Trump appears to have been done in by.......pardon the pun........

Only in "Trump World"...

 

Wrong if it was done with private money not connected to the campaign directly no it doesn't. You might want to try reading the relevant laws some time. And if Trump repaid it with interest + then it is not a contribution but a loan. So the primary charge of concern against Cohen is also a fraud. And Trump even as a presidential candidate is at liberty to spend his money anyway he wants. And lets not forget Cohen wasn't running for office so Trump cannot violate campaign finance law by over paying him for legal services, which is basically what Trump did. Nothing Trump did is any more illegal that Slick Willie's bimbo eruption squad nearly thirty years ago.

 

Which is not illegal any more the Hillary and company trying to cover up Slick Willie's affairs was.

 

It's not a company expense since the legal services were an election fraud cover up genius. Focus...

 

It was Trump's money. That means it wasn't a campaign contribution.

 

You're "dutifully", ignoring the critical timeline/timing and the cover up facts WBK. There are tapes WBK, coming down the evidence pipe WBK, focus....

 

name one he paid off when running for office, and did not report it

the cover up while running for President is what is getting Trump in trouble

 

That still doesn't explain how this was illegal.

 

It was not in fact a legal service. It was a hush money payment made by Trump through his attorney.

 

You can see by the answers from Trump defenders (I'm making that assumption by virtue of the replies by non-Trump defenders since the former are folks I have on ignore) how successful Trump and RWM have been in muddying the waters.

 

Strange. We have had 9 days of trial. Trump is charged with using funds illegally because his purpose was to help his campaign. Yet we haven't learned what is illegal about how the funds were used or what he had in mind when he wrote a check to his lawyer for legal services. This may be worse than the charge of fraud in a case where nobody was defrauded. All of these charges will fail and the prosecutors know it. Their hope is that it will hurt Trump's campaign and that doesn't seem to be happening either. I recommend we abandon political prosecution forever. Somehow I think the judicial system will do what it needs to do to ensure that. There is still hope for it.

 

See post #35.

 

For what reason? It is just a partisan complaint and unrelated to my post.

 

Then you're simply incapable of seeing the forest from a tree WBK, how tragic.

 

Either your confusion is feigned or it's a result of falling victim to news outlets promoting confusion. This boils the matter down very succinctly.

What I Saw Working at The National Enquirer During Donald Trump’s Rise

At the center of the case is the accusation that Trump took part in a scheme to turn The National Enquirer and its sister publications into an arm of his 2016 presidential campaign. The documents detailed three “hush money” payments made to a series of individuals to guarantee their silence about potentially damaging stories in the months before the election. Because this was done with the goal of helping his election chances, the case implied, these payments amounted to a form of illegal, undisclosed campaign spending. And, Bragg argued, because Trump created paperwork to make the payments seem like regular legal expenses, that amounted to a criminal effort at a coverup. Trump has denied the charges against him.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/03/magazine/national-enquirer-trump-lachlan-cartwright.html

 

Oh because defaming them is ever so much better. and NDA are legal sorry.

 

You're incapable of explaining how this was illegal. No surprise there...lol

 

Projection isn't the cloak you think it is...

I already did genius, you keep deflecting away from it. 34 fraudulently filed reimbursements violating NY election laws. The fraudulent payments/expenses were filed in NY, Manhattan hence, why this trial is being brought there. Your talking points are not being used in actual court genius, just for the uninformed Faux audience. Jeez, many trees make a forest brah, see the forest, it's beautiful.

 

trying to move the goal post, I see, lol

if he had reported it, the NDA would have been legal, he did not do that... sorry, the golden calf messed up, he is on trial for violating the election laws

 

A bunch of lawyers say there is no crime in any of that. You believe your lawyers, I'll believe mine.

 

You are simply incorrect in almost every regard.

 

Yes indeed you are per usual NDAs even when in the midst of a campaign are perfectly legal.

 

Show me a law that says you have to report an NDA? That's right there isn't one. That's why the feds took a pass on this nonsense. Nor do you have to report payments made out of your own money as this was.

 

If reported as a campaign contribution. There is a reason they went to great lengths to hide these payments. The whole "it would have been legal if he had done it legally" is the laziest strawman possible

 

Utter nonsense. You do not have to report such things as a campaign expense if the money does not come out of campaign funds. The pretense that All of Trumps money is campaign funds is nonsense.