Politics PRESIDENT TRUMP KICKS AVENATTI'S ASS IN COURT

[Lanny]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-seeks-more-than-300g-in-attorneys-fees-from-stormy-daniels

Trump seeks more than 300G in attorney’s fees from Stormy Daniels

By Benjamin Brown | Fox News

Judge dismisses Stormy Daniels defamation suit against Trump
President Trump awarded attorneys' fees in suit dismissal.

President Donald Trump is seeking more than $300,000 in attorney fees after a federal judge in Los Angeles threw out adult-film actress Stormy Daniel’s defamation lawsuit on free-speech grounds earlier this month.

Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, sued the president in April over a tweet in which he denied her claims of being threatened by a man in a Las Vegas parking lot in 2011 – calling it a “total con job.”

“A sketch years later about a nonexistent man. A total con job, playing the Fake News Media for Fools (but they know it)!” Trump tweeted. He retweeted a side-by-side image comparing the sketch with a photo of Daniels’ husband.

Daniels’ attorney, Michael Avenatti, previously said the tweet damaged his client’s credibility by portraying her as a liar.

“The court agrees with Mr. Trump’s argument because the tweet in question constitutes ‘rhetorical hyperbole’ normally associated with politics and public discourse in the U.S.,” U.S. District Judge S. James Otero in Los Angeles said in a ruling Monday, as Bloomberg reported. “The First Amendment protects this type of rhetorical statement.”

The ruling also stated Trump is “entitled to an award of his attorneys’ fees” against Daniels, the president’s attorney Charles Harder said in a statement to Fox News earlier this month.

Trump is requesting $341,559.50 in attorney’s fees from Daniels, according to a court filing on Monday by the president’s attorneys, the Washington Examiner reported.

The filing in Los Angeles court claimed Daniels “filed this action, not because it had any merit, but instead for the ulterior purposes of raising her media profile, engaging in political attacks against the president by herself and her attorney, who has appeared on more than 150 national television news interviews attacking the President and now is exploring a run for the presidency himself in 2020,” according to the outlet.

Fox News’ Frank Miles, Bradford Betz and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

What about Trump's suit asserting that he never had sex with Ms. Daniels?

 

[BrianFromWA]

After the last election and the current presidency, there may never be a better opportunity for an independent to win the presidency than in 2020. All the bullshit from decades of these two parties' reign has bubbled up the the surface for the world to see. If people don't vote against these two corrupt parties in 2020 we are too far gone.

I don't, but I see it as an opportunity to get the 5-15% needed for a 3rd party to be a real choice later. I think it could've been close to what you said, but it won't be now unless someone major defects. As in, if HRC runs but the DNC doesn't recognize her as their leading candidate (LOL), she could probably poll at 15% as a 3rd party.

If, for instance, all the never-Trump CA voters that voted for Hillary instead of 3rd party (in a state that was going to be handily blue) had voted Stein or Johnson instead, we could've had it so that a 3rd party candidate got financing, airtime, debate slots, etc. Which means that you can have higher-qualified candidates run. If, for instance, Bernie could've run as an Independent, would he be so beholden to the (D) party? If he had guaranteed debate spots and financing, who knows? (Substitute Ron Paul or Tea Party Bob or whoever you non-affiliated politician of choice is...)

This is from 2016, and I think you can just substitute "2016" for 2008, and "2020" for 2012.

Since no third-party candidate received 5% of the vote in the 2008 presidential election, only the Republican and Democratic parties were eligible for 2012 convention grants, and only their nominees were eligible to receive grants for the general election once they were nominated. Third-party candidates could qualify for public funds retroactively if they received 5% or more of the vote in the general election.

 

[barfo]

I don't, but I see it as an opportunity to get the 5-15% needed for a 3rd party to be a real choice later. I think it could've been close to what you said, but it won't be now unless someone major defects. As in, if HRC runs but the DNC doesn't recognize her as their leading candidate (LOL), she could probably poll at 15% as a 3rd party.

If, for instance, all the never-Trump CA voters that voted for Hillary instead of 3rd party (in a state that was going to be handily blue) had voted Stein or Johnson instead, we could've had it so that a 3rd party candidate got financing, airtime, debate slots, etc. Which means that you can have higher-qualified candidates run. If, for instance, Bernie could've run as an Independent, would he be so beholden to the (D) party? If he had guaranteed debate spots and financing, who knows? (Substitute Ron Paul or Tea Party Bob or whoever you non-affiliated politician of choice is...)

This is from 2016, and I think you can just substitute "2016" for 2008, and "2020" for 2012.

The only purpose of a 3rd party candidate in 2020 is to reelect Trump. I expect the Trump campaign to strongly encourage all potential 3rd party candidates, as a 3-way (or more) race is the only way he can win with ~40% approval.

barfo

 

[BrianFromWA]

The only purpose of a 3rd party candidate in 2020 is to reelect Trump. I expect the Trump campaign to strongly encourage all potential 3rd party candidates, as a 3-way (or more) race is the only way he can win with ~40% approval.
barfo

What was Trump's approval rating on Election Day, 2016? (36%, and he won a 2-way race)
More/better choices, more-informed populace, more voting-by-issue rather than voting-by-personality cult, more ability for the candidates to poll what we the voters actually care about...all those are "purposes of a 3rd party candidate", whatever the year.

For instance, I have many friends here in FL that are voting blue-down-the-line (including the avowed, Soros-backed Socialist candidate for Governor) because they want to (in their exact words) "vote in people who will hold Trump accountable." Not even joking. The (D)'s marked on my ballot are for issues, one of them is my firm belief in not becoming a socialist state (or State). One of the Gillum backers is nevertrump because he thinks that any repeal of Obamacare will hurt his son with pre-existing conditions and is willing for the world to burn in order to keep his healthcare. Fair enough--each can have their own reasons for their vote--but he won't listen to any concepts of why insurance-based healthcare is bad as long as Trump is in office, and he thinks voting Blue Line will get it done.

A 3rd party candidate may let that friend vote for someone who is not Trump without voting for an avowed socialist. Maybe one who wants to socialize healthcare and raise taxes, but not defund ICE, for instance.

 

[Hoopguru]

The only purpose of a 3rd party candidate in 2020 is to reelect Trump. I expect the Trump campaign to strongly encourage all potential 3rd party candidates, as a 3-way (or more) race is the only way he can win with ~40% approval.

barfo

not sure I buy that, I actually think that their will be coalition between demo and dem socialist. Kind of how they do it in Europe (England) with coalitions between parties.
My only concern is that with the trend to democratic socialism which is taking over my fathers party, more Americans are trending extreme left with communist, socialist, marxist, and totalitarianism, for the monopolization of power, to the hand of ruling elite, which they think, is superior free -market capitalism. Whatever "We The People Want" is ok by me?

 

[barfo]

What was Trump's approval rating on Election Day, 2016? (36%, and he won a 2-way race)

I think you'd agree that that in general 36% approval is not a recipe for success in a 2-way race, and that a candidate would usually look for additional help rather than assuming victory, in that circumstance.

More/better choices, more-informed populace, more voting-by-issue rather than voting-by-personality cult, more ability for the candidates to poll what we the voters actually care about...all those are "purposes of a 3rd party candidate", whatever the year.

Sure, I should have said outcome instead of purpose.

For instance, I have many friends here in FL that are voting blue-down-the-line (including the avowed, Soros-backed Socialist candidate for Governor) because they want to (in their exact words) "vote in people who will hold Trump accountable." Not even joking. The (D)'s marked on my ballot are for issues, one of them is my firm belief in not becoming a socialist state (or State). One of the Gillum backers is nevertrump because he thinks that any repeal of Obamacare will hurt his son with pre-existing conditions and is willing for the world to burn in order to keep his healthcare.

You think the world will burn if Gillum gets elected?

barfo

 

[barfo]

not sure I buy that, I actually think that their will be coalition between demo and dem socialist. Kind of how they do it in Europe (England) with coalitions between parties.

We don't have a parliamentary system here. In congress two parties can caucus together, but we were talking about the presidential election, and there's no coalition possible there, each party has it's own candidate.

My only concern is that with the trend to democratic socialism which is taking over my fathers party, more Americans are trending extreme left with communist, socialist, marxist, and totalitarianism, for the monopolization of power, to the hand of ruling elite, which they think, is superior free -market capitalism.

I dunno, I don't see that trend myself. Seems to me there is much more evidence for the opposite.

Obama, for example, was less liberal than Jimmy Carter, while Trump is significantly more conservative than Reagan.

barfo

 

[BrianFromWA]

I think you'd agree that that in general 36% approval is not a recipe for success in a 2-way race, and that a candidate would usually look for additional help rather than assuming victory, in that circumstance.
Sure, I should have said outcome instead of purpose.
You think the world will burn if Gillum gets elected?
barfo

"The world" is hyperbole, stolen from a Batman quote. I think that if his policies are enacted, then it will mean a fundamental shift in how our societies are run. If his policies are not enacted (there is a (R) Senate and House in FL, so ramming through a tax increase may be unlikely), what the hell is the point of D's electing a guy who has an open FBI corruption case (the irony is thick with this one) and who has ignored requests from his own law enforcement to help them stem a rise to a state-leading violent crime rate?

 

[barfo]

"The world" is hyperbole, stolen from a Batman quote. I think that if his policies are enacted, then it will mean a fundamental shift in how our societies are run. If his policies are not enacted (there is a (R) Senate and House in FL, so ramming through a tax increase may be unlikely), what the hell is the point of D's electing a guy who has an open FBI corruption case (the irony is thick with this one) and who has ignored requests from his own law enforcement to help them stem a rise to a state-leading violent crime rate?

So you voted for the racist?

barfo

 

[CupWizier]

"The world" is hyperbole, stolen from a Batman quote. I think that if his policies are enacted, then it will mean a fundamental shift in how our societies are run. If his policies are not enacted (there is a (R) Senate and House in FL, so ramming through a tax increase may be unlikely), what the hell is the point of D's electing a guy who has an open FBI corruption case (the irony is thick with this one) and who has ignored requests from his own law enforcement to help them stem a rise to a state-leading violent crime rate?

There are several white supremacists from the republican party running for office. Do you approve of that? There is also Hunter in California that has some serious allegations that is running as well. Why is the republican party allowing their party to be infiltrated with white supremacists?

https://www.vox.com/2018/7/9/175258...-republicans-illinois-north-carolina-virginia

 

[MARIS61]

The only purpose of a 3rd party candidate in 2020 is to reelect Trump. I expect the Trump campaign to strongly encourage all potential 3rd party candidates, as a 3-way (or more) race is the only way he can win with ~40% approval.

barfo

More fake news. You believe anything you want to believe, don't you?

https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-ame...-holds-steady-at-45-percent-ahead-of-midterms

 

[Hoopguru]

We don't have a parliamentary system here. In congress two parties can caucus together, but we were talking about the presidential election, and there's no coalition possible there, each party has it's own candidate.



I dunno, I don't see that trend myself. Seems to me there is much more evidence for the opposite.

Obama, for example, was less liberal than Jimmy Carter, while Trump is significantly more conservative than Reagan.

barfo

If there were more parties then you'd be likely to have a coalition? And I'm kind of thinking it's heading that way. I heard somebody on CNN call it more tribalism?
I here what you're saying and maybe its best that a two party system work like it used to somewhat. I like the idea of term limits to give way to change if the people want it.

 

[CupWizier]

More fake news. You believe anything you want to believe, don't you?

https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-ame...-holds-steady-at-45-percent-ahead-of-midterms

 

[MARIS61]

Obama, for example, was less liberal than Jimmy Carter, while Trump is significantly more conservative than Reagan.

barfo

No. Exact opposite is true.

Not sure you understand the terms you're using.

 

[BrianFromWA]

So you voted for the racist? barfo

of course. I'm white.
(I also voted for his female Hispanic Lieutenant Governor, but probably only because she's hot.)

Or maybe it was because I'd rather vote for a Naval Officer who's deployed to Iraq and been a well-regarded Congressman--accused of being a racist because he said "monkey around with" instead of "fuck around with", and lawmaker who has broad bipartisan support in the FL House and almost a decade of history; than a literal career low-level politician (seriously, he's never held a job other than Tallahassee City Council--which he started before graduating college-- and Mayor, and who is being investigated for corruption in it) and a millionaire Progressive Christian who earned less than 5% of the D vote. You guys would love him.

 

[barfo]

of course. I'm white.
(I also voted for his female Hispanic Lieutenant Governor, but probably only because she's hot.)

Or maybe it was because I'd rather vote for a Naval Officer who's deployed to Iraq and been a well-regarded Congressman--accused of being a racist because he said "monkey around with" instead of "fuck around with", and lawmaker who has broad bipartisan support in the FL House and almost a decade of history; than a literal career low-level politician (seriously, he's never held a job other than Tallahassee City Council--which he started before graduating college-- and Mayor, and who is being investigated for corruption in it) and a millionaire Progressive Christian who earned less than 5% of the D vote. You guys would love him.

Technically, it was 'monkey this up' not 'monkey around with'. And that's not the only reason he looks like a racist.

But, it's your state not mine, so best of luck with whichever governor you elect!

barfo

 

[BrianFromWA]

Technically, it was 'monkey this up' not 'monkey around with'. And that's not the only reason he looks like a racist.

But, it's your state not mine, so best of luck with whichever governor you elect!

barfo

 

[Lanny]

I don't, but I see it as an opportunity to get the 5-15% needed for a 3rd party to be a real choice later. I think it could've been close to what you said, but it won't be now unless someone major defects. As in, if HRC runs but the DNC doesn't recognize her as their leading candidate (LOL), she could probably poll at 15% as a 3rd party.

If, for instance, all the never-Trump CA voters that voted for Hillary instead of 3rd party (in a state that was going to be handily blue) had voted Stein or Johnson instead, we could've had it so that a 3rd party candidate got financing, airtime, debate slots, etc. Which means that you can have higher-qualified candidates run. If, for instance, Bernie could've run as an Independent, would he be so beholden to the (D) party? If he had guaranteed debate spots and financing, who knows? (Substitute Ron Paul or Tea Party Bob or whoever you non-affiliated politician of choice is...)

This is from 2016, and I think you can just substitute "2016" for 2008, and "2020" for 2012.

There are plenty of viable third party candidates from the traditional Republican party.

 

[BrianFromWA]

There are plenty of viable third party candidates from the traditional Republican party.

Absolutely. My point is that, barring something which I don't know that I've ever seen (Kennedy v. Carter maybe, but I was barely alive) an incumbent isn't going to get strong opposition from his party. So if you wanted a decently-known, centrist republican (or even a fiscal far-right but social moderate) to run against Trump, having a viable 3rd party that got funding, airtime and a spot at the debates would have been useful. Now, said hypothetical 3rd-partier is up against two behemoths with the weight of both sides of the government coming down on them.

 

[barfo]

Absolutely. My point is that, barring something which I don't know that I've ever seen (Kennedy v. Carter maybe, but I was barely alive) an incumbent isn't going to get strong opposition from his party. So if you wanted a decently-known, centrist republican (or even a fiscal far-right but social moderate) to run against Trump, having a viable 3rd party that got funding, airtime and a spot at the debates would have been useful. Now, said hypothetical 3rd-partier is up against two behemoths with the weight of both sides of the government coming down on them.

Well, it's hard to imagine a more golden opportunity for 3rd parties than 2016, when both major party candidates were roundly hated.

The utter failure in 2016 should suggest that hoping for a true 3rd party to arise is a fool's errand.

As Trump proved, (and Bernie came somewhat close to showing) it's much more straightforward to simply hijack one of the two existing parties.

barfo

 

[MARIS61]

Avenatti is the new Obama.

Promised Stefanie Clifford free money, but all he gave her was a massive debt.

Last Update 4 hours ago
Stormy Daniels ordered to pay President Trump $292G in legal fees

By Matt Richardson | Fox News

Adult film star Stormy Daniels must pay President Trump $293,000 in legal fees, a judge ruled on Tuesday.

"The U.S. District Court today ordered Stormy Daniels (real name Stephanie Clifford) to pay President Trump $292,052.33 to reimburse his attorneys’ fees (75% of his total legal bill), plus an additional $1,000 in sanctions to punish Daniels for having filed a meritless lawsuit against the President designed to chill his free speech rights," Charles J. Harder, the president's legal counsel, said in a statement.

"The court’s order," Harder said, "along with the court’s prior order dismissing Stormy Daniels’ defamation case against the President, together constitute a total victory for the President, and a total defeat for Stormy Daniels in this case."

Attorneys for President Trump had asked a court earlier this month for nearly $800,000 in lawyers’ fees and penalties from Daniels for the failed defamation lawsuit against him. Harder defended more than 500 hours his firm spent that rang up a nearly $390,000 legal bill for the president and asked for an equal amount in sanctions as a deterrent against a “repeat filer or frivolous defamation cases.”

Daniels alleged she had a one-night affair with Trump in 2006. She sued him earlier this year seeking to break a non-disclosure agreement she signed days before the 2016 election about the alleged affair as part of a $130,000 hush money settlement. Trump has strongly denied the affair took place.

Despite the deal to stay quiet, Daniels spoke out publicly and alleged that five years after the alleged affair she was threatened to keep quiet by a man she did not recognize in a Las Vegas parking lot. She also released a composite sketch of the mystery man.

She sued Trump for defamation after he responded to the allegation by tweeting: “A sketch years later about a nonexistent man. A total con job, playing the Fake News Media for Fools (but they know it)!”

Daniels' lawsuit against Trump was tossed out of court in October, with U.S. District Judge S. James Otero citing free-speech grounds.

"The court agrees with Mr. Trump’s argument because the tweet in question constitutes ‘rhetorical hyperbole’ normally associated with politics and public discourse in the U.S.,” Otero said at the time. “The First Amendment protects this type of rhetorical statement.”

“The ruling also states that the President is entitled to an award of his attorneys’ fees against Stormy Daniels,” Harder said in a statement to Fox News following the judge's order.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/stormy-daniels-ordered-to-pay-president-trump-292g-in-legal-fees

 

[Lanny]

Nonsense and lies.

Former Trump Lawyer Michael Cohen Sentenced to 3 Years in Prison

http://time.com/5477719/michael-cohen-sentenced-prison/

 

[MARIS61]

Judge hints Stormy Daniels' lawsuit against Trump could be tossed
By Samuel Chamberlain | Fox News

A federal judge in Los Angeles appeared inclined Tuesday to toss out a lawsuit against President Trump by adult film star Stormy Daniels seeking to tear up an agreement that paid her $130,000 in exchange for her silence about an alleged sexual relationship with Trump more than a decade ago.

Lawyers for Trump and his onetime personal attorney, Michael Cohen, agreed to rescind the settlement agreement with Daniels, then asked U.S. District Judge S. James Otero to dismiss the lawsuit. Otero did not rule on the request, but seemed to agree that Daniels no longer had grounds to sue.

"It seems you've achieved ... what you sought to achieve," Otero said.

"They admitted what we said all along," Daniels attorney Michael Avenatti told reporters after the hearing. "So any attempt by anyone to claim that this is not a victory for Stormy Daniels is completely bogus and nonsense and dishonest.

Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, brought the lawsuit to free herself from the agreement she'd signed to keep from telling her story late in the 2016 presidential campaign. Cohen arranged the payment and later pleaded guilty to campaign violations after admitting the deal was struck to help Trump defeat Hillary Clinton.

Trump has denied the alleged affair with Daniels, which she says happened in 2006, the year after he married Melania Trump.

Daniels had claimed the agreement was not valid because Trump's signature was not on it, and the president's lawyer has said he was never a party to the settlement.

Despite appearing to get what Daniels originally sought -- dismissal of the agreement she'd disregarded long ago in speaking to news media and writing a book -- Avenatti, who once toyed with challenging Trump for the presidency, fought hard to keep the case alive. He argued the case should continue because he wanted to take sworn statements from Trump and Cohen. He also plans to ask for legal fees.

 

[Lanny]

Judge hints Stormy Daniels' lawsuit against Trump could be tossed
By Samuel Chamberlain | Fox News

A federal judge in Los Angeles appeared inclined Tuesday to toss out a lawsuit against President Trump by adult film star Stormy Daniels seeking to tear up an agreement that paid her $130,000 in exchange for her silence about an alleged sexual relationship with Trump more than a decade ago.

Lawyers for Trump and his onetime personal attorney, Michael Cohen, agreed to rescind the settlement agreement with Daniels, then asked U.S. District Judge S. James Otero to dismiss the lawsuit. Otero did not rule on the request, but seemed to agree that Daniels no longer had grounds to sue.

"It seems you've achieved ... what you sought to achieve," Otero said.

"They admitted what we said all along," Daniels attorney Michael Avenatti told reporters after the hearing. "So any attempt by anyone to claim that this is not a victory for Stormy Daniels is completely bogus and nonsense and dishonest.

Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, brought the lawsuit to free herself from the agreement she'd signed to keep from telling her story late in the 2016 presidential campaign. Cohen arranged the payment and later pleaded guilty to campaign violations after admitting the deal was struck to help Trump defeat Hillary Clinton.

Trump has denied the alleged affair with Daniels, which she says happened in 2006, the year after he married Melania Trump.

Daniels had claimed the agreement was not valid because Trump's signature was not on it, and the president's lawyer has said he was never a party to the settlement.

Despite appearing to get what Daniels originally sought -- dismissal of the agreement she'd disregarded long ago in speaking to news media and writing a book -- Avenatti, who once toyed with challenging Trump for the presidency, fought hard to keep the case alive. He argued the case should continue because he wanted to take sworn statements from Trump and Cohen. He also plans to ask for legal fees.

Are you saying the Trump paid $130,000 for a non discloser agreement for an alleged affair that never happened? Would you do that? I sure as hell wouldn't.

 

[stampedehero]

This proves that Trump can own a whore no matter how she is decked out.

 

[MARIS61]

Feds seize $4.5 million Avenatti plane amid tax scandal

By William La Jeunesse, Paulina Dedaj | Fox News

Michael Avenatti's jet seized from Santa Barbara airport

LOS ANGELES – Embattled lawyer Michael Avenatti was the subject of a federal warrant Wednesday that resulted in the seizure of his private jet, worth about $4.5 million.

A U.S. Attorney’s Office spokesman, Thom Mrozek, confirmed to Fox News that federal agents seized a Honda HA-420 twin-engine jet from Santa Barbara Airport about 10 a.m. after a federal judge issued a warrant.

The plane was originally scheduled to be flown Wednesday to Orange County on Avenatti's behalf, but pilots had to file a new flight plan to San Bernardino County.

A U.S. Attorney’s Office spokesman, Thom Mrozek, confirmed to Fox News that federal agents seized a Honda HA-420 twin-engine jet from Santa Barbara Airport about 10 a.m. after a federal judge issued a warrant. (William La Jeunesse/Lee Ross)

“Federal authorities have seized a jet co-owned by Mr. Avenatti pursuant to a seizure warrant issued by a federal judge. This seizure is related to the pending criminal case in Los Angeles,” a federal official told Fox News.

MICHAEL AVENATTI LIVED LUXURY LIFE WHILE AVOIDING PAYING TAXES FOR A DECADE, SAYS FEDERAL TAX AUTHORITIES

The six-seat business jet was flown by a private contract pilot to Chino Municipal Airport, where it is being held by Threshold Aviation.

Federal court records indicated that the plane, bought on Jan. 30, 2017, was registered to Passport 420, a company co-owned by Avenatti. A government complaint obtained by Fox News said Avenatti’s wife, Lisa-Storie Avenatti, said he owned two private jets -- one through Avenatti & Associates and the other through Passport 420 -- and that each had a value of $4.5 million.

The warrant under which the plane was seized was under seal; Avenatti was accused last month of failing to pay income taxes for almost a decade despite making $18 million since 2010. Officials are also looking at his firm, which is said to have recorded $38 million in deposits but filed no tax returns.

Prosecutors did not disclose if the jet was seized to satisfy a judgment, or in connection with nonpayment of taxes.

Avenatti, who previously represented adult-film star Stormy Daniels in litigation against President Trump, has also been charged with wire and bank fraud in California. And federal prosecutors in New York accused the lawyer of attempting to extort about $25 million from Nike “by threatening to use his ability to garner publicity to inflict substantial financial and reputational harm on the company if his demands were not met.”

After repeated social media attacks on Trump and his former attorney Michael Cohen, Avenatti hinted that he would consider a run for the 2020 presidential election on the Democratic ticket.

Avenatti has since put to rest rumors of a bid for the White House and has ended his contract with Daniels.

 

[bodyman5000 and 1]

Feds seize $4.5 million Avenatti plane amid tax scandal

By William La Jeunesse, Paulina Dedaj | Fox News

Michael Avenatti's jet seized from Santa Barbara airport

LOS ANGELES – Embattled lawyer Michael Avenatti was the subject of a federal warrant Wednesday that resulted in the seizure of his private jet, worth about $4.5 million.

A U.S. Attorney’s Office spokesman, Thom Mrozek, confirmed to Fox News that federal agents seized a Honda HA-420 twin-engine jet from Santa Barbara Airport about 10 a.m. after a federal judge issued a warrant.

The plane was originally scheduled to be flown Wednesday to Orange County on Avenatti's behalf, but pilots had to file a new flight plan to San Bernardino County.

A U.S. Attorney’s Office spokesman, Thom Mrozek, confirmed to Fox News that federal agents seized a Honda HA-420 twin-engine jet from Santa Barbara Airport about 10 a.m. after a federal judge issued a warrant. (William La Jeunesse/Lee Ross)

“Federal authorities have seized a jet co-owned by Mr. Avenatti pursuant to a seizure warrant issued by a federal judge. This seizure is related to the pending criminal case in Los Angeles,” a federal official told Fox News.

MICHAEL AVENATTI LIVED LUXURY LIFE WHILE AVOIDING PAYING TAXES FOR A DECADE, SAYS FEDERAL TAX AUTHORITIES

The six-seat business jet was flown by a private contract pilot to Chino Municipal Airport, where it is being held by Threshold Aviation.

Federal court records indicated that the plane, bought on Jan. 30, 2017, was registered to Passport 420, a company co-owned by Avenatti. A government complaint obtained by Fox News said Avenatti’s wife, Lisa-Storie Avenatti, said he owned two private jets -- one through Avenatti & Associates and the other through Passport 420 -- and that each had a value of $4.5 million.

The warrant under which the plane was seized was under seal; Avenatti was accused last month of failing to pay income taxes for almost a decade despite making $18 million since 2010. Officials are also looking at his firm, which is said to have recorded $38 million in deposits but filed no tax returns.

Prosecutors did not disclose if the jet was seized to satisfy a judgment, or in connection with nonpayment of taxes.

Avenatti, who previously represented adult-film star Stormy Daniels in litigation against President Trump, has also been charged with wire and bank fraud in California. And federal prosecutors in New York accused the lawyer of attempting to extort about $25 million from Nike “by threatening to use his ability to garner publicity to inflict substantial financial and reputational harm on the company if his demands were not met.”

After repeated social media attacks on Trump and his former attorney Michael Cohen, Avenatti hinted that he would consider a run for the 2020 presidential election on the Democratic ticket.

Avenatti has since put to rest rumors of a bid for the White House and has ended his contract with Daniels.

Poor guy. They caught him before he could swing a bigger jet. A Honda is probably ok but I never heard a rap song about one. Sir MixALot doesn't count.

 

[MARIS61]

He'll die in prison for certain. Or live to be 400 years old.

Michael Avenatti is indicted on 36 federal charges
“Money generated from one set of crimes was used to further other crimes,” prosecutors say.
By Emily Stewart Apr 11, 2019, 2:20pm EDT
Celebrity attorney Michael Avenatti is in legal hot water yet again, this time facing perhaps his most serious criminal charges yet:a 36-count federal indictment alleging that he stole millions of dollars from his clients, skirted taxes, and committed wire fraud, perjury, and a number of other financial crimes.

The 61-page Justice Department indictment lays out an alleged scheme Avenatti conducted starting in 2015 to defraud five clients, where he would secure major settlements and then lie to clients about the terms. He would instead put the money in accounts he controlled and then “embezzle and misappropriate” the funds.

Prosecutors allege Avenatti would “lull the client to prevent the client from discovering” his activities. He would tell them payments hadn’t been made yet, or were in installments instead of a lump sum.

One of the clients is a paraplegic man who was granted a $4 million settlement payment from Los Angeles County in January 2015. Avenatti allegedly had the money deposited into a trust for the client he controlled but did not disclose that the payment had been made. He paid his client in installments of about $1,000 to $1,900 over more than three years, totaling $124,000, and told the client that payments to assisted living facilities where he lived were “advances” of the settlement. Because of Avenatti’s activity, the client couldn’t buy a house he wanted, and he lost Social Security benefits because Avenatti failed to respond for him.

Meanwhile, prosecutors say, Avenatti transferred the money to other accounts, including personal ones.

Prosecutors placed the charges into four buckets: wire fraud, tax fraud, bank fraud, and bankruptcy fraud. They allege that on top of defrauding clients, Avenatti failed to file personal tax returns and hid his coffee company’s income, failed to pay payroll taxes for the employees of his coffee company, submitted phony tax returns to secure loans from a Mississippi bank, and lied about his income after filing for bankruptcy, among other allegations.

“Money generated from one set of crimes was used to further other crimes,” said Nick Hanna, a US attorney for the Central District of California, in a press conference on Thursday outlining the charges.

Hanna said Avenatti (who’s recently become known for his anti-Trump posturing)would use money taken from his clients to finance his coffee business, his auto racing enterprise, and his lifestyle. In one instance, Avenatti allegedly used money from a client settlement to pay for his portion of a private jet. (The jet was seized Wednesday.) Hanna said Avenatti’s schemes were an attempt to keep his “financial house of cards from collapsing.”

Some of the charges against Avenatti were announced in March.

If convicted of the 36 charges outlined on Thursday, Avenatti could face 333 years in federal prison plus an additional two-year mandatory sentence for an identity theft charge. He is scheduled to be arraigned on April 29 in the US District Court in Santa Ana, California.

But that’s not the extent of his legal troubles. The IRS is also conducting an ongoing investigation into Avenatti’s tax practices.

“The financial investigation conducted by the IRS details a man who allegedly failed to meet his obligations to the government, stole from his clients, and used his ill-gotten gains to support his racing team, the ownership of Tully’s coffee shops, and a private jet,” acting Special Agent in Charge Ryan L. Korner with IRS Criminal Investigation in Los Angeles said in a statement outlining the charges. “Individuals who intentionally thwart the IRS and fail to meet their tax obligations will be caught and they will be held accountable.”

Avenatti says this is just the big guns out to get him
Avenatti, who never shies away from the spotlight, posted a series of tweets before the charges were released on Thursday, proclaiming his innocence and casting the charges as an effort by his “powerful enemies” to take him down. “I intend to fully fight all charges and plead NOT GUILTY,” he wrote. He also tweeted Theodore Roosevelt’s famous “man in the arena” quote.

For 20 years, I have represented Davids vs. Goliaths and relied on due process and our system of justice. Along the way, I have made many powerful enemies. I am entitled to a FULL presumption of innocence and am confident that justice will be done once ALL of the facts are known.

— Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) April 11, 2019
I intend to fully fight all charges and plead NOT GUILTY. I look forward to the entire truth being known as opposed to a one-sided version meant to sideline me.

— Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) April 11, 2019
Avenatti also tweeted about one of the clients listed in the indictment. The LA Times identified the paraplegic man whom Avenatti allegedly kept the $4 million settlement from as Geoffrey Ernest Johnson, who sued Los Angeles County over his treatment at the Twin Towers Correctional Facility. While jailed there, Johnson, who was suicidal, jumped from an upper floor and injured himself. On Thursday, Avenatti tweeted out a “client testimonial approval” he says Johnson signed less than a month ago “attesting to my ethics and how this case was handled.”

Any claim that any monies due clients were mishandled is bogus nonsense. By way of example only (there are MANY more like this), here is a document Mr. Johnson signed less than a month ago attesting to my ethics and how his case was handled. I look forward to proving my innocence pic.twitter.com/tWL1aIuPy0

— Michael Avenatti (@MichaelAvenatti) April 11, 2019
Avenatti just can’t keep out of legal hot water
Avenatti rose to public prominence as the attorney for Stormy Daniels, the porn actress whom Donald Trump’s lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen paid off ahead of the 2016 election in order to keep her from speaking out about an affair she says she had with Trump in 2006.

He became a media fixture and was eager to bask in the attention. He frequently criticized the president on television and on Twitter and even flirted with a potential 2020 presidential bid.

Avenatti inserted himself into the confirmation hearings of now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, representing a woman who claimed that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted girls in high school and that he was at a party where she was assaulted. The FBI did not consider her claims to be credible.

But most recently, Avenatti has been in the headlines for his own legal troubles.

In March, federal prosecutors in New York arrested him for allegedly attempting to extort more than $20 million from Nike. Prosecutors said Avenatti threatened to hold a press conference revealing “allegations of misconduct by employees of Nike” the night before Nike’s quarterly earnings call if the company didn’t pay him and his client, a former Amateur Athletic Union basketball coach, millions of dollars.

According to prosecutors, in a phone call with Nike’s attorneys, Avenatti said he would take “10 billion dollars” off of the athletic apparel company’s market cap if they didn’t comply. “I’m not fucking around,” he said.


In the New York case, Avenatti was released on $300,000 bond, and if convicted of those charges, he could face 47 years in prison. That would be on top of the more than 300 years the California charges could carry.

https://www.vox.com/2019/4/11/18306437/michael-avenatti-indictment-clients-press-conference

 

[MARIS61]

Michael Avenatti Indicted For Allegedly Stealing Paraplegic Client's Settlement Money

April 11, 20193:05 PM ET
Merrit Kennedy

Updated at 6:06 p.m. ET

Celebrity lawyer Michael Avenatti, who is already accused of federal financial crimes, has been indicted on 36 counts of embezzlement and fraud by a California federal grand jury, U.S. prosecutors announced Thursday.


If Avenatti is found guilty of all charges in the new indictment, he could be sentenced to a maximum of 335 years in prison.

The lawyer had a rapid rise to fame, most prominently representing Stormy Daniels in the adult film actress's case against President Trump. He was a regular guest on cable news programs and even floated a Democratic presidential campaign, during which he told crowds: "I say, 'When they go low, we hit harder.' "


Now prosecutors allege that Avenatti stole millions of dollars from his clients.

Those clients include "Client 1," a man who is paraplegic and who won a $4 million settlement from Los Angeles County. Prosecutors allege Avenatti drained money from the man's trust account and used the money to finance a coffee business and pay other expenses.

"More than four years later, Client 1 is still waiting to receive his portion of the settlement," U.S. Attorney Nick Hanna said at a news conference in Los Angeles.

According to court documents, prosecutors say Avenatti would occasionally send Client 1 "advance" payments that didn't exceed $1,900. He also allegedly undermined his paraplegic client's attempt to buy a house and jeopardized his Social Security payments by failing to file paperwork.

In an emailed statement, law firm Greenberg Gross LLP identified Client 1 as a man named Geoffrey Johnson.

"Mr. Johnson is the victim of an appalling fraud perpetrated by the one person who owed him loyalty and honesty most of all: his own lawyer," said attorney Josh Robbins. "Mr. Avenatti stole millions of dollars that were meant to compensate Mr. Johnson for a devastating injury, spent it on his own lavish lifestyle, then lied about it to Mr. Johnson for years to cover his tracks. His actions have left Mr. Johnson destitute."

Avenatti denied the allegations in posts on Twitter. "I am entitled to a FULL presumption of innocence and am confident that justice will be done once ALL of the facts are known," he wrote. "I intend to fully fight all charges and plead NOT GUILTY. I look forward to the entire truth being known as opposed to a one-sided version meant to sideline me."

In addition to Client 1, Hanna said, Avenatti followed a similar pattern with four other clients.

"Mr. Avenatti received the money on behalf of clients and simply took the money to finance his businesses and personal expenses," Hanna said. In one of those instances, he said, Avenatti took some $2.5 million of a client's settlement money and put it toward a private jet.

"As an attorney, holding your clients' money in trust is one of your highest duties. It is Lawyer 101: You do not steal your clients' money," said Hanna.

Avenatti is accused of failing to pay income taxes — in fact, the federal probe that led to Thursday's indictment began as an IRS investigation in September 2016 as officials were trying to collect debts from Avenatti's coffee business, Tully's Coffee.

"The indictment paints the picture of an individual who began to run afoul with the IRS nearly a decade ago," Ryan Korner, acting special agent in charge with the IRS' Criminal Investigation division, told reporters.

Prosecutors also accuse Avenatti of filing fraudulent applications to a bank in Mississippi to obtain $4.1 million in loans and making false statements when his firm was facing bankruptcy proceedings.

The alleged crimes "are all linked to one another because money generated from one set of crimes appears in the other sets — typically in the form of payments to lull victims and to prevent Mr. Avenatti's financial house of cards from collapsing," said Hanna.

Avenatti is scheduled to be arraigned on April 29 in federal court in Orange County, Calif., the prosecutor's office said.

In March, Avenatti was arrested in New York on separate federal charges and then freed on $300,000 bond.

As NPR's Carrie Johnson reported, authorities "say he tried to extract more than $20 million from shoe giant Nike by threatening to use his ability to attract public attention if the company failed to meet his financial demands."

After the charges were announced last month, Daniels, whose given name is Stephanie Clifford, said in a statement that she was "saddened but not shocked."

"I made the decision more than a month ago to terminate Michael's services after discovering that he had dealt with me extremely dishonestly and there will be more announcements to come," she said.
https://www.npr.org/2019/04/11/7122...edly-stealing-paraplegic-clients-settlement-m

 

[riverman]

Nonsense and lies.

The Jane Austen play?