[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.