We Finally Know the Case Against Trump, and It Is Strong

[Fort Fun Indiana]

When is the last time the Washington Post paid an FEC fine for influencing an election?

Who cares?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It's three that were listed in the Cohen indictment, not two, and I think they were listed as felonies because of the amount

Campaign finance violation
Title 52, United States Code, Section 30101

Causing an unlawful corporate campaign contribution
(Title 52, United States Code, Sections 30118(a) and
30109(d) (1) (A), and Title 18, United States Code, Section 2(b}

Excessive campaign contribution:
Title 52, United States Code, Sections 30116(a) (1) (A),
30116(a) (7), and 30109(d) (1) (A), and Title 18, United States
Code, Section 2(b)

Yes, however, he only pleaded guilty to two.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

For a business setting or an individual, hiding and NDA, is not illegal. However in an election campaign there are laws that can led to illegal action in the process of hiding it. For example:

• If a candidate pays hushmoney, it is considered an election contribution and a campaign expense. Both of which are required to be reported to the FEC. This becomes a public record so there is no veil of secrecy in regard to the payment or the NDA. This is what Trump hoped to avoid by using Cohen to cover it up.
• If an individual other than the candidate, pays hush money or any payment to further the election of the candidate, and the source of money is actually coming from the candidate, then that becomes and illegal election contribution and if it exceeded $2700, then it becomes a second violation. This was the two election violations that Cohen pleaded guilty. The purpose of this is clearly to conceal the hush money, NDA, and the actual source of the payment.

If you read the press release by the DOJ (The United States Attorney Office) which covers the charges Cohen plead guilty, you can see how convoluted the scheme was to hide the hush money payments and who funded it. I think Bragg is going to fill in the blanks of who woman 1, woman2, excutive1, chairmen1, editor1, Attorney1, Attorney2, ect. Then this document is going implicated Trump in the scheme that I believe will lead to a charge of conspiracy or if not a charge, then the underlying crime needed to make the falsification of business records a felony.

Michael Cohen Pleads Guilty In Manhattan Federal Court To Eight Counts, Including Criminal Tax Evasion And Campaign Finance Violations

www.justice.gov

If a candidate pays hushmoney, it is considered an election contribution and a campaign expense. Both of which are required to be reported to the FEC.

The Trump campaign didn't pay any hush money.
Trump can spend whatever he wants on whatever he wants, outside the campaign.
Hush money isn't a legitimate campaign expense.

If an individual other than the candidate, pays hush money...then that becomes and illegal election contribution.

Link?

This was the two election violations that Cohen pleaded guilty.

Yeah, that was cute. They could have had him plead guilty to other imaginary crimes too.

or any payment to further the election of the candidate,

The New York Times paid employees to write stories to further the election of Hillary.
Did they report those as campaign donations?

and the source of money is actually coming from the candidate, then that becomes and illegal election contribution and if it exceeded $2700, then it becomes a second violation.

Trump could spend as much of his own money on his campaign as he wants.
How is a Trump contribution over $2700 a violation, when he spent millions?

If Trump told Cohen to contribute to Biden's campaign and then repaid Cohen, that
would be a violation. Paying Cohen back for a "contribution" to himself......not so much.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Hiding $130k hush money from a campaign is. 'Election fraud'.

The campaign didn't pay any hush money.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If Trump told Cohen to contribute to Biden's campaign and then repaid Cohen, that
would be a violation. Paying Cohen back for a "contribution" to himself......not so much

And yet Trump managed to turn it into a felony anyway.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Campaign finance violation
Title 52, United States Code, Section 30101

Causing an unlawful corporate campaign contribution
(Title 52, United States Code, Sections 30118(a) and
30109(d) (1) (A), and Title 18, United States Code, Section 2(b}


Excessive campaign contribution:
Title 52, United States Code, Sections 30116(a) (1) (A),
30116(a) (7), and 30109(d) (1) (A), and Title 18, United States
Code, Section 2(b)

Causing an unlawful corporate campaign contribution

Cohen didn't make an unlawful contribution to the Trump campaign.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Who cares?

Everyone worried about payments to influence the election.

 

[OKTexas]

You have made a claim.
Can you back it up?

Congress owes taxpayers answers about its harassment ‘shush’ fund

It is wrong for politicians to silence their accusers with money from a secret fund of taxpayer dollars.

thehill.com

.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And yet Trump managed to turn it into a felony anyway.

Yeah, that's why the FEC went after him....oh, wait, it was that hack Bragg. LOL!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Everyone worried about payments to influence the election.

Doesn't look like it to me. It seems people are doing a decent job of ignoring your red herrings.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Yeah, that's why the FEC went after him....oh, wait, it was that hack Bragg. LOL!

Well Trump doesn't have bootlicker republicans shielding him in New York, like he did in the FEC. Oh wait, so you know nothing about that, either.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Doesn't look like it to me. It seems people are doing a decent job of ignoring your red herrings.

The New York Times doesn't influence elections?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The New York Times doesn't influence elections?

Who cares?

 

[Faun]

Being "owned" by someone who does not understand the law is not significant. You have been owned so many times on so many topics, you live in the bargain basement. STFU about conversations you are not involved in.

You say, but sadly, can't prove.

 

[Faun]

If it was a campaign contribution, why didn't the FEC rule that Trump violated the law?

Simple: He didn't! Neither did Cohen.

Two different people, two different circumstances.

Meanwhile, Cohen went to jail for, among other things, an illegal campaign contribution. This is immovable, historical fact. No matter how much you deny it, it's still fact. All that moves is your lucidity, which decreases.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Hiding $130k hush money from a campaign is. 'Election fraud'.

Why are you so wrong all the time?

 

[Faun]

Not the first time someone has plead guilty to a crime they didn't commit to make prosecutors happy and get a lesser sentence and won't be the last. A decent judge would have rejected that count.

You're confused. In the eyes of the law, it doesn't matter if he's truly guilty or not. The Justice Department determined he was guilty of making an illegal campaign contribution. The Justice Department charged him with the relevant charge. He pled guilty and assumed responsibility for that crime. He went to jail for that crime.

That crime occurred within the purview of the law. Trump can mount a defense based on the premise he was either not aware of that transaction; or that he was, but it wasn't for his campaign. If Bragg has any evidence beyond just Cohen's word that they planned that out together to shut her up because of the election, Trump is fucked. And not in a good way. Otherwise, prolly not.

 

[Faun]

Yeah, that's why the FEC went after him....oh, wait, it was that hack Bragg. LOL!

What difference does it make that the FEC didn't go after him?

 

[abu afak]

The New York Times doesn't influence elections?

Here AGAIN/Every time, ToddsterPoofette is a DISHONEST ONE-LINE HARASSMENT TROLL.
(oft 5 or so words with a question mark, as he can't be bothered - and no real knowledge- to Refute anything)
He has NO life and No reason for Posting except Baiting from his Wheelchair for some tiny detail.
`

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What difference does it make that the FEC didn't go after him?

I thought campaign finance violations were an FEC specialty?