confirmation on the record.

It looks like Davis realized that he was confirming that his client lied to Congress and is now trying to walk back his admission...Oooops...LOL. This seems to be what happens when people step foot inside Trump World- inevitably you get slimed and damage your reputation.
 

b4u

Active member
Jul 23, 2010
1,790
10
38
So...Davis initially confirmed the Trump Tower story anonymously and then subsequently recanted his confirmation on the record.

It looks like Davis realized that he was confirming that his client lied to Congress and is now trying to walk back his admission...Oooops...LOL. This seems to be what happens when people step foot inside Trump World- inevitably you get slimed and damage your reputation.
“It was painful,” he told Axios’ Jonathan Swan after being asked why he and Cohen didn’t do more to dispute CNN’s reporting. “We were not the source, we could not confirm, and we could not correct. We had to be silent because of the sensitivity needed in the middle of a criminal investigation."
Davis was not the anonymous source according to himself.
 

LT56

Banned
Feb 16, 2013
1,604
1
0
Davis was not the anonymous source according to himself.
The story you posted is a crock of shit. Lanny Davis was all over cable news this week telling them that Cohen had info against Trump:


Cohen lawyer Lanny Davis suggests his client has knowledge implicating Trump in ‘criminal conspiracy’ to hack Democratic emails


ByAugust 22, 2018 at 2:20 AM
Cohen’s admission that he violated campaign finance laws by paying hush money to two women at Trump’s behest came in the form of a standard plea deal rather than a cooperation agreement requiring that he aid other investigations.

That raised the question of whether Cohen would cooperate, and, crucially, what his cooperation would be worth.

One possible answer came into view the very same day, as Cohen’s attorney, Lanny Davis, suggested on television — and in an interview with The Washington Post late Tuesday — that Cohen had knowledge “of interest” to special counsel Robert S. Mueller III and that his client was “more than happy to tell the special counsel all that he knows.”


Davis said Cohen’s knowledge reached beyond “the obvious possibility of a conspiracy to collude” and included information on whether Trump participated in a “criminal conspiracy” to hack into the emails of Democratic officials during the 2016 election.

President Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen pleaded guilty Aug. 21 to eight violations of banking, tax and campaign finance laws. (Monica Akhtar/The Washington Post)
On “The Rachel Maddow Show,” Davis, a veteran of the Clinton White House, said his client had “knowledge about the computer crime of hacking and whether or not Mr. Trump knew ahead of time about that crime and even cheered it on.”

It was already clear, Davis said, that Trump “publicly cheered it on” — an apparent reference to then-candidate Trump’s appeal to Russia in July 2016 to “find the 30,000 emails that are missing.” The question that Trump’s former attorney might be able to answer, Davis said, is “did he also have private information?”

Davis said he chose his words carefully so as not to violate attorney-client privilege by revealing the specifics of what Cohen had told him.

“I know everyone’s interested in the same question: What does [Cohen] know, and is it going to be harmful to Trump?” Davis told The Post. “The script that I worked out very carefully so I’m not revealing what Mr. Cohen told me is that I believe that what he knows in some respects regarding the subject of the Mueller investigation would be of interest.”

Trump responded to Cohen’s guilty plea on Tuesday — as well as to the conviction of his onetime campaign chairman Paul Manafort on eight fraud charges — by saying these developments had “nothing to do with Russian collusion.”

“Where is the collusion?” he asked during a rally in Charleston, W.Va.

In a statement, Rudolph W. Giuliani, Trump’s lead attorney, said, “There is no allegation of any wrongdoing against the president in the government’s charges against Mr. Cohen.”

But Davis noted, as have others, that what “Donald Trump and all of his henchmen miss when they say, ‘No collusion, no collusion, no collusion’ ” is the issue of criminal conspiracy, which he distinguished from collusion. (For the record, Davis said he thinks there was also collusion, meaning “active coordination between people in the Trump campaign and Russian government officials.”)

“A conspiracy to commit a crime becomes a crime if there’s one overt act — meaning you do anything to implement the crime,” Davis added. “So if there is a conversation and a plan for there to be dirt on Hillary Clinton, and then someone knows the way you’re willing to get the dirt is a Russian agent called WikiLeaks . . . and then WikiLeaks hacks into an email account, which is a crime, then you have committed a crime of conspiracy.”

A crime of conspiracy, he maintained, “could mean that somebody knows about a crime about to be committed and doesn’t call the FBI.”

Davis said Cohen’s possible knowledge of criminal conspiracy was not limited to the June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower between Donald Trump Jr. and Kremlin-aligned lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya. The heavily scrutinized encounter, Davis said, “requires an overt act to be criminal.” This month, Trump acknowledged that the purpose of the meeting was to “get information on an opponent” but said the method was “totally legal and done all the time in politics.”

Davis told The Post that there were other instances, involving overt acts, about which Cohen had knowledge “of interest to Mr. Mueller.” He added, though, again emphasizing attorney-client privilege, that he was “only saying it’s a possibility.”

All of Davis’ statements stress that due to attorney-client privilege he can only say these things are “a possibility”. Thus, his anonymous confirmation to the Post was off script and he has since walked it back to say he personally cannot confirm or deny the story as he was not in the room with Cohen at the time.

The story you cite tries to paint this as Cohen’s retracting the story- He’s not. In fact, he’s been spreading it all over cable news this week with the above attorney-client disclaimer.

Check your sources before posting. Any fringe source that is poorly written and includes click bait headlines with words like “Destroys” or “Blows Huge Hole” should be viewed with skepticism.

Please stop spreading fake news.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.was...riminal-conspiracy-to-hack-democratic-emails/


PS: I’m not going to respond to any of your rebuttals in this thread. I have already given this stupid crap more of my valuable attention than it deserves. Arguing with you creates the illusion that you have offered something worth arguing over- you have not.

LT56 out
 

b4u

Active member
Jul 23, 2010
1,790
10
38
The story you posted is a crock of shit. Lanny Davis was all over cable news this week telling them that Cohen had info against Trump:







LT56 out

my "quote" is from your article!

“It was painful,” he told Axios’ Jonathan Swan after being asked why he and Cohen didn’t do more to dispute CNN’s reporting. “We were not the source, we could not confirm, and we could not correct. We had to be silent because of the sensitivity needed in the middle of a criminal investigation."
 

LT56

Banned
Feb 16, 2013
1,604
1
0
my "quote" is from your article!
I was (obviously) referencing your first post in this thread.

*sighs*


:frusty:


And yes...I am aware that I am posting again when I said I wouldn’t. You post a lot of stupid shit but I must admit that whether by design or sheer stupidity you are annoying af!!!!!


(I hate myself for even responding to you...And I hate you for making me hate myself! Fuck you, b4u!)
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,495
11
38
As a spectator, let me see if I have this right: The OP is excitedly posting a news story whose essential content is that the three networks didn't lead off their news and tell the world that some guy did not actually know something. The posted story's actual bolded words being: "…the “big three” morning and evening network newscasts of ABC, CBS, and NBC failed to inform their viewers that Michael Cohen did not actually know"…etc. etc.

I grant you that the President's lawyer rolling over on his client is newsworthy, but to slag the journalists for not reporting on someone's ignorance??!!!?!?!

Is there no limit to the insanity?

Flash: FredZed does not know if there is water on the Moon! You heard it here first!!!
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,814
3,468
113
As a spectator, let me see if I have this right: The OP is excitedly posting a news story whose essential content is that the three networks didn't lead off their news and tell the world that some guy did not actually know something. The posted story's actual bolded words being: "…the “big three” morning and evening network newscasts of ABC, CBS, and NBC failed to inform their viewers that Michael Cohen did not actually know"…etc. etc.

I grant you that the President's lawyer rolling over on his client is newsworthy, but to slag the journalists for not reporting on someone's ignorance??!!!?!?!

Is there no limit to the insanity?

Flash: FredZed does not know if there is water on the Moon! You heard it here first!!!
No the issue is they didn't issue a retraction.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,814
3,468
113
Did Cohen himself say he knew nothing about the meeting?

Or is this as reliable as a Guiliani/Trump statement?
It's his spokesperson/lawyer.
 

b4u

Active member
Jul 23, 2010
1,790
10
38
I was (obviously) referencing your first post in this thread.

*sighs*


:frusty:


And yes...I am aware that I am posting again when I said I wouldn’t. You post a lot of stupid shit but I must admit that whether by design or sheer stupidity you are annoying af!!!!!


(I hate myself for even responding to you...And I hate you for making me hate myself! Fuck you, b4u!)

rotflmao!!!! omg thank you for that. I had a great laugh!! liberal tolerance at it's finest lol I love me and I don't hate you so there!! :p

ps Fuck U more LT56 ;)
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
80,644
17,847
113
It's his spokesperson/lawyer.
So this was a retraction from his lawyer stating that he fucked up when he stated that Cohen told him about Trump's knowledge of the meeting?
You expect this to be front page news?

The front page news will be what Mueller eventually gets from Cohen.
 

LT56

Banned
Feb 16, 2013
1,604
1
0
So this was a retraction from his lawyer stating that he fucked up when he stated that Cohen told him about Trump's knowledge of the meeting?
You expect this to be front page news?

The front page news will be what Mueller eventually gets from Cohen.
It’s not even a retraction. The lawyer replaced his anonymous confirmation of the story to an on the record “I cannot confirm or deny as I was not in the room myself but it is possible that my client may have information about...”.
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,773
3
0
It’s not even a retraction. The lawyer replaced his anonymous confirmation of the story to an on the record “I cannot confirm or deny as I was not in the room myself but it is possible that my client may have information about...”.
Really, you expect us to believe that Lanny Davis wouldn't be singing from the highest mountain top if Cohen actually had information that the President knew in advance of, and had approved the meeting?
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
80,644
17,847
113
Really, you expect us to believe that Lanny Davis wouldn't be singing from the highest mountain top if Cohen actually had information that the President knew in advance of, and had approved the meeting?
I'd expect Lanny to shut up so that he doesn't give away all his client's negotiating position for nothing.
 

LT56

Banned
Feb 16, 2013
1,604
1
0
Really, you expect us to believe that Lanny Davis wouldn't be singing from the highest mountain top if Cohen actually had information that the President knew in advance of, and had approved the meeting?
He is.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts