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

[jc456]

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"

Your post is retarded, Trump didn't break the law legal experts and even a former FEC chairman say so, suck it.

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.

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

Nope sorry parrot

 

[BluesLegend]

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"

Your post is retarded, Trump didn't break the law legal experts and even a former FEC chairman say so, suck it.

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.

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.

 

[Lesh]

Your post is retarded, Trump didn't break the law legal experts and even a former FEC chairman say so, suck it.

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.

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

 

[Lewdog]

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?

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.

 

[Lesh]

Your post is retarded, Trump didn't break the law legal experts and even a former FEC chairman say so, suck it.

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.

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

 

[jc456]

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.

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

 

[Lesh]

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?

But wait. Your claim is that it definitely wasn't illegal.

Hmmmm

 

[jc456]

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?

But wait. Your claim is that it definitely wasn't illegal.

Hmmmm

Yep definitely!

 

[BluesLegend]

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.

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.

 

[bripat9643]

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.

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.

 

[Lesh]

And gee...Cohen plead GUILTY to it...and implicated the President in that crime

They don't let you plead guilty to non-crimes

Ex-Trump attorney Michael Cohen pleads guilty to campaign finance violations

 

[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?

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.

 

[imawhosure]

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.

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

 

[Lesh]

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 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?

 

[jc456]

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.

Can’t make it up

 

[Pete7469]

This is ALL about the midterms. The left can't 'get' Trump on something valid, so they make shit up and run it 24/7 trying to damage the Trump presidency.

I wonder who they learned that trick from...

Goebbels.

So you’re good with a second special prosecutor right?

I'm good with Ted Cruz becoming AG and arresting everyone in DC who has gotten far richer than their salaries would allow.

So there could be hundreds of special prosecutors.


.

 

[jc456]

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 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?

Huh?

 

[jc456]

And gee...Cohen plead GUILTY to it...and implicated the President in that crime

They don't let you plead guilty to non-crimes

Ex-Trump attorney Michael Cohen pleads guilty to campaign finance violations

Wasn’t a crime! Told you so already

 

[jc456]

This is ALL about the midterms. The left can't 'get' Trump on something valid, so they make shit up and run it 24/7 trying to damage the Trump presidency.

I wonder who they learned that trick from...

Goebbels.

So you’re good with a second special prosecutor right?

I'm good with Ted Cruz becoming AG and arresting everyone in DC who has gotten far richer than their salaries would allow.

So there could be hundreds of special prosecutors.


.

Drain the swamp

 

[imawhosure]

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 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!