Former FEC Chairman To Mark Levin: Stormy Daniels Money Cannot Be In Kind Campaign Contribution

Well finally, an admission that his plea deal is not a legal precedent that can be used against Trump. Just like a broken clock....

Precedent? WTF are you talking about?
Cohen is convicted, dope. Just as convicted as if there were a trial.
nope not the same thing. it's been explained to you in this thread and there is no need to repeat it. we know you're whining normally. need a tissue now?

Guilty is guilty, dope. Convicted is convicted.
again, I can say I am guilty of drinking water under oath, doesn't make it a crime. how many times is that now? you going for a record on stupid?

The federal statute he was charged with violating is quite real, dope.

Look up his plea and show us why the charge was not an actual statute.
it's not a crime though. your own statement says so. DOH! Freudian slip?
 
Precedent? WTF are you talking about?
Cohen is convicted, dope. Just as convicted as if there were a trial.
nope not the same thing. it's been explained to you in this thread and there is no need to repeat it. we know you're whining normally. need a tissue now?

Guilty is guilty, dope. Convicted is convicted.
again, I can say I am guilty of drinking water under oath, doesn't make it a crime. how many times is that now? you going for a record on stupid?

The federal statute he was charged with violating is quite real, dope.

Look up his plea and show us why the charge was not an actual statute.
it's not a crime though. your own statement says so. DOH! Freudian slip?

I made no such statement.
Post up the non-crime, liar.
 
nope not the same thing. it's been explained to you in this thread and there is no need to repeat it. we know you're whining normally. need a tissue now?

Guilty is guilty, dope. Convicted is convicted.
again, I can say I am guilty of drinking water under oath, doesn't make it a crime. how many times is that now? you going for a record on stupid?

The federal statute he was charged with violating is quite real, dope.

Look up his plea and show us why the charge was not an actual statute.
it's not a crime though. your own statement says so. DOH! Freudian slip?

I made no such statement.
Post up the non-crime, liar.
here:
"The federal statute he was charged with violating is quite real."

this isn't a crime. you should read up.
 
Guilty is guilty, dope. Convicted is convicted.
again, I can say I am guilty of drinking water under oath, doesn't make it a crime. how many times is that now? you going for a record on stupid?

The federal statute he was charged with violating is quite real, dope.

Look up his plea and show us why the charge was not an actual statute.
it's not a crime though. your own statement says so. DOH! Freudian slip?

I made no such statement.
Post up the non-crime, liar.
here:
"The federal statute he was charged with violating is quite real."

this isn't a crime. you should read up.

I knew you wouldn't post it, loser.
 
it isn't a crime, it's a violation. you should look up the difference. And trump did not violate it.


Trump didn't plead guilty to a crime, Cohen did.

Ya'll keep talking past each other or (purposely?) ignore the context of posts.


No - Trump didn't plead guilty to a crime.
Yes - Cohen pled guilty to a crime.
No - His guilty plea may not be "binding" or "admissible".
Yes - Affidavits or testimony (outside the plea) under oath by Cohen can be admitted in other courts.
Yes - Cohen could be called to testify or give sworn statements in other proceedings.
Yes - If Cohen pled guilty and then testifies in a different way he could be charged with perjury (either in the guilty plea or in the new testifmony).


.>>>>
 
it isn't a crime, it's a violation. you should look up the difference. And trump did not violate it.


Trump didn't plead guilty to a crime, Cohen did.

Ya'll keep talking past each other or (purposely?) ignore the context of posts.


No - Trump didn't plead guilty to a crime.
Yes - Cohen pled guilty to a crime.
No - His guilty plea may not be "binding" or "admissible".
Yes - Affidavits or testimony (outside the plea) under oath by Cohen can be admitted in other courts.
Yes - Cohen could be called to testify or give sworn statements in other proceedings.
Yes - If Cohen pled guilty and then testifies in a different way he could be charged with perjury (either in the guilty plea or in the new testifmony).


.>>>>
again, it isn't a crime. cohen plead guilty to something that isn't a crime. already explained in here. why not read the thread? educate off of it.
 
it isn't a crime, it's a violation. you should look up the difference. And trump did not violate it.


Trump didn't plead guilty to a crime, Cohen did.

Ya'll keep talking past each other or (purposely?) ignore the context of posts.


No - Trump didn't plead guilty to a crime.
Yes - Cohen pled guilty to a crime.
No - His guilty plea may not be "binding" or "admissible".
Yes - Affidavits or testimony (outside the plea) under oath by Cohen can be admitted in other courts.
Yes - Cohen could be called to testify or give sworn statements in other proceedings.
Yes - If Cohen pled guilty and then testifies in a different way he could be charged with perjury (either in the guilty plea or in the new testifmony).


.>>>>
Even worse... if Cohen changes his story about Trump directing him to silence those women should a case ever arise against trump, that could constitute a breach of his plea agreement and expose him to more jail time.
 
again, it isn't a crime. cohen plead guilty to something that isn't a crime. already explained in here. why not read the thread? educate off of it.


I have read the thread, followed it for quite awhile.

Yes Cohen committed a crime under 52 U.S.C. 30116 (various paragraphs) which under 52 U.S.C. 30109 is punishable by as shown below, things that aren't crimes don't carry felony convicts with up to 5 years in prison per count.

"(d)Penalties; defenses; mitigation of offenses
(1)
(A)Any person who knowingly and willfully commits a violation of any provision of this Act which involves the making, receiving, or reporting of any contribution, donation, or expenditure—
(i)
aggregating $25,000 or more during a calendar year shall be fined under title 18, or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, "


52 U.S. Code § 30109 - Enforcement


..>>>>
 
The snowflakes insist that paying Stormy to shut her pie hole is a campaign contribution. Here's the final word on the subject. Only sheer idiocy would cause anyone to continue claiming that the snowflake theory is valid.


Law Professor and former FEC chairman Bradley Smith spoke with conservative radio host Mark Levin on Tuesday. He laid out the reason why the payment made to porn star Stormy Daniels from President Trump’s private attorney Michael Cohen could not be an in-kind campaign contribution.

“Here’s the bottom line,” Smith told Levin. “The purpose of those laws is to prevent corruption and one way campaign contributions or in-kind campaign contributions are different than bribes is that you have to use them to get elected. You can’t use them to buy yourself grandfather clocks or fur coats or Rolex watches or something like that.”

He said, “And the FEC standard for that is you can’t use your campaign money for personal use. What they mean by that is you can’t use that for something you’d have to pay anyway that’s not directly for your campaign. The question is, ‘is this really a campaign obligation?’”

Professor Smith continued, “None of these expenditures helped Mr. Trump’s campaign. There’s all kinds of reasons why he may want to make these expenditures even if the allegations made by Stormy Daniels are untrue. Just for family harmony, commercial viability over the long term.”

He emphasized, “Historically, the FEC has said these things are not campaign contributions.”

Professor Smith added, “When the FEC wrote the regulation that says what constitutes campaign expenditures and what constitutes personal use, it rejected specifically the idea that a campaign expenditure was anything related to a campaign, and instead says it has to be something that exists only because of the campaign and solely for that reason.”
And?....
 
Former FEC Chairman To Mark Levin: Stormy Daniels Money Cannot Be In Kind Campaign Contribution


of course not - Trump paid her off to stop her from ruining the pancake supper at the Jaycee Hall.

:rolleyes:
 
it isn't a crime, it's a violation. you should look up the difference. And trump did not violate it.


Trump didn't plead guilty to a crime, Cohen did.

Ya'll keep talking past each other or (purposely?) ignore the context of posts.


No - Trump didn't plead guilty to a crime.
Yes - Cohen pled guilty to a crime.
No - His guilty plea may not be "binding" or "admissible".
Yes - Affidavits or testimony (outside the plea) under oath by Cohen can be admitted in other courts.
Yes - Cohen could be called to testify or give sworn statements in other proceedings.
Yes - If Cohen pled guilty and then testifies in a different way he could be charged with perjury (either in the guilty plea or in the new testifmony).


.>>>>
again, it isn't a crime. cohen plead guilty to something that isn't a crime. already explained in here. why not read the thread? educate off of it.
again, it isn't a crime. cohen plead guilty to something that isn't a crime.

Again, post up what Cohen plead guilty to and show us it isn't a crime, dope.
 
Don't you get it guys? Cohen did not plead guilty to a crime and is not going to jail. Sure, the court says he did and is, but what do they know?
 
Don't you get it guys? Cohen did not plead guilty to a crime and is not going to jail. Sure, the court says he did and is, but what do they know?
In typical douchebag fashion, your are trying to conflate the other crimes Cohen plead guilty to with the campaign finance charges. You only proved that you are a sleazy lying scumbag.
 
Guilty of what is the question. Sorry bubba name the crime

Look it up yourself, loser.
You're like a child covering their eyes because the house is on fire.
I don't have to look anything up. I know the answer because I actually listened to experts who know law tell me so. You listen to talk show hosts
Actually, we’re listening to the lawyer who pled guilty to committing that crime. He says it is a crime and he’s facing jail time over it. Why would anyone in their right mind take your word over his?? :dunno:
If Mueller only had those to charges against him, he wouldn't be going to prison.
Says you, but you’re a proven fucking moron. Want even more proof of that?

Mueller had nothing to do with this. Mueller teferred Cohen to the SDNY.

If you EVER say something even half way intelligent, it will only happen if you plagiarize a smart thought from someone else.
Only a congenital idiot would claim Mueller had nothing to do with this.
 
Your not sure what allocates means because you don’t know anything about this process.

It means he had to stand up in front of a judge and say he did acts which constitute the elements of a crime. He then had to plead guilty to that crime. The judge was very detailed in her questioning. And he was detailed in his answers.

Mueller didn’t tell him what to say, ijit, because when you allocate, there has to be independent documentary or other hard evidence to support what you say. For the specific purpose of no one pleading to a crime they didn’t commit.

You’re welcome.
something that isn't a crime isn't a crime. sorry but that is just a fact. And it was arranged in the way it was because he plead out. stupid ass. The judge read from a script.


And that's one reason why plea bargains are not case law.

No, dope. It's not case law because no case was made. The defendant plead guilty.


Well finally, an admission that his plea deal is not a legal precedent that can be used against Trump. Just like a broken clock....

Precedent? WTF are you talking about?
Cohen is convicted, dope. Just as convicted as if there were a trial.
Clueless aren’t they?
 
Look it up yourself, loser.
You're like a child covering their eyes because the house is on fire.
I don't have to look anything up. I know the answer because I actually listened to experts who know law tell me so. You listen to talk show hosts
Actually, we’re listening to the lawyer who pled guilty to committing that crime. He says it is a crime and he’s facing jail time over it. Why would anyone in their right mind take your word over his?? :dunno:
If Mueller only had those to charges against him, he wouldn't be going to prison.
Says you, but you’re a proven fucking moron. Want even more proof of that?

Mueller had nothing to do with this. Mueller teferred Cohen to the SDNY.

If you EVER say something even half way intelligent, it will only happen if you plagiarize a smart thought from someone else.
Only a congenital idiot would claim Mueller had nothing to do with this.
Only a fucking moron doesn’t know what the SDNY is.
 
Don't you get it guys? Cohen did not plead guilty to a crime and is not going to jail. Sure, the court says he did and is, but what do they know?
In typical douchebag fashion, your are trying to conflate the other crimes Cohen plead guilty to with the campaign finance charges. You only proved that you are a sleazy lying scumbag.
My, you certainly are an excitable little twat.

And you are wrong anyway. The campaign finance laws that Cohen broke at the direction of the president are both felonies.
 

Forum List

Back
Top