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

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/white-house/article208870264.html

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

By Peter Stone And Greg Gordon


April 13, 2018 06:08 PM


WASHINGTON

The Justice Department special counsel has evidence that Donald Trump’s personal lawyer and confidant, Michael Cohen, secretly made a late-summer trip to Prague during the 2016 presidential campaign, according to two sources familiar with the matter.

Confirmation of the trip would lend credence to a retired British spy’s report that Cohen strategized there with a powerful Kremlin figure about Russian meddling in the U.S. election.

It would also be one of the most significant developments thus far in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of whether the Trump campaign and the Kremlin worked together to help Trump win the White House. Undercutting Trump’s repeated pronouncements that “there is no evidence of collusion,” it also could ratchet up the stakes if the president tries, as he has intimated he might for months, to order Mueller’s firing.

Trump’s threats to fire Mueller or the deputy attorney general overseeing the investigation, Rod Rosenstein, grew louder this week when the FBI raided Cohen’s home, hotel room and office on Monday. The raid was unrelated to the Trump-Russia collusion probe, but instead focused on payments made to women who have said they had sexual relationships with Trump.

Cohen has vehemently denied for months that he ever has been in Prague or colluded with Russia during the campaign. Neither he nor his lawyer responded to requests for comment for this story.

It’s unclear whether Mueller’s investigators also have evidence that Cohen actually met with a prominent Russian – purportedly Konstantin Kosachev, an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin — in the Czech capital. Kosachev, who chairs the Foreign Affairs Committee of a body of the Russian legislature, the Federation Council, also has denied visiting Prague during 2016. Earlier this month, Kosachev was among 24 high-profile Russians hit with stiff U.S. sanctions in retaliation for Russia’s meddling.

But investigators have traced evidence that Cohen entered the Czech Republic through Germany, apparently during August or early September of 2016 as the ex-spy reported, said the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the investigation is confidential. He wouldn’t have needed a passport for such a trip, because both countries are in the so-called Schengen Area in which 26 nations operate with open borders. 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.

Peter Carr, a spokesman for Mueller’s office, declined comment.

Unconfirmed reports of a clandestine Prague meeting came to public attention in January 2017, with the publication of a dossier purporting to detail the Trump campaign’s interactions with Russia – a series of reports that former British MI6 officer Christopher Steele gathered from Kremlin sources for Trump’s political opponents, including Democrat Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee. Cohen’s alleged communications with the Russians were mentioned multiple times in Steele’s reports, which he ultimately shared with the FBI.

When the news site Buzzfeed published the entire dossier on Jan. 11, Trump denounced the news organization as “a failing pile of garbage” and said the document was “false and fake.” Cohen tweeted, “I have never been to Prague in my life. #fakenews.”

In the ensuing months, he allowed Buzzfeed to inspect his passport and tweeted: “The #Russian dossier is WRONG!”

Last August, an attorney for Cohen, Stephen Ryan, delivered to Congress a point-by-point rebuttal of the dossier’s allegations, stating: “Mr. Cohen is not aware of any ‘secret TRUMP campaign/Kremlin relationship.’”

However, Democratic investigators for the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, which are conducting parallel inquiries into Russia’s election interference, also are skeptical about whether Cohen was truthful about his 2016 travels to Europe when he was interviewed by the panels last October, two people familiar with those probes told McClatchy this week. Cohen has publicly acknowledged making three trips to Europe that year – to Italy in July, England in early October and a third after Trump’s November election. The investigators intend to press Cohen for more information, said the sources, who lacked authorization to speak for the record

One of the sources said congressional investigators have “a high level of interest” in Cohen’s European travel, with their doubts fueled by what they deem to be weak documentation Cohen has provided about his whereabouts around the time the Prague meeting was supposed to have occurred.

Cohen has said he was only in New York and briefly in Los Angeles during August, when the meeting may have occurred, though the sources said it also could have been held in early September.

Evidence that Cohen was in Prague “certainly helps undermine his credibility,” said Jill Wine-Banks, a former Watergate prosecutor who lives in Chicago. “It doesn’t matter who he met with. His denial was that I was never in Prague. Having proof that he was is, for most people, going to be more than enough to say I don’t believe anything else he says.”



“I think that, given the relationship between Michael Cohen and the president,” Wine-Banks said, “it’s not believable that Michael Cohen did not tell him about his trip to Prague.”

The dossier alleges that Cohen, two Russians and several Eastern European hackers met at the Prague office of a Russian government-backed social and cultural organization, Rossotrudnichestvo. The location was selected to provide an alternative explanation in case the rendezvous was exposed, according to Steele’s Kremlin sources, cultivated during 20 years of spying on Russia. It said that Oleg Solodukhin, the deputy chief of Rossotrudnichestvo’s operation in the Czech Republic, attended the meeting, too.

Further, it alleges that Cohen, Kosachev and other attendees discussed “how deniable cash payments were to be made to hackers in Europe who had worked under Kremlin direction against the Clinton campaign.”


Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/white-house/article208870264.html#storylink=cpy
 
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/13/...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news


Trump Sees Inquiry Into Cohen as Greater Threat Than Mueller

By MATT APUZZO, MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT, MAGGIE HABERMAN and EILEEN SULLIVANAPRIL 13, 2018


WASHINGTON — President Trump’s advisers have concluded that a wide-ranging corruption investigation into his personal lawyer poses a greater and more imminent threat to the president than even the special counsel’s investigation, according to several people close to Mr. Trump.

As his lawyers went to court in New York on Friday to try to block prosecutors from reading files that were seized from the personal lawyer, Michael D. Cohen, this week, Mr. Trump found himself increasingly isolated in mounting a response. He continued to struggle to hire a new criminal lawyer, and some of his own aides were reluctant to advise him about a response for fear of being dragged into a criminal investigation themselves.

The raids on Mr. Cohen came as part of a months long federal investigation based in New York, court records show, and were sweeping in their breadth. In addition to searching his home, office and hotel room, F.B.I. agents seized material from Mr. Cohen’s cellphones, tablet, laptop and safe deposit box, according to people briefed on the warrants. Prosecutors revealed in court documents that they had already secretly obtained many of Mr. Cohen’s emails.

Mr. Trump called Mr. Cohen on Friday to “check in,” according to two people briefed on the call. Depending on what else was discussed, the call could be problematic, as lawyers typically advise their clients against discussing investigations.

Mr. Cohen has publicly declared that he would defend the president to the end, but court documents show that prosecutors are building a significant case that could put pressure on him to cooperate and tell investigators what he knows.

Continue reading the main story



The documents seized by prosecutors could shed light on the president’s relationship with a lawyer who has helped navigate some of Mr. Trump’s thorniest personal and business dilemmas. Mr. Cohen served for more than a decade as a trusted fixer and, during the campaign, helped tamp down brewing scandals about women who claimed to have carried on affairs with Mr. Trump.

Mr. Trump, Mr. Cohen and their teams were still scrambling on Friday to assess the damage from the raid early Monday morning. They remained unsure what had been taken, an uncertainty that has heightened the unease around Mr. Trump.

Although his lawyers had projected confidence in their dealings with the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, they were caught flat-footed by the New York raids. The lawyers fear that Mr. Cohen will not be forthcoming with them about what was in his files, leaving them girding for the unknown.

Mr. Cohen and Mr. Trump, through their lawyers, argued in federal court on Friday that many of the seized records were protected by attorney-client privilege. They asked for an order temporarily prohibiting prosecutors from reading the documents until the matter could be litigated. Mr. Cohen argued that he or an independent lawyer should be allowed to review the documents first.

“Those searches have been executed, and the evidence is locked down,” Joanna C. Hendon, a lawyer for Mr. Trump, said in court. “I’m not trying to delay. I’m just trying to ensure that it’s done scrupulously.”

Mr. Cohen’s lawyer, Stephen Ryan, wrote in a court filing that the search “creates constitutional concerns regarding officers of the executive branch rummaging through the private and privileged papers of the president.”

Prosecutors argued that the previously seized emails revealed that Mr. Cohen was “performing little to no legal work, and that zero emails were exchanged with President Trump.” They said their investigation was focused on Mr. Cohen’s business dealings, not his work as a lawyer.

But it is difficult to extract Mr. Cohen from his work for Mr. Trump. For more than a decade, Mr. Trump has unleashed Mr. Cohen on his foes — investigative journalists, business rivals and potential litigants. And the New York search warrant makes clear that the authorities are interested in his unofficial role in the campaign.

Prosecutors demanded all communication with the campaign — and in particular two advisers, Corey Lewandowski and Hope Hicks, according to two people briefed on the warrants.

Prosecutors also seized recordings of conversations that Mr. Cohen had secretly made, but he told people in recent days that he did not tape his conversations with Mr. Trump. Mr. Cohen frequently taped conversations with adversaries and opposing lawyers, according to the two people briefed.

The raids on Mr. Cohen surprised and angered the president, who has been frustrated with the special counsel investigation into Russia’s 2016 election interference, the Kremlin’s possible coordination with Trump associates and whether the president has tried to obstruct those inquiries.

In response to the raids, Mr. Trump has considered firing Mr. Mueller, Attorney General Jeff Sessions and the deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein. On Friday, Mr. Trump’s spirits were frayed in the morning as his lawyer battled in the Manhattan courtroom. But he grew cheerier as the day went on, an adviser said, buoyed by a report by the Justice Department’s inspector general that was damning about a former F.B.I. official, Andrew G. McCabe, who he believed had tried to undermine him.

Mr. Cohen’s lawyers have called the raids of his offices and hotel room an overreach of the law. Prosecutors said on Friday that they had used a search warrant, rather than a subpoena, because they had evidence that Mr. Cohen’s files might be permanently deleted — by whom, the documents did not say. Many details in the documents were redacted, but prosecutors said they had found evidence of fraud and a “lack of truthfulness” on his part.

Mr. Cohen wants his lawyers to be able to review the files and withhold privileged material before prosecutors can see them. As an alternative, he asked that an independent lawyer be allowed to review the files first. A judge scheduled a follow-up hearing for Monday and ordered Mr. Cohen to attend. The judge, Kimba M. Wood, was upset that he was not in court Friday.

Federal agents seized documents that dated back years, some of which are related to payments to two women who have said they had affairs with Mr. Trump. Other documents seized included information about the role of The National Enquirer in silencing one of the women, people briefed on the investigation have said.

Communications between lawyers and their clients are normally off limits to prosecutors, but there are exceptions, including when the materials are considered part of a continuing crime.

Mr. Trump has viewed any investigation of his business and private life to be off limits to prosecutors, but the search warrants make clear that investigators consider those topics part of their case.

Agents sought information about Karen McDougal, a former Playboy model who claims she had a nearly yearlong affair with Mr. Trump shortly after the birth of his youngest son in 2006. American Media Inc., which owns The Enquirer, paid Ms. McDougal $150,000. The company’s chief executive is a friend of Mr. Trump’s.

Agents also demanded information related to Stephanie Clifford, better known as Stormy Daniels, a pornographic film actress. Ms. Clifford has said she had sex with Mr. Trump while he was married. Mr. Cohen has acknowledged paying Ms. Clifford $130,000 as part of a nondisclosure agreement to secure her silence days before Election Day.

Mr. Trump recently told reporters he knew nothing about the agreement.
 
You clowns need to be careful about getting too cocky though. You don;t know what Mueller has.

Cohen denies that he was in Prague knowing full well that it is being reported that Mueller allegedly has proof. Mueller- and we saw this with Flynn- will flat out lie to a targetted person to see if he can get him to confess when he thinks they did something but can't prove it.

I don't have clue whether he was there on not. I have no way of knowing. I do like to see a defendant stand up to Mueller though if they want to go that route- unlike Fynn who caved when Mueller's investigators in fact said the opposite of what they told Flynn to get him to fold.

The ball is in Mueller's court on this Prague thing, as it should be. If Cohen wants to argue that it is just a bullshit newstory, that's fine. Who am I to say? If it turns out that either he was not there or that Mueller cannot prove it, I am sure you will be the last to post anything about it. The media matters packages will conveniently leave that out.

“Bad reporting, bad information and bad story,” Cohen wrote on Twitter, with a link to the news agency’s report. “No matter how many times or ways they write it, I have never been to Prague. I was in LA with my son. Proven!”




https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ies-media-report-of-prague-trip-idUSKBN1HL1C6
 
You clowns need to be careful about getting too cocky though. You don;t know what Mueller has.

Cohen denies that he was in Prague knowing full well that it is being reported that Mueller allegedly has proof. Mueller- and we saw this with Flynn- will flat out lie to a targetted person to see if he can get him to confess when he thinks they did something but can't prove it.

I don't have clue whether he was there on not. I have no way of knowing. I do like to see a defendant stand up to Mueller though if they want to go that route- unlike Fynn who caved when Mueller's investigators in fact said the opposite of what they told Flynn to get him to fold.

The ball is in Mueller's court on this Prague thing, as it should be. If Cohen wants to argue that it is just a bullshit newstory, that's fine. Who am I to say? If it turns out that either he was not there or that Mueller cannot prove it, I am sure you will be the last to post anything about it. The media matters packages will conveniently leave that out.

“Bad reporting, bad information and bad story,” Cohen wrote on Twitter, with a link to the news agency’s report. “No matter how many times or ways they write it, I have never been to Prague. I was in LA with my son. Proven!”




https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ies-media-report-of-prague-trip-idUSKBN1HL1C6


lol the no-knock warrant and now he's been named as a criminal target. Mueller isn't even prosecuting this case, you twat.

You're projecting. You turds have been fallaciously-pursuing the Prague visit as proof Dossier is BS. Cohen stated that he's NEVER been there and now it turns out that he has been there at least twice.

So if no Prague trip means bogus dossier (negative proof)--then by extension placing Cohen there is validation that the Dossier is accurate.
 
So if no Prague trip means bogus dossier (negative proof)--then by extension placing Cohen there is validation that the Dossier is accurate.

First, this should be a relatively simple matter to prove or disprove. However, it is certainly possible for "proof" to be manufactured.

Second, the fact that one aspect of a lengthy fictional story is factual implies nothing about the truthfulness of the remainder. The converse however is true. Obvious inaccuracies would call the accuracy of the whole into question, provided they went to central elements.

You would be correct if the entire basis for doubt hinged on the Prague story. It does not. The so-called dossier was bought and paidfor by the Clinton campaign. It was produced by notorious slime merchants who seemed to have received the assistance of the UK intelligence services in concocting and disseminating it.

There is plenty to look into here, but it involves honesdt and independent prosecutors, who may be hard to find, putting Fusion GPS and Chris Steele in fornt of a grand jury and getting some answers. They should have already raided the offices of the law firm that was used as a cut out to hide the Clinton connection.
 
Oh my God he went to Prague!!??
Or he didn’t!???

This is what the Dems are reaching for!!!

The stank of desperation!!!
 
First, this should be a relatively simple matter to prove or disprove. However, it is certainly possible for "proof" to be manufactured.

Second, the fact that one aspect of a lengthy fictional story is factual implies nothing about the truthfulness of the remainder. The converse however is true. Obvious inaccuracies would call the accuracy of the whole into question, provided they went to central elements.

You would be correct if the entire basis for doubt hinged on the Prague story. It does not. The so-called dossier was bought and paidfor by the Clinton campaign. It was produced by notorious slime merchants who seemed to have received the assistance of the UK intelligence services in concocting and disseminating it.

There is plenty to look into here, but it involves honesdt and independent prosecutors, who may be hard to find, putting Fusion GPS and Chris Steele in fornt of a grand jury and getting some answers. They should have already raided the offices of the law firm that was used as a cut out to hide the Clinton connection.



Holograms. That's it. Or the Illuminati cloned Cohen in Brazil. I hear Gregory Peck cloned him after he did Hitler.

Trump fucks hoo'ers? No proof. $130K was for Fleshlights.

Dossier is tainted bc Cohen stated he didn't get a Passport stamp? Open borders -> passed via Germany.

Funny how proof doesn't matter when it's Comet Ping Pong or Seth Rich. Or when you're all convinced that Hillary's emails will result in prison time. WikiRussia releases the emails and you still can't make a case.
 
Back
Top