Started By
Message
locked post

Trump: Payments to silence women were a ‘simple private transaction

Posted on 12/10/18 at 8:55 am
Posted by Major Dutch Schaefer
Location: Classified
Member since Nov 2011
39044 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 8:55 am

WaPo Link


quote:

President Trump asserted Monday that payments to buy the silence of two women about alleged affairs were not illegal campaign contributions, as federal prosecutors contend, but instead a “simple private transaction.”


quote:

He further asserted that even if the payments could be considered campaign contributions, he should be facing a civil case rather than a criminal case. And he said, Cohen should be held responsible, not him.

“Lawyer’s liability if he made a mistake, not me,” Trump wrote. “Cohen just trying to get his sentence reduced. WITCH HUNT!”
Posted by SDVTiger
Cabo San Lucas
Member since Nov 2011
98116 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 8:57 am to
So just another business transaction

Cant wait for the low iq crowd to try and spin this to a felony
Posted by Bunyan
He/Him
Member since Oct 2016
20931 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 8:57 am to
Correct. Liberals lose again

Posted by MikeBRLA
Baton Rouge
Member since Jun 2005
17204 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 9:00 am to
I mean, it’s better than Hillary’s method of silencing people.
Posted by bamarep
Member since Nov 2013
52562 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 9:12 am to
Reminder: There's a fund that YOU PAY FOR that Congress uses to silence their victims they grope on.
Posted by Volkosoby
Member since May 2017
2699 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 9:12 am to
Looks like Trump is Cleared!
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
44345 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 9:17 am to
quote:

Trump: Payments to silence women were a ‘simple private transaction
In most instances, I would agree. As a general rule, I see no problem with paying hush money to a former mistress.

When done in order to potentially influence an election, the issue becomes cloudier. It is PROBABLY a minor campaign finance violation. Assess and pay the fine, and move on.
Posted by Damone
FoCo
Member since Aug 2016
32966 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 9:19 am to
BUT BUT BUT WE WERE FINALLY GOING TO GET DRUMPF!!!

HE CAN'T KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH IT!!!!!!
Posted by Wtodd
Tampa, FL
Member since Oct 2013
68544 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 9:20 am to
quote:

Cant wait for the low iq crowd to try and spin this to a felony

quote:

low iq crowd to try and spin

They've been doing this for awhile
Posted by TheFonz
Somewhere in Louisiana
Member since Jul 2016
23277 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 9:20 am to
Trump is a good businessman, limiting them to around $130k each. Dumb broads should have held out for more.
Posted by Langland
Trumplandia
Member since Apr 2014
15382 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 9:22 am to
Posted by More&Les
Member since Nov 2012
14684 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 9:27 am to
quote:


In most instances, I would agree. As a general rule, I see no problem with paying hush money to a former mistress.

When done in order to potentially influence an election, the issue becomes cloudier. It is PROBABLY a minor campaign finance violation. Assess and pay the fine, and move on.


the campaign finance statute specifically EXCLUDES items that would have existed outside the campaign or could have existed for another reason.

insert gif of stocking hot wife here
Posted by oogabooga68
Member since Nov 2018
27194 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 9:28 am to
quote:

When done in order to potentially influence an election


Jesus Christ, everything a candidate does is to influence an election...what the frick is wrong with you Lefties?
Posted by More&Les
Member since Nov 2012
14684 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 9:35 am to
quote:


In most instances, I would agree. As a general rule, I see no problem with paying hush money to a former mistress.

When done in order to potentially influence an election, the issue becomes cloudier. It is PROBABLY a minor campaign finance violation. Assess and pay the fine, and move on.


the campaign finance statute specifically EXCLUDES items that would have existed outside the campaign or could have existed for another reason.

insert gif of smocking hot wife here
Posted by AggieHank86
Texas
Member since Sep 2013
44345 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 9:36 am to
quote:

Jesus Christ, everything a candidate does is to influence an election...
Which is why the issue becomes cloudier in the context of an election or campaign.
Posted by MrLSU
Yellowstone, Val d'isere
Member since Jan 2004
29741 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 9:36 am to
Cohen is an idiot. He would have been pardoned had he not gotten in bed with Lanny Davis.
Posted by ABearsFanNMS
Formerly of tLandmass now in Texas
Member since Oct 2014
20205 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 9:41 am to
quote:

When done in order to potentially influence an election, the issue becomes cloudier. It is PROBABLY a minor campaign finance violation. Assess and pay the fine, and move on.


You need to read the WaPo piece by Former chair of the FEC, Bradley Smith. Add into the fact that if Trump can prove he has done this before ever announcing his candidacy, it will be next to impossible to prove that it was anything more than a business transaction!
Posted by 225bred
COYS
Member since Jun 2011
21019 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 9:42 am to
quote:

So just another business transaction

Cant wait for the low iq crowd to try and spin this to a felony





Don't be surprised when they do clamor for a crime.

This is the same retarded crowd that is trying to frame Trump having interest in Russian property for his company PRIOR to becoming POTUS as a felony

They don't understand the laws. If it hurts their feelings, it's a crime.
Posted by alphaandomega
Tuscaloosa-Here to Serve
Member since Aug 2012
17137 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 9:43 am to
quote:

Reminder: There's a fund that YOU PAY FOR that Congress uses to silence their victims they grope on.




Trump should disclose all payments that have been made from that fund.

You know, for transparency.
Posted by NC_Tigah
Make Orwell Fiction Again
Member since Sep 2003
138950 posts
Posted on 12/10/18 at 9:44 am to
quote:

When done in order to potentially influence an election, the issue becomes cloudier.
The extortion of Michael Cohen to plea to a nonexistent violation notwithstanding, when a Trump Organization NDA was performed in the same way its NDAs had been previously done, independent of any election, the issue really is not cloudy at all.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 7Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram