General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTrump Tries to Deny His Crime With Cohen, Confesses by Mistake
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/08/trump-tries-to-deny-crime-with-cohen-confesses-by-mistake.htmlYesterday, President Trumps former lawyer, Michael Cohen, confessed in open court to committing a crime at Trumps direction. The crime is violating campaign finance law, by using Trumps personal funds for a campaign-related expense (paying hush money to his mistresses).
Neither of these statements answers the question of Trumps criminal liability. He did nothing wrong simply changes the question from breaking the law to an undefined definition of wrong which may not overlap with the legal one. (The administration might not consider violating campaign finance law wrong.) The second portion there are no charges against him merely reflects the fact that sitting presidents cant be indicted. Trump could, as they say, shoot somebody on Fifth Avenue, and Sanders could still say he has done nothing wrong and has not been charged with a crime.
Trumps own defense, offered on Fox & Friends, is even more confused. Trump insisted he is in the clear because the payments werent taken out of campaign finance They didnt come out of the campaign, they came from me.
That is not a defense. That is why its a crime. If the money came from the campaign, it would have been legal.
Saboburns
(2,807 posts)Nt
Totally Tunsie
(10,885 posts)eleny
(46,166 posts)Eliot Rosewater
(31,114 posts)who will love him MORE the more he is exposed for being a disgusting piece of shit.
eleny
(46,166 posts)..... .....
Bernardo de La Paz
(49,032 posts)Wwcd
(6,288 posts)Well WTF! Where's his counsel!
Ruuuudy!
dumb ass
underpants
(182,868 posts)But just like lying on the disclosure form would be illegal and refusing to do the disclosure would be illegal, paying for campaign expenses out of a non-campaign account and then declining to report that as a contribution to the campaign is also illegal.
Simply put, there is no legal way to spend money on your election campaign without disclosing that fact.
There are two ways to get out of legal hot water here.
One would be to argue that the payments were genuinely not a campaign expense. Perhaps Trump had no concern about the political impact of Danielss revelations but simply didnt want his wife and kids to find out about the affair. Trump seems to have messed this up, and instead of making the correct argument, he appeared to confess to a crime.
The other would be to argue that Cohen was lying in court and Trump had no knowledge that the payments happened. In the course of the interview, Trump first denies knowing about it, then concedes he did know but says it was only after the fact. Its not entirely clear that this would really exonerate Trump, since even by his account it appears he was aware that Cohen committed a crime on his behalf and didnt say or do anything about it.
FakeNoose
(32,722 posts)Paying Stormy Daniels wasn't illegal, he could have used his own money and kept it private.
But he told Cohen to pay it out of his own pocket and fail to disclose it as a campaign expense.
Trump denied knowing anything about it initially. Once he did that, the ship has sailed and he can't say later that well, he really did know but it wasn't a campaign expense. Everything Trump denied and obfuscated turned out to be true. Why should he ever get the benefit of the doubt?
He had one chance to straighten it out. But instead he lied and got himself into more trouble.
dixiegrrrrl
(60,010 posts)doesn't matter where he got the money in that case, altho spending Foundation on personal expenses is of course also illegal.
Making a news video about it is helpful to Mueller, of course.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)To not aversely affect the campaign or not.
Since he didn't report it...why can't he just go with it being personal?
underpants
(182,868 posts)If it was from the campaign that clearly is illegal
- like Duncan Hunter paying for private school and a $600 rabbit
If it came from him or even outside the campaign it had to be reported as a contribution
Cohen and Trump discussing HOW to do it as we've heard on a tape makes it clear it was part of the campaign. It obviously was but the tape and Cohen being in charge of the RNC finances cement it.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)It all part of campaign? Was that subject (hey this is bad for our campaign) said on that tape? Otherwise thought a while back it would be difficult to prove it was done so as not to hurt his chances. Timing close to election was one angle. Michael s funds weren't campaign funds literally were they?
FakeNoose
(32,722 posts)Mueller figures that was how they tried to make it look like a real campaign expense.
But Underpants made the point above that none of that was necessary if Cheeto had just said, yes I authorized this and it's a private matter not related to the campaign. Instead they tried to pass it off as a campaign expense. Cheeto told Cohen to pay the $130K out of his pocket, and get reimbursed on the sly later. Cohen had to take out a 2nd mortgage to swing that cash, as I understand it.
underpants
(182,868 posts)That part got me. 11 years dealing with Mr. Bigshot (and taking a lot of verbal abuse from him) and he didn't have $130K? Okay maybe Cohen thought the loan would muddy the trail, I don't know.
Merlot
(9,696 posts)He didn't claim $4M in income to not pay taxes, yet couldn't come up with $130K
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Cohen, but have heard Cohen saying " no, no, no.." like you would say at dinner when someone else tried to pick up the check. It struck me like Cohen was trying to act like he would take care of it..no worries. To impress him ? Wasn't Cohen dreaming about following trump to the WH and got dropped? Maybe Cohen fell into the same trap Junior did...always trying to please a father who could never be pleased and knew how to manipulate.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)reported as a direct campaign expense. If the sexual favours purchased were related to the campaign, it is also legal...if it is reported.
The issue is the not reporting either as a campaign expense, in kind or direct.
Clearly Shitler did not want this stuff to spill out during his campaign...so he lied and hid it and told his lawyer to do so.
The greater issue is Shitler directing Cohen to coverup the sexual favours being purchased at all, all the while blissfully unaware the solicitor-client umbrella is not an iron dome...if you are conspiring in a crime.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)underpants
(182,868 posts)Okay that title might not be exactly correct but Cohen did have a high seat in the RNC.
sarge43
(28,942 posts)"....Trump, since even by his account it appears he was aware that Cohen committed a crime on his behalf and didn't say or do anything about it."
That is called being an accessory and that's a crime. It doesn't matter at what point individual became aware of the crime.
Plus, he's violated the Rule of Holes.
STOP DIGGING!
ProfessorGAC
(65,150 posts)Donnie, here's a bigger shovel!
LiberalFighter
(51,041 posts)cstanleytech
(26,317 posts)both the timing of the payments in question as well as the fact his past history of cheating on his other wives was well known so I doubt she would be shocked that he would do it to her as well.
No, in the end this was about trying to kill a story that he believed could have hurt his chances to get into office so it was campaign related thus he is just as guilty as Cohen.
Garrett78
(10,721 posts)Thekaspervote
(32,787 posts)bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Right now theyre shattered all norms and defied former policies. If they can try to seat a SC judge now so close to an election, and Comey comment on candidates before and election, Mueller can issue his report whenever he wants. No more holding us to standards they would never follow. Thats a suckers game.
SCantiGOP
(13,871 posts)which would take years, it would have to be the Justice Dept to decide that the Prez can be indicted.
So, in reality, it is correct to say that, at this time, a sitting President cant be indicted. And Mueller has endorsed that opinion in the past.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)He shouldnt be indicted. Its ridiculous to argue its a blanket policy. Its not in the constitution. Its supposed to prevent his work from being disrupted- but being impeached is legal and just as disruptive. The legality of this policy is completely baseless.
onenote
(42,747 posts)Thus, in all likelihood, the prosecution would wait for Congress to do so before trying him (and maybe even before indicting him).
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Depending on how the midterms go and what comes out in terms of the upcoming trials and other reporting.
I think we really can stall the Kavanaugh thing and depending on how the midterms turn out he would look neutered and weak. Thats going to hurt his own approval more than anything and if congress of fed up, he is toast.
I think it depends on the crime but yeah, an indictment could happen before the impeachment. Nothing is normal anymore.
cstanleytech
(26,317 posts)Congress would still have some power over it as they would be the ones that set the budgets and the President could still make some appointments (though those appointments expire after his final day in office) but he cannot dismiss anyone from there job as that would be the legislative branches job.
LiberalFighter
(51,041 posts)Allowing a criminal to remain as President would be wrong. The President needs to be held to a higher standard.
onenote
(42,747 posts)That "policy" is in the Constitution.
Totally Tunsie
(10,885 posts)surely Mueller and the DOJ can do that too. Since it's not law, merely the norm, Mueller needs to "My Way" an indictment of tRump. Lock him up!
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)They are playing fast and loose w policies and interpreting them any way they can. I dont know why anyone would agree that before the midterm elections is no time to pursue the law. Thats just fucked up.
underpants
(182,868 posts)Nixon's act clearly were while he was POTUS
The beginning of the Clinton investigationS were about his actions prior to POTUS but they ended up impeaching him for action while POTUS.
LiberalFighter
(51,041 posts)Mc Mike
(9,115 posts)now that he's in office, he's committing felonies, high crimes, and misdemeanors to stay in office, involving covering up those election time felonies and misdemeanors. Far straighter and clearer line between his pre and post election criminal actions than starr had with whitewater and lewinsky.
underpants
(182,868 posts)That's probably what I was trying to get across.
Mc Mike
(9,115 posts)revolutionary war costumes with teabags hanging off them and the revolutionary war flags could attest to that idea, I suppose.
lame54
(35,315 posts)If it's changed the repugs will use it to oust a dem pres for sneezing
Garrett78
(10,721 posts)librechik
(30,676 posts)unblock
(52,306 posts)the article literally calls it a fact.
it's not.
it hasn't happened before, donnie's defenders claim it can't happen, and at the moment it appears to be a policy of the department of justice (although that only says he wouldn't be indicted on *federal* charges).
no reason to think he can't be indicted on a state charge, and possibly even a federal charge, though either way it would surely be challenged up to the supreme court.
in any case, it's certainly not a "fact".
RockRaven
(14,990 posts)Corporations are people, my friend. And Trump Org isn't Donald Trump. Donald Trump could have donated an unlimited amount to his own campaign, and gotten a slap on the wrist for failing to properly report it. Trump Org could not make such a donation. Oh, and say hello to RICO, you are about to get intimately familiar with one another. Womp womp.
Ilsa
(61,697 posts)in excess of allowable limits.
GeorgeGist
(25,322 posts)erlewyne
(1,115 posts)Sarah Sanders was shown saying that Trump has not been named
on any charges.
Chuck made the point that Trump is an unnamed co-conspirator.
This just struck me as funny!
EW
LiberalFighter
(51,041 posts)then who is the "in coordination and at the direction of a candidate for federal office"?
lpbk2713
(42,766 posts)And it's downright impossible when someone is as weak minded as Trump.
Gothmog
(145,489 posts)Trump really did confess to a crime here
Perseus
(4,341 posts)Its still a crime, its hush money...
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)If the money had come from the campaign and was reported as a campaign expenditure, then it would have been fine.
Paying people not to talk about things is not illegal.
underpants
(182,868 posts)I can't believe she didn't have some nondescript named LLC they could have funneled it too but then the way they do business.....
Cohen set up a corporation to make the payment if I remember correctly. Why didn't he set up one for both of these women?
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Dem_4_Life
(1,765 posts)What an idiot
DallasNE
(7,403 posts)That is a false statement. They came from Trump Inc. making it a business expense deduction on his tax return making it either tax fraud or a campaign finance law infraction it is lose lose for Trump
D_Master81
(1,822 posts)I meant they didnt come from me
Totally Tunsie
(10,885 posts)Is BigBoy eligible for "English as a Second Language" classes?
NickPeace
(82 posts)I am hearing a bit more about this, and the word impeachment more often as well. I like it! 😊
Fritz Walter
(4,291 posts)Not only would it get him off center stage, but also agolf twittler could use A-25 as the grounds for acquittal - not guilty due to mental incompetence. Just summon me for that jury. Please!
That would work 👍
Alea
(706 posts)uponit7771
(90,359 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)and put his criminal ass on a witness stand?
garybeck
(9,942 posts)i heard a discussion on npr today. they said basically the opposite of this article, that a person can contribute as much as they want to their own campaign.
they said if a contribution of $130K came from another person or business, that would be more than the max allowed and would be illegal.
it is possible that what is illegal about paying for it himself is that he did not report it.
however there is more going on because of the way that the money was transferred to cover up where it actually came from.
but simply contributing to his own campaign is not illegal in itself.