Dem: Cohen filing means Trump committed two felonies

The Hill ^ | December 7, 2018 | Chris Mills Rodrigo

[2ndDivisionVet]

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) argued Friday that federal prosecutors' latest filing in a case involving President Trump's former longtime attorney Michael Cohen means that Trump allegedly committed two felonies.

Lieu, a member of the House Judiciary Committee and frequent Trump critic, told MSNBC's Chris Matthews on "Hardball" that "we have a sitting president of the United States who committed two felonies while running for president.”....

[Wayne07]

Campaigns must report to the FEC the purpose and payee of all disbursements over $200. To keep it legal, all Cohen had to do was either report it, or not bill it as a campaign expense.

[jdsteel]

Campaigns must report to the FEC the purpose and payee of all disbursements over $200.

We both agree the NDA’s were not campaign contributions.

Cohen did not pay the NDA’s with campaign money.

Trump did not pay Cohen with campaign money.

So what FEC paperwork is required again?

[Wayne07]

"Cohen did not pay the NDA’s with campaign money."

He paid it with his money, but was reimbursed with campaign money because explicitly billed it as a campaign expense.

"Trump did not pay Cohen with campaign money."

He did - it becomes campaign money when you pay a campaign expense.

"So what FEC paperwork is required again?"

Any payment over $200 requires disclosure. It wasn't disclosed and that is one of the crimes Cohen is going to jail for.

[jdsteel]

You skipped the part where we both agreed NDA’s are not campaign expenses.

Cohen did NOT bill as “campaign expenses” either. He billed it as “attorney services rendered”.

Trump paying an attorney with money from the Trump Organization for normal attorney services (and NDA’s certainly fall within that description) are, once again, not campaign expenses.

[Wayne07]

I never said an NDA wasn't a campaign expense. I said an NDA is an NDA. It is nothing inherently. It is a campaign expense if it is done for the campaign OR paid for by the campaign. There may be plausible deniability that it was done for the campaign, but the Cohen sentencing documents say it was invoiced by Cohen as a campaign expense reimbursement, which makes it a campaign expense.

You are providing an unsourced quotation, "“attorney services rendered”. Where did you get it? If it is true, great, there is a plausible defense. So where are you getting that info?

[jdsteel]

Cohen was Trump’s private attorney with no connection to his campaign. Every article and quote about the transaction clearly stated that Cohens expenses were billed to Trump as “attorney services rendered” and paid by Trump and NOT by campaign funds. It’s been consistent since the story broke over a year ago, and why Democrats are claiming that the payments were somehow “deceptive”.

Facts not in dispute:

Cohen paid the women out of his own pocket, using a HELOC.

Trump repaid Cohen with a series of payments and did not use campaign funds.

In dispute: Do NDA’s count as a “Campaign Contribution” on the part of either Cohen or Trump?

Answer: Campaign finance laws specifically exclude expenses that would have happened regardless of there being a campaign, and NDA’s are a normal function of celebrities and rich men lives.

It’s really very clear, unless you place yourself in a constant state of “waffle” regarding what a NDA is, as you have.

[Wayne07]

So you have no source, and you are quoting yourself. That’s too bad.

[jdsteel]

An’t do a simple internet search for every report on this matter over the last year or so? I really need to spoon feed you???

[editor-surveyor]

.
He is halucinating!
.

[editor-surveyor]

.
Paying off an extortionist is not a crime.