"Co-conspirator" Trump in deep trouble as Cohen pleads guilty

[schism666]

He also thinks that AMI is owned by Trump. Poor fella is really losing the the little grasp on reality he had left.

vetteman suffers from tds. Total Dumb Shit

 

[coati]

it's just you and the inbred racist left to defend the trump. think about that.

Yeah, I noticed, it's just Rightguide and the overt racist lately. Why aren't the other usual suspects out here defending Trump's payoffs to cover up his extramarital affairs?

C'mon, guys, get to it. Remember, Bill Clinton was impeached for just lying about his extramarital oral sex activities. Has that just become ho-hum stuff now that a stable genius is in charge?

I dunno, maybe when Trump fires more of those involved in the special investigation or the when money laundering gets exposed, that might their attention.

Nahhh, he really could shoot somebody, and it would not affect his base. As the Genius himself said to an admirer, "When you're a star you can do anything you want!"

 

[Rightguide]

Did you miss Sessions lifting his leg and pissing on Tricky Trumpy?

Sessions is probably going to resign or be fired this year. Both he and Rosenstein, if called by Mueller to testify in any obstruction investigation, will both be forced to resign or recuse anyway. Days are numbered for both of them. Rosenstein may already be under investigation for his part in the FISA abuses.

 

[spacekowboy]

vetteman suffers from tds. Total Dumb Shit

You realize he's about to beat his meat to this sentence, don't you? You said the magic word.

 

[schism666]

You realize he's about to beat his meat to this sentence, don't you? You said the magic word.

i just barfed in lance's mom's mouth a bit

 

[Rightguide]

Yeah, I noticed, it's just Rightguide and the overt racist lately. Why aren't the other usual suspects out here defending Trump's payoffs to cover up his extramarital affairs?

They aren't here because there is nothing to defend as far as presidential criminality is concerned. There is no crime alleged by prosecutors attributed to Trump in the payoff as a result of the Cohen plea. It was not adjudicated, it never went to court. It isn't precedent, it didn't create precedent. Nobody cites a plea bargain as precedent. It's a deal between a criminal, who wants to shorten his prison stay, and a prosecutor that applies only to that case.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

They aren't here because there is nothing to defend as far as presidential criminality is concerned. There is no crime alleged by prosecutors attributed to Trump in the payoff as a result of the Cohen plea. It was not adjudicated, it never went to court. It isn't precedent, it didn't create precedent. Nobody cites a plea bargain as precedent. It's a deal between a criminal, who wants to shorten his prison stay, and a prosecutor that applies only to that case.

Do you supposed the candidate for federal office that directed the payments was Bernie Sanders?

 

[Rotadom]

Do you supposed the candidate for federal office that directed the payments was Bernie Sanders?

You can tell he's a beaten man.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

Except he didn’t pay them out of his own pocket, dingdong. AMI made one payment and Cohen was reimbursed by the Trump Organization.

From yesterday's Washington Post:

Through his guilty plea, Cohen implicated Pecker in an arrangement that Cohen said was illegal.

Yet legal experts interviewed Wednesday said such cases are difficult to prove and they thought it unlikely that prosecutors would pursue campaign finance charges against AMI or its executives. The prosecution of former senator and presidential candidate John Edwards on similar campaign finance allegations fell apart in 2012, as many jurors doubted the government had proved that he and an aide tried to cover up his extramarital affair simply to protect his presidential campaign. Edwards’s attorneys said that he worked to conceal the relationship to protect his marriage.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/trump-campaign-tabloid-publisher-hatched-plan-to-bury-damaging-stories-cohen-prosecutors-allege/2018/08/22/72ef55f2-a633-11e8-8fac-12e98c13528d_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.d7b0a3e21c9b

Secondly, the Trump Organization is a privately held conglomerate making it essentially the same thing AS Donald Trump's "own pocket." Personal funds of a candidate are also defined by FEC reg § 100.3:

Personal funds of a candidate means the sum of all of the following:

a. Assets. Amounts derived from any asset that, under applicable State law, at the time the individual became a candidate, the candidate had legal right of access to or control over, and with respect to which the candidate had—

1. Legal and rightful title; or

2. An equitable interest;

b. Income. Income received during the current election cycle, of the candidate, including:

1. A salary and other earned income that the candidate earns from bona fide employment;

2. Income from the candidate's stocks or other investments including interest, dividends, or proceeds from the sale or liquidation of such stocks or investments;

3. Bequests to the candidate;

4. Income from trusts established before the beginning of the election cycle;

5. Income from trusts established by bequest after the beginning of the election cycle of which the candidate is the beneficiary;

6. Gifts of a personal nature that had been customarily received by the candidate prior to the beginning of the election cycle; and

7. Proceeds from lotteries and similar legal games of chance;

https://www.fec.gov/regulations/100-33/2018-annual-100#100-33-b-4

This is not a defense of the President's actions. It is a simple statement of fact relevant to the law which governs.

IF the President has a legal problem at all it is, at this point at least, entirely related to Cohen's guilty plea under Title 18 USC and not speculative potential prosecutions of AMI or that any payments came from the Trump "organization" rather than a personal check signed by Donald J. Trump.

Not to mention the fact both of Trump's attorneys said it was to prevent his campaign from being wrecked.

FEC reg § 100.52 defines Gift, subscription, loan, advance or deposit of money as:

a. A gift, subscription, loan (except for a loan made in accordance with 11 CFR 100.82 and 100.83), advance, or deposit of money or anything of value made by any person for the purpose of influencing any election for Federal office is a contribution.

Strictly on it's face, that is a legal problem for Cohen, not Trump. It is essentially what Cohen pleaded guilty to, although not the specific federal statute. Again, the legal reach to Trump, by virtue of Cohen's plea, is not the violations of law Cohen pleaded guilty to. It is the law of which Trump MIGHT be guilty (namely 18 USC § 2(a)), if he could be prosecuted or impeached for it.

Neither is certainly impossible. It is just a much "thinner" case than you guys are making it out to be as a matter of law. Yes, he is a slimeball. HRC is a slimeball. And neither one is in jail because they (barely) stay on the right side of the law.

 

[Aglaopheme]

Okie dokie.....

Federal Election Commission (FEC) officials wrote in documents released Friday that the Trump Organization may have made an illegal contribution to the Trump campaign by having a staffer assist Melania Trump with her speech at the Republican National Convention, but dismissed the complaint because the action was too minor to be considered a violation of law.

FEC lawyers wrote in an April 2017 filing, first made public on Friday, that Trump Organization employee Meredith McIver's assistance in writing Trump's July 2016 speech may have resulted in "a corporate contribution to the Committee."

However, commissioners wrote that because the value of such services appeared to be too minor for consideration, the commission decided to dismiss the allegation.

 

[about_average]

From yesterday's Washington Post:



Secondly, the Trump Organization is a privately held conglomerate making it essentially the same thing AS Donald Trump's "own pocket." Personal funds of a candidate are also defined by FEC reg § 100.3:




This is not a defense of the President's actions. It is a simple statement of fact relevant to the law which governs.

IF the President has a legal problem at all it is, at this point at least, entirely related to Cohen's guilty plea under Title 18 USC and not speculative potential prosecutions of AMI or that any payments came from the Trump "organization" rather than a personal check signed by Donald J. Trump.





Strictly on it's face, that is a legal problem for Cohen, not Trump. It is essentially what Cohen pleaded guilty to, although not the specific federal statute. Again, the legal reach to Trump, by virtue of Cohen's plea, is not the violations of law Cohen pleaded guilty to. It is the law of which Trump MIGHT be guilty (namely 18 USC § 2(a)), if he could be prosecuted or impeached for it.

Neither is certainly impossible. It is just a much "thinner" case than you guys are making it out to be as a matter of law. Yes, he is a slimeball. HRC is a slimeball. And neither one is in jail because they (barely) stay on the right side of the law.

One question. Did Edwards or his lawyer ever say the payment was to protect his campaign. Don't forget that both of Trump's lawyers said it was.

Then there's this:

An unpaid loan, when added to other contributions from the same contributor, must not exceed the contribution limit. Repayments made on the loan reduce the amount of the contribution. Once repaid in full, a loan no longer counts against the contributor’s contribution limit. However, a loan exceeding the limit is unlawful even if it is repaid in full.

Besides being reported as a contribution, a loan must be continuously reported until it is fully repaid.

https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/handling-loans-debts-and-advances/

Even if Trump did pay Cohen back out of his own pocket, we have Trump on tape conspiring with Cohen on making an illegal campaign contribution and then failing to report it in his FEC filings.

If we didn't have the conspiracy tape to commit a crime and the failure to report the loan to the FEC, Trump would probably have no worries.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

One question. Did Edwards or his lawyer ever say the payment was to protect his campaign. Don't forget that both of Trump's lawyers said it was.

Then there's this:https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/handling-loans-debts-and-advances/

Even if Trump did pay Cohen back out of his own pocket, we have Trump on tape conspiring with Cohen on making an illegal campaign contribution and then failing to report it in his FEC filings.

If we didn't have the conspiracy tape to commit a crime and the failure to report the loan to the FEC, Trump would probably have no worries.

You keep making my point for me. Thanks. The "illegality" of the campaign contribution per se, if we accept your take on it, is STILL Cohen's alone. I can find no statute that would hold Trump PERSONALLY responsible for "conspiring" to induce Cohen to make an illegal contribution OTHER THAN 18 USC 2(a). And neither you nor anyone else has shown me such a statute either. My strict argument is that Trump did NOT make an illegal campaign contribution to his own campaign. Cohen, however, has admitted that he, Cohen, DID make such a contribution. One man's "crime" is not the other's.

And I'm simply saying that had Cohen NOT pleaded guilty to 18 USC (b) and successfully fought that charge based on at least an arguable contention that it was not viewed by him or Trump as a loan or advance, Trump might not even be facing the liability imposed by 2(a).

But that's over and done. We have that plea, and it is the only linchpin that I can see that creates any specific legal liability for Trump, and it is only through that specific statute I keep harping on.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Yeah, I noticed, it's just Rightguide and the overt racist lately. Why aren't the other usual suspects out here defending Trump's payoffs to cover up his extramarital affairs?

C'mon, guys, get to it. Remember, Bill Clinton was impeached for just lying about his extramarital oral sex activities. Has that just become ho-hum stuff now that a stable genius is in charge?

I dunno, maybe when Trump fires more of those involved in the special investigation or the when money laundering gets exposed, that might their attention.

Nahhh, he really could shoot somebody, and it would not affect his base. As the Genius himself said to an admirer, "When you're a star you can do anything you want!"

Clinton was impeached for lying under oath.

 

[about_average]

You keep making my point for me. Thanks. The "illegality" of the campaign contribution per se, if we accept your take on it, is STILL Cohen's alone. I can find no statute that would hold Trump PERSONALLY responsible for "conspiring" to induce Cohen to make an illegal contribution OTHER THAN 18 USC 2(a). And neither you nor anyone else has shown me such a statute either. My strict argument is that Trump did NOT make an illegal campaign contribution to his own campaign. Cohen, however, has admitted that he, Cohen, DID make such a contribution. One man's "crime" is not the other's.

I guess I'm not getting what you're saying.
What I see is you saying he's not guilty then pointing to 18 USC 2(a) which states that he is just as punishable for Cohen's actions as Cohen, assuming 18 USC 2(a) uses the criminal law definition of "principle".

But even if 18 USC 2(a) is using some other definition of "principle", don't forget that Trump is claiming he paid back Cohen which would mean he knowingly violated FEC rules. Definitely for not reporting it, and possibly knowingly accepting an amount that violated FEC rules (I'm only assuming it's a violation to knowingly accept an illegal contribution, I haven't looked for the specific rule).

 

[doowdniw]

To hell with Cohen, Weisselberg just got immunity. Is there a bigger fish than Weisselberg in the Trump organization? Yes, but only one.

 

[KeithD]

To hell with Cohen, Weisselberg just got immunity. Is there a bigger fish than Weisselberg in the Trump organization? Yes, but only one.

Not true, really. There are Donald Jr., Ivanka, and Eric. They all were and are at the top of the Trump organization.

 

[Rightguide]

Do you supposed the candidate for federal office that directed the payments was Bernie Sanders?

It doesn't matter, the payments were legal.

 

[Rightguide]

I guess I'm not getting what you're saying.
What I see is you saying he's not guilty then pointing to 18 USC 2(a) which states that he is just as punishable for Cohen's actions as Cohen, assuming 18 USC 2(a) uses the criminal law definition of "principle".

But even if 18 USC 2(a) is using some other definition of "principle", don't forget that Trump is claiming he paid back Cohen which would mean he knowingly violated FEC rules. Definitely for not reporting it, and possibly knowingly accepting an amount that violated FEC rules (I'm only assuming it's a violation to knowingly accept an illegal contribution, I haven't looked for the specific rule).

The former Chairman of the FEC says you're full of crap. It wasn't an illegal campaign expenditure.

 

[Adre]

Eventually our judiciary will sort much of this out. What’s obvious, when a thread like this even exists, is that many of you elected a lowlife embarrassment to the office. We’ll likely learn of more hush payments, and he’ll throw more people under the bus, but one thing remains constant: his narcissism, his poor character, and his complete lack of self awareness. He is a seriously damaged human.

 

[KeithD]

but one thing remains constant: his narcissism, his poor character, and his complete lack of self awareness. He is a seriously damaged human.

As are those who can't give him up. It's not like they don't have a replacement standing behind him who would serve their reactionary interests, fears, and hatreds just as well.

 

[about_average]

The former Chairman of the FEC says you're full of crap. It wasn't an illegal campaign expenditure.

I don't know who you're talking about since you, again, made a claim with nothing to back it up. But if you're talking about Bradley Smith it's only because he's discounting that both of Trump's lawyers say it was an expenditure to help with Trump's election.

So he's not saying I'm full of crap since he's ignoring two key statements.

 

[doowdniw]

Not true, really. There are Donald Jr., Ivanka, and Eric. They all were and are at the top of the Trump organization.

True enough, but from whom did/do they take their marching orders? And all of Trump's corporate veils are going to end up looking like see through negligees.

 

[Rightguide]

I don't know who you're talking about since you, again, made a claim with nothing to back it up. But if you're talking about Bradley Smith it's only because he's discounting that both of Trump's lawyers say it was an expenditure to help with Trump's election.

So he's not saying I'm full of crap since he's ignoring two key statements.

He's saying Trump did not violate the law with those payments. You can read is statement here or listen to it as well:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...ment-is-not-an-in-kind-campaign-contribution/

 

[about_average]

He's saying Trump did not violate the law with those payments. You can read is statement here or listen to it as well:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...ment-is-not-an-in-kind-campaign-contribution/

Yes, like I said, he's ignoring the fact that both Trump's lawyers said it was for his campaign.
Thanks for confirming I was correct.

You can prove anything is legal if you ignore enough facts. In this case you only need to ignore one, as confirmed by three people, that it actually was for the campaign.

Trump, also, has admitted the same, in a round about way, by saying he can spend as much of his own money as he wants.
If it wasn't for the campaign, that statement would be completely irrelevant to the charges against Cohen.

 

[Pookie]

To hell with Cohen, Weisselberg just got immunity. Is there a bigger fish than Weisselberg in the Trump organization? Yes, but only one.

Weisselberg is "Executive 1" on page 17 of the criminal information filed by prosecutors in the Michael Cohen case.