Michael Avenatti

SlimChance said:
Also people will really see through blatant virtue signalling like this.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...an-boy-us-zero-tolerance-policy-a8492801.html
Click to expand...

No they won't. It's gone down very well and cuts a very favourable contrast with an inept government that's lost trace of the stolen children and a useless Senate that thinks all they have to do is visit a detention centre. Avenatti got a result (a small one) when the government can't figure out what they've done. He's petitioned to take custody of 58 next.

So much winning
 
SlimChance said:
Where exactly do you think his support is going to come from?
Click to expand...

I've answered that

He's got a ready made platform, and he's going to add to it because he'll reach other demographics lake latinos, hispnaics, and white women. He's also younger and fresher faced than Bernie, and lets not forget that Bernie isn't even a Democrat, he's an 'independent'
 
Warbler said:
No they won't. It's gone down very well and cuts a very favourable contrast with an inept government that's lost trace of the stolen children and a useless Senate that thinks all they have to do is visit a detention centre. Avenatti got a result (a small one) when the government can't figure out what they've done. He's petitioned to take custody of 58 next.

So much winning
Click to expand...

Even Vox has written negatively about his media exposure. The Democratic base will not get behind this guy, in fact they won't even take him seriously.

https://www.vox.com/2018/5/7/17326576/stormy-daniels-trump-michael-avenatti-midterm-elections
 
That's not a negative article, it's just repeating what I outlined a few posts ago about the dangers of been seen to push the 2020 run in the shadow of the mid terms. In event look at the first tow paragraphs.

Stormy Daniels has dominated the domestic political news environment over the past week, with high-profile media appearances by Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani and Daniels’s attorney Michael Avenatti making headlines and leading the Sunday shows. Among dedicated Trump haters, that’s made Daniels and Avenatti stars. Jacob Weisberg at Slate hails the attorney as a “brilliant egomaniac who could bring Trump down” while TPM’s Josh Marshall hails his ability to keep Trump off balance and force him into mistakes. It states that he's the individual whose getting Trump off balance and forcing mistakes. How many other Democrats can claim that?

Whether the party gets behind him is a moot point, they didn't get behind Bernie because he wasn't one of them. Avenatti is at least a paid party member. Also he's being inundated with requests to lead Democrat fundraisers. He contacted Iowa to ask if he could attend their event, they offered him the top of the bill speaking slot against other Senators. He put their ticket sales through the roof the moment he was confirmed. This weekend he's in Tampa accepting the same offer from Florida. Sunday, New Hampshire have booked him. Next week he's been asked to go back to Iowa

Avenatti has a path but it depends on Bernie Sanders. If Bernie decides to pass the baton (and there's some indications he will, as he's acknowledged how draining a run is) then he's on Bernie's ticket, but with a wider generic appeal than Sanders. He's got about 25%-30% hard baked in, which is enough to win early primaries in fields of six or more

I note Ladbrokes cut him 100 to 50 yesterday (still 80 with Hills, but they're an outlier). Right now, I'd say he's a more likely runner than Sanders, and Bernie is 14/1 on a very similar platform. The platform alone is going to secure a base level of support, the question is can he build on that? I expect him to, but organising a campaign is going to be whole different challenge.​
 
A couple of things. I'm saying that the Democratic progressive base will not get behind this guy, not the Democratic party. You won't find any progressive commentators that are excited about him. They see him for what he is, a media attention seeking whore. Predictit only has him listed at 35% to actually run. The anecdote to Trump will be someone that actually has clear policies and sell it with a clear message, not a blow in lawyer like Avenatti who is making up his beliefs on the fly. Voters just aren't going go buy it.
 
Last edited:
Drone said:
The Sanders bandwagon whipped-up at their last election strikes me as similar to that of the Corbyn bandwagon whipped-up at ours: youngsters somewhat smitten by the (now) unusual sight of two ageing and greying leftists with a long history of activism taking on 'the establishment'

If both had donned berets we might now have President Sanders and Prime Minister Corbyn...possibly :)

My view is that their novelty will have worn off by the next elections and capricious, naiive youth will look elsewhere; where I've no idea

Sanders will be nearly 80 in 2020 won't he?
Click to expand...

The 'youngsters' aren't the only ones voting Jeremy Corbyn as I'm sure you know. If you've been hit by the bedroom tax, if you work in a public service that has been cut to the bone, or maybe if just your happy to see an old school Labour politician running the party, (and I think many fall in to this later category), then it's not hard to say you'll vote for him. I kind of just wish he'd been running the party all along myself...maybe we wouldnt have gone into Iraq, maybe there'd have been no PFI of hospitals, etc.
 
Last edited:
Marble said:
The 'youngsters' aren't the only ones voting Jeremy Corbyn as I'm sure you know. If you've been hit by the bedroom tax, if you work in a public service that has been cut to the bone, or maybe if just your happy to see an old school Labour politician running the party, (and I think many fall in to this later category), then it's not hard to say you'll vote for him. I kind of just wish he'd been running the party all along myself...maybe we wouldnt have gone into Iraq, maybe there'd have been no PFI of hospitals, etc.
Click to expand...

Maybe there would have been 40 years of Conservative rule.
 
How much of the credit is Avenatti going to get for the Cohen revelations? I don't think Trump is in deep trouble yet but he needs to play smart from here. I was watching back documentaries about Nixon and its mad to think he'd have got away with it had he not been so paranoid and have people flip on him.
 
Last edited:
Avenatti certainly gets a lot of credit in a lot of areas, but there are others involved too, not least of whom is the person who retains him, without her instruction to represent he'd be a spectator. There is also the journalist who first exposed the existence of Essential Consultants too, and whoever it was who seemed to have leaked Avenatti information about how Cohen was selling access to the President through Essential Consultants despite not having registered as a lobbyist

I think it's worth remembering just who Michael Cohen is/ was at the start of 2018 though. Let's not forget that this was Trump's self-described Rottweiler. In certain New York circles Michael Cohen was a feared man following in the footsteps of Trump's previous personal attorneys, notably Roy Cohn and Jay Goldberg. Cohen had built a reputation for intimidation and bullying and some one who you didn't mess with. When the Stormy Daniels story first broke and she breached her DNA on sixty minutes, Cohen confidently predicted he was looking forward to taking a long holiday, a cruise I think he said, paid for with the $20m he was going to get from her after he bankrupted her in court.

By contrast, Avenatti was quick to identify Cohen as the weak link in the Trump house of cards and attacked. Cohen he deduced had graduated near the bottom of his class from America's poorest law school. He didn't appear to have a client book, and so far as Avenatti could establish, hadn't successfully taken a case to trial in his life. His MO seemed to be sending out cease and desist notices and generally threatening Trump's creditors with legal action if they should ever try and get paid for the money he owed them

Cohen continued to profess loyalty to Trump throughout, memorably saying that he'd "take a bullet for Mr Trump" which sparked Avenatti to quip that he "won't take a water balloon". Throughout all this most commentators were saying that the Trump/ Cohen bond was inseparable, it was Avenatti alone at the outset, who predicted that Cohen would be indicted and that Cohen would flip on Trump, and that Trump was particularly stupid for failing to realise the jeopardy he was exposing himself to

I said remember who Michael Cohen was at the start of 2018, because by the end of it he's going to be in prison having pleaded guilty so far to charges that are likely to land him 3-5 years. He will be getting his holiday after all and as yet there's nothing in the charging document to say he's a co-operating witness either (despite this nonsense that Trump was spouting today). There is of course good reason for the FBI not to do a deal with him over the charges he's admitted to. The simple fact is they have the evidence. They don't need to enter a deal with him. It's an open and shut case. Cohen knows that. He hasn't got a leg to stand on.

Returning to Avenatti's political positioning though, this Cohen/ Trump/ Stormy story is potentially going to run (don't rule out the other case of Broidy/ Bechard/ Davidson that Peter Stris is representing surfacing either). What this means for Avenatti is that he's going to be seen as someone landing punches on Trump throughout 2019. The other aspiring Democrat candidates won't. They don't have his opportunity. This is a platform unique to him. The most Kamala Harris can done is smile in a studio and explain why she's against regulating any IT giant that donates to her campaign. For that matter, all of the aspiring Democrat candidates are in the same boat and all will be reduced to clamouring to offer comment, but none will be seen as doing anything. Avenatti will begin to emerge as a doer, and they will be seen as talkers
 
Last edited:
Alan Wieselberg (Trump's CFO) and David Pecker been granted immunity from prosecution now by NYSD

It's not clear to me if this is confined to the Cohen charges, or whether it's running deeper? Immunity isn't given out lightly. The FBI expect to get a return on their investment. These things normally take months to negotiate, but the bits and pieces are beginning to fall off

For what it's worth, I've long suspected that Cohen (despite what Avenatti says) doesn't actually know as much about the real deep secrets of the Trump Organisation as people assume. Cohen was a limited Attorney and 'fixer'. He might know about some of Trump's questionable morality, and might have embarrassing stuff to offer up, but I doubt he was on inside of the serious business stuff. Weiselberg by contrast knows how the Trump Organisation is financed
 
In theory, this should make things easier for lower budget candidates from outside of the party inner sanctum. It's the establishment candidates who'll be losing their grip a little bit. They're supposed to be doing away with caucuses too and moving onto primaries, again this will help smaller campaigns who don't have the organisational infrastructure to get surrogates out to lobby for them in a caucus

The big one Avenatti will come with Bernie and Elizabeth Warren, if both decline to run, (and ideally endorse him given that he's nearer to their platform than the other Dems) then he has a shot at it in a crowded field, as he should have a base in the early voting states. John Delany, (Maryland congressman) is already complaining that Avenatti eclipsed him at the Iowa wing ding.

I think the other shrewdie could be Mikki Haley at 80/1. If the Trump Presidency implodes (and its possible) then there won't be many Republicans who'll escape the fall out unscathed. She might be one of the more likely given her ability to keep stepping over the bodies as they pile up around him
 
Hills 80 into 33 now

Admittedly it probbaly only takes £25 to move a price in what is likely to be a low liquidity and very immature market at this stage. Just announcing a run is normally enough to see a candidate installed at 50/1 regardless of who they are
 
Warbler said:
Hills 80 into 33 now

Admittedly it probbaly only takes £25 to move a price in what is likely to be a low liquidity and very immature market at this stage. Just announcing a run is normally enough to see a candidate installed at 50/1 regardless of who they are
Click to expand...

He is still massively irrelevant for my money. I'd lay 100s all day long. What does interest me is Beto O'Rourke being only 35% to beat Cruz in Texas. That is insanity. If he wins in November then I'm all in on him 2020.
 
Last edited:
Actually agree with Slim. Maybe the times they are a changin', again.
Avenatti can be a good speer point lobbing Molotov Cocktails at Trump, but can see no way he comes within a planet of the nomination.

Also like the Beto O'Rourke angle. I think his strategy of showing up in every county and talking issues and not backing down from his progressive beliefs is the right one. People are tired of hearing about Trump everybody pretty much has made up their mind about him.

Maybe too soon for him this time around but Texas will eventually go Democrat.
 
Texas has three very large cities and doesn't quite have the religious influences that some of the others do along the Gulf State, nor the number of backward rural areas

The demographic shift from California is one thing, the growth of an IT sector is another (although probably a product of the former) and of course its becoming more and more influenced by Hispanics/ Latinos (like Arizona). Traditionally they've proven reluctant to register but a whole load of them did in 2016 (many missing the deadline for the general election). They'll show up for the first time in 2018

O'Rourke needs to beat Cruz though. If he does, his star rises exponentially and he probably becomes the front runner. If he doesn't, then he's a gallant loser, but still remains a 'representative'. When was the last time any Presidential candidate used the House as a launchpad to win the Presidency? Has it ever been done even? It's hard enough doing it from the Senate. Only Kennedy and Obama have succeeded since the war, and you probably need to be young, charismatic and able to capture the zeitgeist to do so (O'Rourke is)

I think Cruz could be in trouble certainly. He hasn't necessarily alienated his base, but he's suffered erosion on them. The 'red hats' still think he's lyin' Ted who told the convention to vote with their conscience. His business backers have always been sceptical of him too for his repeated willingness to shut down congress.

The key is going to be voter enthusiasm, and unusually polling is showing that Democrats are more motivated to turn out in the mid-terms. I seem to think I read the other day that Raphael Cruz was calling for polling stations to be closed down to prevent turnout on his radio show (they're nervous). If it didn't mean risking the loss of the Senate, I half expect Trump wouldn't mind Cruz out the way. Certainly if Scott beats Nelson in Florida I suspect that's a trade that Trump would take

I'm not sure that the Republican losing the Senate necessarily does the damage to Trump that everyone thinks it will do though? With the loss of both houses, he's the only thing standing between the GOP and a meltdown. As the sole beacon they have left it might even cement his position within the GOP. The next two years are then bound to be embroiled with hearings and testimony and the American public will tire of it. A Democrat congress could end up getting the blame in 2020. It's not as if mid term waves haven't happened before and the incumbent President still won two years later

I'm fairly certain the Democrats aren't electing a elder statesman though. I sense the mood at the moment is to pass the torch. That rules out Biden, (despite what polls say at the moment) Warren, probably Bernie (who's an 'independent anyway) and anyone too closely linked to Schumer/ Pelosi. I'm not totally convinced that their primary voters are going to risk putting up a female candidate for Trump run over either (certainly Gillibrand). I can accept that Harris has a nicer air about her, but I think she's vulnerable on substance. What has she ever achieved? (not what jobs she has held) that's a different answer.
 
Last edited:
SlimChance said:
Is this to do with people from California moving there?
Click to expand...

Family in Texas were telling me in the summer, that countless thousands are migrating from California every year; principally due to the vast difference in property prices.

The story was backed-up by the brother-in-law who lives in LA, who confirmed Texas as the target destination for the 25-35 demographic. They cart their expertise (and their politics) in energy and IT (as Warbler pointed out) into a state where they can not only get a foot on the property-ladder, they can afford 3-4 bedroom pool-houses, for what they’d be paying in rent for a 1-bed apartment in LA, San Diego and San Francisco.

My cousin reckons there’s a very good chance Texas turns Blue in the near fiture.
 
The latest Emerson poll has Cruz leading by 1pt

It's getting interesting

Trump is going to Texas soon to stage one of his Nuremburg type rallies. Avenatti (of all people) is going at the same time to run one alongside Trump's

It's not clear to me how this plays out

Beto O'Rourke has run a campaign aside of Trump and focused on Texan issues. I'm not sure he benefits from joining Avenatti's "Don't Mess With America" event (I understand don't mess with Texas was an anti-litter slogan from the 1970's incidentally and not the spirit of the Alamo as it seems to have become today)

At one level Texan Democrats seem to be energised by the fact that they've got someone taking the fight right back to Trump and giving it out. At another level they're nervous that the Avenatti event could over shadow O'Rourke, could energise Republicans, and could backfire if it fails to get the crowd

Can O'Rourke risk identifying with Avenatti? Does he benefit from using Avenatti as attack dog without exposing himself to any associations if it blows up. Might Avenatti cost O'Rourke votes doing this? If Avenatti pulls it off though and helps push O'Rourke over the line, what then?

It's an intriguing sub-plot

I'm honestly not sure how I'd advise Beto O'Rourke on this one. It's not clear whether Avenatti has offered him a platform, or whether one has been requested. It's not clear if the O'Rourke campaign has co-ordinated this with #theresistance (I hate that stupid hashtag)
 
So who is the member of the Resistance working against Trump from within the White House?

This is one helluva pantomime he's putting on

All roads lead to John Kelly I reckon
 
Warbler said:
The latest Emerson poll has Cruz leading by 1pt

It's getting interesting

Trump is going to Texas soon to stage one of his Nuremburg type rallies. Avenatti (of all people) is going at the same time to run one alongside Trump's

It's not clear to me how this plays out

Beto O'Rourke has run a campaign aside of Trump and focused on Texan issues. I'm not sure he benefits from joining Avenatti's "Don't Mess With America" event (I understand don't mess with Texas was an anti-litter slogan from the 1970's incidentally and not the spirit of the Alamo as it seems to have become today)

At one level Texan Democrats seem to be energised by the fact that they've got someone taking the fight right back to Trump and giving it out. At another level they're nervous that the Avenatti event could over shadow O'Rourke, could energise Republicans, and could backfire if it fails to get the crowd

Can O'Rourke risk identifying with Avenatti? Does he benefit from using Avenatti as attack dog without exposing himself to any associations if it blows up. Might Avenatti cost O'Rourke votes doing this? If Avenatti pulls it off though and helps push O'Rourke over the line, what then?

It's an intriguing sub-plot

I'm honestly not sure how I'd advise Beto O'Rourke on this one. It's not clear whether Avenatti has offered him a platform, or whether one has been requested. It's not clear if the O'Rourke campaign has co-ordinated this with #theresistance (I hate that stupid hashtag)
Click to expand...

O'Rourke would do well to stay 100 miles away from him.
 
Warbler said:
So who is the member of the Resistance working against Trump from within the White House?

This is one helluva pantomime he's putting on

All roads lead to John Kelly I reckon
Click to expand...

Why does it have to be someone so high up? It's obviously someone betting Trump's presidency will implode and giving themselves an out to appear virtuousness when it's over.
 
Last edited:
I don't think the NYT would have given anonymity to some middle ranking, back-room policy wonk. There's been plenty of them leaking.

When the essay clearly says that the cabinet have been having discussions about invoking the 25th amendment it has to be someone who is privy to that level of discussion, and it even goes onto explain the reasons why they've decided not to invoke it (the real reason is fear incidentally)

I'm persuaded by the idea that it's someone who either expects to leave shortly, or intends leaving on their own fruition. I'm equally persuaded that its someone who had a chord struck by the out pouring of sentiment about John McCain as the NYT have said that they'd only been negotiating the terms of anonymity for a couple of days. The time line sits on top of the McCain funeral. It points to a military man, and McCain isn't the sort of person that conservatives typically invoke as a political force (the man who thought Sarah Palin was a good idea!). Conservatives invoke John McCain for more nebulous reasons of service and duty, rather than as a great political thinker (which he wasn't). It all points to a military man to me, and John Kelly
 
Back
Top