"I only hire the best"

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Nebe

They did take the money.

Correct me if I am wrong but wasn’t Clinton impeached simply for denying that he had an affair with Lewinski?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He lied about it under oath. He also wrote a huge check to one of his accusers (was it Juanita Brodderick?).

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

He lied about it under oath. He also wrote a huge check to one of his accusers (was it Juanita Brodderick?).

I thought it was Paula Jones that they reached a settlement with.

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

I thought it was Paula Jones that they reached a settlement with.

Yes.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Murder, Rape, Kidnapping...those are Serious Felonies.

Paying off a couple of chicks you banged....not so much.

be more overly Dramatic...you can't

Lying about oral affairs w/ an adult intern?

Also interesting that the same crowd, including the Cheeze-it Commander in Chief, yell "rule of law" and want to arrest people who report to designated areas and turn themselves in and request asylum as they law instructs say this if is no big deal. Just a felony, I guess 🤔

Also, the crime wasn't paying off a couple of chicks, but you know that don't you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Love how the faithful keep insisting there is nothing to see...

And love how Trump heaps praise on convicted felons ,, basically calling the government and people in the jury part of the which hunt .... so much for the rule of law


I guess it wouldn't be an issue to some if he pardoned Manafort

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Lying about oral affairs w/ an adult intern?

Also interesting that the same crowd, including the Cheeze-it Commander in Chief, yell "rule of law" and want to arrest people who report to designated areas and turn themselves in and request asylum as they law instructs say this if is no big deal. Just a felony, I guess 🤔
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

illegal immigration isn't even a felony but for Trumpanzees its the most heinous crime in America

[Nebe]

“Trumpanzees” !!!!!!!

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Lying about oral affairs w/ an adult intern?

Under Oath.....but you knew that, didn't you

Originally Posted by zimmy

Also, the crime wasn't paying off a couple of chicks, but you know that don't you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You're right, that isn't the crime.

They are trying, desperately, to link it to campaign funds......because the multi millionaire couldn't afford to pay for it himself.

Soooooooo......still got nothing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Under Oath.....but you knew that, didn't you




You're right, that isn't the crime.

They are trying, desperately, to link it to campaign funds......because the multi millionaire couldn't afford to pay for it himself.

Soooooooo......still got nothing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That is either a completely uniformed or intentionally ignorant statement. He could afford to pay it. The reason money was funneled through Cohen and the trump foundation was to hide it. That is where the crime came from. Given the lot that supports him he would have been better off letting it come out. It's always the cover up as they say.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Don't forget about the timing which was clearly because of the fear that if it came out prior to the election it would impact the results.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

They are trying, desperately, to link it to campaign funds......because the multi millionaire couldn't afford to pay for it himself.

Soooooooo......still got nothing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Doesn’t matter if it was linked to campaign funds or private cash. If the payoffs were intended to influence the election, which Cohen said they were, and they were directed by Trump, which Cohen says they were under oath, then Trump quite likely is looking at a clearly impeachable offense.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

We will see what happens with this. Clearly it has our resident #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s in a lather. I predict more whining will ensue when it becomes another nothing 🍔.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by wdmso

illegal immigration isn't even a felony but for Trumpanzees its the most heinous crime in America

Deflating a football is only punishable by a 50k fine.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

What was that you used to say, John, We get the government we deserve

OHHHH BOY we got it didn't we

Originally Posted by PaulS

Does anyone have an example of an infraction that lead Mueller to eventually charge someone w/breaking the law?

Financial stuff - not collusion with Russia - that is what we need. Hard proof.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by zimmy

That is either a completely uniformed or intentionally ignorant statement. He could afford to pay it. The reason money was funneled through Cohen and the trump foundation was to hide it. That is where the crime came from. Given the lot that supports him he would have been better off letting it come out. It's always the cover up as they say.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No, the crime was that Trump used campaign funds to pay off the women for their silence. Hence the supposed funneling through Cohen. Funneling his own money through his own lawyer really isn't that sneaky.

Zero proof of that as of yet, other than Cohen's testimony, but now they have something to dig into.

And it's Uninformed not uniformed.....and I'm the ignorant one.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

And it's Uninformed not uniformed.....and I'm the ignorant one.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes you are right, a spelling error while typing with Swype on a cellphone clearly places me a step below you on the ignorance scale, everything else aside. He's a felon and he is getting his comeuppance.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Zimmerman does not like to be portrayed as stupid even to the extent he will blame his device instead of owning said stupidity.

I love the irony of his post.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

Zimmerman does not like to be portrayed as stupid even to the extent he will blame his device instead of owning said stupidity.

I love the irony of his post.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Awww, you got me. I am so stupid that I think the word uniformed means you lack information. Paul S clearly has a read on you. Are you getting frustrated Donny is going down? So frustrated that all you have left is spell checking for me. Sad...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Its funny to see we get the statement "We get the government we deserve"

then following that statement some go on to Minimize the POTUS behavior never taking ownership for who voted him or still support him religiously .. then say its the dems's fault he got elected

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Awww, you got me. I am so stupid that I think the word uniformed means you lack information. Paul S clearly has a read on you. Are you getting frustrated Donny is going down? So frustrated that all you have left is spell checking for me. Sad...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I just thought it was funny that you tried to knock somebody for being uninformed and you can’t even spell the word. And I enjoy pushing your buttons on occasion just for kicks.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Yes you are right, a spelling error while typing with Swype on a cellphone clearly places me a step below you on the ignorance scale, everything else aside. He's a felon and he is getting his comeuppance.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Spelling and Punctuation are pretty important when you're trying to assert your intellectual Superiority

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Doesn’t matter if it was linked to campaign funds or private cash. If the payoffs were intended to influence the election, which Cohen said they were, and they were directed by Trump, which Cohen says they were under oath, then Trump quite likely is looking at a clearly impeachable offense.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Not trying to be a wise-azz, asking a sincere question.

It's not a crime for an average Joe to write a big check to make something embarrassing go away, right? Clinton wrote a big fat check to one of his accusers.

But it might be a crime for Trump to do it, because he was campaigning? If part of his motive was making this skank keep quiet during the run-up to the election, that's the crime? But it would have been OK if he did it the day after the election?

Doesn't every commercial every candidate releases, attempt to influence the outcome of an election?

[PaulS]

Jim, you are correct it's not a crime to write the check to the woman. The issue is that the timing was during the run up to the election. I think one month before the election. So if Trump wrote the check 3 years prior and prior to his announcing his candidacy there would not be a legal issue. I think also that part of the issue is they didn't declare it so it is a campaign finance violation. The same with the National Enquirer money. It is being viewed as a way to help the campaign but not being declared which is a campaign violation of some sort. I have no idea what would have happened if was the day after the election.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Here is an explanation of what Cohen did and what he should have done, that I think is correct.
Trump is angry at Michael Cohen, of course, because Cohen just pleaded guilty to (among other things) making an illegal contribution to Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign by paying hush money to Stormy Daniels just before the election. Moreover, Cohen told the judge in the case that he did so “in coordination with and at the direction of” Trump.

Cohen’s actions were illegal because individuals may only contribute a limited amount of money or in-kind services to political campaigns. During the 2016 election, the maximum was $5,400. Cohen fraudulently obtained a home equity loan and then wired $130,000 of it to the lawyer representing Daniels on October 27, 2016.

What Trump certainly doesn’t understand, and what makes his tweet extra-wonderful, is that the problem with Cohen isn’t just that he (in Trump’s mind) betrayed Trump. It’s that Cohen is genuinely a terrible lawyer.

J.P. Morgan famously said, “I don’t know as I want a lawyer to tell me what I cannot do. I hire him to tell me how to do what I want to do.” But what Cohen managed to do was fail in both ways. He didn’t tell Trump that Trump couldn’t pay off Daniels using Cohen himself as a conduit — but he also failed to advise Trump that there was a way to do it that would have been totally legal.

Here’s how.

Donald Trump (and only Donald Trump) could legally donate an unlimited amount of money to his campaign, because he was the candidate. Therefore, he would have been in the clear if he had made an in-kind donation to his campaign by paying Daniels directly with his own money. He could also have used money raised by his campaign, including his own contributions, to pay Daniels. (Trump’s campaign took in a total of $333 million, with $66 million of that coming from Trump himself.)

In either case, Trump’s campaign would be required to disclose the expenditure. But according to the Federal Election Commission’s rules, campaign contributions and expenditures made after October 27, 2016 did not have to be disclosed until December 8. So if Trump could have put Daniels off just one more day, there would have been no public paper trail until a month after the election. And even then, the disclosed payment might not by itself expose the wrongdoing.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Jim, you are correct it's not a crime to write the check to the woman. The issue is that the timing was during the run up to the election. I think one month before the election. So if Trump wrote the check 3 years prior and prior to his announcing his candidacy there would not be a legal issue. I think also that part of the issue is they didn't declare it so it is a campaign finance violation. The same with the National Enquirer money. It is being viewed as a way to help the campaign but not being declared which is a campaign violation of some sort. I have no idea what would have happened if was the day after the election.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I guess that makes sense in the sense that he might have to declare all campaign-related expenses. But there's a good chance he would have done the same exact thing even if he wasn't running for POTUS, right? So does the criminal question come down to this...was it a campaign issue, or a personal (private issue)? How about if he pays his home electric bill with his own money. If he didn't pay it, that could become fodder for the press during the election, right? So does he have to declare the money he's using to pay his electric bill for his home, since you could argue that paying it, has an impact on the election?

I don't think it's rare for people who are (1) uber wealthy, and (2) devoid of morals, to pay hush money to people they wrong. If he used campaign money and didn't declare it, that seems pretty bad. If he used his own money to make a private issue go away, but part of his motivation was to avoid damaging his campaign...that doesn't seem like a big deal to me. At that level, at this point in history, there's almost no distinction between his personal matters and campaign matters. Especially for this guy.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I guess that makes sense in the sense that he might have to declare all campaign-related expenses. But there's a good chance he would have done the same exact thing even if he wasn't running for POTUS, right?

So when we wasn't running why didn't he? Ding ding ding

Also look at the timing of the hush money and his grab em debacle...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

So when we wasn't running why didn't he? Ding ding ding

Also look at the timing of the hush money and his grab em debacle...

So anything a candidate does to even potentially protect his image, must be declared. Again, that's almost everything.

I have no problem believing that part of the motivation for the payoff, was the election. But if he used his own money, then it looks like a nothingburger, with extra zilch on the side. If he used money to hire political consultants or to rent a campaign office, that's obvious campaign stuff.

Where's the line drawn between what's campaign-related, and what's personal business? EVERYTHING is potentially a campaign issue, especially with this guy.


This guy has done much, much worse.

[PaulS]

Jim, to answer your question it is a campaign Finance issue. Nothing to do with the legality of paying hush money which I'm sure happens all the time to various people. Now let's not forget that what happened between President Trump and Stormy Daniels is not illegal. If he was paying her hush money related to any illegal act that would be a different issue.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

So when we wasn't running why didn't he? Ding ding ding

Also look at the timing of the hush money and his grab em debacle...

Is anyone saying he diverted campaign contributions to the payoff? Or is it accepted that he used his personal money?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Jim, to answer your question it is a campaign Finance issue. Nothing to do with the legality of paying hush money which I'm sure happens all the time to various people. Now let's not forget that what happened between President Trump and Stormy Daniels is not illegal. If he was paying her hush money related to any illegal act that would be a different issue.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"it is a campaign Finance issue"

Then everything a candidate does, from the moment he declares to the moment the polls close, is a campaign issue.

"If he was paying her hush money related to any illegal act that would be a different issue."

Agreed. It would also be different if he used campaign money for the payoff. Is anyone suggesting he did?

What bothers m most is that he had an affair with a disgusting skank while he was married with kids. If he paid her off with his own money, I could care less that he didn't itemize that expense on a campaign form. If that's a crime, and an impeachable offense, he'll have to answer for it, especially if the democrats take the house. But on the spectrum of possible campaign finance fraud, that's about as benign as it gets. When I think of campaign fraud, I assume it's diverting campaign funds for personal use like the GOP representative Duncan Hunter just got indicted for, he and his wife committed an actual fraud and should go to prison. If Trump used his own money but didn't disclose it because it could possibly influence the campaign, then he has to disclose everything he does. Everything. Every move he makes, is a potential weapon to use against him. You can't ask him to disclose every move he makes.