Posted on 12/08/2018 7:55:52 AM PST by Olog-hai
“Influencing an election” that sure covers a lot of ground-in fact as much ground as prosecutors think it should cover. Now the common sense interpretation would be money used directly to influence voters as in campaign ads, mail outs, and rallies. Since it is difficult to show that a NDA which was not known by the voters could have swayed their decision and influenced their vote. So just who did the agreement influence? The only people it influenced would be the people directly parties to that agreement.
Congress had a taxpayer fund the spent $17,000,000 hushing up sex scandals. Release the names. NOW. <<<<
YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!.....NOW!!!!!!!!
I guess Its a crime if you spend your own money......but it’s a “perk” if you spend Taxpayers money......./s
So Clinton’s bags of cash that Gore acted as bag man from the Chinese was okay? The duplicity and distortions of facts by the media can be counted as grains of sand on a beach.
That begs the question as to what he’s saving himself from. He’s “confessing” to things that aren’t crimes, to make them seem like crimes to the low-info public.
Nope, not even then. The Marxists always need a Trotsky/Goldstein for the public to focus their hate on instead of themselves. Like Lenin said, “Hatred is the basis of communism”.
If republicans don't stand up and go on the offensive, it will probably end with the next election. While a few republicans hide in the shadows just to protect their space at the trough, the dems will run away with out government and our future.
Why would the Uniparty go on the offensive against itself?
Your headline that they have tied Trump to some (any) crime is false. Show me the trial that convicted him or do you not believe in the right to a trial? Even the likes of you would be innocent until a trial proves you guilty of anything!.
My headline? I’m not Michael Balsamo.
Of course, Balsamo and his ilk cheered on the presumption of guilt with respect to Brett Kavanaugh.
“Federal law requires that any payments made “for the purposes of influencing” an election must be reported in campaign finance disclosures. The court filing Friday makes clear that the payments were made to benefit Trump politically.”
LUDICROUS INTERPRETATION OF FEDERAL LAW.
The law has never been interpreted that way before. And it would not even withstand judicial review, much less the scrutiny of a jury.
Unfortunately Cohen has pleaded guilty to it in these circumstances.
So let’s argue it in the public square.
Accuse Trump of that crime and turn the report over to the US House. And let’s have the media and the professional left, in fact let’s encourage them, to put pressure on their elected House representatives to impeach.
And let’s have the public argument over whether a candidate can be charged with this crime of paying off a mistress during an election campaign.
We WANT the Democrats to be forced into an impeachment vote over this allegation.
Based on what? The testimony of a crooked lawyer is is being jailed for lying to the Feds? Why should anyone believe him over President Trump?
Cohen, again, has pleaded “guilty” to a non-crime. And it’d be a travesty of justice to be imprisoned for a non-crime too. This is a constitutional crisis indeed.
Didn’t report spending money to influence a federal election.
I shit you not.
Of course, it’s not a question of belief. Except on the part of crooked prosecutors who should themselves be in federal prison.
Just more wishful thinking by a liberal. Not even news anymore.
That bogus “interpretation” of the law is an attack on any monetary transaction these demagogues deem to have “influenced an election”. If I buy a car built by UAW members, and it doesn’t get reported on someone’s campaign fund reports, that could be construed as “illegal” under this tortuous redefinition.
This headline gets top billing on the AP’s website for now.
Trump could always claim that the payments were made to prevent his wife from hearing about the allegations. John Edwards tried that tack when he got into trouble over the hush money to his mistress...and was not found guilty in a court of law.
Direct illegal payments to buy the silence of women whose claims of extramarital affairs.
Congress and senate have a department that does the same thing so it must be legal.OH WAIT Trump did it.
Law is not for everyone only the few.
Chuck Schumer was the target for such claims, he threatened a slander suit against one woman and then I never read anything more about it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.