Sidebar: Speaking of that time frame, PBS had a show about Betty White last night.

Speaking to Rue McClanahan "I think you wear too much make-up and are a ****, but then I realized you really don't wear too much make-up"!!

I tell you something that is curious about the Cohen case. There is nothing in the Docket entry about any proceeding yesterday. Not even a minutes entry. There are two filings from that were entered in yesterday, one is a final billing invoice of the Special Master submitted for payment, and a final catalogue list of of seized evidence from the warrant, 7434 ruled privileged and 57 ruled non privileged but all contested by the plaintiff.

Nothing on any plea deal, or reading aloud of a statement in allocution no nothing. Just wierd

Whatever that was that was tweeted isn't any part of formal record....

What? Can you post the docket? (I'm frugal and don't waste money for access to anything, including TexAgs premium. Sorry, Gabe and Looch.)

Sasappis said:

---

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

I tell you something that is curious about the Cohen case. There is nothing in the Docket entry about any proceeding yesterday. Not even a minutes entry. There are two filings from that were entered in yesterday, one is a final billing invoice of the Special Master submitted for payment, and a final catalogue list of of seized evidence from the warrant, 7434 ruled privileged and 57 ruled non privileged but all contested by the plaintiff.

Nothing on any plea deal, or reading aloud of a statement in allocution no nothing. Just wierd

---

You are looking at the civil case where Cohen sued the USA about the search. There is now a criminal case filed entitled US v Cohen. Look at the big case bot and it has the full citation.

---

Really? Lanny Davis kept that case alive?

Sasappis said:

---

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

I tell you something that is curious about the Cohen case. There is nothing in the Docket entry about any proceeding yesterday. Not even a minutes entry. There are two filings from that were entered in yesterday, one is a final billing invoice of the Special Master submitted for payment, and a final catalogue list of of seized evidence from the warrant, 7434 ruled privileged and 57 ruled non privileged but all contested by the plaintiff.

Nothing on any plea deal, or reading aloud of a statement in allocution no nothing. Just wierd

---

You are looking at the civil case where Cohen sued the USA about the search. There is now a criminal case filed entitled US v Cohen. Look at the big case bot and it has the full citation.

---

No I'm looking at a Criminal Docket not a civil docket and I've run a query on anything else on cohen and come up with zero

Okay I found the case #: 1:18-cr-00602-WHP-1

Completely different Judge and court

Here's a free version of the plea it's 22 pages or I'd post the whole thing



https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.499666/gov.uscourts.nysd.499666.2.0_4.pdf

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

Okay I found the case #: 1:18-cr-00602-WHP-1

Completely different Judge and court

Here's a free version of the plea it's 22 pages or I'd post the whole thing



https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.499666/gov.uscourts.nysd.499666.2.0_4.pdf

---

That is not the plea. That is the Information.

WTF is going on with Sessions and why is he letting this circus continue?!

aggiehawg said:

---

What? Can you post the docket? (I'm frugal and don't waste money for access to anything, including TexAgs premium. Sorry, Gabe and Looch.)

---

You are correct I had three things going at once and crossed up the documents, there is no copy of the plea in the docket entry yet.

If there's a plea agreement, why is it unusual that is based on an informationl rather than an indictment?

BMX Bandit said:

---

If there's a plea agreement, why is it unusual that is based on an informationl rather than an indictment?

---

Means there have been discussions on this for quite awhile. No sense sending to a grand jury if the defendant is willing to talk about a plea. The fact that the case was opened the day before the plea is significant in that regard.

Surprised no one has a transcript of the proceedings yet.

BMX Bandit said:

---

If there's a plea agreement, why is it unusual that is based on an informationl rather than an indictment?

---

So Mueller didn't trust he would get an indictment? After a year?

The search warrant was allegedly pursuant to a grand jury subpoena. Now we know that was a lie?

When a grand jury is impaneled but they don't seem to be going your way, a prosecutor can't just yank it and make up his/her/ze own charges.

BMX Bandit said:

---

If there's a plea agreement, why is it unusual that is based on an informationl rather than an indictment?

---

Your question is valid no doubt

But I find it strange that Mueller has had a special GJ empaneled for a couple of months now, and the only indictments you have scene were Manafort Gates and Russians. Not that it matter in Cohen since it was handed off.

Flynn, Papadopoulos, van der Zwaan, all done on info

The GJ has been hearing stuff on Stone and former Madams and lord knows who.

aggiehawg said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

If there's a plea agreement, why is it unusual that is based on an informationl rather than an indictment?

---

So Mueller didn't trust he would get an indictment? After a year?

The search warrant was allegedly pursuant to a grand jury subpoena. Now we know that was a lie?

When a grand jury is impaneled but they don't seem to be going your way, a prosecutor can't just yank it and make up his/her/ze own charges.

---

I Really have no idea either way.. But is it weird for a plea to come from an information? That's my question.

Sasappis said:

---

Sarge 91 said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

If there's a plea agreement, why is it unusual that is based on an informationl rather than an indictment?

---

Means there have been discussions on this for quite awhile. No sense sending to a grand jury if the defendant is willing to talk about a plea. The fact that the case was opened the day before the plea is significant in that regard.

---

That is not unusual either. Often the first filing is the information and plea.

---

After over two years of Cohen being named in the Steele Dossier is quite unusual.

Sarge 91 said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

If there's a plea agreement, why is it unusual that is based on an informationl rather than an indictment?

---

Means there have been discussions on this for quite awhile. No sense sending to a grand jury if the defendant is willing to talk about a plea. The fact that the case was opened the day before the plea is significant in that regard.

Surprised no one has a transcript of the proceedings yet.

---

Can't order one until it's generated and posted

That's not Lanny Davis' signature. Who sold Cohen down the river?

aggiehawg said:

---

That's not Lanny Davis' signature. Who sold Cohen down the river?

---

Roscoe's docket posting has the attorney's names. 2 are listed for Cohen, seems Lanny wasn't there.

aggiehawg said:

---

That's not Lanny Davis' signature. Who sold Cohen down the river?

---

Lanny is nothing but a mouthpiece for the narrative

Guy Petrillo, Esq. and Amy Lester, Esq. are the attorney of record

WOW! So Lanny isn't acting as his lawyer in any sense. He's just a very poor talking mouth.

Well, Trump has Giuliani whose mouth works faster than his brain and Cohen has Lanny whose mouth isn't even connected to his brain. Well this is great.

FML.

aggiehawg said:

---

WOW! So Lanny isn't acting as his lawyer in any sense. He's just a very poor talking mouth.

Well, Trump has Giuliani whose mouth works faster than his brain and Cohen has Lanny whose mouth isn't even connected to his brain. Well this is great.

FML.

---

This whole thing is a **** show.

aggiehawg said:

---

WOW! So Lanny isn't acting as his lawyer in any sense. He's just a very poor talking mouth.

Well, Trump has Giuliani whose mouth works faster than his brain and Cohen has Lanny whose mouth isn't even connected to his brain. Well this is great.

FML.

---

Lanny is doing exactly what he does. Remember what he was doing for Bill Clinton, pushing the narrative of Monica on her knees in the oval wasn't coitus and wasn't the definition of sex, even though the legal definition of fellatio in oral sex. Lanny Davis is a spin doctor not a trial attorney.



Lanny isn't even affiliated with this firm.

The media keeps calling Lanny co-counsel and how he negotiated all these deals, but no where in any court record does it show Lanny Davis as counsel or co-counsel in any way

I truly think this is just a ploy by Cohen - act like I've flipped on Trump and have ALL the goods on him, and I've seen the error of my ways!

And start the Go-FundMe page and rake in the dough from the idiot liberals.

FbgTxAg said:

---

I truly think this is just a ploy by Cohen - act like I've flipped on Trump and have ALL the goods on him, and I've seen the error of my ways!

And start the Go-FundMe page and rake in the dough from the idiot liberals.

---

Sasappis said:

---

FbgTxAg said:

---

I truly think this is just a ploy by Cohen - act like I've flipped on Trump and have ALL the goods on him, and I've seen the error of my ways!

And start the Go-FundMe page and rake in the dough from the idiot liberals.

---

And giving up his law license and going to prison is just another way to stick it to the liberal idiots?

---

A few months ago, it was the "liberal line" to claim no attorney client privilege required after the police raid because Cohen hadn't been an acting attorney in ages...

Not saying you are a liberal, but that argument was made by the typical paid dem trolls on this site.