You guys missed the most important connection here:
Firm Tied to Russian Oligarch Made Payments to Michael Cohen
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/firm-tied-to-russian-oligarch-made-payments-to-michael-cohen/ar-AAwYKDt?ocid=spartanntp
How does Avenatti get such detailed information from Michael Cohen's business dealing the FBI seized?
>References to the transactions first appeared in a document posted to Twitter on Tuesday by Michael Avenatti. seven-page document, titled “Preliminary Report of Findings,” does not explain the source of his information but describes in detail dates, dollar amounts and parties involved in various dealings by Mr. Cohen and his company. Most of the transactions involved two banks: First Republic Bank and City National Bank."
The point of the post anon was that Avenatti, Stormy's atty, has inside information on Cohen business dealings. You got to ask how did he get that info?
Agreed anon on most of what you said. No one is insinuating Potus knows Cohen was dirty or not. Though I imagine he found it out along the way, if he is dirty, that is. The Vekselberg is a huge connection. The article I sourced also went on to say Avenatti has detailed info on Cohen's financials. Who's leaking?
Not likely. The US is now oil independent. Potus goal is to remove the terrorist from the ME and let the people take control of their own govt. ISIS is all but gone.
Avenatti? No way. They are part of an ongoing investigation. Records seized during a search warrant on Cohen. How would Avenatti 1. know what records were seized and 2. Have any right to view them before Discovery?
Gotcha. Avenatti is def a black hat. So is Stormy.
Sometimes fun to watch the meltdown, kek
Thanks for the reference anon. Had already seen it. As I said, the connection is huge. My post was about Cohen's financials getting leaked to Avenatti.
Gowdy's assessment of Comey's actions always bothered me. He didn't sound like /our guy/ then.
> Gowdy said when asked whether Comey broke the law. “Remember, he ignored the statute that says ‘grossly negligent.’ He now has a requirement that it has to be intentional and you have to do it to harm the United States. So under the standard that he set in summer 2016 with Secretary Clinton, I don’t think Jesus could win that case.”