Trump-Stormy Daniels settlement at heart of potential NY DA indictment didn't violate

Are you deliberately misunderstanding what I said? Cohen created a fake consultancy firm and a new bank account to fudge the money issue. trump could have written a check without going through all this rigmarole. Cohen was a patsy until he finally wised up.
[FONT=&]
2016


Oct. 17
: Cohen files paperwork to incorporate a firm known as Essential Consultants LLC in Delaware.[/FONT]

[FONT=&]Oct. 25: No deal with Daniels has been finalized, and Davidson tells Cohen, Howard and Pecker that his client is close to reaching an agreement with another outlet to tell her story. Cohen agrees to finalize the deal. [/FONT]
[FONT=&]Oct. 26: Cohen opens a bank account for Essential Consultants and transfers $131,000 he obtained by taking out a home equity line of credit into the new account. [/FONT]
[FONT=&]Oct. 27: Cohen wires $130,000 to Davidson, Daniels' attorney.

[/FONT]
2017

[FONT=&]January: Cohen seeks reimbursement from the Trump Organization for $180,035 — $130,000 for the payment to Daniels, plus a wiring fee and an extra $50,000. Trump Organization executives double the reimbursement to $360,000 and add another $60,000, for a total of $420,000 to be paid in monthly installments for 12 months.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Cohen sends invoices for $35,000 per month and receives $420,000 from the company over the course of the year.[/FONT]
[FONT=&]Jan. 20: Trump is sworn in as the 45th president of the United States.[/FONT]
Sooooo?
 
It looks like the defense “I did it for Melania” may not work, because Stormy was trying to get money from Trump earlier for her silence and he wouldn’t pay until it became an issue for the election.
Did Stormy ever talk earlier. She made it plain that she was going to talk and Trump finally believed her. He didn't want Melania or his other family members to find out. When something has duel purposes campaign and election it isn't a FEC violation. Remember John Edwards? NOT GUILTY.
 
What crime? It isn't illegal for a candidate to spend his own money how he pleases. So tell what law was broken. State the law.


Hans von Spakovsky Former member of the FEC

It was a campaign finance violation. I ran a campaign and the rules are clear. Trump paid them off for political purposes. Cohen got charged for it and got 3 years. When Cohen was on trial they referred to person one, because they were protecting a person in office. He no longer has that shield.
 
Trump-Stormy Daniels settlement at heart of potential NY DA indictment didn't violate campaign law: FEC expert

Prosecutors in the Manhattan district attorney's office won't have much of a legal leg to stand on if they indict former President Donald Trump on violating campaign finance law, according to a legal expert and former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC).

"If the state charges are based on a supposed violation of federal campaign finance law, then the Manhattan DA is way off base," Hans von SpakovskyManhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office will reportedly meet with law enforcement officials to discuss logistics for some time next week regarding a potential indictment, which stems from a years-long investigation into Trump's alleged hush money scandal involving porn star Stormy Daniels.

In the final weeks of the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump's then-lawyer Michael Cohen sent $130,000 to Daniels to prevent her from disclosing her alleged 2006 affair with Trump, who has denied the affair. Trump subsequently reimbursed Cohen.

It's been widely speculated that Trump could be charged with overseeing the false recording of the reimbursements in his company's internal records as "legal expenses."

Prosecutors are also expected to charge Trump with violating campaign finance laws by arranging the payments to buy Daniels' silence weeks before the 2016 election. However, experts have questioned the legal reasoning behind such a charge.

"A settlement payment of a nuisance claim is not a federal campaign expense," said von Spakovsky, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation. "The state DA has no authority to prosecute a federal campaign finance violation in any event."

Such cases, he argues, are within the province of the FEC, where he served as a commissioner, or the U.S. Justice Department, explaining that both agencies have known about the facts for years but have chosen not to prosecute Trump.

"So, the federal agencies with jurisdiction did not consider it a violation," said von Spakovsky, who's been following this case for years.

In 2018, von Spakovsky wrote that the payment to Daniels seemed to be a "nuisance settlement," which celebrities often make, especially when faced with the threat of a false or salacious claim.

"Critics of the president claim this not only was a campaign expense that should have been reported but a potentially illegal loan by Cohen. But the settlement was ultimately paid out of Trump's personal funds and had nothing to do with the campaign since their alleged one-night stand occurred 10 years before the campaign," wrote von Spakovsky. "No reasonable member of a jury would consider this to be a campaign-related expense that needed to be reported, or to which any other campaign finance rules in the Federal Election Campaign Act apply."....


"The alleged one-night stand between Daniels and Trump is far more of a stretch," wrote von Spakovsky. "Daniels had no connection to the presidential campaign of any kind and the encounter — if it occurred — didn't happen during the campaign itself. In any event, even if the Daniels payment were to be considered a campaign-related expense, unlike Edwards, the nominal $130,000 payment wasn't made by Trump campaign donors but by Trump's personal attorney (not the campaign's attorney) with whom he has a long-standing business relationship. . . . Even if one might be able to reasonably construe the payment to Daniels as somehow related to the presidential campaign, there still would be no violation since candidates are allowed to spend as much of their own money as they want on their own campaigns."


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tr...ictment-didnt-violate-campaign-law-fec-expert

================================


If this pending arrest is hinged around this hush money payment to Stormy Daniels the case is doomed to failure. A Presidential candidate can do what they want with their own money. This case will not see Trump behind bars or saddled with a felony conviction if it hinges on this payment.

I hate to say it, but this is an "argument from authority" fallacy.
 
He would have been a lot better off to just admit that he boinked her and "So what?" The MAGATs wouldn't have cared. Look at all of them just here who cheered him on. Trump's too used to dirty dealings to be that honest.

You'll never be as attractive as "Stormy Daniels".
 
Yeah, you keep believing that, that Melania didn’t know. :laugh:

I think Donald hit Hillary while Bill hit Melania.

donald-trump-hillary-clinton.jpg
 
Back
Top