Posted on 12/08/2018 10:25:47 PM PST by Para-Ord.45
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.
..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.
...Moreover, campaign finance infractions are often settled by payment of an administrative fine, not turned into felony prosecutions. To be sure, federal prosecutors in New York City have charged them as felonies before – most notably in 2014 against Dinesh D’Souza, whom Trump later pardoned.
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 ...
Yes they are. Everything that is being filed in court filings is based upon what Cohen is saying.
Daniels and McDougal all occurred before Trump even considered running for office.
No, incorrect. It has nothing has to do with what Cohen said. There is a literal paper trail that put Cohen in jail. The campaign finance violations have nothing to do with Cohen's testimony, they are black and white banking transactions, and missing disclosures. Cohen could claim Trump is the devil, or and angel and it has no bearing on these specific issues. This isn't a he/said she/said case where there is some grey area. It could get to that later, but not now.
Based upon how Cohen has characterized those transactions and paper trails by his sworn testimony and plea agreements.
Oh, that district and Grand Jury are stupid enough to issue an indictment.
And it’ll be headline news for a few weeks.
But if Trump let’s his lawyers handle it, nothing will come from it.
The USSC would intervene (Original Jurisdiction) and state clearly a sitting POTUS cannot be indicted.
Then it’s the House’s turn to look stupid.
I volunteer
I have no idea what Electors have to do with this, so please elaborate.
Sure a state DA may bring charges. But it will be challenged 6 ways to Sunday. Can a state bring charges against POTUS? Civil suits, yes, at the convenience of the defendant. Criminal charges? Appeals apeals appeals... Then there are still the other questions: Selective prosecution, is there a crime, is there willful knowledge a crime was committed, can you flip a client’s attorney into a witness against the client? A to the latter only if they are both engaged in a crime together which they will do doubt allege but as other said this was routine Trump paid many women over the years this one is “illegal” only because he won the election.
No, it doesn't matter how Cohen characterized them. The existence of the payments, and the lack of disclosure is the crime. There is no way to characterize them into legality or illegality. Intent has no bearing, these are technical infractions.
On that I totally agree. He probably cost the GOP the House by playing defense the whole time. He cannot and imo will not for much longer. Time to declassify and re-open the criminal investigations.
And I’ve written many times, those immunity grants the FBI handed out should be nullified - as they were granted by one conspirator to his/her co-conspirator. Cannot let DOJ give immunity to their criminal conspirators. Though there may be plenty of wiggle room in those agreements, or, their immunity forces them to tell the truth (can’t plead the 5th if you have immunity, else false the dreaded ‘process crime’ charge).
If you follow the Q-Anon people and “trust the plan”, which I do and don’t, they say the indictments are already written and waiting to drop. I say they all should be Muellered. New Special Prosecutor. How many home mortgage applications have lies on them? Tax returns in order? Did they meet with Russians or people representing Russians? Did they cover up Awan Brothers crimes. There are scores of people who should be in the sausage factory right now.
Not necessarily. Cohen paid, and was repaid. Cohen received a retainer for these purposes. And according to the tapes you mentioned, Trump instructed Cohen to pay which implies he would be paid back which he was. IMO this ain’t a crime this is routine attorney-client business.
Cohen pleading guilty doesn’t automatically lead to Trump being guilty. Whether you can get 12 New Yorkers, his home state, to convict is not as slam dunk as some may think. If it even gets that far.
Clinton’s approval rating shot up during impeachment, though he had a compliant supportive media. This would be a really low cheap shot if the DA tried this stunt. It would fire up the GOP base. Impeachment would imo not lead to conviction in the Senate.
Thanks for your input and great insight.
Presidential "elections" are not provided for in the Constitution. They are unnecessary to the choice of the President or Vice President, which is made by Electors appointed by the State Legislatures, in whatever way makes sense to them.
It so happens that all 50 State Legislatures have chosen idiots voting as their method of appointment, but any of them could change that tomorrow without running afoul of the Constitution.
Congress, in Article I §4, has authority over (can regulate) elections for Senators and Representatives: "The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing [sic] Senators".
This section does not confer authority on Congress to regulate the methods State Legislatures choose to appoint their Electors. And no other Article or Amendment does so, either.
Therefore: All laws about campaign finance, donations, spending, primaries, commissions, or debates are unconstitutional and void. The only power Congress has over the choosing of Presidents and Vice Presidents is the structure of and rules for the Special Joint Session that opens and counts the Electoral Votes.
The voting that takes place in each State on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November is not a Federal election. It is 50 separate State elections, that take place under rules made by the State Legislatures.
Maybe that's why Mueller handed it off to the US Attorney. It was outside his scope.
Then why would a former FEC chairman say they weren’t campaign finance violations?
It isn’t the tapes that are the issue, it is that Cohen invoiced Trump org for campaign services and used the money to pay himself back for the hush money. By being stupid, he explicitly intertwined the campaign and the payoff, sending himself to jail. At a minimum it is a political headache for Trump. Democrats would be dumb to try and impeach over a relatively minor campaign violation, but it is a violation.
It isn't inherently a violation, so when Former FEC Chairman Bradley Smith said it in August, he was using the available information at the time, and assuming Cohen was a competent lawyer. In the last week, we now have the details of the investigation, and Cohen made the payoffs in such a way they were in violation.
To who? Mueller and his 17 D prosecutors he has on staff? Including one who had convictions overturned by the USSC in re: Enron. LOL
Is Trump responsible as to how Cohen made payments? Trump paid the money to Cohen. Cohen is responsible to what Cohen did.
All Trump knew was he was paying money to Cohen so Cohen could take care of the NDAs.
Correct but payment not illegal if campaign paid would have been illegal
Short answer: Legally, yes. Which is why you need good lawyers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.