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

That reminds me ... I still have the latest Real Time episode to watch. Where's my vape... ?

 

election laws require you report hush money payments while you are a candidate

the republican poster child of Adultery, Republicans no longer can claim to be the family values party

 

No they don't election laws prevent you from using donated campaign funds for personal expenses like paying legal fees for NDAs. Part of the problem with the case is the attempt to stand the law on it's head and make it bark like a trained seal. And even that is questionable since the only other time it has come before the courts was when Democrat Gary Hart actually did use campaign funds to make child support payments to his mistress and was charged accordingly and acquitted by a jury who apparently thought the government should bugger off and find something worth while to do. As regards this insipid case that would be very good advice. I love to be able to present the Defense's response to the prosecutions summary at the end of it all. Hell it damn near writes itself.

 

You literally have no idea what you are talking about and couldn't be more wrong. If the money is spent to support the campaign, it is a campaign contribution. Period. If Trump spends money on his campaign, it is a campaign contribution. It has to be reported as such. Welcome to reality. Feel free to wake up to it at any time.

 

In reading that comment I'm reminded of Kellyanne Conway's comfort with the bizarre proposition there is room in the world for two opposing realities. Trump's, and everyone else's.

 

I, unlike you, know exactly what I am talking about. The law is actually that you can't use campaign funds for private expenses like paying lawyers for NDAs why you are doing an NDA is utterly irrelevant to that. We don't have thought crimes in this country.

 

Not in conjunction with a Presidential Campaign

 

Being reimbursed for a campaign contribution is called a "strawman contribution"
The fact that there is a term for it means he made a contribution.

 

But no one is "just saying it was illegal"
Trump has been INDICTED. That goes way beyond "just saying"

 

You're welcome for the reminder.

 

You seem to appear not to understand that political prosecutions and criminal prosecutions are different from one another.

 

You are talking about two entirely different things. Both of which are illegal. Using campaign funds for personal use and making campaign contributions without reporting them. More than one thing can be illegal. Surely you know this.

 

The self-serving reference by Trump to the process of being held responsible for alleged crimes as "political persecution" does not make it so. It's just as much of an alternative reality as his claim about the size of his inauguration crowd.

 

No one made a campaign contribution. Trump paid a lawyer for services rendered out of his own pocket. Legally you don't get to assume xy&z simply because it suits your narrative.

 

You seriously have not paid attention to a single detail of this case. His lawyer paid the money to protect the campaign. Trump paid him back. That's not not payment for a legal service. I'm sorry reality is inconvenient for your partisan narrative. Pecker testified to the same.

 

And Trump reembursed him making it a loan. And of course there are any number of reasons Trump may have done the NDA that had nothing to do with the campaign.

 

Here's the problem. Trump's defenders keep making the mistake of thinking what he says bears any resemblance to reality or truth. He says he won the election..........they believe him. He says he didn't know anything about the hush money payments........they believe him. He says he didn't schtoink Stormy..........they believe him. He says Joe Biden is guilty of crimes.........they believe him. His word is gospel to them. Like an Orange Messiah.

 

Here's the real problem. Biden's defenders keep making the mistake of thinking what he says bears any resemblance to reality or truth. He says he won the election..........they believe him. He says he didn't know anything about his sons foreign business dealings........they believe him. He says he didn't sexually assault Tara Reade..........they believe him. He says Donald Trump is guilty of crimes.........they believe him. His word is gospel to them. Like an Pasty white donut.

 

One has to admit, they do wear the cloak of ignorance quite well. It must offers them the mirage of warmth and security.

 

Everyone involved said they did so for the campaign. And supposedly there was a comment about "Do I still have to pay if we win." Cohen's "loan" broke campaign finance law as it wasn't reported as being a campaign contribution and it exceeded the limits for campaign contributions. Trump paying him back doesn't change that. It just further confirms Trump's involvement in the plot.

 

Which doesn't make it a campaign contribution.

 

It absolutely does. Spending money to help the campaign is a campaign contribution. Hell, even anything of monetary value is a campaign contribution, even if it isn't cash

 

No.

 

In your alternate dimension, perhaps not. But back here in reality, you are wrong.

 

The high school mentality of some who post here blows my mind.