Paying people off to avoid a scandal is perfectly legal

[Lewdog]

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?

They are...

 

[Faun]

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.

And about a week after the Access Hollywood tape went public where he admitted to sexually assaulting women and trying to commit adultery.

 

[ElmerMudd]

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.

It is not illegal for a President to bring an intern into his office and have sex games with a cigar.
Clinton was impeached for lying about it.
Trump is doing everything Clinton and Nixon did wrong. Trump is doing all this, utilizing Joseph McCarthy's tactics.

Mueller is using McCarthy tactics. Why all these plea deals to make up lies?

Roy Cohen was Joseph McCarthy's lead lawyer in his investigations. Roy Cohen was a mentor to Trump. There is no coincidence.
Roy Cohen was a disgusting human being who utilized lying and deceit to get what he wanted. He taught McCarthy and Trump his tactics.

 

[OKTexas]

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???????????????

.

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.

.

Because they aren't right around the election... people deal with controversies all the time that people just forget, and it was actually a Congressional policy to make harassment settlements with government funds.

So you're saying if the NDA had been done in June 2015 instead of Oct 2016 everything would be good because it was done so far out from the election? Congresscritters raise money year round, what do you think would happen to those efforts if contributors knew the congressmen had been accused of sexual harassment? Isn't it all about the intent to effect an election?

.

 

[Flopper]

You know they don't need to charge Cohen with the conspiracy charge... because he plead guilty to the crime they conspired on. They charge the co-conspirators with conspiracy because they didn't commit the actual crime that they conspired on.

So you think a member of the bar telling the judge the devil made me do it, automatically implicates the devil in the charges. Grow the **** up man.

.

No... because they had done an investigation and corroborated his statements. Quit being a moron.

Really, did the investigation show the member of the bar telling his client that they couldn't do it that way because it was against the law? After all Cohen would have ethically and duty bound as a fiduciary to do exactly that.

.

Cohen's testimony was he made the payments with direction and coordination of the candidate (Trump). He admitted that what he did was illegal. Whether he told Trump that the payments would be illegal, we don't know. However, since he was Trump's lawyer and he knew it was illegal, it seems he would have told his client. We don't have access to the interview with Cohen, only his testimony.

If Cohen felt it was illegal he had an obligation as a member of the bar not to do it, there's no excuse for a lawyer to intentionally place a client in jeopardy.

.

In his testimony, he said his actions was at the direction and coordination of the candidate (Trump). We don't know whether Cohen advised Trump that it was illegal.

 

[bripat9643]

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.

A plea is not testimony. The so-called "paper trail" does prove that paying stormy for signing an NDA constitutes a campaign contribution.

Try sticking to facts, for once.

 

[Skylar]

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.

.

Because they aren't right around the election... people deal with controversies all the time that people just forget, and it was actually a Congressional policy to make harassment settlements with government funds.

So you're saying if the NDA had been done in June 2015 instead of Oct 2016 everything would be good because it was done so far out from the election? Congresscritters raise money year round, what do you think would happen to those efforts if contributors knew the congressmen had been accused of sexual harassment? Isn't it all about the intent to effect an election?

.

11 days before the election....and you're still trying to argue that it had nothing to do with the election?

C'mon. Really?

 

[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.

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.

Why should anyone believe he isn't lying now when he's being threatened with spending the rest of his life in prison?

 

[Skylar]

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.

A plea is not testimony

Says you, citing you. And you don't know a thing.

Show us anything that backs your claim that a plea before a judge in court isn't sworn testimony. Anything other than you insisting it must be so because you said so.

You can't. You're done.

The so-called "paper trail" does prove that paying stormy for signing an NDA constitutes a campaign contribution.

Try sticking to facts, for once.

The paper trail that you insisted didn't exist until 10 minutes ago?

Sorry, Brit.....but you don't know what you're talking about. You're just denying everything, the charges, the testimony, the paper trail, all of it. Like a child looking into the sun and insisting the sun doesn't exist.

Good luck with that.

 

[Lewdog]

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.

.

Because they aren't right around the election... people deal with controversies all the time that people just forget, and it was actually a Congressional policy to make harassment settlements with government funds.

So you're saying if the NDA had been done in June 2015 instead of Oct 2016 everything would be good because it was done so far out from the election? Congresscritters raise money year round, what do you think would happen to those efforts if contributors knew the congressmen had been accused of sexual harassment? Isn't it all about the intent to effect an election?

.

If had been done BEFORE he announced he was running for President.

I'm not sure why you keep arguing about the issues with Congress paying off harassment cases... I don't agree with it and think it should never have been allowed. You're just creating a red herring.

 

[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.

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.

Why should anyone believe he isn't lying now when he's being threatened with spending the rest of his life in prison?

Sworn testimony. His plea deal goes away if he lies. And of course, there's a paper trail backing up his account.

Why woiuld anyone believe Trump? His story has changed again and again. It changed yet again 3 days ago. And he's never offered his account under oath.

Sworn testimony under oath, backed by documentation is far more reliable than a random tweet.

 

[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.

.

Because they aren't right around the election... people deal with controversies all the time that people just forget, and it was actually a Congressional policy to make harassment settlements with government funds.

So you're saying if the NDA had been done in June 2015 instead of Oct 2016 everything would be good because it was done so far out from the election? Congresscritters raise money year round, what do you think would happen to those efforts if contributors knew the congressmen had been accused of sexual harassment? Isn't it all about the intent to effect an election?

.

If had been done BEFORE he announced he was running for President.

I'm not sure why you keep arguing about the issues with Congress paying off harassment cases... I don't agree with it and think it should never have been allowed. You're just creating a red herring.

OK is just trolling. He refuses to look into the most basic aspects of the case. He doesn't even know the difference between a campaign contribution and a campaign expense.

Willful ignorance is the final refuge of the Trump supporter. And the level of denial and eyes screwed shut among the right this week has been nothing less than staggering.

 

[bripat9643]

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.

A plea is not testimony

Says you, citing you. And you don't know a thing.

Show us anything that backs your claim that a plea before a judge in court isn't sworn testimony. Anything other than you insisting it must be so because you said so.

You can't. You're done.

The so-called "paper trail" does prove that paying stormy for signing an NDA constitutes a campaign contribution.

Try sticking to facts, for once.

The paper trail that you insisted didn't exist until 10 minutes ago?

Sorry, Brit.....but you don't know what you're talking about. You're just denying everything, the charges, the testimony, the paper trail, all of it. Like a child looking into the sun and insisting the sun doesn't exist.

Good luck with that.

At what point in the process did Cohen swear to tell the truth?

 

[bripat9643]

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.

Why should anyone believe he isn't lying now when he's being threatened with spending the rest of his life in prison?

Sworn testimony. His plea deal goes away if he lies. And of course, there's a paper trail backing up his account.

Why woiuld anyone believe Trump? His story has changed again and again. It changed yet again 3 days ago. And he's never offered his account under oath.

Sworn testimony under oath, backed by documentation is far more reliable than a random tweet.

Total bullshit. Once the judge accepts it, it's a done deal. It only goes away if he reneges on his side of the deal. As far as we know, the only thing he agreed to is to plead guilty.

 

[Faun]

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.

Why should anyone believe he isn't lying now when he's being threatened with spending the rest of his life in prison?

Because turning on Trump relinquishes any chance for a presidential pardon. There was no reason to lie to make trump look guilty.

 

[bripat9643]

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.

Why should anyone believe he isn't lying now when he's being threatened with spending the rest of his life in prison?

Because turning on Trump relinquishes any chance for a presidential pardon. There was no reason to lie to make trump look guilty.

He's already done that, moron. There was a very good reason to lie: spending the rest of his life in prison if he didn't. He would have plead guilty to ******* a unicorn in the ass if it prevented that from happening. Everyone who read your claim that "he had no reason to lie" has to be rolling on the floor laughing.

 

[OKTexas]

Hey retard, you're mixing up the two whores.

.

Dumbfuck, I mixed up no one as I never said I was talking about only one porn star. I was clear, comparing the National Inqurier sitting on a story with In Touch sitting on a story. And we know for a fact that Trump knew the inquirer was sitting on a story even though the story wasn’t released to the public; meaning you’re assumption he didn’t know about the In Touch article stems only from your brain, which you’ve proven is deformed.

Poor little retard, there's nothing being reported or written, that I've seen, that says Trump was aware of the In Touch interview. If he were aware, why would he pay her to not give an interview that she had already given several years before? You're the one making assumptions against logic.

.

To buy her silence for the election. You’re not very bright.

LMAO, the silence was broken 6 years earlier.

.

Which makes his choice to do it right before the election even more confusing.

Not really, no one was aware of the In Touch interview, Faun insist that's Trump and Cohen knew about it. Of course he has presented zero proof.

.

 

[Faun]

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.

Why should anyone believe he isn't lying now when he's being threatened with spending the rest of his life in prison?

Because turning on Trump relinquishes any chance for a presidential pardon. There was no reason to lie to make trump look guilty.

He's already done that, moron. There was a very good reason to lie: spending the rest of his life in prison if he didn't. He would have plead guilty to ******* a unicorn in the ass if it prevented that from happening. Everyone who read your claim that "he had no reason to lie" has to be rolling on the floor laughing.

As always, you make no sense. You're literally arguing he flipped on Trump to reduce his prison sentence while ignoring the presidential pardon he would have received, eliminating his sentence entirely, had he just remained loyal to trump.

 

[Skylar]

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.

Why should anyone believe he isn't lying now when he's being threatened with spending the rest of his life in prison?

Sworn testimony. His plea deal goes away if he lies. And of course, there's a paper trail backing up his account.

Why woiuld anyone believe Trump? His story has changed again and again. It changed yet again 3 days ago. And he's never offered his account under oath.

Sworn testimony under oath, backed by documentation is far more reliable than a random tweet.

Total bullshit. Once the judge accepts it, it's a done deal. It only goes away if he reneges on his side of the deal. As far as we know, the only thing he agreed to is to plead guilty.

Says you, citing yourself. And you're nobody.

Show us anything affirming your nonsense claim that pleading guilty before a judge in court is not sworn testimony.

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

You can't. You're entire argument is to just make up nonsense and deny everything.

Good luck with that, too.

 

[OKTexas]

Hey retard, you're mixing up the two whores.

.

Dumbfuck, I mixed up no one as I never said I was talking about only one porn star. I was clear, comparing the National Inqurier sitting on a story with In Touch sitting on a story. And we know for a fact that Trump knew the inquirer was sitting on a story even though the story wasn’t released to the public; meaning you’re assumption he didn’t know about the In Touch article stems only from your brain, which you’ve proven is deformed.

Poor little retard, there's nothing being reported or written, that I've seen, that says Trump was aware of the In Touch interview. If he were aware, why would he pay her to not give an interview that she had already given several years before? You're the one making assumptions against logic.

.

To buy her silence for the election. You’re not very bright.

LMAO, the silence was broken 6 years earlier.

.

Then why, pray tell, was Stormy Daniels paid 11 days before the election?

See post 1217

.