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

[Toddsterpatriot]

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.
`

How are you doing Sandy?

Itchier than usual?

 

[abu afak]

How are you doing Sandy?
Itchier than usual?

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.
`

 

[Flopper]

Really, then how are congresscritters getting away with the execution of NDAs using public funds to hide derogatory information from the voting public. Last I heard it would be illegal for the US treasury to make campaign contributions.

.

I would assume they are getting away with it because no one is investigating and charging them with a crime.

 

[Flopper]

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.

The act of paying hushmoney by the candidate or from the campaign in itself is not illegal. What is illegal is failing to report it as an election contribution and as a campaign expense. Since Trump did not want to make hushmoney payments known to the public he had Cohen act as his agent, who of course failed and got himself convicted of a number of crimes including a couple election law violation.

While Trump could have made an unlimited contribution to his campaign, Cohen could not. His limit was $2700 even thou Trump refunded the hushmoney payments after the election.

Looking at the DOJ Cohen guilty plea press release, it answers a lot of questions and provides some insight into where Bragg is going with the underlying crime needed for falsification of business records to be a felony.

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

www.justice.gov

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The act of paying hushmoney by the candidate or from campaign in itself is not illegal. What is illegal is failing to report it as an election contribution and as a campaign expense. Since Trump did want to make his hushmoney payments know to public he had Cohen act as his agent.

What is illegal is failing to report it as an election contribution and as a campaign expense.

It's neither.

 

[Flopper]

What is illegal is failing to report it as an election contribution and as a campaign expense.

It's neither.

I suggest you read what the FEC considers an election contribution.

 

[Flopper]

After reading Bragg's statement of facts and the DOJ press release of the Cohen's guilty plea it is just about impossible to belief that Trump was not instrumental in an illegal scheme to coverup the hushmoney payments. Trump refunded to Cohen the hushmoney payments plus a fee for running the scheme; that is he backed a scheme to violate federal campaign finance laws.

To believe that Cohen operated without support and help by Trump is just crazy.

https://manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/2023-04-04-SOF.pdf

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

www.justice.gov

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I suggest you read what the FEC considers an election contribution.

Thanks.

Contribution limits - FEC.gov

The federal contribution limits that apply to contributions made to a federal candidate's campaign for the U.S. House, U.S. Senate or U.S. President. Includes limits that apply to individual donations, as well as to contributions by political action committees (PACs) and party committees to...

www.fec.gov

 

[Faun]

I thought campaign finance violations were an FEC specialty?

Do you not realize that didn't answer my question?

 

[OKTexas]

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.

I'm not confused about a damn thing. Cohen was coerced by prosecutors to pelad to a crime he didn't commit. And the only thing Bragg has is exculpatory evidence that the grand jury never saw. Before you get all ignorant commie on me, I'm aware Bragg had no obligation to share exculpatory evidence with the grand jury. But his failure to do so just proves all he was interested in was getting a political indictment, not justice.

.

 

[OKTexas]

I would assume they are getting away with it because no one is investigating and charging them with a crime.

Can you say two tiered justice system?

.

 

[Faun]

I'm not confused about a damn thing. Cohen was coerced by prosecutors to pelad to a crime he didn't commit. And the only thing Bragg has is exculpatory evidence that the grand jury never saw. Before you get all ignorant commie on me, I'm aware Bragg had no obligation to share exculpatory evidence with the grand jury. But his failure to do so just proves all he was interested in was getting a political indictment, not justice.

Bullshit. He was a lawyer. He knew he didn't have to admit to any crime he didn't commit. Even worse for you, he never denied it. Not when he was charged. Not since.

 

[OKTexas]

Bullshit. He was a lawyer. He knew he didn't have to admit to any crime he didn't commit. Even worse for you, he never denied it. Not when he was charged. Not since.

Keep drinking that commie cool aid.

.

 

[Faun]

Keep drinking that commie cool aid.

The commie bullshit is all yours. Cohen made an excessive campaign contribution. Cohen was charged with making an excessive campaign contribution. Cohen pleaded guilty for making an excessive campaign contribution. The court accepted his plea to making an excessive campaign contribution. The court sentenced him for making an excessive campaign contribution. Cohen went to jail for making an excessive campaign contribution. Cohen still says he made an excessive campaign contribution. You denying any of that is you denying reality.

 

[OKTexas]

The commie bullshit is all yours. Cohen made an excessive campaign contribution. Cohen was charged with making an excessive campaign contribution. Cohen pleaded guilty for making an excessive campaign contribution. The court accepted his plea to making an excessive campaign contribution. The court sentenced him for making an excessive campaign contribution. Cohen went to jail for making an excessive campaign contribution. Cohen still says he made an excessive campaign contribution. You denying any of that is you denying reality.

Yet he is on written and spoken record denying any such contribution and that neither Trump or his campaign had any foreknowledge of his executing the NDA. He is also on record saying that he would do anything to try to stay out of prison. If he's the best Bragg has, he ain't got shit.

.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Yet he is on written and spoken record denying any such contribution and that neither Trump or his campaign had any foreknowledge of his executing the NDA. He is also on record saying that he would do anything to try to stay out of prison. If he's the best Bragg has, he ain't got shit.

.

You would be correct if that is all the prosecution has.

However they also have, according to the court documents, the testimony of David Pecker (AMI Media), the testimony of Allen Weisseilberg (Trump Organization Chief Financial Officer), other testimony, texts, emails, contemporaneous notes, invoices, business ledgers, checks, etc.

Then of course we know that Cohen was known to make audio records of phone calls. One of which concerning Karen McDougal is already in the public sphere. Are the others? Considering Cohen was Trump’s fixer and Cohen probably recognized the need for CYA regarding Trump, probably better than 50/50 there are more tapes.

So one would think that a DA charging an ex-President would have much more that the word of one man.

Time will tell if the DA has his ducks in a row.

WW

 

[Faun]

Yet he is on written and spoken record denying any such contribution and that neither Trump or his campaign had any foreknowledge of his executing the NDA. He is also on record saying that he would do anything to try to stay out of prison. If he's the best Bragg has, he ain't got shit.

So what? Trump also denied any knowledge of any of it. Until his cancelled checks surfaced, proving his earlier denials were lies like Cohen's. Only then did he finally admit reimbursing Cohen.

 

[Flopper]

I'm not confused about a damn thing. Cohen was coerced by prosecutors to pelad to a crime he didn't commit. And the only thing Bragg has is exculpatory evidence that the grand jury never saw. Before you get all ignorant commie on me, I'm aware Bragg had no obligation to share exculpatory evidence with the grand jury. But his failure to do so just proves all he was interested in was getting a political indictment, not justice.

.

Cohen plead guilty to:
Five counts of willful tax evasion
One count of making false statements to a bank
One count of causing an unlawful campaign contribution
One count of making an excessive campaign contribution.

If the prosecutors did not have solid evidence to convict, Cohen would have fought it, not plead guilty because that end his legal career. The following year he was disbarred. I don't know where tax evasion crimes came from but false statements to the bank came from opening the corporate account of a shell corporation using a phony name Cohen would use this account to issue payments to McDougal and Daniels. the unlawful campaign contribution was do to fact that it was coming from a corporate account which is an illegal contribution. And of course excess contribution comes from the size of hush money payments.

If Bragg can prove the payments were to influence the election and Trump was instigator then he will have the proof he needs to show that falsification of the business records was to cover up another crime, actually a number of crimes.

Bragg will not have a problem proving these payments were meant to influence the election:

• The DOJ concluded the payments were election contributions
• Cohen will testify that the purpose of the hushmoney was to influence the election
• The editor or CEO at the National Enquirer can testify that the purpose of payments to McDougal through the Enquirer were part of Trump's campaign for President.
• Lastly, the history of Trump's illicit relations in the media, refusal to pay hushmoney years before the election will make it very difficult for Trump lawyers to convince a jury that Trump arranged these hushmoney payments just before an election to protect his good name which he has been dragging through the mud for the last 30 years.

Bragg should not have a problem proving that Trump was the instigator of the payments and cover up scheme. He has documents for payments to Cohen and invoices showing how the money was spent. Also, it is not reasonable to think that Cohen would spend over $400,000 in hushmoney payments and legal fees without the knowledge and support of his boss. Trumps $420,000 in payments to Cohen backs this.

 

[OKTexas]

You would be correct if that is all the prosecution has.

However they also have, according to the court documents, the testimony of David Pecker (AMI Media), the testimony of Allen Weisseilberg (Trump Organization Chief Financial Officer), other testimony, texts, emails, contemporaneous notes, invoices, business ledgers, checks, etc.

Then of course we know that Cohen was known to make audio records of phone calls. One of which concerning Karen McDougal is already in the public sphere. Are the others? Considering Cohen was Trump’s fixer and Cohen probably recognized the need for CYA regarding Trump, probably better than 50/50 there are more tapes.

So one would think that a DA charging an ex-President would have much more that the word of one man.

Time will tell if the DA has his ducks in a row.

WW

Yep, I'm getting bored with this thread, there's enough evidence in the public sphere to create a ton of reasonable doubt. You commies enjoy playing with yourselves.

.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Yep, I'm getting bored with this thread, there's enough evidence in the public sphere to create a ton of reasonable doubt. You commies enjoy playing with yourselves.

.

There isn't a lot of evidence in the public sphere, but what there is is pretty damaging to reasonable doubt. If you look at court documents and don't get suckered into what the talking heads on TV say or hang on every word Trump says.

It's the evidence presented to the Grand Jury, the Court, and laid before the Jury (if the case gets that far) that will matter.

Will Trump be convicted? I don't know. But to claim the case resets solely on the testimony of Cohen is, IMHO, a very bad mistake. Something people can assume Trump's layers are not making now that the Prosecution is/has turned over all evidence to the defense.

But you have a good day, some of us will continue to watch the case unfold and talk about the facts.

WW