• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

The common thread in Trump's defenders

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
8,078
2,554
✟263,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
They were considered campaign contributions because they were made to prevent damage to his status as a candidate. Think of it like an advertising expense: you buy ads to make your guy look good and you buy ads to make the other guy look bad.
Trump paid him back. How is that a campaign violation. It was loan. The payback is where the money was found.....Trump paid Stormy Daniels, not Cohen in the end.
Your opponent does the same thing in reverse. Advertising/messaging is a big part of a campaign's expenditures and I don't think it's unreasonable to consider as campaign expenses those costs incurred during a campaign to protect a candidate's image . John Edwards was prosecuted for more-or-less the same thing in 2011 for hiding his affair during the 2008 campaign.
Trump paid stormy Daniels, not Cohen. Cohen got the money back..
 
Upvote 0

iluvatar5150

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2012
29,411
29,090
Baltimore
✟751,506.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Trump paid him back. How is that a campaign violation. It was loan. The payback is where the money was found.....Trump paid Stormy Daniels, not Cohen in the end.

You should take some time to read up on the relevant laws. You and several others keep getting a bunch of basic stuff wrong that would be remedied with a bit of homework.

There are strict limits on how much a person can donate to a campaign. Cohen greatly exceeded those limits. Candidates are exempt from those limits with respect to their own campaigns, but are not exempt from reporting donations or loans to their campaigns. Trump did not report these contributions.

It's also true that corporations are not allowed to make any donations directly to political campaigns, and at least some of the reimbursements were made to Cohen through the Trump Organization. I'm not clear on whether or not this played into any of the charges, but it wouldn't surprise me if it did.
 
Upvote 0

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
8,078
2,554
✟263,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
The problem is that to justify extending the statute of limitations, the prosecution had to prove that the documents were internally falsified with the intent of concealing a crime. Some claim that the other "crime" was election interference. However, no evidence was even discussed or presented pointing to election fraud. Even if there was, this would have been a federal crime to be tried in a federal court. Furthermore, the star witness of the prosecution, Michael Cohen, admitted (under oath) that he internally falsified the documents without Trump's knowledge to steal from Trump because he did not get the bonus he felt he deserved! That in itself should have been enough to close the case. But this is Trump we are talking about and the left could not afford to loose this opportunity to destroy him. So the left just covered their ears and pretended Cohen's confession never happened. Again, no such evidence was presented, nor was there any argument that election interference ever happened. So instead, the judge immediately barred any Trump supporter from being in the jury (so much for having a jury of his peers) and instructed them that as long as they "believed" Trump was covering up a crime, it was enough to find him guilty. So not only was this a trial looking for a crime, it was a trial where the court could literally imagine a crime without evidence. So to answer your question, my evidence is a lack of evidence. When asked what crime Trump committed, all I hear is just regurgitation from left wing sources who tell their followers what to think or believe.

In the end, it doesn't really matter. Trump will defeat Biden on election day, he will pardon himself, he will spend his first day of office purging the leftist corruption, and there will be riots and violent meltdowns never seen before. Days after the election, the violence from the left will make the 2020 BLM and Jan 6th look like a love fest.
In the end I hope he does not pardon himself. This needs to be overturned, and his rights being violted needs to be remedied. If this stands, this stuff is going ruin this country
 
Upvote 0

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
8,078
2,554
✟263,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
You should take some time to read up on the relevant laws. You and several others keep getting a bunch of basic stuff wrong that would be remedied with a bit of homework.

There are strict limits on how much a person can donate to a campaign. Cohen greatly exceeded those limits.
How is that a donation? Trump was to pay him back.
Candidates are exempt from those limits with respect to their own campaigns, but are not exempt from reporting donations or loans to their campaigns. Trump did not report these contributions.
Was it a loan? It was a loan to Trump...
It's also true that corporations are not allowed to make any donations directly to political campaigns, and at least some of the reimbursements were made to Cohen through the Trump Organization. I'm not clear on whether or not this played into any of the charges, but it wouldn't surprise me if it did.
It was not a donation. They made a non-disclosure agreement a campaign contribution. Ridiculous.
 
Upvote 0

Foamhead

I like water
Aug 27, 2005
779
746
47
✟60,505.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Others
Like I said, I will not be asking you for anything.

If I really want to know something, I will go to someone who is not biased and actually knows
Apparently your idea of "not biased" means "tells me what I want to hear". You will also note I didn't actually address the question of what Trump was charged with, other people did, so you have no idea what my bias may or may not be.

What I said was you have been answered multiple times and continuing to ask as if you had not is, in my opinion, trolling.

Cheers.
 
Upvote 0

iluvatar5150

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2012
29,411
29,090
Baltimore
✟751,506.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
It was not a donation. They made a non-disclosure agreement a campaign contribution. Ridiculous.
It's not only not ridiculous, it's not inconsistent with previous applications of the law, which you would know if you'd educated yourself a bit.

But I get it - homework is hard and it's much easier to be angry and rant about how bad the other people are.
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Elliewaves
Upvote 0

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
8,078
2,554
✟263,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
It's not only not ridiculous, it's not inconsistent with previous applications of the law, which you would know if you'd educated yourself a bit.

But I get it - homework is hard and it's much easier to be angry and rant about how bad the other people are.
What previous application? Where has a non disclosure agreement been made into a campaign contribution before? Legal scholars I have watched are educated.
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
41,812
44,921
Los Angeles Area
✟1,000,810.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Upvote 0

iluvatar5150

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2012
29,411
29,090
Baltimore
✟751,506.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
What previous application? Where has a non disclosure agreement been made into a campaign contribution before?

The John Edwards case is the most applicable, but Clarence Norman in Brooklyn was also convicted of soliciting a third party to cover campaign expenses in excess of the contribution limits.



Legal scholars I have watched are educated.

What legal scholars?
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Elliewaves
Upvote 0

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
8,078
2,554
✟263,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
The John Edwards case is the most applicable, but Clarence Norman in Brooklyn was also convicted of soliciting a third party to cover campaign expenses in excess of the contribution limits.





What legal scholars?
John Edwards took money from DONORS to his campaign. He did not have that kind of money.......This is the opposite of what happened with Trump.....Trump paid for a legal non disclosure agreement. They made it into a campaign contribution.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
41,812
44,921
Los Angeles Area
✟1,000,810.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
John Edwards took money from DONORS to his campaign.......This is the opposit of what happened with Trump.....
It really isn't.

Michael Cohen (the donor) paid Stormy Daniels (in an illegal campaign donation).

The elaborate scheme for Trump to reimburse Michael Cohen required the falsification of business documents to disguise the campaign donation as imaginary legal services. That is the crime that Trump was charged with and convicted of.
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
41,812
44,921
Los Angeles Area
✟1,000,810.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
The drugs analogy again is helpful

The charges in the first degree apply because these false invoices and payments were falsified in order to disguise "another crime".

Rather than bank robbing, the analogy I've been thinking about is buying drugs.

Michael Cohen buys $130,000 of illicit narcotics with his own money and gives it all to Donald Trump. (Just as Trump is the ultimate beneficiary of the NDA.)

Donald Trump could write a check for $130,000 and put "Repayment for the illicit narcotics" in the memo section. But that might expose the commission of a crime.

Instead, to disguise that crime, he falsifies documents to make the payments be about fictitious legal services that were never performed.

Donald Trump wasn't charged with buying drugs. Because he didn't buy drugs.
Donald Trump wasn't charged with making an illegal campaign donation. Because he didn't make one.

He was charged with falsifying business documents to conceal the fact that a crime was committed.
 
Upvote 0

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
8,078
2,554
✟263,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
It really isn't.

Michael Cohen (the donor) paid Stormy Daniels (in an illegal campaign donation).
That is where COSTELLO comes in....I think also Hope Hicks. Costello testified Cohen did it all on his own. He wanted to be among the staff of Trumps presidency. Hope Hicks, testified that Cohen as a fixer, was mostly fixing things that he himself messed up. He would often go rogue.
And if you will notice, the DONORS to Edwards attempted to say their money was a gift.....Because Edwards did not have enough money to outright pay personally.... Cohen it was not a gift, Trump was to pay him back...
The elaborate scheme for Trump to reimburse Michael Cohen required the falsification of business documents to disguise the campaign donation as imaginary legal services. That is the crime that Trump was charged with and convicted of.
It was Cohen's elaborate scheme. TRUMP could easily pay 130,000 . It was also that he was stealing from Trump, that he did stuff like that....
 
Upvote 0

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
8,078
2,554
✟263,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
The drugs analogy again is helpful



Donald Trump wasn't charged with buying drugs. Because he didn't buy drugs.
Donald Trump wasn't charged with making an illegal campaign donation. Because he didn't make one.

He was charged with falsifying business documents to conceal the fact that a crime was committed.
I know what COHEN bought. He bought stormy Daniels silence as that is what non disclosure agreements DO. And they are Legal, not illegal. Even if Donald Trump knew Cohen did it on his own (ridiculous because Trump could have easily done it himself, unlike Edwards) it is not illegal.
Edwards accepted campaign Money, he used for a hidden purpose. Trumps money they turned into campaign money, simply because he was running for office.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
41,812
44,921
Los Angeles Area
✟1,000,810.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
That is where COSTELLO comes in....I think also Hope Hicks. Costello testified Cohen did it all on his own.
You're getting your defenses confused. Correct. Cohen was the donor. He was not paying this money to benefit himself, but to benefit Trump's election chances. Hence, Cohen went to prison for this too-large campaign donation and his other crimes.
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Elliewaves
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Fact-Based Lifeform
Oct 17, 2011
41,812
44,921
Los Angeles Area
✟1,000,810.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Edwards accepted campaign Money, he used for a hidden purpose.
Nope!

Payments to Hunter and Young

In August 2008, Fred Baron, Edwards' campaign finance chairman, told NBC News that he had been providing financial assistance to both Hunter and Young without Edwards' knowledge; he further stated that no campaign funds had been used.

Baron/Cohen was not paying that money to benefit himself, but to benefit Edwards'/Trump's election chances. So what does that make the payment? Correct. It is a campaign donation. And an illegal one due to its size.
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Elliewaves
Upvote 0

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
8,078
2,554
✟263,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
You're getting your defenses confused. Correct. Cohen was the donor. He was not paying this money to benefit himself, but to benefit Trump's election chances. Hence, Cohen went to prison for this too-large campaign donation and his other crimes.among the white house staff
Non disclosure agreements are done all the time, they are not illegal. No matter why they are done......But that court and prosecutor made the why of it a campaign contribution. The opposite of what EDWARDS DID....

Cohen, does everything to benefit himself. Costello testified to Cohen wanting to be among the white house staff. The presidents personal lawyer. Which Costello said Cohen was not qualified for.....He stole from Trump through his ROGUE ways. Which ways Hope hicks testified to. Stormy's lawyers contacted him. Shady guy all around.

Non disclosure agreements are done all the time, they are not illegal.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
8,078
2,554
✟263,173.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Nope!

Payments to Hunter and Young

In August 2008, Fred Baron, Edwards' campaign finance chairman, told NBC News that he had been providing financial assistance to both Hunter and Young without Edwards' knowledge; he further stated that no campaign funds had been used.

Baron/Cohen was not paying that money to benefit himself, but to benefit Edwards'/Trump's election chances. So what does that make the payment? Correct. It is a campaign donation. And an illegal one due to its size.
It still does not matter. Edwards was having it paid for by someone else. He could not pay it. Trump DID...... Edwards did not pay for a non disclosure agreement, and then have that classed a campaign contribution, of his own money...

Here is the quote again
Campaign contributions.

." The indictment alleged that Edwards conspired to accept and receive campaign contributions exceeding legal limits to protect and advance his candidacy while concealing the unlawful contributions from the public2."

Trump, had a non disclosure agreement.
two different things
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0