Remember John Edwards?

[struth]

You keep forgetting that I dont see it as a campaign expense

You and the Deep State are really reaching with that

Don’t worry the FEC didn’t either

 

[sealybobo]

Why not?

They have given biden plenty of campsign assistance during the months leading up to november

Dems have nothing to lose

Bill Maher was explaining what a pussy Merrick Garland is. He should have charged Trump a year ago so all 4 cases happened before the election. What a pussy.

 

[Mac-7]

At least the Deep State is consistent.

They prosecuted Edwards because they felt it was legally a campaign expense.

The claims of political prosecution and two systems of justice is therefore phony.

The two cases are very different

Edwards accepted campsign donstions thst he used to pay off his mistress

Trump used his own money

 

[sealybobo]

I notice they always put glasses on these bimbos when they appear to testify, I guess, to make them look smart:

View attachment 943415

View attachment 943418

View attachment 943419

If you don't want Trump's jizz in your eye, wear glasses.

 

[Marener]

The two cases are very different

Edwards accepted campsign donstions thst he used to pay off his mistress

Trump used his own money

But I thought you said paying women off wasn’t a campaign expense so Edwards therefore wasn’t using campaign donations.

Seeks like youre the one with double standards here.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Cohen did. Trump paid him back.

All of it done off the books for the campaigns, when it was legally required to be done as a campaign expenditure.

At least that’s the allegation.

So, Trump made a campaign expenditure for himself.

 

[sealybobo]

The two cases are very different

Edwards accepted campsign donstions thst he used to pay off his mistress

Trump used his own money

Trump's team, like Edwards, has said the payment to Daniels was to spare his family embarrassment rather than influence the election.

Wait! So he did fuck her?

A politician paying hush money during a campaign to keep an alleged affair out of the headlines — there is, undeniably, a striking similarity between the cases of one Donald J. Trump, former president, and John Edwards, a disgraced senator, with both accused not just of cheating but of skirting laws to cover it up.

The legal cases against both, however, are quite different.

For one, Trump has not been charged with violating federal campaign finance laws. Edwards was.

Trump has denied the affair and any knowledge of the payments to Daniels, pleading not guilty to the charges he falsified business records.

In other words, federal prosecutors demonstrated that it is indeed possible to put someone behind bars for a hush payment to an alleged mistress — which is itself legal — by arguing that it broke campaign finance laws, coming as it did during a heated election. They were helped, to be sure, by the fact that Cohen pleaded guilty, eliminating the need for a trial; the Edwards prosecution failed, by contrast, because it went before jurors — and because key witnesses, namely the donors who provided the cash for Edwards' mistress, were unable to appear and be questioned at trial

When Cohen was indicted, prosecutors noted that he did not act alone, stating that he had made the payment to Daniels to "influence the 2016 election," and that he did so after having "coordinated with one or more members of the [Trump] campaign."

When he indicted the former president, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Brag did not do so on charges of violating federal law — he, of course, cannot do that. Instead, he accused Trump of falsifying business records to hide the fact he was paying back Cohen for that payment to a porn star. That is a more straightforward case, in some respects: the prosecutor alleges that the payments to Cohen were marked as being for a retainer that federal prosecutors have already demonstrated did not exist.

Bragg does not need to prove that Trump broke federal campaign finance laws; he needs to prove that he falsified business records, which is a crime no matter the reason.

 

[sealybobo]

So, Trump made a campaign expenditure for himself.

If only Michael Cohen didn't already get caught, spend time in prison and now is testifying against Trump. That's where your case falls apart.

 

[Marener]

So, Trump made a campaign expenditure for himself

He can do that, but he needs to report it as such.

He didn’t. He created false records to hide it.

 

[Mac-7]

But I thought you said paying women off wasn’t a campaign expense so Edwards therefore wasn’t using campaign donations.

Seeks like youre the one with double standards here.

I said it was not a campaign expense for trump

Or if you prefer to call it that I disagree but even so it was trump’s own money

 

[Couchpotato]

Yea! He didn't break the law having sex with a porn star. He simply paid to have sex with a porn star. The act of paying isn't illegal. It's the sex.

Did Trump pay Daniels for the actual sex?

 

[Mac-7]

Trump's team, like Edwards, has said the payment to Daniels was to spare his family embarrassment rather than influence the election.

Wait! So he did fuck her?

A politician paying hush money during a campaign to keep an alleged affair out of the headlines — there is, undeniably, a striking similarity between the cases of one Donald J. Trump, former president, and John Edwards, a disgraced senator, with both accused not just of cheating but of skirting laws to cover it up.

The legal cases against both, however, are quite different.

For one, Trump has not been charged with violating federal campaign finance laws. Edwards was.

Trump has denied the affair and any knowledge of the payments to Daniels, pleading not guilty to the charges he falsified business records.

In other words, federal prosecutors demonstrated that it is indeed possible to put someone behind bars for a hush payment to an alleged mistress — which is itself legal — by arguing that it broke campaign finance laws, coming as it did during a heated election. They were helped, to be sure, by the fact that Cohen pleaded guilty, eliminating the need for a trial; the Edwards prosecution failed, by contrast, because it went before jurors — and because key witnesses, namely the donors who provided the cash for Edwards' mistress, were unable to appear and be questioned at trial

When Cohen was indicted, prosecutors noted that he did not act alone, stating that he had made the payment to Daniels to "influence the 2016 election," and that he did so after having "coordinated with one or more members of the [Trump] campaign."

When he indicted the former president, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Brag did not do so on charges of violating federal law — he, of course, cannot do that. Instead, he accused Trump of falsifying business records to hide the fact he was paying back Cohen for that payment to a porn star. That is a more straightforward case, in some respects: the prosecutor alleges that the payments to Cohen were marked as being for a retainer that federal prosecutors have already demonstrated did not exist.

Bragg does not need to prove that Trump broke federal campaign finance laws; he needs to prove that he falsified business records, which is a crime no matter the reason.

If it makes you happy I suspect that trump did have sex with Daniels

 

[Marener]

I said it was not a campaign expense for trump

Or if you prefer to call it that I disagree but even so it was trump’s own money

But for some reason you think it was a campaign expense for Edwards.

THAT’S THE DOUBLE STANDARD.

 

[JoeB131]

She wrote about it in her diary, even said she would wait till late to take a shower. Hoping her dad wouldn't come in. Even Hunter calls him pedo joe. Oh, you're good with a witness against Trump being a convicted purgerer, so spare me your concern.

That diary is a fake. It was not in the purported document that they two crooks tried to sell to veritas.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

He can do that, but he needs to report it as such.

He didn’t. He created false records to hide it.

He hid a contribution to himself? That sounds serious.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If only Michael Cohen didn't already get caught, spend time in prison and now is testifying against Trump. That's where your case falls apart.

Cohen was caught making a contribution to Trump? Wow!
That sounds much more serious than all his tax fraud charges.

 

[jknowgood]

That diary is a fake. It was not in the purported document that they two crooks tried to sell to veritas.

No it's real, if it wasn't the people wouldn't of went to jail.

 

[Marener]

He hid a contribution to himself? That sounds serious.

He hid the payment from the public. These expenditure reports are publicly available.

 

[JoeB131]

No it's real, if it wasn't the people wouldn't of went to jail.
View attachment 943440

Nope, that's fake. Putting a picture of a young Biden next to it doesn't make it less fake.

 

[Couchpotato]

But I thought you said paying women off wasn’t a campaign expense so Edwards therefore wasn’t using campaign donations.

Seeks like youre the one with double standards here.

Paying off your mistress isn't a campaign expense which is why it's illegal to use campaign funds to do it. Which is what Edwards did and Trump didnt do.

Make sense now?