situation or is rudy wrong and it could matter? no, it s not a whatever kind of situation. yes, that s not a technical legal term that i m familiar with. whatever funds. there are a number of questions that are raised here the first, of course, this has been covered whether there is a campaign finance violation and what matter itses is that the paymen made by cohen not necessarily that it was reimbursed by the president from his personal funds. that itself the first issue on the campaign finance front. the other issue is given what s been revealed in this avenotti executive summary, assuming it s accurate. there are a number of questions of terms where payments, for example, from vekselberg as we go mentioned ultimately ended up and who was the ultimate beneficiary of those payments and there are questions, of course, regarding lobbying and whether appropriate registrations were made by cohen. let me ask you that given your expertise, how does that
work? how would investigators go about finding where this money went? well, in the avenotti executive summary, we have links between first republic bank. the avenotti bank. we know that for example there was a standards chartered bank involved at some point with overseas entities, there is a bank in california i believe. it s citibank or city national bank. and so there is already aparentsly a money trail and a bank-to-bank trail and financial transactions, whether it be a wire, ach payment or some other electronic payment, there is a record of those through the banks. those can readily be obtained by prosecutors, including if there is a shell company involved, such as essential consultants or some other entity. where there is a shell company, maybe a difficulty in locating the ultimate beneficial owner, for example, especially if its
this symbrolio, it means the footsteps are getting louder the collars are getting more on this play. speaking of breaking news, i will cut in. i have more. i want to thank you, brian weiss for joining us. i want to bring mia wiley back in. i was just handed the first most detailed response of michael cohen and his legal team here to all these allegations from mr. avenotti. i want to tell you what we have. we have been promising we would by the as we got it. the first full response. number one, avenotti has published numerous statements from mr. cohen, errors that they ve misidentified at least one wire transfer to a different michael cohen, a canadian citizen. it says, number two, in this, mia, i m curious, your view is significant. brands few response from cohen s lawyers, it says while much of this report is inaccurate, they allege, mr. avenotti has
the russians have it. as president he hads a a candidate it seems to flow into each other in a classic economic modem. your thoughts. and julia s point about this being very surprising the fact that this revelation came from stormy daniels attorney general it is shocking. there are two stories at play, stormy daniels attorney michael avenotti seems to be implying the payments from this oligarch were going to cohen in order to reimburse him to pay stormy daniels off before the election. in that way the russians were trying to make sure the stormy agreement would not come out before the election, therefore in keeping that quiet? to allow trump to win. it s a part of the whole pattern? possibly. that s what avenotti is asserting. there is another angle to this, which is that this was simply cash for access. vekselberg was doing business. a play of money $13 billion. he has a few bucks and change for the american president is
was this an effort by vekselberg who has interest in the occupation, clearly that didn t work. the sanctions now keep him off u.s. soil and the part away from mueller. people just joining us, we have a bombshell story from michael avenotti. he s got his story out tonight, apparently a solid one that russian oligarch, victor vekselberg watched by our government has been given a half a malto his fixer used to pay off stormy daniels. barbara, how would he get this information? it seems he may have gotten it from mule early. i don t know if he got it from mueller. second question as a prosecutor, why would he put it out? why would it be in avenotti s interest to throw this bombshell out now? how is guiliani, second question, go on television one more time? because there is a big question in the paper, wouldn t guiliani be shut up by trump?