While I disagree with NightlyPoe on a lot of things, I have to agree with him that you have completely failed to answer the hypothetical question he's asked you twice now and requested an answer for.  You also haven't explicitly refused to answer and given a reason for doing so.  You've just ignored it even though NightlyPoe made it clear that the point his question was illustrating was a central part of the point he was trying to make. 

Hypothetically, it could be that you think the payment should be illegal both ways, and then his question would be irrelevant, but you haven't said that either.  (If you did say this I would expect you to justify it.) 

For my own part, while I agree with NightlyPoe's sentiment that campaign money ought not be used for paying hush money to mistresses, I do think that Machiavellian is completely right that the payments here were clearly motivated by and pursuant to the ongoing campaign and therefore, if one side of his dichotomy is is correct, then it is the one saying it should be reported. I also think this is supported by the clear fact that it would be information relevant to the decision process of many conscientious voters. Repulsed though NightlyPoe and I am by the idea, the remedy is not for candidates to use personal money in secret for campaign reasons, but rather for the people to not give campaign donations to candidates with a bunch of talkative mistresses waiting to come out of the woodwork.

The thing about hush money is that if you declare what you had used the money for it kind of defeats the purpose of hush money.  

Ok, so your answer is that everyone is corrupt and no matter how many times Trump will lie about anything whether big or small you believe his actions so far shows he is legit.  Yeah that sounds like a cop out.  I support this corrupt person because I believe everyone else is corrupt.  I am not sure what actions make you believe Trump is somehow more honest then his years of basic lying, cheating and incompetence but that part I will not argue.  

My point is that it seems you just excuse everything.  Its one thing for someone to be wrong, to make mistakes, its another for people to be tolerant if that person constantly does something wrong and just accept it.

Did Stormy lose her husband during this whole thing.  Yeah, maybe you see she turned out ok but it appears to me she lost something and probably at the end of this will lose more for dealing with Trump.

Ahhh, ok, I see yours and his point.  No, I do not believe paying hush money is illegal.  What I have been arguing is if he was advised that the payment violated campaign finance laws and did it anyway then he choose to ignore them, felt that he could get away with it and believe those laws do not apply to him.  I do not care if Trump paid hush money to any of these woman.  My point is did he do so knowing that he was violating these laws.  There appear to be evidence that at least he understood that these payments were needed because they pose a risk to the campaign.  

Ok, I can agree that a lawyer would take whatever is the lesser of the charges for his client if they are guilty.  I am still not sure what part here is a lesser crime.  Yes, he was offered a plea deal for admitting guilt for reduced sentence.  We will have to see exactly how that plays out if this ever goes any further than Cohen going to jail.

No, my answer was "considering any individual who follows a political path, is corrupt enough that they shouldn't be given this type of power ever." I never said anything about always believing Trump, your assuming that. I also never said I supported him. You assume because I'm indirectly taking his side in this case, that I'm solely on his side, when I just explained how the situation would play out based on the facts available.

Your point is more of a blunt edge. This is one topic about one situation, and yet I'm somehow defending everything Trump has ever done? I'm not a coloring book, but if I was, your supposed to stay inside the edges, not color the entire page.

So you say it's Trump's own fault for screwing around with Stormy, and he should face any consequences that arise because of that, but Stormy is solely a victim and isn't responsible at all for her side of the poor decisions, and everyone should feel sorry for her? Apparently her husband doesn't have a lot of good to say about her aside from just the Trump fling. Is she not the one who came forward in the first place? It's Trump's fault she didn't think things through back then and more recently?

I don't think he follows through on those tweets.  "Go after" would mean directing them (FBI) to put major resources into digging through their (police) entire lives looking for any little thing to nail them on for the explicit purpose of crippling the investigation against himself, due to the distraction if nothing else. 

If we're talking about prosecutorial discretion, aren't we in the gray area between the executive and judicial branches?  I imagine that the president's powers aren't unfettered there either.  I believe people have gotten in trouble for abusing prosecutorial discretion.

I had thought you were talking about what might be called "investigatorial discretion", i.e. "don't investigate this guy", which is close to a mirror equivalent to "investigate the hell out of these guys", my hypothetical. 

For that matter, the subject of the investigation (the "active policing" you mentioned) isn't directly relevant, but the president's actions would indirectly affect it.  I'm posting in a hurry, but I'm not convinced at a glance that an indirect effect of this nature would run afoul of the limits you suggest.  Maybe, though. 

Isn't the reason we are here is a direct result of Trump actions.  One of the things I continue to state is that because of Trump's inexperience in politics and his willingness to not care about the laws put into place over his office has made political blunders left and right.  Even the Comey firing could have been done when he was elected, not after he made a request for Comey to let things slide.  Next, he could have stuck with the story Sessions presented and the document from Rosenstein giving the green light to fire Comey but he had to go on national TV and admit it was over the Russian investigation (really, how stupid can you be).  The investigation was going nowhere under Comey because it was totally under funded.  If he listen to his daughter and Son in Law, this whole thing would have been over long ago.

The hush money payment also looks like another example where Trump was given information that this would be a violation and he decided to go for it.  Trump doesn't respect the laws that govern his office and since he loves to push the boundaries, people have to accept that he will trip over one of them and find himself  in legal jeopardy.  The blame goes to the man making the decisions not the reactions as the results.