Russian interference with the 2016 election

[carpedm9587]

We shall see? But we've already seen. The story was proven false over a year ago!

Jan 2017: "Cohen said that during the time the report places him in Prague, he was actually with his son visiting USC and meeting with the baseball coach. A USC baseball source confirmed Tuesday night that Cohen and his son had visited USC on August 29th."
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...r-trump/512762

[CARPESPLAIN]

OK, I've read the article. I realize that showing the claims against Cohen were wrong is important to the right, but this article certainly does not provide evidence that Cohen was not in Prague. The only specific time the dossier identifies is "Aug-Sep" 2016, AFAIK. Cohen has shown proof it could not have been Aug 23-29th. He has shown us the outside of his passport, which tells us nothing (unless somewhere else he showed the inside?). His passport also does not have to show "Prague" or "Czech Republic." The Czech Republic is part of the EU, which allows for open transport between EU nations without documentation at the borders. So all Cohen would have to do is fly into or out of anywhere in the EU, and he can get to Prague invisibly.

So, we know what Cohen claims, and we know what the dossier claims, and we know that apparently Mueller's team has evidence that he was there. We have not seen that evidence, and we have not seen adequate evidence from Cohen that shows he was NOT there in any part of the two months in question.

Logically, that leaves us with "we don't know." Those arguing it is proven can't make that case. Those arguing it was disproven also cannot make that case - unless there is some evidence out there I have not found or not seen.

[/CARPESPLAIN]

Now - if history repeats itself, this explanation will likewise be spun as "Carpe is claiming the evidence for NOT X proves X."

P.S. Sparko, we really need to create some "carpesplain" tags. Maybe have it automatically shift to a crazy font in a wild color with misaligned margins? That would be totally cool!

[Juvenal]

He has shown us the outside of his passport, which tells us nothing (unless somewhere else he showed the inside?)

There are also second passports for those whose passport entry stamps to one country would prevent them from visiting a second. And there are ways of bypassing customs, too, if you have access to a private jet.

But the larger takeaway from McClatchy isn't that Cohen visited Prague.

It's that Mueller knows Cohen visited Prague.


As I mentioned earlier, the leak to McClatchy is itself newsworthy. This is the second leak I can pin directly on Mueller's team, the first being the Guccifer revelations.

The Guccifer leaks were from a transitional team being reassigned to Mueller, and were tangential at best.

This one is fully targeted, and smells like trying to fight it out in the press, something Mueller has always been loathe to do, but not something the FBI in general has been shy about. *cough* McCabe *cough*

[One Bad Pig]

News on Cohen in Prague

Sources: Mueller has evidence Cohen was in Prague in 2016, confirming part of dossier

If the Prague trip happened, and Mueller can prove it, the largest known hole in the Steele dossier vanishes, and Cohen is implicated in direct cooperation, as described in the dossier, by his categorical denials. And by the positioning of the accusation with his consigliere, it would implicate the don.

I see no real alternative to any sourcing for this story outside the Mueller team, so there's that, though I have sincere doubts that Mueller would have authorized its release. If it's true, and we'll have to wait for solid evidence on that, this would be a bombshell leak, the sort of thing that would headline articles of impeachment.

Cohen has responded.

Cohen doubles down on claim he's never been to Prague after Mueller report

Cohen Again Denies He Made Prague Visit During Trump Campaign

Have you considered posting actual evidence in your posts, rather than merely allegations with links?

Those of us not breathlessly following every sordid detail are blissfully unaware of what the alleged 'largest known hole in the Steele dossier" is, let alone how this ostensibly fills it.

[rogue06]

Have you considered posting actual evidence in your posts, rather than merely allegations with links?

Those of us not breathlessly following every sordid detail are blissfully unaware of what the alleged 'largest known hole in the Steele dossier" is, let alone how this ostensibly fills it.

Presenting actual evidence is positively caustic to the narrative being promoted.

[Juvenal]

Presenting actual evidence is positively caustic to the narrative being promoted.

Not in this thread, please.

[Mountain Man]

Have you considered posting actual evidence in your posts, rather than merely allegations with links?

Those of us not breathlessly following every sordid detail are blissfully unaware of what the alleged 'largest known hole in the Steele dossier" is, let alone how this ostensibly fills it.

The Steele dossier identified a man named Michael Cohen who went to Prague to visit some Russians. Trump's personal lawyer happens to be named Michael Cohen, so liberals breathlessly claimed that this proved that Trump colluded with Russia. The only problem is that it was the wrong Michael Cohen which blew a big hole in the Steele dossier. Now that the raid on Cohen's office provides some nice cover, liberal outlets are once again trotting out this fake news without bothering to point out that it was debunked in last January.

[Tassman]

The Steele dossier identified a man named Michael Cohen who went to Prague to visit some Russians. Trump's personal lawyer happens to be named Michael Cohen, so liberals breathlessly claimed that this proved that Trump colluded with Russia. The only problem is that it was the wrong Michael Cohen which blew a big hole in the Steele dossier. Now that the raid on Cohen's office provides some nice cover, liberal outlets are once again trotting out this fake news without bothering to point out that it was debunked in last January.

Cohen may well have been lying, something not unknown in the Trump camp. "Mueller has evidence Cohen was in Prague in 2016, confirming part of dossier..."

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/poli...208870264.html

[Mountain Man]

If Cohen was lying then how could his story have been independently confirmed?

"Cohen said that during the time the report places him in Prague, he was actually with his son visiting USC and meeting with the baseball coach. A USC baseball source confirmed Tuesday night that Cohen and his son had visited USC on August 29th."

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...-trump/512762/

[carpedm9587]

The Steele dossier identified a man named Michael Cohen who went to Prague to visit some Russians. Trump's personal lawyer happens to be named Michael Cohen, so liberals breathlessly claimed that this proved that Trump colluded with Russia. The only problem is that it was the wrong Michael Cohen which blew a big hole in the Steele dossier. Now that the raid on Cohen's office provides some nice cover, liberal outlets are once again trotting out this fake news without bothering to point out that it was debunked in last January.

OK - I've been through the article, the links in the article, and I've done it twice. I see NOTHING in this that "proves" it is the wrong Michael Cohen. I see it asserted several times. I see a heavily redacted document with no names referenced, and I see a list of "things we know" that don't even begin to come close to "proving: it was the wrong Michael Cohen.

That doesn't prove it was the right one, of course. But where on earth is all of this evidence that it was "the wrong Michael Cohen?" Can anyone outline exactly what this case was...?

[carpedm9587]

If Cohen was lying then how could his story have been independently confirmed?

"Cohen said that during the time the report places him in Prague, he was actually with his son visiting USC and meeting with the baseball coach. A USC baseball source confirmed Tuesday night that Cohen and his son had visited USC on August 29th."

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...-trump/512762/

The dossier places him in Prague in Aug/Sep. That's about 9 weeks. He was shown to be with his son a total of one of those weeks, and claims he was "in NYC" the other eight. So continually claiming that "he was with his son" for that one week does not disprove the assertion that he was "in Prague" any of the other 8 weeks.

It also doesn't prove he was. We don't know what this apparently new evidence is. So the best any of us can say, it seems to me, is "I don't know."

[Mountain Man]

It's very simple: Cohen can't be in two places at once. We have proof that he was one place (Los Angles) which means that it is physically and logically impossible for him to be in another place (Prague).

And Tass keeps posting that McClatchy link, but he apparently missed this bombshell admission just 7-paragraphs below the headline: "The disclosure still left a puzzle: The sources did not say whether Cohen took a commercial flight or private jet to Europe, and gave no explanation as to why no record of such a trip has surfaced."

In simpler language, there is no record of Cohen making a trip to Prague.

[Juvenal]

OK - I've been through the article, the links in the article, and I've done it twice. I see NOTHING in this that "proves" it is the wrong Michael Cohen. I see it asserted several times. I see a heavily redacted document with no names referenced, and I see a list of "things we know" that don't even begin to come close to "proving: it was the wrong Michael Cohen.

That doesn't prove it was the right one, of course. But where on earth is all of this evidence that it was "the wrong Michael Cohen?" Can anyone outline exactly what this case was...?

I've seen a video of Jake Tapper of CNN citing a government source back then that claimed there was another Michael Cohen, same birth year, different birthday, different nationality, in Prague.

To square with the Steele dossier, that different Cohen would have had to have been meeting with Russian intelligence agents to pay off Romanian hackers and arrange to have them lie low in another country. That doesn't work for me.

It's not as if it would be an outrageous coincidence to have two Michael Cohen's in Prague at any one time.

[Tassman]

It's very simple: Cohen can't be in two places at once. We have proof that he was one place (Los Angles) which means that it is physically and logically impossible for him to be in another place (Prague).

And Tass keeps posting that McClatchy link, but he apparently missed this bombshell admission just 7-paragraphs below the headline: "The disclosure still left a puzzle: The sources did not say whether Cohen took a commercial flight or private jet to Europe, and gave no explanation as to why no record of such a trip has surfaced."

In simpler language, there is no record of Cohen making a trip to Prague

https://www.vox.com/2018/4/13/172366...steele-dossier

[Mountain Man]

"Anonymous sources" ... yeah, OK.

[Mountain Man]

To square with the Steele dossier, that different Cohen would have had to have been meeting with Russian intelligence agents to pay off Romanian hackers and arrange to have them lie low in another country. That doesn't work for me.

That's because the Steele dossier is as phony as a $3 bill.