Former FEC Chairman To Mark Levin: Stormy Daniels Money Cannot Be In Kind Campaign Contribution

[Rustic]

Bripat9643, is it a campaign contribution? I think that may be for a jury to decide. The learned professor's statement that the expenditure did not help President Trump's primary or general election campaign is sophistry. If the the woman's accusation became common knowledge, it may likely been detrimental to Trump's political purposes.

“Historically, the FEC has said these things are not campaign contributions”? This question has often arisen historically, and always in this exact or very similar manner?

Respectfully, Supposn​

Take the campaign out of the picture. Does Trump still make the payment? Most likely, yes. Hence, it's going to be hard to prove it's only a campaign benefit.

Then why did it take him ten years to do that?

And why do it weeks before the election.

Hmmm

Smell that?

It's the smell of Trumper bullshit

... and still no Russian connection

There's been plenty of Russian connections.

Are you stupid or lying?

Such as?

...and still no Russian connection

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Former FEC Chairman To Mark Levin: Stormy Daniels Money Cannot Be In Kind Campaign Contribution

Former Trump attorney, Michael Cohen to federal judge: "Guilty your honor"

Which proves exactly nothing.

It proves that Michael Cohen believes it to be a crime and it proves the judge believes it to be a crime.

it doesn't matter what Cohen believes. It says nothing about what the judge believes.

A judge is not going to accept a guilty plea on something that is not even a crime.

Are you dense?

If I am a murderer and plea down to robbery, it is a crime, I just didn't do it! I said I did as a plea deal.

Why did he do it? (Cohen)

Because they were going to prosecute his wife since she also signed the tax returns. Same way they got Flynn, threatened to prosecute his son.

What I do agree with you on is-----------> The Republicans are dragging their feet, but I know why.

It is an unwritten rule, (maybe written, not sure) that you can NOT install another special prosecutor within 90 days of an election. Sessions can't do it, or won't do it, and neither will Rosenstein since he is buried up to his a** in this mess. They should have done it before, but Sessions is incompetent.

Still, Trump is at fault for not accepting his resignation.

As Trump stated-------> The worst thing he ever did was make Sessions the AG...………...and in my opinion, the 2nd worst thing he did was not accepting his resignation when offered. Therefore------->should the Repubs lose the midterms because of the collusion/delusion, Trump shot himself in the foot; and us too!

WTF?

That's not how it works at all. You can't be charged with a lessser crime that you didn't commit.

If you committed murder, they may be able to downgrade your charge depending on your actions and level of cooperation. They certainly cannot charge you for a crime that is not in evidence.

 

[bripat9643]

The snowflakes insist that paying Stormy to shut her pie hole is a campaign contribution. Here's the final word on the subject. Only sheer idiocy would cause anyone to continue claiming that the snowflake theory is valid.

Former FEC Chairman To Mark Levin: Stormy Daniels Money Cannot Be In Kind Campaign Contribution​

Law Professor and former FEC chairman Bradley Smith spoke with conservative radio host Mark Levin on Tuesday. He laid out the reason why the payment made to porn star Stormy Daniels from President Trump’s private attorney Michael Cohen could not be an in-kind campaign contribution.

“Here’s the bottom line,” Smith told Levin. “The purpose of those laws is to prevent corruption and one way campaign contributions or in-kind campaign contributions are different than bribes is that you have to use them to get elected. You can’t use them to buy yourself grandfather clocks or fur coats or Rolex watches or something like that.”

He said, “And the FEC standard for that is you can’t use your campaign money for personal use. What they mean by that is you can’t use that for something you’d have to pay anyway that’s not directly for your campaign. The question is, ‘is this really a campaign obligation?’”

Professor Smith continued, “None of these expenditures helped Mr. Trump’s campaign. There’s all kinds of reasons why he may want to make these expenditures even if the allegations made by Stormy Daniels are untrue. Just for family harmony, commercial viability over the long term.”

He emphasized, “Historically, the FEC has said these things are not campaign contributions.”

Professor Smith added, “When the FEC wrote the regulation that says what constitutes campaign expenditures and what constitutes personal use, it rejected specifically the idea that a campaign expenditure was anything related to a campaign, and instead says it has to be something that exists only because of the campaign and solely for that reason.”​

First off, he's the former FEC Chairman so it isn't "the final word on the subject."

Do you have a quote of any other FEC chairman contradicting what he says?

Who the fuck is your "FEC chaiman" in Cohen vs the USA?

Hint: nobody.

Is that supposed to mean something?

 

[bripat9643]

it doesn't matter what Cohen believes. It says nothing about what the judge believes.

A judge is not going to accept a guilty plea on something that is not even a crime.

Says who? There is a statute about campaign expenditures. The problem is that neither Trump no Cohen violated it.

Cohen said he violated it, the Southern District of New York says Cohen violated it. That is all that really matters, everything is just opinion and holds no actual value.

Wrong. Neither of those facts matter. They prove nothing other than that Cohen agreed to a plea bargain. If I agreed to a contract that said there are unicorns on Mars, would that prove there are unicorns on Mars?

They prove nothing other than that Cohen agreed to a plea bargain

No. They prove that Cohen admitted guilt to specific, felonious campaign finance violations.

In other words, he agreed to a plea bargain, which proves nothing about Trump.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

No, what people say means nothing, all that matters is what the court says.

Did it matter what all the people were saying about OJ during his murder trial?

The courts haven't said he's guilty. Cohen says he's guilty, and you just agreed that it doesn't matter what he says.

True, the courts have not yet finished the process.

Perhaps the thing to do is give them some time to do so.

Yes, they actually have finished the "process."

If you plead guilty as the result of a plea bargain—-and the Judge accepted your plea—- your status is the same as if you had been found guilty by a Judge or Jury at trial.

Your status is the same. However, it has never been proved. That's what you can't seem to figure out.

It is proven, dope. The man admitted guilt.

My god you dopes are dumb as shit.

What in your mind makes you believe that a jury could know better than the man himself?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

No, what people say means nothing, all that matters is what the court says.

Did it matter what all the people were saying about OJ during his murder trial?

The courts haven't said he's guilty. Cohen says he's guilty, and you just agreed that it doesn't matter what he says.

True, the courts have not yet finished the process.

Perhaps the thing to do is give them some time to do so.

Yes, they actually have finished the "process."

If you plead guilty as the result of a plea bargain—-and the Judge accepted your plea—- your status is the same as if you had been found guilty by a Judge or Jury at trial.

It takes a special kind of stupid to believe that Cohen's plea bargain means Trump is guilty. I'm done arguing with you.

What payments were cohen and Trump discussing on tape before they were made?.

 

[Lesh]

A judge is not going to accept a guilty plea on something that is not even a crime.

Says who? There is a statute about campaign expenditures. The problem is that neither Trump no Cohen violated it.

Cohen said he violated it, the Southern District of New York says Cohen violated it. That is all that really matters, everything is just opinion and holds no actual value.

Wrong. Neither of those facts matter. They prove nothing other than that Cohen agreed to a plea bargain. If I agreed to a contract that said there are unicorns on Mars, would that prove there are unicorns on Mars?

They prove nothing other than that Cohen agreed to a plea bargain

No. They prove that Cohen admitted guilt to specific, felonious campaign finance violations.

In other words, he agreed to a plea bargain, which proves nothing about Trump.

Well he admitted guilt and implicated Trump. Proof...no in that trial..no ...

We'll see.

Cohen's records are in Mueller's hands and Cohen's guilt statement was vetted...by the prosecutor

 

[bripat9643]

Former FEC Chairman To Mark Levin: Stormy Daniels Money Cannot Be In Kind Campaign Contribution

Former Trump attorney, Michael Cohen to federal judge: "Guilty your honor"

Which proves exactly nothing.

Of course, it proves it was in fact, a crime.

It proves no such thing, dumbass.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It wasn’t a crime

No matter how many times you point out this fact to the left, they ignore it and keep on parroting the fake news.

Despite what this right wing hack claims...yes Matilda...it was a crime. In fact it was a crime that included conspiracy...another cime

Linky to the specific law that was violated?

Can you explain how it was violated in your own words? (note: rhetorical questions as you clearly cannot).

Analysis | How the Stormy Daniels payment may have violated election law

May? FEC guy says no, but the news guy is more qualified! Children, can’t make this up

Not the news guy, dope.
A federal judge.

He said your dumb as shit.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It wasn’t a crime

No matter how many times you point out this fact to the left, they ignore it and keep on parroting the fake news.

Despite what this right wing hack claims...yes Matilda...it was a crime. In fact it was a crime that included conspiracy...another cime

Legal experts including a former FEC head say you are wrong. But go on parroting the fake news that's what you people do.

He's a right wing "expert" who also thinks Citizens United was a great decision

Now this fool ^^^ is questioning SCOTUS decisions Can't refute legal experts and a former head of the FEC who says election laws were not broken so the lib deflects to SCOTUS rulings. Has my vote for most desperate lib post of the day.

The deflection is yours alone, dope.

Cohen is guilty. He named Trump as a co-conspirator.

There is no narrative that you can create that will change that fact.

 

[bripat9643]

Says who? There is a statute about campaign expenditures. The problem is that neither Trump no Cohen violated it.

Cohen said he violated it, the Southern District of New York says Cohen violated it. That is all that really matters, everything is just opinion and holds no actual value.

Wrong. Neither of those facts matter. They prove nothing other than that Cohen agreed to a plea bargain. If I agreed to a contract that said there are unicorns on Mars, would that prove there are unicorns on Mars?

They prove nothing other than that Cohen agreed to a plea bargain

No. They prove that Cohen admitted guilt to specific, felonious campaign finance violations.

In other words, he agreed to a plea bargain, which proves nothing about Trump.

Well he admitted guilt and implicated Trump. Proof...no in that trial..no ...

We'll see.

Cohen's records are in Mueller's hands and Cohen's guilt statement was vetted...by the prosecutor

The prosecutor has vested interest in a particular conclusion. Only a dumbass would believe his opinion is credible.

Your claim that he "implicated Trump" means nothing. Unless Trump goes to trial, which will never happen, and Cohen testifies against him under oath, the upshot of his plea deal is exactly nothing as far as Trump is concerned. Keep in mind that Obama committed a more serious infraction than Trump. I don't recall all you imbeciles calling for his impeachment at the time.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It wasn’t a crime

No matter how many times you point out this fact to the left, they ignore it and keep on parroting the fake news.

Despite what this right wing hack claims...yes Matilda...it was a crime. In fact it was a crime that included conspiracy...another cime

Linky to the specific law that was violated?

Can you explain how it was violated in your own words? (note: rhetorical questions as you clearly cannot).

Analysis | How the Stormy Daniels payment may have violated election law

Washington Post - fake news.

SDNY says you're dumb as shit.

 

[bripat9643]

No matter how many times you point out this fact to the left, they ignore it and keep on parroting the fake news.

Despite what this right wing hack claims...yes Matilda...it was a crime. In fact it was a crime that included conspiracy...another cime

Legal experts including a former FEC head say you are wrong. But go on parroting the fake news that's what you people do.

He's a right wing "expert" who also thinks Citizens United was a great decision

Now this fool ^^^ is questioning SCOTUS decisions Can't refute legal experts and a former head of the FEC who says election laws were not broken so the lib deflects to SCOTUS rulings. Has my vote for most desperate lib post of the day.

The deflection is yours alone, dope.

Cohen is guilty. He named Trump as a co-conspirator.

There is no narrative that you can create that will change that fact.

Cohen plead guilty. Being guilty and pleading guilty are two separate things. I know you're trying to blur that distinction, but you won't get away with it.

 

[bripat9643]

The courts haven't said he's guilty. Cohen says he's guilty, and you just agreed that it doesn't matter what he says.

True, the courts have not yet finished the process.

Perhaps the thing to do is give them some time to do so.

Yes, they actually have finished the "process."

If you plead guilty as the result of a plea bargain—-and the Judge accepted your plea—- your status is the same as if you had been found guilty by a Judge or Jury at trial.

It takes a special kind of stupid to believe that Cohen's plea bargain means Trump is guilty. I'm done arguing with you.

What payments were cohen and Trump discussing on tape before they were made?.

Of what relevance is that?

 

[bripat9643]

No matter how many times you point out this fact to the left, they ignore it and keep on parroting the fake news.

Despite what this right wing hack claims...yes Matilda...it was a crime. In fact it was a crime that included conspiracy...another cime

Linky to the specific law that was violated?

Can you explain how it was violated in your own words? (note: rhetorical questions as you clearly cannot).

Analysis | How the Stormy Daniels payment may have violated election law

Washington Post - fake news.

SDNY says you're dumb as shit.

Who is SDNY?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

First off, he's the former FEC Chairman so it isn't "the final word on the subject."

Do you have a quote of any other FEC chairman contradicting what he says?

No but I have a person who plead guilty to the crime. Do you think they charged the man for the crime without consulting the current FEC Chairman?

Sure. Why not?

Why not? Because these are professionals, not idiots who get engineering degrees out of Cracker Jacks boxes.

They are corrupt. Nothing they say can be believed.

They are I am corrupt. Nothing they I say can be believed.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Linky to the specific law that was violated?

Can you explain how it was violated in your own words? (note: rhetorical questions as you clearly cannot).

Analysis | How the Stormy Daniels payment may have violated election law

May is not Sept, October, nor November, nor is May DID!

When did Cohen plead guilty to the crime you claim is not a crime?

Yesterday?

Ever hear of a plea deal, or is that to far over your head-)

You plea to a lesser charge, even one you might not have committed, to lessen your exposure.

By the way...…….did you also know that pleading guilty under a plea deal, can NOT be used as evidence to prosecute anyone else; or is that to far over your head too, lol!

And it's important to note that PLEA DEALS are not case law. People plead out to things for which they are not guilty all of the time in order to avoid costly trials. We have such a complicated system of law that most people have unknowingly broke at least a few.

A guilty plea is an admission of guilt.

 

[Lesh]

Analysis | How the Stormy Daniels payment may have violated election law

May is not Sept, October, nor November, nor is May DID!

When did Cohen plead guilty to the crime you claim is not a crime?

Yesterday?

Ever hear of a plea deal, or is that to far over your head-)

You plea to a lesser charge, even one you might not have committed, to lessen your exposure.

By the way...…….did you also know that pleading guilty under a plea deal, can NOT be used as evidence to prosecute anyone else; or is that to far over your head too, lol!

And it's important to note that PLEA DEALS are not case law. People plead out to things for which they are not guilty all of the time in order to avoid costly trials. We have such a complicated system of law that most people have unknowingly broke at least a few.

A guilty plea is an admission of guilt.

ANd there was no plea deal in the Cohen Case

 

[bripat9643]

Analysis | How the Stormy Daniels payment may have violated election law

May is not Sept, October, nor November, nor is May DID!

When did Cohen plead guilty to the crime you claim is not a crime?

Yesterday?

Ever hear of a plea deal, or is that to far over your head-)

You plea to a lesser charge, even one you might not have committed, to lessen your exposure.

By the way...…….did you also know that pleading guilty under a plea deal, can NOT be used as evidence to prosecute anyone else; or is that to far over your head too, lol!

And it's important to note that PLEA DEALS are not case law. People plead out to things for which they are not guilty all of the time in order to avoid costly trials. We have such a complicated system of law that most people have unknowingly broke at least a few.

A guilty plea is an admission of guilt.

It doesn't prove you're actually guilty, moron.

 

[bripat9643]

May is not Sept, October, nor November, nor is May DID!

When did Cohen plead guilty to the crime you claim is not a crime?

Yesterday?

Ever hear of a plea deal, or is that to far over your head-)

You plea to a lesser charge, even one you might not have committed, to lessen your exposure.

By the way...…….did you also know that pleading guilty under a plea deal, can NOT be used as evidence to prosecute anyone else; or is that to far over your head too, lol!

And it's important to note that PLEA DEALS are not case law. People plead out to things for which they are not guilty all of the time in order to avoid costly trials. We have such a complicated system of law that most people have unknowingly broke at least a few.

A guilty plea is an admission of guilt.

ANd there was no plea deal in the Cohen Case

Of course there was. How fucking stupid are you?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Linky to the specific law that was violated?

52 U.S. Code § 30118 - Contributions or expenditures by national banks, corporations, or labor organizations

52 U.S. Code § 30116 - Limitations on contributions and expenditures

*sigh*

I'll refer you to #1 of My Policies

Error | US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

But I will note that spending one's own money doesn't fall under either of these laws.

I'll refer you here: