re: WSJ: Donald Trump Played Central Role in Hush Payoffs to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal

quote:

---

Because it is DoJ policy not to directly name an un-indicted person. The candidate is Trump, it's just a wonky legal thing.

---

So you can't confirm anything yet you know it's Trump. Classic.

quote:

---

Because it is DoJ policy not to directly name an un-indicted person. The candidate is Trump, it's just a wonky legal thing.

---

It's also the DOJ policy to not indict a sitting president.

This is a waste of time from a legal perspective put you may gain some traction from a political perspective.

quote:

---

You are making a strawman.

---

How is that a strawman? Are you not trying to influence an election when you give to a candidate?

quote:

---

The illegal part has to do with the amount, the fact that it was a corporate donation, and that it wasn't disclosed.

---

OK, then that's fine. What's the penalty? $10k?

Obama had all kinds of campaign finance violations and the media never went to this level to use it as the reason to oust him.

quote:

---

That’s not illegal

---

LINK

quote:

---

What’s wrong with paying the women? How did it violate the law?

Under federal campaign finance law, individual campaign contributions are limited to $2,700 per individual, or $5,400 for a couple, for each election cycle – that includes primary elections and the general election.

Federal law bars direct corporate contributions to federal candidates. The money paid to Daniels – $130,000 – was moved through a limited-liability company called Essential Consultants. Cohen created the company a few weeks before the election. The payment to Daniels was a campaign contribution, according to Cohen, who said in court on Tuesday that when he paid Daniels off, he was acting on behalf of the campaign with the aim of helping Trump win the presidency.

In other words, Cohen was making a campaign-related expenditure on behalf of the campaign.

There would have been no problem, legally, with making such a payment to Daniels if the Trump campaign had paid the $130,000 with donated contributions and reported it to the Federal Election Commission.

Prosecutors made it clear that the payment was a campaign contribution because Cohen was repaid by the Trump Organization after he submitted “sham” invoices for legal work.

Originally, after the deal came to light, Cohen said he acted on his own and had not been reimbursed by the Trump Organization, or by the campaign. He recanted that statement on Tuesday.

---

quote:

---

OK, then that's fine. What's the penalty? $10k?

---

quote:

---

What does the law say about this case?

The Federal Election Campaign Act states, in part, that while individuals are limited to making donations of $2,700 to presidential candidates, businesses may not make direct contributions to candidates for president.
When candidates use or loan their personal funds for campaign use, they are making contributions to their campaigns, but contributions by candidates are not subject to limits. In other words, they may spend whatever they want on their campaigns.
It is a felony offense to conspire to make a campaign contribution that exceeds $25,000.

---

Google is easy.

quote:

---

Michael Cohen pleaded

---

we got a regular legal scholar over here

quote:

---

Michael Cohen pleaded

we got a regular legal scholar over here

---

The Trump administration has created a generation of amateur legal enthusiasts!

quote:

---

That doesn't link Trump to this payment

---

The evidence contradicts your assertion. You can yell fake news all you want, it's just not the case.

quote:

---

there's no way they could make that stick in court.

---

Wouldn't be in court unless Trump resigns or this waits till he's out of office. I'd agree the Senate probably wouldn't convict him on this because theyre partisan.

quote:

---

The evidence contradicts your assertion. You can yell fake news all you want, it's just not the case.

---

Ok, show me the evidence (not circumstantial evidence).

quote:

---

Wouldn't be in court unless Trump resigns or this waits till he's out of office. I'd agree the Senate probably wouldn't convict him on this because theyre partisan.

---

So how is he in serious legal trouble, then?

quote:

---

Ok, show me the evidence (not circumstantial evidence).

---

Ok, here's even more:

quote:

---

Mr. Cohen, who complained to associates about Mr. Trump’s frugality, was also worried his boss would balk at reimbursing Mr. Pecker. He secretly recorded Mr. Trump discussing the deal.

Um, I need to open up a company for the transfer of all of that info regarding our friend, David, you know, so that—I’m going to do that right away,” said Mr. Cohen, according to a copy of the audio file.

As Mr. Cohen explained his plans, Mr. Trump spoke over him: “So, what are we gonna pay…One-fifty?” Mr. Trump asked. Mr. Cohen paused and replied, “Yes.”

Mr. Cohen said he would be getting “all the stuff,” meaning the other files on Mr. Trump he had been seeking. They discussed the uncertainty about what might become of the files if Mr. Pecker no longer ran American Media. “Yeah, I was thinking about that,” Mr. Trump said. “Maybe he gets hit by a truck.”

Messrs. Pecker and Cohen signed a contract for the transfer of the McDougal story in late September. Mr. Cohen set up a shell company in Delaware for the transaction on Sept. 30.

---