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

[Saint Guinefort]

Irrelevant. He committed a crime to hide another crime; sexual assault of Paula Flowers. By committing perjury, he was attempting to both hide his infidelity from his wife and, more importantly, hiding a pattern of sexual predation.

Oh I agree Clinton was guilty as sin and was appropriately impeached. I am just fascinated at how Trump's crimes are getting a pass when they are very similar: hiding sexual misbehavior.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Oh I agree Clinton was guilty as sin and was appropriately impeached. I am just fascinated at how Trump's crimes are getting a pass when they are very similar: hiding sexual misbehavior.

Like Clinton, Trump was attempting to hide his sexual infidelity, but also like Clinton, Trump committed a crime in doing it.

Since Watergate, Americans have been taught the lesson that cover-ups are often worse than the initial crime. It appears the rich, powerful and arrogant think the lesson doesn't apply to them.

 

[QP!]

I still see this as the equivalent of
charging a guy who bombed school busses
for throwing a gum wrapper on the sidewalk.

These types of charges (false filings) are amongst the most common and numerous by State Prosecutors. They call them bread and butter cases.

Imagine the absurdity of sending Cohen to jail for acting 'on behalf of Trump', while saying the charge is not serious enough to send Trump to jail for. That is like saying 'why send Gotti to jail for taxes when he also committed murders'.

What we do not want is a standard where we say 'you get off any lesser charges as long as you do increasingly worse things', when those worse things can be much harder to prosecute.

Nope, charge this. Get a guilty verdict and allow Felon Trump to face the more serious charges after, one by one and if he beats them, he is still Felon Trump for the rest of his life.

 

[QP!]

"I think Bragg is out of time. The statute of limitations is about two years on this offense. That has already run," Turley explained. "You can extend it to five years if you connect it as a felony to another crime. Even at five years, I'm not sure the time has not run out. So there's going to be some very intense challenges here.”
Professor Turley


Trump NY prosecutor is 'outside of his lane': Jonathan Turley

Fox News
https://www.foxnews.com › media › ny-prosecutor-outsi...
6 days ago — "One would say Bragg is outside of his lane, but in this case, he's on a completely different highway," Turley said on "Fox & Friends Weekend," ...



Trump, Trump, Trump!

Nope.

State rights... State rights... State rights... remember that?

States get wide latitude, even by this Supreme Court, to govern within their borders, and if a State wants to wave or create an exception to the Statute of Limitations during a pandemic as many cases simply cannot be heard, that is their right. Also while a State does not have to follow the DOJ rule on not prosecuting a President while he is in office, as forcing a President to be in court while he runs the country is a danger to citizens, most States would not bring a case for the same reason until he was out of office. It would be perceived as an unfair burden on the POTUS to have to deal with otherwise relatively small charges while running the country.

 

[QP!]

you seem to have no clue what you are talking about.......only an idiot would think he is talking about reimbursing costs to Stormy.......granted I don't operate on the scale that Cohen and Trump work on but when I handle an eviction for a client, I bill them for my fees and my costs, which include the filing fee of the court and the fee of the sheriff who serves the summons and complaint on the tenant. That does not mean I am paying the tenant for THEIR costs.......I am billing the client for costs I have advanced on their behalf.......the money given to Stormy was not HER costs......the money given to Stormy was TRUMP's costs......

finish it. Finish that last sentence as you are so close to a break thru showing you have a modicum of understanding this.


...the money given to Stormy was Trump's cost ...HE MUST BOOK AS HIS OWN CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION TO HIS CAMPAIGN OR HE IS BREAKING CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAW!

Trump made no such filing and is trying to say all the money given to Cohen was 'legal costs' and that he did not even know Cohen was giving it to Stormy. that he had not authorized any settlement and did not know about it. He is arguing Cohen went rogue because, you know, Cohen just really wanted to give Stormy $130k from his own money for no reason, even Trump did not want him to.

The issue Trump has is the Cohen audio recording, the various documents, and Pecker from the National Enquirer will all seem set to confirm Trump new and was directing it all. So the types of lies that serve Trump in Politics will again fail in the courts.


And lol at you outing yourself a slum lord lawyer. So fitting. Bottom of the barrel and bottom of the intelligence list. You basically are a filing clerk submitting paperwork and getting orders all day and no intellectual thought beyond that is needed. I have known numerous legal clerks who are far smarter in law and valued and make multiples more money than slum lord lawyers. FLOL.

 

[QP!]

If a expense would have been paid even if the candidate was not running the expense is NOT considered a campaign expense by the FEC. Trump would have paid the NDA with Daniels regardless of the election to prevent Melania and his family from finding out. Trump also did not want the public embarrassment and damage to the Trump Brand. So the payment wasn't a FEC violation. You are just desperate.

FALSE.

Empty Fox talking point eaten up by the gullible.


If an expense has duel purpose, which it certainly can, and if Trump argues the only reason he decided to pay on the eve of his election run was to protect Milenia when he was not looking to pay in all the years prior, he will have to convince a jury it was not ALSO to protect him in the election.

if the jury finds it is reasonable to think he might have wanted to protect Milenia but he ALSO wanted to protected his campaign. then he would be guilty of Campaign Finance violations.

so that comes down to what discussions and notes do they have on that? Do you think Trump was telling Michael Pecker (National Enquirer) that he was so concerned about his deep love for wife Melania, FLOL, or do you think he was saying this would be a disaster for his campaign? Any betting man knows which Trump cares about and which he does not.

...Trump may face an uphill struggle with those arguments, given the fact that having “mixed motives” to protect himself personally and to protect his campaign could leave him liable, and the timing of the payments suggests there was an urgency to pay the money before the end of the 2016 campaign.


cite

 

[Uncensored2008]

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.

Yeah, we know.

It's a political witch hunt. It's what the Nazi democrats do to disenfranchise voters and corrupt elections.

 

[QP!]

You miss my point: I think Clinton should have been prosecuted the full extent of the law for lying. But remember WHY he lied...it was because he wanted to hide a blowjob.

I also expect Trump to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

I make no distinction based on party. That's for the Trump supporters who gave him an addition $1.5million after he announced he was going to be arrested.

And the idea for the Perjury Trap was credited to Brett Kavanaugh who was #2 on Ken Starrs team.

Ken Starrs team had spent 4+ years trying to get the Clintons on anything and drew a nothing burger. A witch hunt that found no witches. But they got wind of the Monica Lewinsky affair, which should have meant nothing to them as it is not against the law, but Kavanaugh put out the idea that 'everyone lies about affairs by default' and as such we can then get him for perjury. They set the perjury trp.

So you see the pattern. The Republicans for decades have been chasing the Dems with witch hunts and finding nothing and crying about perjury traps while they are the ones setting them.

 

[QP!]

Yeah, we know.

It's a political witch hunt. It's what the Nazi democrats do to disenfranchise voters and corrupt elections.

...

Hmmm, which side is often searching for crimes they cannot find....

And which side is often charging crimes that they find and get convictions for...

And that Trump list of Indictments and Convicted has grown quite a bit since then.

And we can add the Durham Investigation (4year plus and still going) as yet another Trump witch hunt going no where.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Hmmm, which side is often searching for crimes they cannot find....

And which side is often charging crimes that they find and get convictions for...

And that Trump list of Indictments and Convicted has grown quite a bit since then.

And we can add the Durham Investigation (4year plus and still going) as yet another Trump witch hunt going no where.

We are fully aware that the democrat party is not subject to the laws imposed on others.

 

[QP!]

.....

Here is a real lawyer, not a slum lawyer paper pusher, saying how Trump is 100% guilty if he used Cohen as a proxy for the payment to Stormy and did not book it properly.

And note this real lawyer is Trump's current defense lawyer on this case.

Herp derp, herp derp.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Agreed that both are reprehensible. That was my whole point.

As far as Clinton being open to "blackmail" for doing the deed in the Oval with an intern, well I suspect he was already liable to blackmail from any number of other women.

the issue isn't what either Clinton or Trump did......the issue is what the demmycrats are DOING......

 

[Saint Guinefort]

the issue isn't what either Clinton or Trump did......the issue is what the demmycrats are DOING......

And the fact that the Right is offended by it when they did the same thing to Clinton.

It's a matter of hypocrisy.

I'm A-OK with Billy Clinton being nailed for lying under oath. But by the same token I'm also A-OK with Trump being nailed for trying to hush up a sex worker while campaigning for office.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

Here is a real lawyer, not a slum lawyer paper pusher, saying how Trump is 100% guilty if he used Cohen as a proxy for the payment to Stormy and did not book it properly.

And note this real lawyer is Trump's current defense lawyer on this case.

Herp derp, herp derp.

no one is denying that Cohen pled guilty as part of a plea deal to get reduced jail time for his tax fraud case.....we're just pointing out Trump didn't violate any laws.....

 

[Saint Guinefort]

no one is denying that Cohen pled guilty as part of a plea deal to get reduced jail time for his tax fraud case.....we're just pointing out Trump didn't violate any laws.....

It is such a shame that Trump surrounds himself with so many people who commit crimes. I guess it's because he's such a good person that the evil people flock to him.

 

[PostmodernProphet]

And the fact that the Right is offended by it when they did the same thing to Clinton.

It's a matter of hypocrisy.

I'm A-OK with Billy Clinton being nailed for lying under oath. But by the same token I'm also A-OK with Trump being nailed for trying to hush up a sex worker while campaigning for office.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

I have no problem with Trump being treated the same as Clinton......when Hilliary was caught reporting campaign research as legal fees the FEC fined her $8000......so, are we good?......

 

[PostmodernProphet]

It is such a shame that Trump surrounds himself with so many people who commit crimes. I guess it's because he's such a good person that the evil people flock to him.

Clinton and Biden have had that problem as well, haven't they.....

 

[Saint Guinefort]

I have no problem with Trump being treated the same as Clinton......when Hilliary was caught reporting campaign research as legal fees the FEC fined her $8000......so, are we good?......

I don't recall those charges. Sorry.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I have no problem with Trump being treated the same as Clinton......when Hilliary was caught reporting campaign research as legal fees the FEC fined her $8000......so, are we good?......

^^^
Satan's minions believe "Two wrongs make a right".

Hillary is out of politics for good. Toss out Trump and I think most Lefties will agree that you're both good. LOL

 

[PostmodernProphet]

No doubt, but I support the Constitution. In this case, both the 9th and 10th Amendments. Do you?

excellent.....I applaud your decision to condemn the Demmycrat Party for everything they have done the past six years......