Prelude To Detroit: Matt Gaetz Handles Sean Hannity But Who Handles Him?

Matt Gaetz has been quite colorful in his psyoptics.

Cocktails & Popcorn: Michael Cohen, Matt Gaetz, Nancy Pelosi, Rashida Tlaib & Ethics - Stripping Attorney Client Privilege

The article, below, was found as I was trying to find out which rock Sean Hannity slid beneath.

The reporting claims House Ethics released a report.

I searched House Ethics for the report, but found nothing which led me to believe the matter was referred to the OIG, which in turn, may have referred to his Florida District U.S. Attorney Office, which may have been the source of this article, but, hey, what do I know?

I know messy leakiness when I see it because Matt was mean to my Sweetie.

Neither do I know if Matt is going to be stripped of his right to keep and bear the arms of the United States if he is defrocked of his law license.

#maytheheavensfall

Sean Hannity advised Gaetz on deleting Cohen tweet

Fox News’s Sean Hannity advised Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) about a tweet that was perceived as threatening to President Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen in 2019, according to a House Ethics Committee's report released on Friday.

The report on Gaetz included screenshots from a text conversation between Hannity and the Florida representative with the handwritten label “conservation with Sean Hannity on Feb 27th.”

That 2019 text conversation and the ethics investigation were centered on a tweet by Gaetz that suggested Cohen had not been faithful to his wife. The tweet came one day before the president’s former lawyer was scheduled to testify before a House committee.

Democrats and legal experts accused Gaetz of participating in witness tampering with the tweet, prompting the lawmaker to apologize. The House Ethics Committee admonished Gaetz for his Cohen tweet, saying it "did not meet the standards by which Members of the House should govern themselves."

The text exchange included in the report began with one from Gaetz: “F---ers are coming for my law license. You were right. We all spend our time in the barrel.”

“Run this shit by me!!!” Hannity replied. “You won’t lose the license.”

The Fox News host said it was “smart to pull it down and say what u said. It will pass. Attention span of people is zero. Just learn from it.”

The Florida lawmaker followed up by asking how long he should “lay low.” Hannity answered, “Just a while” and encouraged Gaetz to reach out to Cohen or his lawyer Lanny Davis.

“Just say you were upset at what was transpiring and meant it as a question, not a statement,” Hannity wrote. “And u would never threaten anyone. In retrospect it was poorly written and you wish u didn’t send it. That’s a CYA,” using an acronym for “cover your ass.”

Hannity then provided Gaetz with contact information for Cohen and Davis but instructed the lawmaker to send the apology to “me first.”

Gaetz sent a draft of the apology to Hannity. Another screenshot shows the Florida representative saying, “Cohen asked me to post apology and pls ask ppl to leave his family alone. I did. It felt good.”

Hannity responded, “Good,” and Gaetz followed up by saying, “You are amazing. Thank you.”

Fox News and Gaetz’s office did not immediately return a request for comment.

In February 2019, the Florida lawmaker posted the tweet in question to Cohen. It said, “Do your wife & father-in-law know about your girlfriends? Maybe tonight would be a good time for that chat. I wonder if she’ll remain faithful when you’re in prison. She’s about to learn a lot.”

Gaetz uses convention speech to criticize Biden for lack of activity
Michael Cohen burned book manuscript to prevent leak by pro-Trump...
Gaetz tweeted an apology hours after posting the tweet, saying it was not his “intent to threaten.”

"While it is important 2 create context around the testimony of liars like Michael Cohen, it was NOT my intent to threaten, as some believe I did," he tweeted. "I’m deleting the tweet & I should have chosen words that better showed my intent. I’m sorry."

Months later, the Florida Bar determined there was “no probable cause” that Gaetz broke its rules with his tweet on Cohen.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Ohio Settles Stormy's Defamation Lawsuit - What Is Next?

Stormy is back and she is just getting started.

City to pay Stormy Daniels $450,000 over strip club arrest

Stormy

Columbus, Ohio – Ohio’s capital city has reached a $450,000 settlement with Stormy Daniels over the porn actress’ arrest at a strip club last year.

Her federal defamation lawsuit against several Columbus officers alleged officers conspired to retaliate against her over her claims that she had sex with Donald Trump before he became president.

In this Oct. 11, 2018, file photo, adult film actress Stormy Daniels arrives for the opening of the adult entertainment fair Venus in Berlin. Columbus, Ohio has reached a $450,000 settlement with Stormy Daniels over the porn actress’ arrest at a strip club last year.

City attorney’s office spokeswoman Meredith Tucker says the agreement was reached after mediation Friday with all parties agreeing the figure was fair “given the facts and circumstances involved.”

A message was left with an attorney for Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford.

Daniels was arrested on suspicion of inappropriately touching an undercover officer. Prosecutors later dropped charges.

An internal police review determined her arrest was improper but not planned in advance or politically motivated.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

WATERGATE: Judiciary Subpoenas John Dean But Not John Conyers, Jr. - Sean Hannity Sucks

Watergate is back but the U.S. House Judiciary did not think this one out very well.

This may be a bit awkward but we are dealing with "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending).

If U.S. House Judiciary Committee calls John Dean, former White House Legal Counsel of Nixon, during Watergate, to testify so the members can "learn" on how to proceed in impeachment hearings, well, that would mean....dare I say it....

Fine, I will say it.

The U.S. House Judiciary Committee will have no choice but to subpoena the individual who constructed the impeachment hearing process.

They will have to #sayhisname so he can testify on what went on in Judiciary, behind the scenes, in Watergate, where Hillary Clinton worked for him.

Judiciary would most definitely have to call Hillary Clinton to testify so we can see how badly she bears false witness into the congressional record, again.

Or, if the Committee does not want to #sayhisname, I could always publish my own testimony into the record with lots of hyperlinks so the Members do not have to #sayhisname because I will be discussing CAPTA, which is what Watergate was covering up - the industry of trafficking tiny humans.

That would be fun.

I bet Roger Stone would be fun to be subpoenaed since he was right there, too.

Sean Hannity promulgates false claims into the public record, where all he had to do was to do a basic internet search.

Hannity sucks.

Please enter this into the record.

DEMOCRATS SEARCH FOR A 'PATH FORWARD' ON IMPEACHING TRUMP IN JOHN DEAN'S TESTIMONY

John Dean, Fisagate
John Dean, former White House counsel to President Nixon,
is sworn in during a hearing on the nomination of federal appeals
court judge Brett Kavanaugh to be an associate justice on the U.S.
 Supreme Court, in the Hart Senate Office Building on
September 7, 2018, in Washington, DC.

It might be 2019, but Democrats are looking to John Dean to be their guiding light.

The former Richard Nixon White House counsel will testify before the House Judiciary Committee next week as part of a series of hearings about the Mueller report, offering Democrats a prime opportunity to further publicly highlight what a growing number of members believe to be impeachable offenses committed by President Donald Trump.

Democrats are increasingly split on opening an impeachment inquiry into Trump, as more members across Capitol Hill defy leadership's wishes and join their dozens of colleagues in advocating for such a proceeding—and they hope Dean can help their position and messaging.

"It will be very, very helpful to us, as we think about the path forward," Representative Pramila Jayapal, a Judiciary Committee Democrat, told Newsweek. "What were the things that were relevant from Watergate? What were those tipping point moments? What do the American people need to know about what was in the Mueller report? This will help us to continue to get the information out in front of the people about what exactly has happened."

John Dean, Watergate

The divisive topic of impeachment continues to loom large over the Democratic Party — whether they like it or not — as they seek to force the Trump administration's hands in complying with their congressional probes into obstruction and abuse of power. Dean knows all too well about those topics, having pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice for his involvement in the Watergate scandal in the 1970s that led to the unraveling of the Nixon administration. His cooperation with a special prosecutor and his testimony before Congress about key Watergate figures — including the president — helped to move lawmakers and the public on impeachment and push Nixon to resignation.

Now, decades later, Dean's testimony could sway Democrats and help to shift the public's perception on impeachment for a different president.

"We're still doing what we wanted to do in the very beginning: to make sure that the public has as much information as they possibly can, and that we continue to lay out a case to begin impeachment proceedings," Representative Val Demings, a Judiciary Committee Democrat, told Newsweek.

Democrats reiterated it was not their intent to hold such hearings for the sole purpose of persuading anyone's particular mind on impeachment, it's to "be sure that the American people understand the contents of the Mueller report," as Representative David Cicilline, a Judiciary Democrat, told Newsweek.

But the former special counsel's public remarks last week, in which he simply highlighted information already revealed in his 448-page report, acted as the tipping point for many House Democrats on calling for impeachment proceedings. They said that simply hearing from certain figures in public, such as Mueller and Dean, could act as a game changer to how they proceed and how the public wants them to proceed.

"It's a fluid situation that we're in," Representative Jamie Raskin, also a Democrat on Judiciary, told Newsweek, speaking on whether Dean's upcoming testimony could have the ability to move the needle on impeachment. "I think it's unfolding. Anything could change the direction we're going in."

Although he's referred to impeachment in the past, Representative Hank Johnson does not agree with some of his Democratic colleagues that now is the time for an impeachment inquiry. There's too little support for it in Congress, as well as with the American people, the Judiciary Committee Democrat told Newsweek, in order for him to call for the proceedings.

However, he, too, viewed the upcoming hearings with Dean and other prominent legal experts as a chance to shift the public's mind and, as a result, perhaps begin to change minds like his.

RELATED STORIES
House Democrats to Host Series of Hearings on Mueller Report
Democrats Want Mueller to Testify—Even if it Means Just Reading His Report
Mueller’s Report ‘Is More Damning Than All’ Others
"Most people are not going to read the Mueller report. But a lot more will be watching the proceedings on TV, and we can make up their minds in that way," Johnson said. "Most people are receptive to new information. The information has to be presented to them in a manner that is relatable."

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

TRUMP: Trump talks Mueller report fallout in 'Hannity' exclusive | FULL - When Will They Say His Name?

How did this entire Mueller investigation begin?

Who was the individual who requested this entire investigation?

Why was there a request for this investigation?

Stay tuned....we are almost in Detroit and Trump has the IG Report in his back pocket, which contains all the answers to the aforementioned questions.

Let us see if Judiciary Jolly Jerry comes up with the same findings as Michael Horowitz.

#perkinscoiecucks

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

A Brief History On The Evolution Of Political Propaganda To Cyberwars

Always remember, it started in child welfare.

It started in Detroit.

Just sharing.

#cyberwars are real.

Art of War

Policraticus Of the Frivolities of Courtiers and the Footprints of Philosophers

The Prince

Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars by on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

JUDICIARY: Transparency & Accountability: Examining Google and its Data Collection, Use and Filtering Practices - Color Commentary

I get such  a tickle when watching House Judiciary question the gatekeepers of the internet questions on its search engine algorithms and control of the data when it comes to censorship.

I remember sitting in the first Google hearing, in absolute awe that they actually spoke, quite openly, mind you, of reverse algorithms in searches.

Some Member's staffers actually developed good questions, some just left their Member look like a bumbling fool.

That is mean and a reflection of incompetence.

Google is an equal opportunity censorship organization because they suppress my searches.

Gaetz seemed to have an issue with Google suppressing conservative speech.

Allow me to bring him up to speed.

Google suppressed me, so that argument gets defenestrated.

Most of that "conservative speech" is funded propaganda talking points by foreign, online operations, like that of Granpa Corsi, my affectionate name for the conservative online celebrity, Dr. Jerome Corsi, who made his fortune spinning yarns by the Youtube fireplace about how Obama has a fake birth certificate and, at one point, told the world he was "Q".

But never forget TYT and the other foreign, online personalities of CNN, MSNBC & FOX pumping those propaganda talking points.

Shout out to Johnson for dropping "Flat Earthers" in the public record.

Shout out to Rashkin for dropping #pizzagate and the pizzacrappers..

FUN FACT! CONGRESSIONAL CHIEFS OF STAFF RUN BACKDOOR, CONGRESSIONAL OFFICE - PERSONAL INUREMENT OPERATIONS ON GMAIL!

Now, that is what I call a Public Private Partnership!

Jayapal just asked about access to due process in the courts in sexual harassment for Google employees.

I wonder what she is going to say about a staffer, who was sexually harassed by fellow staffers, Members of congress, and their Super Secret Smarty Pants Public Private Partnerships for almost 10 years.

Gohmert is going after Wikipedia using political bias against conservatives asking if Google should be held accountable in a court of law, which was an interesting approach to letting the people have access to due process, if they can afford it, or know how to do it.

Funny, no one has yet to raise the issue of foreign funding of political social media operations, both conservative and liberal, or whatever.

Oh wait, King just brought up Grampa Corsi without mentioning his name. (someone may want to look into King's Public Private Israeli funding network.)

MAXIMUS GOODLATTECUS just asked who was making decisions on Google content moderation, meaning Youtube.

Someone should ask him who funded that child welfare propaganda he put out through the Committee promoting propaganda.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: Stormy Daniels Has All The Legal Geniuses Suing Each Other's Attorney Client Privileges Away

Go Stormy!

She is a legal dominatrix.

She has all these "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) suing each other over ethical concerns regarding the besmirching of the honorable profession of being an officer of the court of law.

Something tells me the "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) in the military "sex, drugs & dark weapons" scandals is going to be even messier.

Remember David Patreaus?

I do.

He has an email scandal and I bet there are some extremely naughty stuff in his attachments.

Oh, and before I forget, Perkins Coie Sucks.

Stormy Daniels Says Michael Cohen Told Melania Daniels Was a Liar

New lawsuit says the president's lawyer tried to do damage control about alleged affair face-to-face with the First Lady at Mar-a-Lago.

Stormy Daniels’ old attorney plotted with President Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, to get her on the Sean Hannity Show and deny her affair with the president, according to a new lawsuit filed Wednesday.

The porn actress is suing Keith Davidson, her former lawyer and peddler of Hollywood dirt and sex tapes, alleging he breached his fiduciary duty by secretly collaborating with Cohen and disclosing information about her legal strategy.

Earlier this year, Daniels became a household name after filing a lawsuit against Cohen and Trump to invalidate a “hush agreement” she signed weeks before the 2016 election. Cohen paid Daniels $130,000 in exchange for her silence on her alleged 2006 romp with Trump, then a real-estate mogul and reality TV star.

Daniels’ legal filings reveal how Davidson, the counselor who inked her non-disclosure agreement, supposedly enjoyed a chummy relationship with Cohen behind the scenes.

Another allegation in the lawsuit: Cohen held a meeting with First Lady Melania Trump at Mar-a-Lago in March to discredit Daniels.

Davidson’s spokesman called the lawsuit “outrageously frivolous” and said it was an attempt by Daniels’ attorney, Michael Avenatti, to distract from negative press about his former law firm, which was slapped with a $10-million bankruptcy settlement.

“That said, Attorney Davidson is very happy that [Avenatti] has filed this lawsuit because [Davidson] strongly believes that the filing constitutes a full and complete waiver of the attorney-client privilege,” said the spokesman, Dave Wedge, in a statement to The Daily Beast.

Wedge appeared to make lemonade out of legal lemons.

“Thankfully, the truth can now finally come out to rebut the false narrative about Attorney Davidson that Mr. Avenatti has been pushing in his more than 175 television appearances and countless other media interviews,” Wedge continued. “Attorney Davidson believes that the American people deserve to know the entire truth—and they soon will. This lawsuit has made that happen.”

Keith Davidson should have been charged after his arrest for extortion not long ago. He is a disgrace to the profession. Watch him now try and distract away from his own unethical conduct. Ms. Daniels deserved better. https://t.co/wd6rfnFCuQ via @thedailybeast

— Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) June 6, 2018

For his part, Avenatti said that text messages discussing a potential Hannity interview only bolster his client’s claim of a cover-up.

“These text messages show that the prior denials by Mr. Trump and Mr. Cohen relating to what Mr. Trump knew and about the honesty of my client were absolute lies,” Avenatti said in a statement. “There was a significant cover-up here as part of an attempt to deceive the American people and Mrs. Trump and we intend on getting to the bottom of it.”

In January, Davidson and Cohen tried to do damage control after In Touch magazine ran a steamy interview with Daniels on bedding Trump, according to the lawsuit filed in Los Angeles Superior Court and first reported by NBC News.

“Call me,” Cohen texted Davidson on Jan. 17, after learning of the scoop. The lawyers—who were supposed to be opposing counsel—“hatched a plan” to get Daniels on Fox News with Sean Hannity to decry the story’s accuracy, the complaint says.

Two hours later, at 2:32 p.m., Cohen messaged Davidson again. “I have her tentatively scheduled for Hannity tonight. Call me after your trial,” Cohen wrote. (Cohen, who’s facing a federal probe over his business dealings and the Daniels NDA, admitted last month that Hannity is one of three recent clients. Another is GOP donor Elliott Broidy.)

Cohen scheduled Daniels—born Stephanie Clifford—to appear on Hannity’s show “only after consultation with Mr. Trump,” the complaint says.

“She cannot don’t [sic] today. She is flying to LA tomorrow. I’m trying to get her to commit for tomorrow,” Davidson replied.

But Cohen, in a panic, sent a cascade of texts to persuade Daniels, “with the assistance of Mr. Hannity, to lie to the American public about her relationship with Mr. Trump via the Fox News broadcast,” her complaint states.

“Can you call me please,” Cohen wrote at 3:25 p.m. He followed up with “Please call me” about 20 minutes later. “Anything?” Cohen added.

“Still trying,” Davidson replied.

“This is no good,” Cohen wrote. “We need her as by doing tomorrow you just create another news cycle instead of putting an end to this one.”

“C’mon!” Cohen desperately texted at 5:01 p.m.

Yet around 5:30 p.m., Cohen changed his tune.

“Let’s forget tonight,” Cohen wrote. “They would rather tomorrow so they can promote the heck out of the show.” According to the lawsuit, “They” refers to Fox News and the Trump administration.

By 8 p.m., Cohen informed Davidson that the porn star’s appearance on Hannity was unnecessary.

“Keith, The wise men all believe the story is dying and don’t think it’s smart for her to do any interviews,” Cohen texted. “Let her do her thing but no interviews at all with anyone.” (In her lawsuit, Daniels says the “wise men” include Trump.)

Davidson agreed, answering, “100%”

“Thanks pal,” Cohen replied. “Just no interviews or statements unless through you.”

“Got it,” Davidson wrote.

These texts show Davidson was set to arrange a media appearance not for Daniels’ benefit but for the benefit of Trump, the lawsuit alleges.

“Indeed, once Mr. Cohen concluded that it was no longer in his own best interest, or those of his client… Mr. Cohen called off the appearance entirely and Mr. Davidson agreed without hesitation,” her lawsuit states.

Davidson wasn’t acting as Daniels’ lawyer; he instead was a “puppet” for Cohen and Trump, the lawsuit says.

In February, Davidson learned Daniels had a new attorney and was about to spill the beans on her affair with Trump, the complaint says. Davidson then allegedly tipped Cohen off about her plans. As a result, Cohen began an arbitration against Daniels on Feb. 27 and sought a temporary restraining order to silence her, the lawsuit alleges.

Davidson allegedly contacted Cohen again in March, alerting him that Daniels was preparing to file a lawsuit to void her “hush agreement.”

Cohen then made efforts to quickly meet with First Lady Melania Trump to “get out in front” of the bombshell suit, “and to convince her that [Daniels] was a liar and not to be trusted,” the complaint says.

The embattled Trump stalwart allegedly met with Melania Trump on March 2 at Mar-a-Lago but stuck with his own narrative. “Cohen did not disclose to Mrs. Trump that not only was [Daniels] far from being a liar, Mr. Cohen had begged her to appear on Mr. Hannity’s show weeks earlier,” the lawsuit says.

The complaint also alleges that Cohen recorded his conversations with Davidson, and that those discussions include sensitive information on Daniels.

Meanwhile, Davidson is accused of withholding Daniels’ entire client file from her and refusing to turn over text messages and correspondence with Cohen.

“Mr. Davidson’s failure to provide the information demanded has prejudiced Ms. Clifford in numerous ways including… hampering her ability to review documents and cooperate with government inquiries regarding Mr. Cohen, Mr. Trump and Mr. Davidson.”

Daniels is seeking damages and fees in excess of $100,000.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Day 130 - Hillary's Henchmen, Awan Brothers Access to Key Subcommittee

Begin Whisper Campaign to Out Congressional Break-ins

Special Prosecutor for Awan Brothers?

Jason Chaffetz Joins the Fray

31 Dem Reps Funnel $5M to Awan Brothers

Enter Amanda Carpenter's Clout to Awan Brothers Investigation

Enter Sean Hannity and Lou Dobbs

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©