The major takeaway from the 40-page sentencing memorandum filed by federal prosecutors Friday for Michael Cohen, President Trump’s former personal attorney, is this: The president is very likely to be indicted on a charge of violating federal campaign finance laws.
It has been obvious for some time that President Trump is the principal subject of the investigation still being conducted by the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York.
Cohen earlier pleaded guilty to multiple counts of business and tax fraud, violating campaign finance law, and making false statements to Congress regarding unsuccessful efforts to build a Trump Tower in Moscow.
Yes, Cohen has stated he did the hands-on work in orchestrating hush-money payments to two women who claim to have had sexual liaisons with Trump many years ago (liaisons Trump denies).
But when Cohen pleaded guilty in August, prosecutors induced him to make an extraordinary statement in open court: the payments to the women were made “in coordination with and at the direction of” the candidate for federal office – Donald Trump.
Prosecutors would not have done this if the president was not on their radar screen. Indeed, if the president was not implicated, I suspect they would not have prosecuted Cohen for campaign finance violations at all. Those charges had a negligible impact on the jail time Cohen faces, which is driven by the more serious offenses of tax and financial institution fraud, involving millions of dollars. ..."
In marked contrast, though, when it was discovered that Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign was guilty of violations involving nearly $2 million – an amount that dwarfs the $280,000 in Cohen’s case – the Obama Justice Department decided not to prosecute. Instead, the matter was quietly disposed of by a $375,000 fine by the Federal Election Commission.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
This is only a scare tactic by the Dems. Campaign contribution violations are usually only paid off by fines (as was Obama’s $2 million). Furthermore, it’s a very minor crime to pursue a president with.
Additionally, Trump not only has several ways to delay this until he leaves office, but Cohen himself has proven to be a liar, so the prosecution’s case itself is suspect.
I think Trump will simply threaten that information on sexual harassment payments by Congress might be leaked somehow, and then the whole thing will disappear.
Stormy Daniels wasn’t running for office.
There is no there there on this... at worst there is a technocratic “crime” of failing to report...
The left salivating over this is nonsensical.
Please, please go for the impeachment dems... please, go for it... you will lose the house, and any shot at the White House is done as well....
Stupidity... where’s the collusion?
President Trump consistently stays on offense.
I love this man and am so grateful for ALL that he as done for us in his short time in office.
There are those who want EVERYTHING done, like impatient children, but I’ll stick with him because he knows WHEN and HOW to do things.
“”President Trump on Monday denied the hush-money payments to porn star Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal in the weeks leading up to the 2016 election were campaign contributions, instead calling them a “simple private transaction.””
I leave and I keep coming back to the wording in this thread - why on earth is money PAID to shut someone up referred to as “campaign contributions?” Do they mean to say “PAID FROM CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS?” Was this dame running a campaign for something and just raising money?
I understand that Cohen played games and went to great extremes classifying what the payment was for - did he classify it as “CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS” - if so, to whom?
No wonder things are so messed up in this country. No one speaks or writes anymore so a normal person (I used to be one) can make sense of what they’re seeing or hearing.
After John Edwards was indicted, FEC auditors determined that the hush money he received from wealthy
donors to cover up a torrid affair did not need to be reported in the campaign's financial disclosure reports,
his campaign's chief financial officer testified.
After three weeks of salacious testimony about Edwards' affair with mistress Rielle Hunter and the nearly $1 million
collected to keep it quiet, Edwards' lawyers kicked off their defense focusing on the much less steamy intricacies
of campaign finance law.
After reviewing the campaign's financials for four years, the FEC determined last month that money Edwards' aides
collected from wealthy donors Rachel "Bunny" Mellon and Fred Baron were "not campaign contribution[s],"
Lora Haggard, Edwards' 2008 chief financial officer, said........ (Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
Tucker covered this really good last night (which is why it puzzles me he was so anti-Trump in that interview, as he seems to carry water for him otherwise)
Getting a haircut expensed to the campaign should also be disclosed as it gives and advantage to the candidate. They are stretching the definitions here.