By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Trump's Personal Lawyer And Campaign Manager Both Going To Prison

SuaveSocialist on 24 August 2018

Ivanka, I'm in fear for my life
From the long arm of the law
Mueller's catching up to my running
And I'm so far from my home

Ivanka, I can hear you a-cryin'
You're so scared because you know
Mueller's comin' out of the shadows
And we don't have very long...

The jig is up, the word is out
They got my attorney
We used to meet on Easy Street
How could he desert me?

There's gonna be Hell to pay
Mueller Ain't Going Away
I'm a wanted man...



Around the Network
boozehound on 24 August 2018
SpokenTruth said:
boozehound said:

That’s the only reason the investigation exists. Of course it has devolved into opposition research and ridiculous excuse for the state to harass a sitting president. Your lack of focus on Russia tells me exactly where you stand. You couldn’t care less about Russian collusion, you just want to see him burn like a heretic.

During the course of the main investigation, other crimes were uncovered.  Were they supposed to just ignore them?

Any Federal attorney could take over those charges. Mueller wasn’t appointed to go after decade plus old tax fraud. He is using the charges as leverage, it’s cheap squeeze tactics plain and simple. Only the blind couldn’t see through this charade. 



Machiavellian on 24 August 2018
boozehound said:
SpokenTruth said:

During the course of the main investigation, other crimes were uncovered.  Were they supposed to just ignore them?

Any Federal attorney could take over those charges. Mueller wasn’t appointed to go after decade plus old tax fraud. He is using the charges as leverage, it’s cheap squeeze tactics plain and simple. Only the blind couldn’t see through this charade. 

Actually you are right, that is why Mueller isn't making these charges, its the state of NY.  I believe you forgot that Mueller handed this off to the state jurisdiction since the original case to raid Cohen had nothing to do with the Russia investigation.  As for the tactics to squeeze a criminal to give up other criminals, this has been done since laws were instituted in a civilized country.  Why it has to be something cheap or a charade can only be explained by a Trump supporter who would let every criminal connected to Trump go free if they believe convicting them is harassment to the President.  It's not like Cohen isn't being convicted of crimes that has nothing to do with Trump.  If during Mueller investigation, Cohen crimes were also found, it appears that his team did the right thing and sent it to the State AG.



bowserthedog on 24 August 2018
JRPGfan said:
bowserthedog said:

Right but it's not a serious thing. Obama did it too and was fined.  It's not something you go to jail for or get impeached for.

Its a federal crime...... how is that not a "serious thing" ?
Its one of the things Michael cohen is going to jail for..... something he did FOR TRUMP, at his direction.

 

also "but obama did it tooo" :

"Election law experts said that more minor violations are treated as regulatory or civil matters, while egregious and willful campaign finance violations are treated as criminal acts" -
Jane C. Timm (nbc news)

Obama's was treated as a minor civil matter, because of the nature of it (what amount, and how it happend ect).
The two cases are not the same at all, Trumps violantion is much worse, his is being treated as a criminal act.
 

Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-cites-massive-obama-campaign-finance-violation-experts-say-cohen-n902921

 

 

Obama campagne finance violations (a week before he won, his campagne workers messed up):

missing filing deadlines (late to say I recieved some money as a donation)
reporting the wrong dates on donation (I mislabel something)

vs

Trump campagne finance violations (trump himself ordered his lawyer to do something unlawfull):

knowingly directed my lawyer to pay hushmoney, over the said amount allowed for, to kill a story that could have cost me the election.

 

They are 2 very differnt things.

Hush money is legal.  

You're basing all of this on Cohen's word. The words of a man who was facing much more time for other crimes committed. Since the money was paid back from Trump personally it was not a crime at all. It also occurred before he even ran for office. Give me an example of somebody else who ran for president and hush money was considered a campaign expense rather than a personal expense?



https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0JquK6FGR6O-0O-6L-VAuw

Machiavellian on 24 August 2018
bowserthedog said:
JRPGfan said:

Its a federal crime...... how is that not a "serious thing" ?
Its one of the things Michael cohen is going to jail for..... something he did FOR TRUMP, at his direction.

 

also "but obama did it tooo" :

"Election law experts said that more minor violations are treated as regulatory or civil matters, while egregious and willful campaign finance violations are treated as criminal acts" -
Jane C. Timm (nbc news)

Obama's was treated as a minor civil matter, because of the nature of it (what amount, and how it happend ect).
The two cases are not the same at all, Trumps violantion is much worse, his is being treated as a criminal act.
 

Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-cites-massive-obama-campaign-finance-violation-experts-say-cohen-n902921

 

 

Obama campagne finance violations (a week before he won, his campagne workers messed up):

missing filing deadlines (late to say I recieved some money as a donation)
reporting the wrong dates on donation (I mislabel something)

vs

Trump campagne finance violations (trump himself ordered his lawyer to do something unlawfull):

knowingly directed my lawyer to pay hushmoney, over the said amount allowed for, to kill a story that could have cost me the election.

 

They are 2 very differnt things.

Hush money is legal.  

You're basing all of this on Cohen's word. The words of a man who was facing much more time for other crimes committed. Since the money was paid back from Trump personally it was not a crime at all. It also occurred before he even ran for office. Give me an example of somebody else who ran for president and hush money was considered a campaign expense rather than a personal expense?

First let's stop saying Hush money is legal without the context.  The context is that the hush money was paid during a period when the President was a candidate and the amount of money used had to be reported.  Cohen and his lawyer are not going to plead guilty to a no charge, that is absolutely silly to even keep that pretense up. 

Now if you say that just because Cohen is guilty does that mean the President is guilty that's another story.  The only way to prove that President Trump is guilty is if he had full awareness that the money would violate campaign finance laws and he willingly order it done.  This is the distinction you should be arguing not whether the hush money is legal or not legal.  There is no legal scholar saying that what Cohen admitted to was not illegal as a rep and lawyer for the Trump campaign.  People really need to get their discussion points correct.

Now, this is where other evidence in the case that will determine if this part can be proven or not.  Emails, tapes, receipts you name it.  What no one knows yet is what evidence does Cohen has and the prosecutors that verify his statement that he was order to make the payments with Trump full understanding it was a violation.



Around the Network
bowserthedog on 24 August 2018
SpokenTruth said:
bowserthedog said:

Hush money is legal.  

You're basing all of this on Cohen's word. The words of a man who was facing much more time for other crimes committed. Since the money was paid back from Trump personally it was not a crime at all. It also occurred before he even ran for office. Give me an example of somebody else who ran for president and hush money was considered a campaign expense rather than a personal expense?

The payment happened in October 2016.  1 month before the election.

The problem with considering it a campaign expense is that in order for it to be considered a campaign expense you have to prove that it was done solely for the purpose of benefitting the campaign. Things like expensive hair cuts, american made suits benefit the campaign and aren't considered campaign expenses. For example. It should also be noted that Trump's campaign would be charged not Trump personally if this is indeed viewed as a violation by the FEC.

If intentions matter as it seems like a lot of you are suggesting it should also be noted that the law exists to prevent private entities from donating so much that they can control the candidate once they are in power. This is clearly an example where it was in no way an attempt to buy political favors from Trump. 

Here's an informative piece about the law around campaign over donating.  Nowhere does it mention the possibility of anything more than a fine. 

 

https://www.wileyrein.com/newsroom-newsletters-item-709.html



https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0JquK6FGR6O-0O-6L-VAuw

Machiavellian on 24 August 2018
bowserthedog said:
SpokenTruth said:

The payment happened in October 2016.  1 month before the election.

The problem with considering it a campaign expense is that in order for it to be considered a campaign expense you have to prove that it was done solely for the purpose of benefitting the campaign. Things like expensive hair cuts, american made suits benefit the campaign and aren't considered campaign expenses. For example. It should also be noted that Trump's campaign would be charged not Trump personally if this is indeed viewed as a violation by the FEC.

If intentions matter as it seems like a lot of you are suggesting it should also be noted that the law exists to prevent private entities from donating so much that they can control the candidate once they are in power. This is clearly an example where it was in no way an attempt to buy political favors from Trump. 

Here's an informative piece about the law around campaign over donating.  Nowhere does it mention the possibility of anything more than a fine. 

 

https://www.wileyrein.com/newsroom-newsletters-item-709.html

That is a misleading article since it only talks about the fine penalty.  Here is something a little more comprehesive and it has jail time.

https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/news/congressional-testimony-and-reports/campaign-finance/200305_RtC_Increased_Penalties_Campaign_Finance_Offenses.pdf

Got to the Amendment section as you will find the fine for such crimes is only just part of what can happen.  Basically we would need to know if this was to go to trial against the President what level prosecutors would change.  At the end of the day, if prosecutors believe the offense is serious enough, it would be considered no different than a criminal fraud case with jail time.

Last edited by Machiavellian - on 24 August 2018

bowserthedog on 24 August 2018
Machiavellian said:
bowserthedog said:

The problem with considering it a campaign expense is that in order for it to be considered a campaign expense you have to prove that it was done solely for the purpose of benefitting the campaign. Things like expensive hair cuts, american made suits benefit the campaign and aren't considered campaign expenses. For example. It should also be noted that Trump's campaign would be charged not Trump personally if this is indeed viewed as a violation by the FEC.

If intentions matter as it seems like a lot of you are suggesting it should also be noted that the law exists to prevent private entities from donating so much that they can control the candidate once they are in power. This is clearly an example where it was in no way an attempt to buy political favors from Trump. 

Here's an informative piece about the law around campaign over donating.  Nowhere does it mention the possibility of anything more than a fine. 

 

https://www.wileyrein.com/newsroom-newsletters-item-709.html

That is a misleading article since it only talks about the fine penalty.  Here is something a little more comprehesive and it has jail time.

https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/news/congressional-testimony-and-reports/campaign-finance/200305_RtC_Increased_Penalties_Campaign_Finance_Offenses.pdf

Got to the Amendment section as you will find it the fine is only just part of what can happen.  Basically we would need to know if this was to go to trial against the President what level prosecutors would change.  At the end of the day, if prosecutors believe the offense is serious enough, it would be considered no different than a criminal fraud case with jail time.

The problem with all of these arguments is that the Trump Campaign hasn't been charged. What more proof do you need that he hadn't done anything illegal in this case?

In order for it to qualify for the more serious offence, there is a list of conditions which need to have been met.

"(2) Provide a sentencing enhancement for any person convicted of such violation if such violation involves – (A) a contribution, donation, or expenditure from a foreign source; (B) a large number of illegal transactions; (C) a large aggregate amount of illegal contributions, donations, or expenditures; (D) the receipt or disbursement of governmental funds; and (E) an intent to achieve a benefit from the Federal Government."  

We will have to wait and see what happens. But based on history I think it's going to be very difficult to see Trump get into legal trouble on this one. You have to be able to prove two things for it to potential end up in criminal charges against the campaign. You'd have to prove that Trump would not have wanted to silence these women for personal reason such as embarrassment or his wife finding out. This was something that prosecutors failed to do in the case of John Edwards a few years back. You'd also have to prove that Trump didn't pay Cohen back using his own personal money. And for a guy who spent over 60 million of his own money it would be very hard to do so. I personally find it a bit humorous that a guy who received the lowest amount of public donations in modern times that he'd be the one to go down for a donation that was clearly not intended to influence him. 

BTW.  Politifact has it as similar to Obama in potential severity. 

https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/cfe97272-bf17-4f08-b0e3-ba3788daa810



https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0JquK6FGR6O-0O-6L-VAuw

Machiavellian on 24 August 2018
SpokenTruth said:
bowserthedog said:

The problem with considering it a campaign expense is that in order for it to be considered a campaign expense you have to prove that it was done solely for the purpose of benefitting the campaign. Things like expensive hair cuts, american made suits benefit the campaign and aren't considered campaign expenses. For example. It should also be noted that Trump's campaign would be charged not Trump personally if this is indeed viewed as a violation by the FEC.

If intentions matter as it seems like a lot of you are suggesting it should also be noted that the law exists to prevent private entities from donating so much that they can control the candidate once they are in power. This is clearly an example where it was in no way an attempt to buy political favors from Trump. 

Here's an informative piece about the law around campaign over donating.  Nowhere does it mention the possibility of anything more than a fine. 

 

https://www.wileyrein.com/newsroom-newsletters-item-709.html

That's because that site is only listing the civil penalties. That's what the FEC has purview over.  the DoJ has criminal purview over campaign finance violations.  Are you completely ignoring the fact that Cohen has already plead guilty to one count of willfully causing an unlawful corporate contribution and one count of making an excessive campaign contribution at the request of a candidate or campaign for the "principal purpose of influencing [the] election"?

Here is a link to the documents for the case of The United States of America vs Michael Cohen.
https://www.vox.com/2018/8/21/17765496/michael-cohen-plea-deal-sdny-criminal-prison

The funny part is all these people who keep saying the hush money isn't a crime definitely not doing their research.  If they really wanted to go the defense route with Trump, they could easily state the President could state he did not know it was a violation of campaign laws, then the burden of proof would drop to Cohen and prosecutors to prove he is lying.  but then again, Trump and his big mouth probably going off script throws John Edwards into the mix making it appear during his interviews he understood where his hush money fell.  I am sure if it stays in the media long enough the idiot would incriminate himself without even knowing it.



boozehound on 24 August 2018
Machiavellian said:
boozehound said:

Any Federal attorney could take over those charges. Mueller wasn’t appointed to go after decade plus old tax fraud. He is using the charges as leverage, it’s cheap squeeze tactics plain and simple. Only the blind couldn’t see through this charade. 

Actually you are right, that is why Mueller isn't making these charges, its the state of NY.  I believe you forgot that Mueller handed this off to the state jurisdiction since the original case to raid Cohen had nothing to do with the Russia investigation.  As for the tactics to squeeze a criminal to give up other criminals, this has been done since laws were instituted in a civilized country.  Why it has to be something cheap or a charade can only be explained by a Trump supporter who would let every criminal connected to Trump go free if they believe convicting them is harassment to the President.  It's not like Cohen isn't being convicted of crimes that has nothing to do with Trump.  If during Mueller investigation, Cohen crimes were also found, it appears that his team did the right thing and sent it to the State AG.

You are mistaken. The plea deal is with mueller, the NY DA is going for additional state charges after they pass what they need to under state law. The federal stuff is done, he plead guilty. That’s why a Trump pardon would be useless for Cohen even though I doubt Trump would pardon him at this point anyway. I already mentioned this in my first post, it’s obvious why he flipped so I’m not forgetting anything. I don’t know why you keep saying that lol. The NY attorney is the one that granted immunity to the CFO and it has to do with the Daniels NDA which is a bogus charge to begin with. 

I like how you assume trump is already a criminal and think it’s civilized to use a special counsel to frame a sitting president. This isn’t a standard rat case like you want to treat it. He is a sitting president whether you like it or not. Your point is irrelevant, raiding a presidents lawyers office based on a phony dossier isn’t standard everyday stuff. No, this hasn’t been done before, it’s a fucking joke and your excuses for it just because it’s Trump is on you. Don’t try to make me seem like a crazy trump supporter when it’s you who support this mockery of our justice system. If trump is a criminal I want to see the crime, until then you are full of it. It is cheap and a charade. You can write it off with generic trump supporter insults if you want but I know my shit and you aren’t phasing me.