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

[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.

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

Horseshit.

So Cohen is convicted of a phantom crime?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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?

I know right? That was my point.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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.

Except for the audio of him and Trump discussing these felonious payments before they happened.
New word for you: co-conspirator.

 

[bripat9643]

No, it only proves that Cohen agreed to the plea. There's nothing "felonious" about the violation. If it was felonious, then why aren't both Clinton and Obama in prison?

The charge he plead to was a federal felony, retard.

Is Obama in prison? No? Then you must be mistaken.

Obama plead guilty to a felony?

That's what that idiot Hutch Starskey claims.

I did not see him claim that Obama plead guilty to a felony, what post number was that?

Obama 2008 campaign fined $375,000

 

[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.

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

It proves no such thing, dumbass.

One can only plead to a crime, dope

 

[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.

Except for the audio of him and Trump discussing these felonious payments before they happened.
New word for you: co-conspirator.

There were no "felonious payments," you psycho douche nozzle.

 

[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?

I know right? That was my point.

You're babbling incoherently.

 

[Lesh]

Well he’s convicted of committing a crime — so yeah, it’s a crime.

Obama was convicted of a far worse crime. Why isn't he going to prison?

Obama was convicted od nothing, dope.

He paid a $365,000 fine for not reporting donations, asshole.

I really am sorry about the tourettes troll. Ya know there is medication available for that.

Do you have healthcare insurance?

Health insurance is a Ponzi scheme

Yea...no one needs or wants health insurance.

Dude..the meth is rotting your brain

 

[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.

One can only plead to a crime, dope

A parking ticket can be considered a crime.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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.

They aren't. Not to the court anyway.

Cohen is a convicted federal felon. No nareative can change that fact.

 

[Lewdog]

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?

I know right? That was my point.

You're babbling incoherently.

The judge in the Cohen plea deal was there for a reason... to make sure that a crime had been committed, and to make sure Cohen admitted to committing it and knew what he was pleading to. Judges don't let people plea to non-crimes.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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?

Yo momma.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Cohen plead guilty to have a dozen crimes moron, all of which were crimes with the exception of the Stormy payment. Here I'll reply for you, but but but...but BUTTHURT.

Still retardedly suggesting that Cohen, his attorney, the prosecutor and the judge all just made a mistake doesn't change what actually happened.

Cohen plead guilty to, and named Trump as a co-conspirator in two counts related to the payment, dope.

The payment wasn't illegal, man it sucks to be you.

So what did Cohen plead guilty to?

A charge, not necessarily a crime.

You get charged with a crime. You plead or are found guilty of a crime.

Cohen pled guilty to crimes. Manifort was found guilty of crimes. Get it?

No you plea guilty to a charge. You can be charged with something you didn't do. You can choose to plea to it to avoid other things you did do. It's called a plea agreement, read up on it.

And as I said before, the judge has nothing to do with whether what he did was a crime or not, That's not the judges job, that's the job of a jury. But if you plea out you're giving up your right to a jury so the judge's job at that point is to ensure you are of sound mind and body and to sentence you once its said and done. NOT to decide whether you're guilty or not.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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?

None. None at all. Go back to your paint chips

 

[bripat9643]

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?

I know right? That was my point.

You're babbling incoherently.

The judge in the Cohen plea deal was there for a reason... to make sure that a crime had been committed, and to make sure Cohen admitted to committing it and knew what he was pleading to. Judges don't let people plea to non-crimes.

More invented bullshit. There's no way for the judge to determine guilt without a trial, moron. The campaign spending violation isn't a felony. If it was, a lot of politicians would be going to jail. Obama was fined for this exact same violation. I don't recall any of you psychotic assholes calling for Obama's impeachment.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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.

Actually it does. He's a convicted felon. There's no changing that.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Retarded is suggesting that Cohen plead guilty to a crime that was in fact not a crime.

That is about as retarded as one can be for Trump.

Cohen plead guilty to have a dozen crimes moron, all of which were crimes with the exception of the Stormy payment. Here I'll reply for you, but but but...but BUTTHURT.

Still retardedly suggesting that Cohen, his attorney, the prosecutor and the judge all just made a mistake doesn't change what actually happened.

Cohen plead guilty to, and named Trump as a co-conspirator in two counts related to the payment, dope.

The payment wasn't illegal, man it sucks to be you.

So what did Cohen plead guilty to?

A charge, not necessarily a crime.

Yikes!

 

[Hutch Starskey]

You asked a question and you got your answer. What you do with it is up to you. I cannot force you to stop being ignorant.

You are correct, as long as spending your own money is reported on your campaign finance report.

I asked for an explanation in the poster's own words.

But thanks for playing.

Awwww...you didn't get what you demanded?

Would you like a crying towel now or later

You were presented with the facts. Sorry if you don't like them

Sorry to disappoint, but you did not present any facts. You spewed LW Prog delusions.

The fact is that Cohen is a convicted felon and he named Trump as a co-conspirator.

Even if that were true, he's a "co-conspirator" to the equivalent of a parking ticket. However, since Cohen wasn't charged with conspiracy, then Trump can't be a "co-conspirator."

As with every one of your posts, you only proved that you're a dumbass.

Even if that were true, he's a "co-conspirator" to the equivalent of a parking ticket.

You mean a federal felony.

 

[Lewdog]

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

Hint: nobody.

Is that supposed to mean something?

I know right? That was my point.

You're babbling incoherently.

The judge in the Cohen plea deal was there for a reason... to make sure that a crime had been committed, and to make sure Cohen admitted to committing it and knew what he was pleading to. Judges don't let people plea to non-crimes.

More invented bullshit. There's no way for the judge to determine guilt without a trial, moron. The campaign spending violation isn't a felony. If it was, a lot of politicians would be going to jail. Obama was fined for this exact same violation. I don't recall any of you psychotic assholes calling for Obama's impeachment.

He's not there to determine guilt... the fucking defendant is PLEADING GUILTY. The judge was there to make sure it was a crime he was pleading to and that he knew what he was pleading to.

Every thread I see you post in, you say dumber shit than the time before. I'm not even sure how that is possible anymore.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Just as long as they report it. Did Trump report the payments on his campaign finances?

It wasn't a campaign expenditure, so he isn't required to report it.

Then why did you just make this comment, dumbass?

A candidate can donate as much of his own funds as we wants

Seems you cannot keep your stories straight

You seem to believe that conflicts with something else I have posted.

Loser.

Brilliant retort!

Accurate AF.