Is It UnConstitutional To Pass Laws Then Apply Them Retroactively?

[JimBowie1958]

Thanks JB1958 for a bit more clarity. Yesterday in my Google search I did find the recent law that allows the state to turn over state tax returns, but I hesitated to assume that is what you are referencing.

The new law requires state tax officials to release the president’s state returns for any “specified and legitimate legislative purpose” on the request of the chair of one of three congressional committees: the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Finance Committee and the Joint Committee on Taxation.
Cuomo Signs a Bill to Allow Release of Trump’s State Tax Returns​

Yeah that is the law I was thinking this case related to, but it seems that it is only tangential to the bigger question of whether the President can be subject to state criminal proceedings.

To get Trump, Democrats are tearing down protections for privacy, the office of President itself and Federal Supremacy.

My Gawd, they are really in panic mode.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Donald Trump and hush money: On par with jaywalking?

Cohen told a federal judge Aug. 21 that Trump had directed him to pay two women $150,000 and $130,000 respectively to stay silent about their alleged affairs with Trump. In a federal court filing, Cohen said this was done to "influence the 2016 presidential election."

Dershowitz said even if true, this hardly amounts to an impeachable offense.

"Any candidate has the right to pay hush money to somebody to influence the outcome of the election," he told CNN’s Chris Cuomo on Aug. 21. "The next question is whether it has to be reported, and is that a technical violation? When you think how many technical violations the Obama campaign committed and every other campaign committed, failure to report a contribution by the candidate itself is essentially jaywalking."

Assessing the legality of paying hush money comes down to a matter of legal opinion, not a fact-check. But one possibility is clear: On a legal basis, what Cohen described implicates Trump in something much more serious than a failure to fill out paperwork.

To recap the basics, Karen McDougal, a former Playboy model, and Stormy Daniels, the stage name of Stephanie Clifford, who directs and acts in pornographic films, have said they had sex with Trump. Trump has denied their stories. They had plans to go public. Both woman have said they were paid to keep quiet in the months leading up to election day 2016.

Personal or campaign expenses
The key divide among legal scholars is whether the payments should be seen as essentially personal.

Federal election law says something is personal if a candidate would have incurred the cost regardless of the campaign. The technical language is an expense that would "exist irrespective of the candidate’s election campaign."

So painting your house to make it look good in a campaign commercial wouldn’t be a campaign expense because sooner or later, every house needs a paint job.

"Paying blackmail for activities unrelated to the campaign is simply not a campaign expense," said Bradley Smith, former chair of the Federal Election Commission and law professor at Capital University Law School in Columbus, Ohio. "It is certainly legal for a candidate to pay hush money from other funds — other than campaign funds — even though it may benefit him as a candidate."

 

[JimBowie1958]

Ignorance Could Be Legal Bliss for Trump on Hush Money Payments - Liberty Headlines

President Donald Trump has never been shy about his ignorance.

He claimed that “nobody knew health care could be so complicated.”

He routinely mangles basic facts about the U.S. economy, military and foreign alliances.

But ignorance may be Trump’s best defense in the investigation that now poses the most direct legal threat to him, a probe into payments to two women to buy their silence in the final weeks of the 2016 presidential campaign.

Although the Russia investigation led by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III has gotten more attention, federal prosecutors in Manhattan pursuing a separate case have said the president directed an illegal scheme committed by his longtime lawyer, Michael Cohen, who is scheduled to be sentenced on Wednesday.

The U.S. attorney’s office said in a court filing that Trump, referred to as “Individual-1,” directed Cohen to pay $280,000 to two women in an illegal effort to sway the election. The money went to Karen McDougal, a former Playboy playmate, and Stormy Daniels, a porn star, to keep them quiet about their claims of affairs with Trump years ago.

If prosecutors want to target Trump — presumably after he leaves office since Justice Department rules bar indicting a sitting president — they must prove not only that campaign finance laws were broken but that Trump knew he was breaking them.

“If he truly had no idea what he was suggesting was improper, that can be an escape hatch,” said Jessica Levinson, a Loyola Law School professor who specializes in election issues.

In most criminal cases, ignorance of the law is no defense. But campaign laws are different. They require a defendant acted “knowingly and willfully” to violate the law, a tougher standard that may play to Trump’s advantage.

“There are certain kinds of crimes, like armed robbery, where we expect everyone knows it’s against the law to go into a bank with a gun and get money,” UC Irvine election law professor Richard L. Hasen said. “But there are other kinds of legal violations where it only becomes a crime when you do it willfully.”

 

[Papageorgio]

Trumps tax records are from a periood before this ridiculous New York law that was written to specifically target him. I have a lot of problems with that kind of law, but it is applying to all his past records too.

Isnt that just retroactive Stalinism?

Trump will ask Supreme Court to take New York tax returns case after losing appeal

By your logic, DNA testing can't be used as evidence for crimes that were committed before DNA testing. And other such like that.

DNA testing is not affiliated with any law. Not sure how your logic got you there.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Compare the differences here:
Former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen sentenced to 3 years in prison

That sentencing stemmed from Cohen pleading guilty to campaign finance violations related to payments to women alleging affairs with Mr. Trump. Cohen will serve his term concurrently with a two-month sentenced imposed for lying to Congress over a proposed Trump Tower Moscow project, a charge brought by special counsel Robert Mueller. The court is fining him $50,000 each for the separate cases.​

Manhattan D.A. Subpoenas Trump Organization Over Stormy Daniels Hush Money

Mr. Vance’s latest foray into the hush-money case could present a legal and political quandary.

Mr. Trump’s lawyers will try to portray Mr. Vance, a Democrat, as leading a partisan attack. Earlier this year, similar criticism was leveled by a lawyer for Paul J. Manafort, Mr. Trump’s former campaign chairman. After Mr. Manafort was convicted of federal crimes, Mr. Vance’s office charged him with state felonies in hopes he would still face prison if he received a presidential pardon.​

Obama 2008 campaign fined $375,000

“At the time, the 2008 campaign was record breaking, with over 3 million grass-roots donors,” Obama campaign spokewoman Katie Hogan said. “The very few outstanding questions about the $750 million that was raised have now all been resolved.”

The major sticking point for the FEC appeared to be a series of missing 48-hour notices for nearly 1,300 contributions totaling more than $1.8 million — an issue that lawyers familiar with the commission’s work say the FEC takes seriously. The notices must be filed on contributions of $1,000 or more that are received within the 20-day window of Election Day.

More than half of those contributions were transferred from the Obama Victory Fund,a joint committee between the campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

Sources said the fine resulting from the settlement agreement has been paid, with $230,000 coming from the Obama campaign’s coffers and the remainder from the DNC.

The document outlined other violations, such as erroneous contribution dates on some campaign reports. The Obama campaign was also late returning some contributions that exceeded the legal limit.

For critics of the Obama campaign, the audit was a reminder of other reporting errors by the 2008 effort, which campaign officials said they tried to correct in real-time. But independent experts, including former FEC commissioner Michael Toner, said after the audit was released that the infractions were relatively minor, given the scope of the campaign.​

So if you are a Republican and not a RINO like Dole, the government throws the book at you to include solitary confinement before a sentence is given, but if you are a RINO or a Democrat, its OK, no big deal, just pay the fine and move on, roflmao

 

[JimBowie1958]

By your logic, DNA testing can't be used as evidence for crimes that were committed before DNA testing. And other such like that.

DNA testing is not affiliated with any law. Not sure how your logic got you there.

Is there a legal difference between taking DNA vrs accessing private records that were protected at the time from such subpoena as have been directed at Trump?

DNA left in public is not protected, but taking DNA from your person is protected as I understand it and a court ordered warrant is required to get your personal DNA from your body otherwise, isnt it?

But private personal documents that were made at a time in which they could not be acquired without a criminal case being sought are protected.

In the future can any state government pass a law that makes your private today into public documents effectively by requiring minimal legal maneuvering?

The NY DA says they think that something Trump and his corporation did may have violated the law in a way most legal scholars say is not a violation of the law, his use of legal fees to cover his fix-it lawyers costs. But the NYDA thinks they are illegal anyway, and so this disintegrates Trumps privacy protections?

That is a pretty thin leaf, even for fascists like NY Democrats.

 

[Syriusly]

To apply this law retroactively to one person out of millions in that state is simply politics disguised as 'law' and a pretty thin disguise at that.

Trump has a right to his privacy and New York Dems are willing to throw everyone's right to privacy under the bus in their hysterical obsessive fit to find any dirt on Trump that they can.

So it's a tradition not a obligation that previous presidential candidates and elected officials release their tax returns?

I haven't been following what's going on with the attempt to compel Trump to release his tax returns but my understanding is that financial records can be subpoenaed during the course of an investigation or legal action. Is that what's happening here?

Not really because there is no crime that is being investigated, which is yet another objection to this law. At the time Trump's lawyer paid Daniels and another whore, there was no law against it, and the money came from Cohen's office slush fund, who was on retainer, in essence and a pot of money Cohen had for expenses none of which was illegal til later. Who else is being prosecuted fro this ridiculous crime of buying silence of whining little bitches?

Normally your right to privacy requires a warrant that itself requires a crime to investigate and evidence that suggests that violating the persons privacy will yeild more evidence.

Where is Trumps crime other than defeating She-Who-Has-Dibs-On-the-Presidency?

Wow- if only there were news articles which recounted the crimes that New York is pursuing.
Judge rejects Trump's bid to keep tax returns secret in New York

Please explain in detail exactly how Trump's tax returns from 8 years ago will help an investigation into 2 Non Disclosure Agreements signed in 2016? After that, explain when NDAs were outlawed and cite the statute outlawing them.

It's a fishing expedition.

Tax returns can be amended going back years- and those amendments could be used to conceal Trump's effort to hide from voters his adultery with a porn star while he was

Of course the investigation isn't into NDA's- it is into payments made to the women Trump committed adultery with to keep those women from telling voters about Trump's adultery- and whether those payments were a violation of campaign finance laws.

But then again- you knew that.

 

[Syriusly]

By your logic, DNA testing can't be used as evidence for crimes that were committed before DNA testing. And other such like that.

DNA testing is not affiliated with any law. Not sure how your logic got you there.

The NY DA says they think that something Trump and his corporation did may have violated the law in a way most legal scholars say is not a violation of the law, his use of legal fees to cover his fix-it lawyers costs. But the NYDA thinks they are illegal anyway, and so this disintegrates Trumps privacy protections?

Since when do prosecutors ask whether 'most legal scholars' agree with their investigation?

The prosecutors can issue subpoenas in this case exactly like they can for any other American. Trump is not above the law.

And none of this has anything to do with the law New York passed which allows the State of New York to turn over state tax records to Congress.

 

[Syriusly]

Compare the differences here:
Former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen sentenced to 3 years in prison

That sentencing stemmed from Cohen pleading guilty to campaign finance violations related to payments to women alleging affairs with Mr. Trump. Cohen will serve his term concurrently with a two-month sentenced imposed for lying to Congress over a proposed Trump Tower Moscow project, a charge brought by special counsel Robert Mueller. The court is fining him $50,000 each for the separate cases.​

Manhattan D.A. Subpoenas Trump Organization Over Stormy Daniels Hush Money

Mr. Vance’s latest foray into the hush-money case could present a legal and political quandary.

Mr. Trump’s lawyers will try to portray Mr. Vance, a Democrat, as leading a partisan attack. Earlier this year, similar criticism was leveled by a lawyer for Paul J. Manafort, Mr. Trump’s former campaign chairman. After Mr. Manafort was convicted of federal crimes, Mr. Vance’s office charged him with state felonies in hopes he would still face prison if he received a presidential pardon.​

Obama 2008 campaign fined $375,000

“At the time, the 2008 campaign was record breaking, with over 3 million grass-roots donors,” Obama campaign spokewoman Katie Hogan said. “The very few outstanding questions about the $750 million that was raised have now all been resolved.”

The major sticking point for the FEC appeared to be a series of missing 48-hour notices for nearly 1,300 contributions totaling more than $1.8 million — an issue that lawyers familiar with the commission’s work say the FEC takes seriously. The notices must be filed on contributions of $1,000 or more that are received within the 20-day window of Election Day.

More than half of those contributions were transferred from the Obama Victory Fund,a joint committee between the campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

Sources said the fine resulting from the settlement agreement has been paid, with $230,000 coming from the Obama campaign’s coffers and the remainder from the DNC.

The document outlined other violations, such as erroneous contribution dates on some campaign reports. The Obama campaign was also late returning some contributions that exceeded the legal limit.

For critics of the Obama campaign, the audit was a reminder of other reporting errors by the 2008 effort, which campaign officials said they tried to correct in real-time. But independent experts, including former FEC commissioner Michael Toner, said after the audit was released that the infractions were relatively minor, given the scope of the campaign.​

So if you are a Republican and not a RINO like Dole, the government throws the book at you to include solitary confinement before a sentence is given, but if you are a RINO or a Democrat, its OK, no big deal, just pay the fine and move on, roflmao

LOL- because of course Republicans always get jail time while Democrats only get fines.

You are comparing a criminal prosecution by the Republican lead Justice Department of Cohen- who pled guilty- to the civil complaint by the FEC against the Obama campaign.

Election Law Violations Compared: Obama 2008 vs. Trump 2016
Not only does the matter have to be something that is purposeful, but it [also has to be] a major violation. People often have reporting violations [and] that’s what the Obama ones were determined to be.

In [Cohen’s] case, what [the Department of Justice] determined is that there was a criminal intent to hide a campaign contribution … and so, it falls within a criminal violation, as opposed to just a civil one to be enforced by the FEC.

 

[Nostra]

To apply this law retroactively to one person out of millions in that state is simply politics disguised as 'law' and a pretty thin disguise at that.

Trump has a right to his privacy and New York Dems are willing to throw everyone's right to privacy under the bus in their hysterical obsessive fit to find any dirt on Trump that they can.

So it's a tradition not a obligation that previous presidential candidates and elected officials release their tax returns?

I haven't been following what's going on with the attempt to compel Trump to release his tax returns but my understanding is that financial records can be subpoenaed during the course of an investigation or legal action. Is that what's happening here?

Not really because there is no crime that is being investigated, which is yet another objection to this law. At the time Trump's lawyer paid Daniels and another whore, there was no law against it, and the money came from Cohen's office slush fund, who was on retainer, in essence and a pot of money Cohen had for expenses none of which was illegal til later. Who else is being prosecuted fro this ridiculous crime of buying silence of whining little bitches?

Normally your right to privacy requires a warrant that itself requires a crime to investigate and evidence that suggests that violating the persons privacy will yeild more evidence.

Where is Trumps crime other than defeating She-Who-Has-Dibs-On-the-Presidency?

Wow- if only there were news articles which recounted the crimes that New York is pursuing.
Judge rejects Trump's bid to keep tax returns secret in New York

Please explain in detail exactly how Trump's tax returns from 8 years ago will help an investigation into 2 Non Disclosure Agreements signed in 2016? After that, explain when NDAs were outlawed and cite the statute outlawing them.

It's a fishing expedition.

Tax returns can be amended going back years- and those amendments could be used to conceal Trump's effort to hide from voters his adultery with a porn star while he was

Of course the investigation isn't into NDA's- it is into payments made to the women Trump committed adultery with to keep those women from telling voters about Trump's adultery- and whether those payments were a violation of campaign finance laws.

But then again- you knew that.

Why would Trump amend a tax return from 8 years ago to try to conceal an NDA signed in 2016?

You make no sense, as usual.

 

[Syriusly]

Thanks JB1958 for a bit more clarity. Yesterday in my Google search I did find the recent law that allows the state to turn over state tax returns, but I hesitated to assume that is what you are referencing.

The new law requires state tax officials to release the president’s state returns for any “specified and legitimate legislative purpose” on the request of the chair of one of three congressional committees: the House Ways and Means Committee, the Senate Finance Committee and the Joint Committee on Taxation.
Cuomo Signs a Bill to Allow Release of Trump’s State Tax Returns​

Yeah that is the law I was thinking this case related to, but it seems that it is only tangential to the bigger question of whether the President can be subject to state criminal proceedings.

To get Trump, Democrats are tearing down protections for privacy, the office of President itself and Federal Supremacy.

My Gawd, they are really in panic mode.

Privacy? Do you think that any other American isn't subject to a subpoena?
The Office of the President? They are not subpoening the office of the President- they are subpoening Trump's accountants
Federal Supremacy? So much for Republicans believing in State's rights......apparently you think that States can't investigate a President.....

 

[Syriusly]

So it's a tradition not a obligation that previous presidential candidates and elected officials release their tax returns?

I haven't been following what's going on with the attempt to compel Trump to release his tax returns but my understanding is that financial records can be subpoenaed during the course of an investigation or legal action. Is that what's happening here?

Not really because there is no crime that is being investigated, which is yet another objection to this law. At the time Trump's lawyer paid Daniels and another whore, there was no law against it, and the money came from Cohen's office slush fund, who was on retainer, in essence and a pot of money Cohen had for expenses none of which was illegal til later. Who else is being prosecuted fro this ridiculous crime of buying silence of whining little bitches?

Normally your right to privacy requires a warrant that itself requires a crime to investigate and evidence that suggests that violating the persons privacy will yeild more evidence.

Where is Trumps crime other than defeating She-Who-Has-Dibs-On-the-Presidency?

Wow- if only there were news articles which recounted the crimes that New York is pursuing.
Judge rejects Trump's bid to keep tax returns secret in New York

Please explain in detail exactly how Trump's tax returns from 8 years ago will help an investigation into 2 Non Disclosure Agreements signed in 2016? After that, explain when NDAs were outlawed and cite the statute outlawing them.

It's a fishing expedition.

Tax returns can be amended going back years- and those amendments could be used to conceal Trump's effort to hide from voters his adultery with a porn star while he was

Of course the investigation isn't into NDA's- it is into payments made to the women Trump committed adultery with to keep those women from telling voters about Trump's adultery- and whether those payments were a violation of campaign finance laws.

But then again- you knew that.

Why would Trump amend a tax return from 8 years ago to try to conceal an NDA signed in 2016?

You make no sense, as usual.

I don't know why he would amend his tax returns to conceal his illegal campaign payments but he absolutely could have.

 

[Nostra]

Not really because there is no crime that is being investigated, which is yet another objection to this law. At the time Trump's lawyer paid Daniels and another whore, there was no law against it, and the money came from Cohen's office slush fund, who was on retainer, in essence and a pot of money Cohen had for expenses none of which was illegal til later. Who else is being prosecuted fro this ridiculous crime of buying silence of whining little bitches?

Normally your right to privacy requires a warrant that itself requires a crime to investigate and evidence that suggests that violating the persons privacy will yeild more evidence.

Where is Trumps crime other than defeating She-Who-Has-Dibs-On-the-Presidency?

Wow- if only there were news articles which recounted the crimes that New York is pursuing.
Judge rejects Trump's bid to keep tax returns secret in New York

Please explain in detail exactly how Trump's tax returns from 8 years ago will help an investigation into 2 Non Disclosure Agreements signed in 2016? After that, explain when NDAs were outlawed and cite the statute outlawing them.

It's a fishing expedition.

Tax returns can be amended going back years- and those amendments could be used to conceal Trump's effort to hide from voters his adultery with a porn star while he was

Of course the investigation isn't into NDA's- it is into payments made to the women Trump committed adultery with to keep those women from telling voters about Trump's adultery- and whether those payments were a violation of campaign finance laws.

But then again- you knew that.

Why would Trump amend a tax return from 8 years ago to try to conceal an NDA signed in 2016?

You make no sense, as usual.

I don't know why he would amend his tax returns to conceal his illegal campaign payments but he absolutely could have.

You are babbling complete bullshit. You have no coherent reason they need 8 years of tax returns to look into NDAs signed in 2016.

None.

You just announced it is nothing but a fishing expedition. "He could have".

 

[Syriusly]

Wow- if only there were news articles which recounted the crimes that New York is pursuing.
Judge rejects Trump's bid to keep tax returns secret in New York

Please explain in detail exactly how Trump's tax returns from 8 years ago will help an investigation into 2 Non Disclosure Agreements signed in 2016? After that, explain when NDAs were outlawed and cite the statute outlawing them.

It's a fishing expedition.

Tax returns can be amended going back years- and those amendments could be used to conceal Trump's effort to hide from voters his adultery with a porn star while he was

Of course the investigation isn't into NDA's- it is into payments made to the women Trump committed adultery with to keep those women from telling voters about Trump's adultery- and whether those payments were a violation of campaign finance laws.

But then again- you knew that.

Why would Trump amend a tax return from 8 years ago to try to conceal an NDA signed in 2016?

You make no sense, as usual.

I don't know why he would amend his tax returns to conceal his illegal campaign payments but he absolutely could have.

You are babbling complete bullshit. You have no coherent reason they need 8 years of tax returns to look into NDAs signed in 2016.

None.

You just announced it is nothing but a fishing expedition. "He could have".

No I am just explaining why they may have asked for 8 years- you just believe your Orange Messiah is above the law, and approve of his payoff to conceal his adulteries.

 

[Nostra]

Please explain in detail exactly how Trump's tax returns from 8 years ago will help an investigation into 2 Non Disclosure Agreements signed in 2016? After that, explain when NDAs were outlawed and cite the statute outlawing them.

It's a fishing expedition.

Tax returns can be amended going back years- and those amendments could be used to conceal Trump's effort to hide from voters his adultery with a porn star while he was

Of course the investigation isn't into NDA's- it is into payments made to the women Trump committed adultery with to keep those women from telling voters about Trump's adultery- and whether those payments were a violation of campaign finance laws.

But then again- you knew that.

Why would Trump amend a tax return from 8 years ago to try to conceal an NDA signed in 2016?

You make no sense, as usual.

I don't know why he would amend his tax returns to conceal his illegal campaign payments but he absolutely could have.

You are babbling complete bullshit. You have no coherent reason they need 8 years of tax returns to look into NDAs signed in 2016.

None.

You just announced it is nothing but a fishing expedition. "He could have".

No I am just explaining why they may have asked for 8 years- you just believe your Orange Messiah is above the law, and approve of his payoff to conceal his adulteries.

No, you aren't explaining anything. You are flailing.

His tax returns from 8 years ago play no part in NDAs signed in 2016, no matter what you think.