Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SeekAndFind

Manfort’s troubles are irrelevant. Cohen is all that matters.

First and foremost Cohen’s claim that he was directed by Trump has no corroboration.

Davis claims that there is a wire transfer doc from Trump to Cohen, OK whoopdedoo.

Let’s not get lost here, paying off lovers is not at all illegal.

Hushing up those lovers benefits a candidate.

Real simple, any monies that benefit a candidate have to be disclosed.

That’s what potentially incriminates Trump if he can be shown to have directed the payoff......and.....directed the non-disclosure. Both issues have to be proven by the FEC to stick.


15 posted on 08/22/2018 10:32:01 AM PDT by gandalftb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: gandalftb

What if they weren’t lovers and her accusations are false?


19 posted on 08/22/2018 10:37:55 AM PDT by bankwalker (Immigration without assimilation is an invasion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: gandalftb

You’re all over threads posting this wacky crap.

FEC regulations specifically state that if there are other legitimate reasons for a payout then considering it a campaign contribution can be ignored.

It may come at a political cost, but there is no legal jeopardy. The feds tried it with John Edwards and it failed, if they try it with the president it will fail too.


30 posted on 08/22/2018 11:11:23 AM PDT by hirn_man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: gandalftb

Trump did not violate any law pertaining to Michael Cohen ... Cohen made the payment to Stormy Daniels ‘because’ she was ‘Black Mailing’ Trump.... The payment was made by Cohen. Then after receiving the black mail $$ she demanded more!


31 posted on 08/22/2018 11:17:58 AM PDT by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: gandalftb

Real simple, any monies that benefit a candidate have to be disclosed.

This statement is an oversimplification. Since Trump funded his own campaign, at least through the primary, he is entitled to spend as much of his own money as desired, without an FEC cap (as with individual donors). It’s also murky to determine specifically how the money accrues a tangible benefit to the candidate: keeping a hooker silent may, or may not, influence the outcome, but there is no way to draw such a conclusion, other than by inference. Which is entirely subjective.


57 posted on 08/22/2018 3:27:38 PM PDT by confederatecarpetbag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson