Michael Avenatti is the lawyer for Stormy Daniels. He's also an embarrassment to lawyers everywhere. Let me illustrate. Here's an excerpt from an article that appeared a few hours ago on the internet a Yahoo News:
Michael Avenatti, attorney for porn start STormy Daniels, said Rudy Giuliani's stunning Wednesday night interview on Fox News will doom the presidency of Donald Trump. Giuliani told Sean Hannity that Trump repaid his personal attorney, Michael Cohen, for the $130,000 sent to Danieals as part of a nondisclosure agreement, something the president has previously denied. Daniels claims the agreement kept her from discussing her alleged affair with Trump. In response, Avenatti told "CNN Tonight" that Trump could face "potential criminal liability" related to money laundering, campaign finance and fraud violations.
There's so much wrong with this paragraph that it is hard to know where to begin, but we ought to focus on Avenatti.
1. Avenatti is an attorney. As such, he is supposed to act in an ethical manner. Ethical behavior does not include making false claims that someone has committed a crime.
2. There is no way that Trump repaying Cohen for money he laid out in this matter could possibly constitute money laundering. Trump used his own personal money that he had legally and he used it for an expenditure which was also perfectly legal. That's not money laundering no matter how you twist it, and Avenatti must know that.
3. Trump's use of his own money for a non-disclosure agreement is not a campaign expenditure. But let's humor Avenatti and assume that it was a campaign expenditure. Trump as the candidate has an absolute right under the law to spend whatever he wants on his own campaign. There's no campaign finance violation. This too is something that Avenatti well knows.
4. If Trump spent his own money on the non-disclosure agreement, there is no fraud. Trump didn't misrepresent facts in any way that could possibly be civil fraud and certainly not criminal fraud. Again, Avenatti knows that. That's strike three on the false charge list.
5. It's also important to note that the article is wrong when it says that the president denied paying Cohen back for the $130,000. The article links to a story about Trump being asked on Air Force One if he knew anything about the payment made to Stormy Daniels and he said that he did not. That remains Trump's position. Cohen entered into the non-disclosure agreement on his own without telling Trump about it or the payments. Trump only learned all the details recently.
So we have an article based upon false claims that quotes a lawyer who it seems is making false charges of criminal behavior by Trump. Of course, Avenatti is the same lawyer who previously indicated that he had video or some other recording of a sexual encounter between Trump and Stormy Daniels. He's also the same lawyer who released an artist's sketch of a man who Daniels claims allegedly threatened her in 2012 if she went public with any story about Trump. Strangely, the guy in the sketch looks very much like the guy Daniels was dating at the time.
I understand that Avenatti's goal here is to make as much noise as possible so that his client and he get more notoriety. That goal, however, does not give Avenatti the right to falsely charge criminal acts by another person, not even if that person is president. If there were an award for embarrassment of the year, I would nominate Avenatti.
Michael Avenatti, attorney for porn start STormy Daniels, said Rudy Giuliani's stunning Wednesday night interview on Fox News will doom the presidency of Donald Trump. Giuliani told Sean Hannity that Trump repaid his personal attorney, Michael Cohen, for the $130,000 sent to Danieals as part of a nondisclosure agreement, something the president has previously denied. Daniels claims the agreement kept her from discussing her alleged affair with Trump. In response, Avenatti told "CNN Tonight" that Trump could face "potential criminal liability" related to money laundering, campaign finance and fraud violations.
There's so much wrong with this paragraph that it is hard to know where to begin, but we ought to focus on Avenatti.
1. Avenatti is an attorney. As such, he is supposed to act in an ethical manner. Ethical behavior does not include making false claims that someone has committed a crime.
2. There is no way that Trump repaying Cohen for money he laid out in this matter could possibly constitute money laundering. Trump used his own personal money that he had legally and he used it for an expenditure which was also perfectly legal. That's not money laundering no matter how you twist it, and Avenatti must know that.
3. Trump's use of his own money for a non-disclosure agreement is not a campaign expenditure. But let's humor Avenatti and assume that it was a campaign expenditure. Trump as the candidate has an absolute right under the law to spend whatever he wants on his own campaign. There's no campaign finance violation. This too is something that Avenatti well knows.
4. If Trump spent his own money on the non-disclosure agreement, there is no fraud. Trump didn't misrepresent facts in any way that could possibly be civil fraud and certainly not criminal fraud. Again, Avenatti knows that. That's strike three on the false charge list.
5. It's also important to note that the article is wrong when it says that the president denied paying Cohen back for the $130,000. The article links to a story about Trump being asked on Air Force One if he knew anything about the payment made to Stormy Daniels and he said that he did not. That remains Trump's position. Cohen entered into the non-disclosure agreement on his own without telling Trump about it or the payments. Trump only learned all the details recently.
So we have an article based upon false claims that quotes a lawyer who it seems is making false charges of criminal behavior by Trump. Of course, Avenatti is the same lawyer who previously indicated that he had video or some other recording of a sexual encounter between Trump and Stormy Daniels. He's also the same lawyer who released an artist's sketch of a man who Daniels claims allegedly threatened her in 2012 if she went public with any story about Trump. Strangely, the guy in the sketch looks very much like the guy Daniels was dating at the time.
I understand that Avenatti's goal here is to make as much noise as possible so that his client and he get more notoriety. That goal, however, does not give Avenatti the right to falsely charge criminal acts by another person, not even if that person is president. If there were an award for embarrassment of the year, I would nominate Avenatti.
No comments:
Post a Comment