Why Do Trump Supporters Have Such A Hard Time Admitting He's A Convicted Felon?

[konradv]

You just can't name the lie.

There are just too many. I haven’t got all day.

 

[Rambunctious]

There seems to be a lot of self-denial about his convictions. Why can't his supporters admit the truth--that he was convicted on all 34 charges by a DC court.
Will this fact also follow the election result deniers path of massive resistance at first and now a comparatively few still hold out that Trump won the 2020 election?

Because technically he is not a convicted felon....

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I don't believe that matters. Paying a private attorney money from a private corporation to perform private legal work is not an official act of a president.

Or a crime.

 

[Mick2]

There are just too many.

You just can't name a single one.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Daniels first threatened to go public with her claims 5 years earlier. Trump didn't pay her then and she told her story to In Touch magazine.

If I recall, Daniels and her attorney at that time who handled the NDA.

He is a scumbag, but so is Trump. So which one to believe? Given the other evidence I mentioned, I believe Cohen over Trump.

Paying for her silence weeks before the election certainly appeared to benefit Trump's candidacy. And given he waited until the election to buy her silence, it looks like a campaign violation to me.

Paying for her silence weeks before the election certainly appeared to benefit Trump's candidacy.

People do all sorts of things to benefit their candidacy, that doesn't make them a crime.

And given he waited until the election to buy her silence, it looks like a campaign violation to me.

Campaign money wasn't used.

 

[Mick2]

Paying for her silence weeks before the election certainly appeared to benefit Trump's candidacy.

People do all sorts of things to benefit their candidacy, that doesn't make them a crime.

And given he waited until the election to buy her silence, it looks like a campaign violation to me.

Campaign money wasn't used.

The FEC already dismissed it. NDAs are not campaign violations.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Those are motivation theories as to why the acts were committed. They show the mens rea or criminal intent to commit the offense.

That is different than the criminal charges.

He was charged with state laws not federal. The motive was to hid Cohen's criminal campaign fraud.

WW

The motive was to hid Cohen's criminal campaign fraud.

How does hiding Cohen's "crime" benefit the campaign?

 

[Robert W]

No, I do not, but Trump dies and he has done it since day one. How come you do not criticize him for that?

By the way, how does that apply to Trump’s criminal conviction? other than the fact that Trump did the criminal act in order to generate those actions to get elected. Do YOU support politicians (especially running for President) that do criminal acts to get elected?

Lawfare was used to impeach Trump, used by Obama to overthrow the government as stipulated to by official documents plus findings by Tulsi Gabbards investigation and submitted to the proper legal group to deal with.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Giving a campaign contribution of $130,000 when the legal limit was $2700 isn't a crime?

Trump can spend as much as he wants on his own campaign.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No, I do not, but Trump dies and he has done it since day one. How come you do not criticize him for that?

By the way, how does that apply to Trump’s criminal conviction? other than the fact that Trump did the criminal act in order to generate those actions to get elected. Do YOU support politicians (especially running for President) that do criminal acts to get elected?

Trump did the criminal act in order to generate those actions to get elected.

Paying for an NDA isn't a criminal act.

 

[Robert W]

The motive was to hid Cohen's criminal campaign fraud.

How does hiding Cohen's "crime" benefit the campaign?

How does paying two prostitutes benefit the campaign? Why were the women not prosecuted for extortion of Cohen?

 

[Mick2]

Giving a campaign contribution of $130,000 when the legal limit was $2700 isn't a crime?

Candidates have no limit to the amount of personal funds they use on their own campaigns. WTF? You're an example of the brain rot spread by left-wing MSN.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Techically only partially true. To paraphrase Paul Harvey... There is more to the story.

#1
Under federal campaign finance law individuals are limited to the amount of cash and (what are called) in-kind contributions to a campaign exceeding these limits is why Cohen was charged and convicted of Federal campaign finance fraud. However, a candidate can contriubute UNLIMITED funds and contributions to their own campaign, the catch is that is has to be reported to the FEC and such records are available to the public.

#2
Testimony in court was that Trump wanted to stiff Daniels (pun intended). To delay payment until after the votes had been cast at which point he could withhold payment and the story could come out as the election was over. That shows the payments were about the condition of the campaign and not for preventing the story coming out as Trump was fine with it coming out later.

#3
As the bumper sticker pionts out, paying for an NDA is not illegal. However no one was ever charged with obtaining an NDA. The charges stemmed from (a) the method of payment by Cohen fronting the money (which was illegal), and (B) Trump money laundering the money through his business to hide Cohen's crimes. The later payments were spread out and "invoiced" for a retainer that didn't exist (Cohen didn't work for Trump by this time) and for services not preformed during the period of the invoice. Breaking the payments over a year was specifically to hide the payments instead of making a one-time lump sum payment.

#4
So Trump COULD have done this all legally, but choose not to, instead using illegal methods to make the NDA payment (Cohen's actions) and to hide Cohen's crime by falsifying records. How could Trump have done it leally?

• Choen negotiates the deal with Daniels and her lawyer,
• Trump withdraws the required amount from his personal accounts,
• Trump provide Cohen with the legal instrument of payment (certified check, electronic transfer, etc.),
• The deal is closed, Trump pays and both parties sign the NDA,
• Trump then reports the contribution to his campaign to the FEC.

So a candidate can make unlimited cash and in-kind contributions to their own campaign. Trump gives Cohen the payment instrument. Meaning Cohen would not have had to front the campaign the illegal loan. Cohen would not have been convicted of Federal campaign fraud. Daniels would have been paid off and kept her mouth shut. But the payment would have been public record.

Now remember the timing. This was just before the election. The final FEC filing had ALREADY been made and was in the public record. At this point Trumps filing of the cash support to his campaign would have had to be reported until AFTER the election. And since testimony in court was Trump was fine if the story came out later, he would have achived his goal.

Under Scenerio #4 there was no crime. Cohen didn't commit campaign fraud, Trump wouldn't have been convicted of falsification of business records.

WW

Meaning Cohen would not have had to front the campaign the illegal loan.

Cohen didn't lend the campaign any money.

 

[Robert W]

If Daniels went to Trump and said pay me $$$ or I go to the press, then that would be extortion.

However that isn't what happened, she never approached Trump or the campiagn for money. She (through her attorney) was shopping the story to various news outlets. Under the "Catch-n-Kill" scheme developed by Trump, Cohen, and Pecker, Pecker being in the media would keep his ear out for such stories. Therefore it was the Trump camp that contacted her with a money offer to kill the story. That is NOT extortion. This series of evens was testified to by Pecker in court.

WW

Were I the lawyer, since the women went to seek cash, I would leap up and down that the motive was extortion. Their intent was to inflict harm on Trump, and it sure did.

 

[Mick2]

Under the "Catch-n-Kill" scheme developed by Trump, Cohen, and Pecker, Pecker being in the media would keep his ear out for such stories.

And the point here?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There was an FEC violation. Cohen was convicted of it.

Cohen's "crime" wasn't Trump's crime.

 

[Marener]

FEC says otherwise. And the FEC commissioner wasn't allowed to testify on the matter by the judge.

A federal court agrees with me.

 

[Marener]

Cohen's "crime" wasn't Trump's crime.

True. Trump’s crime was falsification of business records.

 

[Robert W]

Meaning Cohen would not have had to front the campaign the illegal loan.

Cohen didn't lend the campaign any money.

Don't worry since WW is operating as an agent of the prosecution so he sees it from their side only. A good lawyer would see it both ways and of course depending on his side argue the side he likes most. Think like Jonathan Turley and we do fine.

 

[Marener]

People do all sorts of things to benefit their candidacy, that doesn't make them a crime.

True. But it does make it a campaign expenditure.