Did President Trump violate campaign finance laws? Professor Dershowitz doesn't think so!

[The Purge]

Why spend the money? Even billionaires want to save money in that respect they are just human. Again if anything it is a campaign violation, and didn't Edward's go through court with a similar situation and found NOT GUILTY?

Then why spend the money in 2016?

Undoubtedly that is when she actually wanted money.

Funneling cash to hide an affair? Trump, Edwards scandals have similarities - WRAL-TV
WRAL.com › funneling-cash-to...
3 days ago · Consider the parallels of Donald Trump and John Edwards. Two then- presidential candidates caught up in accusations of adultery

She wanted money in 2011 as she tried to sell her story then.

If trump silenced her to protect his family, he would have done so then. That he waited until 11 days before his election reveals his intent of the payoff.

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

Cohen admitted to making these payments on behalf of the campaign. That proves the knowing and willing standard. Michael Cohen plea deal: How were campaign finance laws broken? | Atlanta: News, Weather and Traffic

Cohen can admit to anything for a PLEA DEAL in all his tax a other scandals discovered that have NOTHING to do with Trump or Russia

 

[2aguy]

Undoubtedly that is when she actually wanted money.

Funneling cash to hide an affair? Trump, Edwards scandals have similarities - WRAL-TV
WRAL.com › funneling-cash-to...
3 days ago · Consider the parallels of Donald Trump and John Edwards. Two then- presidential candidates caught up in accusations of adultery

She wanted money in 2011 as she tried to sell her story then.

If trump silenced her to protect his family, he would have done so then. That he waited until 11 days before his election reveals his intent of the payoff.

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

You’re not answering the actual question...

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

Having the Enquirer buy it kept him OUT of the picture....wouldn't you have someone else dirty their hands than YOU get personally involved...

Except Trump's hands were dirtied. Cohen admitted to making and planning these payments on behalf of the campaign.

It doesn't matter..... they are not illegal.... why is that so hard for you to understand. And even if they did do something illegal, guess what, they would pay a fine...just like obama paid a fine for millions of dollars of foreign donations taken by his campaign....

The one in trouble? Hilary, she actually broke the law with the 84 million dollars that she intentionally laundered through the state parties...

 

[WTP]

Then why spend the money in 2016?

Undoubtedly that is when she actually wanted money.

Funneling cash to hide an affair? Trump, Edwards scandals have similarities - WRAL-TV
WRAL.com › funneling-cash-to...
3 days ago · Consider the parallels of Donald Trump and John Edwards. Two then- presidential candidates caught up in accusations of adultery

She wanted money in 2011 as she tried to sell her story then.

If trump silenced her to protect his family, he would have done so then. That he waited until 11 days before his election reveals his intent of the payoff.

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

Cohen admitted to making these payments on behalf of the campaign. That proves the knowing and willing standard. Michael Cohen plea deal: How were campaign finance laws broken? | Atlanta: News, Weather and Traffic

You don't know the law.....The former head of the FEC said he didn't break the law..... try finding what he said and you will see you don't know what you are talking about.

"The former head of the FEC"? You mean the guy who doesn't work there any longer? The guy who didn't go to the Knowing and willing standard of the law as it applies to the Federal Election Act? ttps://transition.fec.gov/ans/answers_compliance.shtml

Most violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) result in civil penalties--fines arrived at through a conciliation process. Knowing and willful violations of certain FECA provisions can lead to imprisonment. The FEC has exclusive civil enforcement authority, and may refer criminal violations to the U.S. Department of Justice. For additional information see our page describing the complaint process. Note that sentencing guidelines for criminal violations of the law are set by the U.S. Sentencing Commission.

 

[2aguy]

Then why spend the money in 2016?

Undoubtedly that is when she actually wanted money.

Funneling cash to hide an affair? Trump, Edwards scandals have similarities - WRAL-TV
WRAL.com › funneling-cash-to...
3 days ago · Consider the parallels of Donald Trump and John Edwards. Two then- presidential candidates caught up in accusations of adultery

She wanted money in 2011 as she tried to sell her story then.

If trump silenced her to protect his family, he would have done so then. That he waited until 11 days before his election reveals his intent of the payoff.

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

Cohen admitted to making these payments on behalf of the campaign. That proves the knowing and willing standard. Michael Cohen plea deal: How were campaign finance laws broken? | Atlanta: News, Weather and Traffic

Cohen can admit to anything for a PLEA DEAL in all his tax a other scandals discovered that have NOTHING to do with Trump or Russia

In fact, he plead to 2 things that aren't even crimes..... I would suggest that lanny davis is not working for Cohen but is actually working for hilary, obama and mueller...

 

[Faun]

Then why spend the money in 2016?

Undoubtedly that is when she actually wanted money.

Funneling cash to hide an affair? Trump, Edwards scandals have similarities - WRAL-TV
WRAL.com › funneling-cash-to...
3 days ago · Consider the parallels of Donald Trump and John Edwards. Two then- presidential candidates caught up in accusations of adultery

She wanted money in 2011 as she tried to sell her story then.

If trump silenced her to protect his family, he would have done so then. That he waited until 11 days before his election reveals his intent of the payoff.

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

You’re not answering the actual question...

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

Having the Enquirer buy it kept him OUT of the picture....wouldn't you have someone else dirty their hands than YOU get personally involved...

The Inquirer didn’t buy Stormy Daniels’ story. And that’s whose silence trump paid for.

Stormy Daniels, in 2011, sought to sell her story. The question you’re flat out refusing to address, is....

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

 

[2aguy]

Undoubtedly that is when she actually wanted money.

Funneling cash to hide an affair? Trump, Edwards scandals have similarities - WRAL-TV
WRAL.com › funneling-cash-to...
3 days ago · Consider the parallels of Donald Trump and John Edwards. Two then- presidential candidates caught up in accusations of adultery

She wanted money in 2011 as she tried to sell her story then.

If trump silenced her to protect his family, he would have done so then. That he waited until 11 days before his election reveals his intent of the payoff.

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

Cohen admitted to making these payments on behalf of the campaign. That proves the knowing and willing standard. Michael Cohen plea deal: How were campaign finance laws broken? | Atlanta: News, Weather and Traffic

You don't know the law.....The former head of the FEC said he didn't break the law..... try finding what he said and you will see you don't know what you are talking about.

"The former head of the FEC"? You mean the guy who doesn't work there any longer? The guy who didn't go to the Knowing and willing standard of the law as it applies to the Federal Election Act? ttps://transition.fec.gov/ans/answers_compliance.shtml

Most violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) result in civil penalties--fines arrived at through a conciliation process. Knowing and willful violations of certain FECA provisions can lead to imprisonment. The FEC has exclusive civil enforcement authority, and may refer criminal violations to the U.S. Department of Justice. For additional information see our page describing the complaint process. Note that sentencing guidelines for criminal violations of the law are set by the U.S. Sentencing Commission.

Here......

Former FEC Chair: Trump Hush Money Unseemly, But Not Illegal

Former chair of the FEC, Bradley Smith, has more (via WaPo):

…[R]egardless of what Cohen agreed to in a plea bargain, hush-money payments to mistresses are not really campaign expenditures. It is true that “contribution” and “expenditure” are defined in the Federal Election Campaign Act as anything “for the purpose of influencing any election,” and it may have been intended and hoped that paying hush money would serve that end. The problem is that almost anything a candidate does can be interpreted as intended to “influence an election,” from buying a good watch to make sure he gets to places on time, to getting a massage so that he feels fit for the campaign trail, to buying a new suit so that he looks good on a debate stage. Yet having campaign donors pay for personal luxuries — such as expensive watches, massages and Brooks Brothers suits — seems more like bribery than funding campaign speech.

That’s why another part of the statute defines “personal use” as any expenditure “used to fulfill any commitment, obligation, or expense of a person that would exist irrespective of the candidate’s election campaign.” These may not be paid with campaign funds, even though the candidate might benefit from the expenditure. Not every expense that might benefit a candidate is an obligation that exists solely because the person is a candidate.

Suppose, for example, that Trump had told his lawyers, “Look, these complaints about Trump University have no merit, but they embarrass me as a candidate. Get them settled.” Are the settlements thus “campaign expenses”? The obvious answer is no, even though the payments were intended to benefit Trump as a candidate.

If the opposite were true and they were considered campaign expenses, then not only could Trump pay them with campaign funds, but also he would be required to pay these business expenses from campaign funds. Is that what campaign donations are for?

[…]

Yes, those payments were unseemly, but unseemliness doesn’t make something illegal. At the very least, the law is murky about whether paying hush money to a mistress is a “campaign expense” or a personal expense.

Mr. Smith ends with some very wise words: “Laws, once stretched from their limited language and proper purpose, are difficult to pound back into shape. We should proceed with caution here.”

 

[WTP]

She wanted money in 2011 as she tried to sell her story then.

If trump silenced her to protect his family, he would have done so then. That he waited until 11 days before his election reveals his intent of the payoff.

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

You’re not answering the actual question...

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

Having the Enquirer buy it kept him OUT of the picture....wouldn't you have someone else dirty their hands than YOU get personally involved...

Except Trump's hands were dirtied. Cohen admitted to making and planning these payments on behalf of the campaign.

It doesn't matter..... they are not illegal.... why is that so hard for you to understand. And even if they did do something illegal, guess what, they would pay a fine...just like obama paid a fine for millions of dollars of foreign donations taken by his campaign....

The one in trouble? Hilary, she actually broke the law with the 84 million dollars that she intentionally laundered through the state parties...

Telling me "it doesn't matter..... they are not illegal" is an argument that says nothing and is meant for idiots. Obama's violation had zero to do with this, and Hillary deflections are for cowards like you. Educate yourself about the law, and stop being a Trump Sheep idiot;
Most violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) result in civil penalties--fines arrived at through a conciliation process. Knowing and willful violations of certain FECA provisions can lead to imprisonment. The FEC has exclusive civil enforcement authority, and may refer criminal violations to the U.S. Department of Justice. For additional information see our page describing the complaint process. Note that sentencing guidelines for criminal violations of the law are set by the U.S. Sentencing Commission.

 

[Claudette]

Undoubtedly that is when she actually wanted money.

Funneling cash to hide an affair? Trump, Edwards scandals have similarities - WRAL-TV
WRAL.com › funneling-cash-to...
3 days ago · Consider the parallels of Donald Trump and John Edwards. Two then- presidential candidates caught up in accusations of adultery

She wanted money in 2011 as she tried to sell her story then.

If trump silenced her to protect his family, he would have done so then. That he waited until 11 days before his election reveals his intent of the payoff.

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

You’re not answering the actual question...

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

Having the Enquirer buy it kept him OUT of the picture....wouldn't you have someone else dirty their hands than YOU get personally involved...

The Inquirer didn’t buy Stormy Daniels’ story. And that’s whose silence trump paid for.

Stormy Daniels, in 2011, sought to sell her story. The question you’re flat out refusing to address, is....

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

Why did she wait till 2011 when this happened in 2206 or 2007??

If it happened at all. Its a he said she said. No way to prove which is correct.

 

[Faun]

Undoubtedly that is when she actually wanted money.

Funneling cash to hide an affair? Trump, Edwards scandals have similarities - WRAL-TV
WRAL.com › funneling-cash-to...
3 days ago · Consider the parallels of Donald Trump and John Edwards. Two then- presidential candidates caught up in accusations of adultery

She wanted money in 2011 as she tried to sell her story then.

If trump silenced her to protect his family, he would have done so then. That he waited until 11 days before his election reveals his intent of the payoff.

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

Cohen admitted to making these payments on behalf of the campaign. That proves the knowing and willing standard. Michael Cohen plea deal: How were campaign finance laws broken? | Atlanta: News, Weather and Traffic

Cohen can admit to anything for a PLEA DEAL in all his tax a other scandals discovered that have NOTHING to do with Trump or Russia

In fact, he plead to 2 things that aren't even crimes..... I would suggest that lanny davis is not working for Cohen but is actually working for hilary, obama and mueller...

LOLOL

Yes, because being a lawyer himself, and with his own neck stretched out on the chopping block, he also couldn’t tell he was being accused of a crime that wasn’t really a crime.

 

[2aguy]

Undoubtedly that is when she actually wanted money.

Funneling cash to hide an affair? Trump, Edwards scandals have similarities - WRAL-TV
WRAL.com › funneling-cash-to...
3 days ago · Consider the parallels of Donald Trump and John Edwards. Two then- presidential candidates caught up in accusations of adultery

She wanted money in 2011 as she tried to sell her story then.

If trump silenced her to protect his family, he would have done so then. That he waited until 11 days before his election reveals his intent of the payoff.

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

You’re not answering the actual question...

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

Having the Enquirer buy it kept him OUT of the picture....wouldn't you have someone else dirty their hands than YOU get personally involved...

The Inquirer didn’t buy Stormy Daniels’ story. And that’s whose silence trump paid for.

Stormy Daniels, in 2011, sought to sell her story. The question you’re flat out refusing to address, is....

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

It doesn't matter.....

And he did... according to the FEC chair this fact shows even more that Trump didn't break the law.

Trump lawyer’s efforts to suppress Stormy Daniels started in 2011

The president’s personal attorney Michael Cohen interceded in 2011 to prevent porn star Stormy Daniels from airing her story about an alleged affair with Donald Trump, telling the agent who arranged for its publication that he could harm her career, according to a person involved in the discussions

 

[2aguy]

She wanted money in 2011 as she tried to sell her story then.

If trump silenced her to protect his family, he would have done so then. That he waited until 11 days before his election reveals his intent of the payoff.

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

Cohen admitted to making these payments on behalf of the campaign. That proves the knowing and willing standard. Michael Cohen plea deal: How were campaign finance laws broken? | Atlanta: News, Weather and Traffic

Cohen can admit to anything for a PLEA DEAL in all his tax a other scandals discovered that have NOTHING to do with Trump or Russia

In fact, he plead to 2 things that aren't even crimes..... I would suggest that lanny davis is not working for Cohen but is actually working for hilary, obama and mueller...

LOLOL

Yes, because being a lawyer himself, and with his own neck stretched out on the chopping block, he also couldn’t tell he was being accused of a crime that wasn’t really a crime.

They got him to plea guilty to 2 charges that weren't crimes so they could go after Trump companies..... and lanny davis negotiated that deal...you moron.

 

[Faun]

She wanted money in 2011 as she tried to sell her story then.

If trump silenced her to protect his family, he would have done so then. That he waited until 11 days before his election reveals his intent of the payoff.

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

You’re not answering the actual question...

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

Having the Enquirer buy it kept him OUT of the picture....wouldn't you have someone else dirty their hands than YOU get personally involved...

The Inquirer didn’t buy Stormy Daniels’ story. And that’s whose silence trump paid for.

Stormy Daniels, in 2011, sought to sell her story. The question you’re flat out refusing to address, is....

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

Why did she wait till 2011 when this happened in 2206 or 2007??

If it happened at all. Its a he said she said. No way to prove which is correct.

Your irrelevance is noted and discarded. It matters not why she waited until 2011. All that matters is that she sought to sell her story in 2011. Had trump silenced her in 2016 to protect his family, as rightards are laughably leaping to his defense, he would have silenced her in 2011.

But he didn’t. He silenced her 11 days before his election. Looking at those events in 2011 and 2016 reveal his reason for silencing Stormy Daniels.... and Melanie wasn’t it.

 

[The Purge]

Undoubtedly that is when she actually wanted money.

Funneling cash to hide an affair? Trump, Edwards scandals have similarities - WRAL-TV
WRAL.com › funneling-cash-to...
3 days ago · Consider the parallels of Donald Trump and John Edwards. Two then- presidential candidates caught up in accusations of adultery

She wanted money in 2011 as she tried to sell her story then.

If trump silenced her to protect his family, he would have done so then. That he waited until 11 days before his election reveals his intent of the payoff.

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

You’re not answering the actual question...

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

Having the Enquirer buy it kept him OUT of the picture....wouldn't you have someone else dirty their hands than YOU get personally involved...

The Inquirer didn’t buy Stormy Daniels’ story. And that’s whose silence trump paid for.

Stormy Daniels, in 2011, sought to sell her story. The question you’re flat out refusing to address, is....

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

I already answered you perhaps read slower!

 

[WTP]

She wanted money in 2011 as she tried to sell her story then.

If trump silenced her to protect his family, he would have done so then. That he waited until 11 days before his election reveals his intent of the payoff.

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

Cohen admitted to making these payments on behalf of the campaign. That proves the knowing and willing standard. Michael Cohen plea deal: How were campaign finance laws broken? | Atlanta: News, Weather and Traffic

You don't know the law.....The former head of the FEC said he didn't break the law..... try finding what he said and you will see you don't know what you are talking about.

"The former head of the FEC"? You mean the guy who doesn't work there any longer? The guy who didn't go to the Knowing and willing standard of the law as it applies to the Federal Election Act? ttps://transition.fec.gov/ans/answers_compliance.shtml

Most violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) result in civil penalties--fines arrived at through a conciliation process. Knowing and willful violations of certain FECA provisions can lead to imprisonment. The FEC has exclusive civil enforcement authority, and may refer criminal violations to the U.S. Department of Justice. For additional information see our page describing the complaint process. Note that sentencing guidelines for criminal violations of the law are set by the U.S. Sentencing Commission.

Here......

Former FEC Chair: Trump Hush Money Unseemly, But Not Illegal

Former chair of the FEC, Bradley Smith, has more (via WaPo):

…[R]egardless of what Cohen agreed to in a plea bargain, hush-money payments to mistresses are not really campaign expenditures. It is true that “contribution” and “expenditure” are defined in the Federal Election Campaign Act as anything “for the purpose of influencing any election,” and it may have been intended and hoped that paying hush money would serve that end. The problem is that almost anything a candidate does can be interpreted as intended to “influence an election,” from buying a good watch to make sure he gets to places on time, to getting a massage so that he feels fit for the campaign trail, to buying a new suit so that he looks good on a debate stage. Yet having campaign donors pay for personal luxuries — such as expensive watches, massages and Brooks Brothers suits — seems more like bribery than funding campaign speech.

That’s why another part of the statute defines “personal use” as any expenditure “used to fulfill any commitment, obligation, or expense of a person that would exist irrespective of the candidate’s election campaign.” These may not be paid with campaign funds, even though the candidate might benefit from the expenditure. Not every expense that might benefit a candidate is an obligation that exists solely because the person is a candidate.

Suppose, for example, that Trump had told his lawyers, “Look, these complaints about Trump University have no merit, but they embarrass me as a candidate. Get them settled.” Are the settlements thus “campaign expenses”? The obvious answer is no, even though the payments were intended to benefit Trump as a candidate.

If the opposite were true and they were considered campaign expenses, then not only could Trump pay them with campaign funds, but also he would be required to pay these business expenses from campaign funds. Is that what campaign donations are for?

[…]

Yes, those payments were unseemly, but unseemliness doesn’t make something illegal. At the very least, the law is murky about whether paying hush money to a mistress is a “campaign expense” or a personal expense.

Mr. Smith ends with some very wise words: “Laws, once stretched from their limited language and proper purpose, are difficult to pound back into shape. We should proceed with caution here.”

Once again, this has already been explained to you and others. Your attempt at being brain dead about it, is on you. For the former FEC chairman to say you can invent anything to influence an election flies in the face of common logic. If that were true, we wouldn't have a Federal Election Act that has a clause for knowing and willing. Those are crimes, and they have been proven;
Most violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) result in civil penalties--fines arrived at through a conciliation process. Knowing and willful violations of certain FECA provisions can lead to imprisonment. The FEC has exclusive civil enforcement authority, and may refer criminal violations to the U.S. Department of Justice. For additional information see our page describing the complaint process. Note that sentencing guidelines for criminal violations of the law are set by the U.S. Sentencing Commission.

You all keep playing for the team of the willfully stupid, and it simply won't work. This crime was willfully and knowingly planned. And that is a crime under the Federal Elections Act.

 

[The Purge]

She wanted money in 2011 as she tried to sell her story then.

If trump silenced her to protect his family, he would have done so then. That he waited until 11 days before his election reveals his intent of the payoff.

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

Cohen admitted to making these payments on behalf of the campaign. That proves the knowing and willing standard. Michael Cohen plea deal: How were campaign finance laws broken? | Atlanta: News, Weather and Traffic

Cohen can admit to anything for a PLEA DEAL in all his tax a other scandals discovered that have NOTHING to do with Trump or Russia

In fact, he plead to 2 things that aren't even crimes..... I would suggest that lanny davis is not working for Cohen but is actually working for hilary, obama and mueller...

LOLOL

Yes, because being a lawyer himself, and with his own neck stretched out on the chopping block, he also couldn’t tell he was being accused of a crime that wasn’t really a crime.

Don't plead guilty no plea deal....Flynn, dont plead guilty we are going after your son!

 

[Faun]

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

Cohen admitted to making these payments on behalf of the campaign. That proves the knowing and willing standard. Michael Cohen plea deal: How were campaign finance laws broken? | Atlanta: News, Weather and Traffic

Cohen can admit to anything for a PLEA DEAL in all his tax a other scandals discovered that have NOTHING to do with Trump or Russia

In fact, he plead to 2 things that aren't even crimes..... I would suggest that lanny davis is not working for Cohen but is actually working for hilary, obama and mueller...

LOLOL

Yes, because being a lawyer himself, and with his own neck stretched out on the chopping block, he also couldn’t tell he was being accused of a crime that wasn’t really a crime.

They got him to plea guilty to 2 charges that weren't crimes so they could go after Trump companies..... and lanny davis negotiated that deal...you moron.

Imbecile, Cohen was the one who pled guilty, not Davis. Being an attorney himself, presumably, he knows what is and what is not a crime. You’re beyond delirious to claim he pled guilty to non-criminal charges.

 

[The Purge]

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

You’re not answering the actual question...

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

Having the Enquirer buy it kept him OUT of the picture....wouldn't you have someone else dirty their hands than YOU get personally involved...

The Inquirer didn’t buy Stormy Daniels’ story. And that’s whose silence trump paid for.

Stormy Daniels, in 2011, sought to sell her story. The question you’re flat out refusing to address, is....

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

Why did she wait till 2011 when this happened in 2206 or 2007??

If it happened at all. Its a he said she said. No way to prove which is correct.

Your irrelevance is noted and discarded. It matters not why she waited until 2011. All that matters is that she sought to sell her story in 2011. Had trump silenced her in 2016 to protect his family, as rightards are laughably leaping to his defense, he would have silenced her in 2011.

But he didn’t. He silenced her 11 days before his election. Looking at those events in 2011 and 2016 reveal his reason for silencing Stormy Daniels.... and Melanie wasn’t it.

In your opinion, other TRUTHS may differ!

 

[WTP]

Then why spend the money in 2016?

Undoubtedly that is when she actually wanted money.

Funneling cash to hide an affair? Trump, Edwards scandals have similarities - WRAL-TV
WRAL.com › funneling-cash-to...
3 days ago · Consider the parallels of Donald Trump and John Edwards. Two then- presidential candidates caught up in accusations of adultery

She wanted money in 2011 as she tried to sell her story then.

If trump silenced her to protect his family, he would have done so then. That he waited until 11 days before his election reveals his intent of the payoff.

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

Cohen admitted to making these payments on behalf of the campaign. That proves the knowing and willing standard. Michael Cohen plea deal: How were campaign finance laws broken? | Atlanta: News, Weather and Traffic

Cohen can admit to anything for a PLEA DEAL in all his tax a other scandals discovered that have NOTHING to do with Trump or Russia

Su

Cohen admitted to making these payments on behalf of the campaign. That proves the knowing and willing standard. Michael Cohen plea deal: How were campaign finance laws broken? | Atlanta: News, Weather and Traffic

Cohen can admit to anything for a PLEA DEAL in all his tax a other scandals discovered that have NOTHING to do with Trump or Russia

In fact, he plead to 2 things that aren't even crimes..... I would suggest that lanny davis is not working for Cohen but is actually working for hilary, obama and mueller...

LOLOL

Yes, because being a lawyer himself, and with his own neck stretched out on the chopping block, he also couldn’t tell he was being accused of a crime that wasn’t really a crime.

They got him to plea guilty to 2 charges that weren't crimes so they could go after Trump companies..... and lanny davis negotiated that deal...you moron.

Imbecile, Cohen was the one who pled guilty, not Davis. Being an attorney himself, presumably, he knows what is and what is not a crime. You’re beyond delirious to claim he pled guilty to non-criminal charges.

I cannot get over the ignorance from these Trump apologists.

 

[Claudette]

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

You’re not answering the actual question...

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

Having the Enquirer buy it kept him OUT of the picture....wouldn't you have someone else dirty their hands than YOU get personally involved...

The Inquirer didn’t buy Stormy Daniels’ story. And that’s whose silence trump paid for.

Stormy Daniels, in 2011, sought to sell her story. The question you’re flat out refusing to address, is....

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

Why did she wait till 2011 when this happened in 2206 or 2007??

If it happened at all. Its a he said she said. No way to prove which is correct.

Your irrelevance is noted and discarded. It matters not why she waited until 2011. All that matters is that she sought to sell her story in 2011. Had trump silenced her in 2016 to protect his family, as rightards are laughably leaping to his defense, he would have silenced her in 2011.

But he didn’t. He silenced her 11 days before his election. Looking at those events in 2011 and 2016 reveal his reason for silencing Stormy Daniels.... and Melanie wasn’t it.

Oh bullshit. What does it matter when he paid her off. She was after money either with a book or a pay off. It was a smart move on his part especially before the election.

Oh and who knows if the affair ever happened? Its a he said she said and frankly most people couldn't care less.

 

[Faun]

She wanted money in 2011 as she tried to sell her story then.

If trump silenced her to protect his family, he would have done so then. That he waited until 11 days before his election reveals his intent of the payoff.

She was paid by the Enquirer in 2011. SHE simply wanted MORE, and unlike Edward's that used campaign donors money to pay off his lover, Trump used personal money thereby taking it out of a campaign legal indictment, simply a FEC possible violation.

You’re not answering the actual question...

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

Having the Enquirer buy it kept him OUT of the picture....wouldn't you have someone else dirty their hands than YOU get personally involved...

The Inquirer didn’t buy Stormy Daniels’ story. And that’s whose silence trump paid for.

Stormy Daniels, in 2011, sought to sell her story. The question you’re flat out refusing to address, is....

If the reason trump bought her silence in 2016 when she was seeking to sell her story was to protect his family — why didn’t he buy her silence in 2011 when she sought to sell her story?

I already answered you perhaps read slower!

No, you changed the topic to the National Inquirer, which has nothing to do with Trump paying off Stormy Daniels.

But that’s ok, I knew you couldn’t provide a lucid answer to my question when I asked it.