About That $35,000 Check Cohen Came Up With Today

4
1147

During today’s House spectacle with lying Michael Cohen shooting off Democrat talking points, he said he had evidence of Trump’s criminality. One of the pieces of “evidence” was a $35,000 check that Cohen said Trump gave him to pay Stormy.

CNN wants to promote the idea that the President violated campaign finance law. They call it a criminal conspiracy which is hogwash. The prosecutors , Cohen, whoever are weaponizing campaign finance laws.

NO LAWS MIGHT HAVE BEEN BROKEN

The payments by President Trump to Karen MacDougall and Stormy Daniels did not break the law according to FEC Chairman Bradley Smith. The Trump payoffs to the women were personal expenditures.

Smith wrote:

“However, regardless of what Cohen agreed to in a plea bargain, hush-money payments to mistresses are not really campaign expenditures. It is true that “contribution” and “expenditure” are defined in the Federal Election Campaign Act as anything “for the purpose of influencing any election,” and it may have been intended and hoped that paying hush money would serve that end. The problem is that almost anything a candidate does can be interpreted as intended to “influence an election,” from buying a good watch to make sure he gets to places on time, to getting a massage so that he feels fit for the campaign trail, to buying a new suit so that he looks good on a debate stage. Yet having campaign donors pay for personal luxuries — such as expensive watches, massages, and Brooks Brothers suits — seems more like bribery than a funding campaign speech.”

What he is saying in that paragraph is that Trump’s attempts to “influence an election” isn’t enough to label an action a campaign finance issue. There is a problem that comes in with the FEC language regarding the applicable test: “…if the expense would exist even in the absence of the candidacy or even if the officeholder were not in the office, then the personal use ban applies.”

It’s only a personal expenditure if Trump would have paid it regardless of the context. If he pays off women all the time, he can show evidence that is true.

WATCH:


PowerInbox
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
4 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments