I love seeing all those troublesome women Democrats on the panel!

Really good live analysis of what's happening in the room by NYT's analysts:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/02/27/us/politics/michael-cohen-testimony.html?src=cohenHomepagePromo

Interesting point here:

Among the interesting atmospherics I’ve seen on Twitter - a report by Yashar Ali that Lynne Patton, a Trump family loyalist who is now at HUD, is planning to be in the room, sitting just behind Rep. Mark Meadows, a Trump ally.

Patton’s presence is interesting to me for two reasons - she is among the few African-Americans in the administration, and she was brought into the Trump orbit by Cohen.
...
I want to mention again that Lynne Patton, a HUD official, is sitting directly behind Meadows. There is such a blurring of powers right now taking place in this hearing.

This committee is HUGE.

Good grief, this is ugly from the first moment.

God, shut up Mark Meadows.

His opening statement: the things he said which were true were very damning, and then things he said which sounded like what democrats WANTED to hear but were inferences and pretty weak/unsubstantiated. That’s too bad, because he had enough without pandering, and the pandering detracts from his credibility and effectiveness.

Not to mention, Cohen is all those things he accuses DJT - he is a tax cheat, he is a conman, and he is a liar. I don’t know if he is a racist, but I was in a room once when he was across the room and I read lips and I’m ptretty sure he used the “N” word multiple times. I mean how else could he associate with DJT without being a racist?

whatever

He's trying to earn our sympathy.

in the words of Pat Benatar . . .

Anonymous wrote:His prepared statement: https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000169-2d31-dc75-affd-bfb99a790001

WOW!!

Double WOW! If I were trump, junior, his TV lawyer (Guiliani?) and lawyers who read and approved Cohen's earlier statement, I would be changing my underwear--probably several times

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I certainly hope the Senators will listen closely to this highly credible witness.

You've got to be kidding.

He doesn't need to be credible if there is documentation.

You mean the documentation that he just "stumbled across?" LOL.

Maybe his cousin found one of his old Blackberries in the family storage unit? Who cares where it came from if it proves wrongdoing or crimes?

Cohen outlines multiple impeachable crimes in his statement. And, presumably, he's providing evidence.

Keep spinning, Trumpsters. The POTUS will be impeached.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My prediction: We're going to hear gobs and gobs of evidence about Trump's despicable moral character but scant factual evidence about his crimes. This will be very frustrating, as his base could care less about his ethics or moral compass. I want to hear about Cohen's visibility into Trump's criminal activity and I believe we won't hear any of that in the public testimony.

His base doesn't care about any crimes he has committed. He could, as he once bragged, murder someone on 5th Avenue and they would still vote for him.

Let’s not even normalize that he said that.
Remember, remember there was a time before a candidate could just say those words. I know you know. But it needed to be reminded.
“When someone tells you who they are...”

Anonymous wrote:My prediction: We're going to hear gobs and gobs of evidence about Trump's despicable moral character but scant factual evidence about his crimes. This will be very frustrating, as his base could care less about his ethics or moral compass. I want to hear about Cohen's visibility into Trump's criminal activity and I believe we won't hear any of that in the public testimony.

His base doesn't care about any crimes he has committed. He could, as he once bragged, murder someone on 5th Avenue and they would still vote for him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s incriminating?

Trump knew that Stone was coordinated document releases with Wikileaks. This is the crime of Conspiracy to Defraud the United States, colloquially called "collusion."

Oh and Trum knowingly paid Cohen for fake.work to hide the illegal payment to Stormy.

As did Jr. Let us not forget Trump's money guy who arranged this has full immunity.

Oh yeah, Weiselberg. There are so many criminals in Trumpworld, one forgets!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s incriminating?

Trump knew that Stone was coordinated document releases with Wikileaks. This is the crime of Conspiracy to Defraud the United States, colloquially called "collusion."

Oh and Trum knowingly paid Cohen for fake.work to hide the illegal payment to Stormy.

As did Jr. Let us not forget Trump's money guy who arranged this has full immunity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I certainly hope the Senators will listen closely to this highly credible witness.

You've got to be kidding.

He doesn't need to be credible if there is documentation.

You mean the documentation that he just "stumbled across?" LOL.

Cancelled checks and signed documents that have verifiable date stamping are credible.

And for as much of a liar Cohen is, he doesn't hold a candle to Trump in that department.

And, you think Cohen just "stumbled across" this evidence? LOL.

He is provided a lot of evidence including a hand written note written by DJT on a newspaper. We don't know which one was "recently" discovered. What are you getting at? The checks were writer just a year ago. Does it matter if he's had them the whole time or just downloaded them from his bank yesterday? Does that change anything for you?