Paying people off to avoid a scandal is perfectly legal

[bripat9643]

I just explained why he couldn't do that, but your skull is too thick for it to penetrate.

No, you claimed he could not do that, you did not explain why.

Why would anyone, especially most of all a trained lawyer, plead guilty to something that is not even a crime?

And how can it not be a crime if the statute he is accused of breaking is listed on the plea agreement? Did they just make up that part as well?

Yes, I did explain why, but it didn't penetrate your thick skull.

I know that this will be news to you, but "because I said so" is not an explanation.

Your desperation is getting laughable, hell I am almost starting to feel pity for you.

I explained it, but you're too ******* stupid to see it.

No, you just denied any crime committed because you said so.

And you're nobody.

Wrongo, dumbass.

 

[Lewdog]

Since these funds are used to keep embarrassing situations quiet to keep a congresscritter more electable, how can they not be considered campaign contributions. Aren't they being spent to influence an election? You can't have it both ways, if Trump and Cohen are criminals, these congresscritter must be too, they're not reporting these contributions form the taxpayers.

.

Trump was not a politician when payments were made.

Trump was running for public office when the payments to aid his campaign were made.

Thus, they were campaign contributions.

No he wasn’t. No payments that he “authorized” took place before he was a candidate. The 2016 payment was not authorized by Trump. Cohen just did it.

Cohen claims trump directed him to do it.

Prove he's lying.....

He said exactly the opposite before the plea agreement.

When he was trying to cover Trump's ass like Trump wanted him to... until Rudy and Trump turned on him and Trump sold out the U.S. for Putin in a global stage.

 

[Skylar]

Since these funds are used to keep embarrassing situations quiet to keep a congresscritter more electable, how can they not be considered campaign contributions. Aren't they being spent to influence an election? You can't have it both ways, if Trump and Cohen are criminals, these congresscritter must be too, they're not reporting these contributions form the taxpayers.

.

Trump was not a politician when payments were made.

Trump was running for public office when the payments to aid his campaign were made.

Thus, they were campaign contributions.

No he wasn’t. No payments that he “authorized” took place before he was a candidate. The 2016 payment was not authorized by Trump. Cohen just did it.

Cohen claims trump directed him to do it.

Prove he's lying.....

He said exactly the opposite before the plea agreement.

That wasn't sworn testimony under penalty of perjury.

Trump, for example, lies constantly to the American people via twitter. But none of it rises to the level of perjury as none of it is under oath. Trump has never given a statement under oath on the topic.

Cohen has.

And Cohen has a paper trail to back up his account. While Trump has.....yet another in a series of changing stories.

 

[Skylar]

No, you claimed he could not do that, you did not explain why.

Why would anyone, especially most of all a trained lawyer, plead guilty to something that is not even a crime?

And how can it not be a crime if the statute he is accused of breaking is listed on the plea agreement? Did they just make up that part as well?

Yes, I did explain why, but it didn't penetrate your thick skull.

I know that this will be news to you, but "because I said so" is not an explanation.

Your desperation is getting laughable, hell I am almost starting to feel pity for you.

I explained it, but you're too ******* stupid to see it.

No, you just denied any crime committed because you said so.

And you're nobody.

Wrongo, dumbass.

Oh, I'm quite right. Shall I quote your batshit conspiracy about the judge and prosecutors in the Cohen case?

Shall I quote your naked, fact free denials of the crime....a crime Micheal Cohen admitted to......citing only yourself?

You're running from your own pseudo-legal gibberish and conspiracy nonsense. If your argument had merit, you wouldn't have to flee.

 

[joaquinmiller]

Trump was not a politician when payments were made.

Trump was running for public office when the payments to aid his campaign were made.

Thus, they were campaign contributions.

No he wasn’t. No payments that he “authorized” took place before he was a candidate. The 2016 payment was not authorized by Trump. Cohen just did it.

Cohen claims trump directed him to do it.

Prove he's lying.....

He already stated Trump never authorized it. Only changed his story when offered a plea deal for actual crimes.

Cohen isn't going to make a very good witness against Trump when he's made to diametrically opposed claims about the matter.

When he has Pecker, Weisselberg or Gates corroborating it, he will make a fine, sworn witness.

In the meantime, the man who trembles in fear of a perjury trap rants on Twitter.

 

[Care4all]

Deflection. The feds can give a sentencing recommendation to a state judge...

The sentencing recommendation was part of the agreement. Why did you avoid my question?

Because your question has nothing to do with this discussion and you are just going to try and state some conspiracy theory.

1. You folks contend that paying for an NDA to avoid embarrassment before an election, is a campaign expense, right?

2. Any entity that gives a candidate more than $2,700 in an election cycle is violating campaign finance laws, right?

3. It's been proven that sitting congress critter have used taxpayer funds to pay for NDAs far in excess of allowable campaign finance laws, WHY AREN'T YOU DEMANDING THEIR PROSECUTION???????????????

.

was it during an election cycle?

The house is in a constant election cycle, they raise money all the time. But the cycle is irrelevant, the question is, was the money spent to keep the congresscritter more electable, therefore influencing an election?

.

The answer is, yes of course it was to make the congress critter more electable.... and a damn shame that it came out of our tax dollars.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm not sure why, but it seems the Democrats think that paying off a woman to be quiet about a scandal is somehow illegal. Well, it isn't.

Meanwhile, I'm wondering what any of this has to do with collusion with Russia...

Happens all the time in Hollywood and business world. Stormy payoff was before Trump was even an announced candidate. She most likely approached Trump. Her and her ex-husbands m.o., it’s called “extortion.”

Nonsense. Stormy Daniels was paid 11 days before the election.

Trump never authorized any such thing. Cohen just did it.

Cohen swore, under penalty of perjury, that he was directed by the Candidate. A Trump tweet doesn't rise to the level of sworn testimony. In fact, I think you will never see any sworn testimony from Trump.

There's no penalty of perjury in a plea agreement, moron. It's not testimony.

 

[Skylar]

That money comes out of a fund for Congress, just like if a company has legal funds for settling cases of wrongdoing. I think it is ridiculous that any party should be getting their sexual harassment suits or whatever liability suit paid for with tax dollars. They rip off citizens enough already. The money should come out of their paychecks.

Since these funds are used to keep embarrassing situations quiet to keep a congresscritter more electable, how can they not be considered campaign contributions. Aren't they being spent to influence an election? You can't have it both ways, if Trump and Cohen are criminals, these congresscritter must be too, they're not reporting these contributions form the taxpayers.

.

Is this where you start calling a campaign contribution an 'expense' again?

You know you can actually read an article or two on the topic and get answers to these questions in a few minutes, right?

I don't want some reporters opinion, I'm asking people here. You can deflect all you want, that just demonstrates your discomfort with the prospect of admitting that payoffs for silence, aren't really campaign expenses.

.

You don't want to bother to read up on the most basic aspects of the case.

When you have, I'd be happy to discuss it with you. But feeding you, baby bird style, answers to questions you could find yourself is tedious. And of course, I'm more than happy to correct your misunderstandings.

On short term loans or campaign expenses, for example.

You got Trump this time, tubby. Ooohhhh, he might get a fine ...

Laughing....and notice you don't actually dispute any point of fact I've made regarding the case.

That Cohen's payments were excessive campaign contributions. That Cohen admitted that he made these illegal campaign contributions under Trump's direction and with Trump's coordination. The paper trail backing up Cohen's account. The faked invoices, the fraudlent descriptions of work, the faked time lines.

Good. You're learning.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You mean like Republican Blake Farenthold?

I mean anyone of either party. Should they be prosecuted for campaign finance violations? They accepted money far beyond the donation limits to pay for what you and your ilk say is a campaign expense.

.

That money comes out of a fund for Congress, just like if a company has legal funds for settling cases of wrongdoing. I think it is ridiculous that any party should be getting their sexual harassment suits or whatever liability suit paid for with tax dollars. They rip off citizens enough already. The money should come out of their paychecks.

Since these funds are used to keep embarrassing situations quiet to keep a congresscritter more electable, how can they not be considered campaign contributions. Aren't they being spent to influence an election? You can't have it both ways, if Trump and Cohen are criminals, these congresscritter must be too, they're not reporting these contributions form the taxpayers.

.

Is this where you start calling a campaign contribution an 'expense' again?

You know you can actually read an article or two on the topic and get answers to these questions in a few minutes, right?

I don't want some reporters opinion, I'm asking people here. You can deflect all you want, that just demonstrates your discomfort with the prospect of admitting that payoffs for silence, aren't really campaign expenses.

.

If the purpose of the payoffs for silence was to influence the outcome of the election then they were campaign expenses no different than a TV ad.

 

[bripat9643]

Trump was not a politician when payments were made.

Trump was running for public office when the payments to aid his campaign were made.

Thus, they were campaign contributions.

No he wasn’t. No payments that he “authorized” took place before he was a candidate. The 2016 payment was not authorized by Trump. Cohen just did it.

Cohen claims trump directed him to do it.

Prove he's lying.....

He said exactly the opposite before the plea agreement.

That wasn't sworn testimony under penalty of perjury.

Trump, for example, lies constantly to the American people via twitter. But none of it rises to the level of perjury as none of it is under oath. Trump has never given a statement under oath on the topic.

Cohen has.

And Cohen has a paper trail to back up his account. While Trump has.....yet another in a series of changing stories.

A plea agreement isn't testimony, numskull. There is no paper trail.

 

[joaquinmiller]

You mean like Republican Blake Farenthold?

I mean anyone of either party. Should they be prosecuted for campaign finance violations? They accepted money far beyond the donation limits to pay for what you and your ilk say is a campaign expense.

.

That money comes out of a fund for Congress, just like if a company has legal funds for settling cases of wrongdoing. I think it is ridiculous that any party should be getting their sexual harassment suits or whatever liability suit paid for with tax dollars. They rip off citizens enough already. The money should come out of their paychecks.

Since these funds are used to keep embarrassing situations quiet to keep a congresscritter more electable, how can they not be considered campaign contributions. Aren't they being spent to influence an election? You can't have it both ways, if Trump and Cohen are criminals, these congresscritter must be too, they're not reporting these contributions form the taxpayers.

.

Is this where you start calling a campaign contribution an 'expense' again?

You know you can actually read an article or two on the topic and get answers to these questions in a few minutes, right?

I don't want some reporters opinion, I'm asking people here. You can deflect all you want, that just demonstrates your discomfort with the prospect of admitting that payoffs for silence, aren't really campaign expenses.

.

That's absurd.

 

[Skylar]

I'm not sure why, but it seems the Democrats think that paying off a woman to be quiet about a scandal is somehow illegal. Well, it isn't.

Meanwhile, I'm wondering what any of this has to do with collusion with Russia...

Happens all the time in Hollywood and business world. Stormy payoff was before Trump was even an announced candidate. She most likely approached Trump. Her and her ex-husbands m.o., it’s called “extortion.”

Nonsense. Stormy Daniels was paid 11 days before the election.

Trump never authorized any such thing. Cohen just did it.

Cohen swore, under penalty of perjury, that he was directed by the Candidate. A Trump tweet doesn't rise to the level of sworn testimony. In fact, I think you will never see any sworn testimony from Trump.

There's no penalty of perjury in a plea agreement, moron. It's not testimony.

Says you, citing yourself. And you're clueless.

The court filings, as well as Cohen’s sworn testimony, added a new layer to the Trump team’s series of shifting accounts about Trump’s role in financing hush money payments ahead of the election.

What Michael Cohen's guilty plea means for Donald Trump

And the only one that says that Cohen never gave sworn testimony.....is you, citing you. And you have no idea what you're talking about.

That really is it, isn't it? Your entire argument has devolved into you just making shit up, backed by nothing.

 

[Foxfyre]

Cohen said payments from his own $$$ to the whores were never authorized by Trump or campaign.
Stormy Daniels Payment May Be Illegal, Even If It Came From Trump’s Lawyer

He is ON TAPE planning it.

Is he? You think the media wouldn't be all over that replaying such a clip again and again and again and again?

 

[Skylar]

Trump was running for public office when the payments to aid his campaign were made.

Thus, they were campaign contributions.

No he wasn’t. No payments that he “authorized” took place before he was a candidate. The 2016 payment was not authorized by Trump. Cohen just did it.

Cohen claims trump directed him to do it.

Prove he's lying.....

He said exactly the opposite before the plea agreement.

That wasn't sworn testimony under penalty of perjury.

Trump, for example, lies constantly to the American people via twitter. But none of it rises to the level of perjury as none of it is under oath. Trump has never given a statement under oath on the topic.

Cohen has.

And Cohen has a paper trail to back up his account. While Trump has.....yet another in a series of changing stories.

A plea agreement isn't testimony, numskull. There is no paper trail.

A plea before the court IS sworn testimony under threat of perjury. And the federal prosecutors have already submitted the paper trail to the court in court filings the following day.

Again, you're just huffing naked denial of.....well, everything. The testimony, the charges, the evidence. Your entire argument it to pretend that none of it exists.

Good luck with that.

 

[Skylar]

Cohen said payments from his own $$$ to the whores were never authorized by Trump or campaign.
Stormy Daniels Payment May Be Illegal, Even If It Came From Trump’s Lawyer

He is ON TAPE planning it.

Is he? You think the media wouldn't be all over that replaying such a clip again and again and again and again?

It was all over the news. You can read the transcript and listen to the tape yourself if you'd like.

You won't. But you could.

 

[Faun]

Cohen is not lying and the Feds are corroborating his words with facts from Pecker and his CFO. trump is a criminal....but that is just one of the crimes he has committed. There are much more serious felonies on the horizon.

Cohen is a proven liar.

So is Trump.

Trump first said he had no knowledge of the NDA.

Then he said ok, he knew about it, but he did not pay it.

Then he said, ok, he paid for it by reimbursing his attorney, but it wasn't paid for with campaign funds.

Then he said, ok, doesn't matter that it wasn't campaign funds, it was his own money and he can spend as much as he wants.

Then he said, that doesn't matter because it's not a crime.

And all of that adds up to that Trump committed the minor offense of not reporting a campaign contribution that was repaid. Obama had a bunch of those and got a fine, which his campaign and the DNC paid, not him

Which is why it's so baffling that rightards are in such utter denial that trump violated campaign finance laws when all he's facing is a fine.

 

[Skylar]

I mean anyone of either party. Should they be prosecuted for campaign finance violations? They accepted money far beyond the donation limits to pay for what you and your ilk say is a campaign expense.

.

That money comes out of a fund for Congress, just like if a company has legal funds for settling cases of wrongdoing. I think it is ridiculous that any party should be getting their sexual harassment suits or whatever liability suit paid for with tax dollars. They rip off citizens enough already. The money should come out of their paychecks.

Since these funds are used to keep embarrassing situations quiet to keep a congresscritter more electable, how can they not be considered campaign contributions. Aren't they being spent to influence an election? You can't have it both ways, if Trump and Cohen are criminals, these congresscritter must be too, they're not reporting these contributions form the taxpayers.

.

Is this where you start calling a campaign contribution an 'expense' again?

You know you can actually read an article or two on the topic and get answers to these questions in a few minutes, right?

I don't want some reporters opinion, I'm asking people here. You can deflect all you want, that just demonstrates your discomfort with the prospect of admitting that payoffs for silence, aren't really campaign expenses.

.

That's absurd.

Yup. Every poster has a weakness. OK's is pride. Most posters if they make a mistake will admit it or at the very least, shrug it off and stop making the mistake.

But OK is too prideful to admit he's fucked up. He got campaign contributions and campaign expenses confused. And rather than admitting his mistake.....he continues to cling to the idea that Cohen's payment from his own pocket was a campaign 'expense'.

Despite the fact that the courts have recognized it as a campaign contribution. But OK is stuck. He has to keep polishing that turd, no matter what. Even when it demonstrates he's laughably, comically wrong.

 

[Faun]

You mean like Republican Blake Farenthold?

I mean anyone of either party. Should they be prosecuted for campaign finance violations? They accepted money far beyond the donation limits to pay for what you and your ilk say is a campaign expense.

.

That money comes out of a fund for Congress, just like if a company has legal funds for settling cases of wrongdoing. I think it is ridiculous that any party should be getting their sexual harassment suits or whatever liability suit paid for with tax dollars. They rip off citizens enough already. The money should come out of their paychecks.

Since these funds are used to keep embarrassing situations quiet to keep a congresscritter more electable, how can they not be considered campaign contributions. Aren't they being spent to influence an election? You can't have it both ways, if Trump and Cohen are criminals, these congresscritter must be too, they're not reporting these contributions form the taxpayers.

.

Is this where you start calling a campaign contribution an 'expense' again?

You know you can actually read an article or two on the topic and get answers to these questions in a few minutes, right?

I don't want some reporters opinion, I'm asking people here. You can deflect all you want, that just demonstrates your discomfort with the prospect of admitting that payoffs for silence, aren't really campaign expenses.

.

He had ten years to pay her off. That he waited until just before an election and just after the Access Hollywood tape came out; shows it was to influence the election.

 

[Skylar]

I mean anyone of either party. Should they be prosecuted for campaign finance violations? They accepted money far beyond the donation limits to pay for what you and your ilk say is a campaign expense.

.

That money comes out of a fund for Congress, just like if a company has legal funds for settling cases of wrongdoing. I think it is ridiculous that any party should be getting their sexual harassment suits or whatever liability suit paid for with tax dollars. They rip off citizens enough already. The money should come out of their paychecks.

Since these funds are used to keep embarrassing situations quiet to keep a congresscritter more electable, how can they not be considered campaign contributions. Aren't they being spent to influence an election? You can't have it both ways, if Trump and Cohen are criminals, these congresscritter must be too, they're not reporting these contributions form the taxpayers.

.

Is this where you start calling a campaign contribution an 'expense' again?

You know you can actually read an article or two on the topic and get answers to these questions in a few minutes, right?

I don't want some reporters opinion, I'm asking people here. You can deflect all you want, that just demonstrates your discomfort with the prospect of admitting that payoffs for silence, aren't really campaign expenses.

.

He had ten years to pay her off. That he waited until just before an election and just after the Access Hollywood tape came out; shows it was to influence the election.

10 years to pay.....and the payment comes 11 days before the election. But it has 'nothing to do with the election'.

One of the main reasons I'm not conservative.....is the quantity of reason and common sense that you have to sacrifice to be one. Especially in the Trump era.

 

[Faun]

Since these funds are used to keep embarrassing situations quiet to keep a congresscritter more electable, how can they not be considered campaign contributions. Aren't they being spent to influence an election? You can't have it both ways, if Trump and Cohen are criminals, these congresscritter must be too, they're not reporting these contributions form the taxpayers.

.

Trump was not a politician when payments were made.

Trump was running for public office when the payments to aid his campaign were made.

Thus, they were campaign contributions.

No he wasn’t. No payments that he “authorized” took place before he was a candidate. The 2016 payment was not authorized by Trump. Cohen just did it.

Cohen claims trump directed him to do it.

Prove he's lying.....

He said exactly the opposite before the plea agreement.

So? He was covering for trump who was also lying at the time, claiming he had nothing to do with the payments. But then facts emerged showing they were lying.