Ethics Office has ‘essentially’ reported Trump to the Justice Department for potential criminal pros

Hush money isn’t an expense. Court fees would be.

 

Written by trumps lawyer? Lol ok

 

Representative John Conyers Settled Sexual-Harassment Complaint Using Taxpayer Money: Report

Could Conyers use taxpayer money to pay settlements as an office expense?

 

He doesn’t run the office of compliance

 

I guess that's why you aren't an attorney, or an accountant.

Of course Hush money is an expense.

Nice try, no Cigar.

 

Well, between the cartoons that represent Trumpter intellect, you did ask for a quote!

"OGE has concluded that, based on the information provided as a note to part 8, the payment made by Mr. Cohen is required to be reported as a liability," Apol wrote to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, adding, "you may find the disclosure relevant to any inquiry you may be pursuing regarding the President's prior report that was signed on June 14, 2017."

Trump failed to make that disclosure in his 2017 statement. He covered it up, and has repeatedly lied aobut it. Trump lied about it. Cohen lied about it. Trump changed his lie. He had Guliani go out and tell a completely different story.

And then there's this:

"
Walter Shaub, the former head of OGE who is now the senior director of ethics at the Campaign Legal Center, said he is “heartened” that Apol flagged Trump’s disclosure errors to the Justice Department.

“If DOJ investigates and determines that president Trump knew of his debt to Cohen when he filed last year’s report, there will be reason to suspect that his omission of the debt from last year’s report was ‘knowing and willful,’ which would be a crime,” Shaub, who resigned in July 2017, said in a written statement. “No one from the Trump camp asked OGE last year whether the debt was reportable and that, instead, President Trump’s attorney asked OGE to allow him to be the first filer in history to be excused from the obligation to certify that his report was true.”

Got that? Trump's legal team would NOT attest to the accuracy of the Trump financial disclosure statement that THEY THEMSELVES submitted!!!!

https://www.politico.com/story/2018...losed-stormy-daniels-payment-last-year-591886

 

Yes, it is.

It is also an in kind contribution to a Presidential campaign.

 

Reimbursing attorney fees and costs is an in kind contribution to a Presidential Campaign?

Again, such a claim proves why you aren't an attorney, or an accountant.

 

It was required to be specified, it appears. The OGE is mistaken, Plus, it was paid via Trump's REGULAR RETAINER to Cohen....so how does he know/care what Cohen did with his usual pay?

And what law do you delude this involves, in your latest Trump frenzy?

 

Bullshit. it was PERSONAL service to Trump, paid for by his PERSONAL FUNDS, per his monthly retainer to Cohen...

You guys get funnier every day....meanwhile, let's IGNORE the fact that the insanely corrupt Obama Swamp KGB-FBI/DOJ put a spy into the Trump Campaign...MADNESS.

 

Paying off a porn star to be silent days before a Presididential election is an in kind political contribution. The case law on this is very clear.

The fact that Trump, Cohen, and Guliani have lied repeatedly about these events is problematic as well.

 

Bullshit. He had a personal interest in keeping the Blowjob Queen from spreading lies about him, called his MARRIAGE.

Utter nonsense, and there is NO CASE LAW ruling saying otherwise.

 

Mr Trump filed papers yesterday that refute your claim.

I suppose I should be sympathetic to your dilemma.

Your hero, and his accolydes have told so many conflicting lies about these matters that it's hard for you to keep up with the spin.

Of course, if you accept one of the Guliani claims, i.e the one you made about Daniels being paid off out of a running slush fund that Trump paid Cohen, then you have a whole new rat's nest of issues to look into.

 

As if it matters ... "sitting president". As I understand it, Trump disclosed his payment to Cohen as required. There's a difference of opinion on whether the payment was characterized correctly. Ethics contention is that Cohens fees should have been reported as a "liability". Trump recorded the payment as an "expenditure". Now this discrepancy pales in comparison to "legal fees" = "covert foreign oppo research" ... so I'd assume Dems will just as quickly dismiss any suggestion of impropriety ... right? ::

 

Oh, really? Let's see the BIG DIFFERENCES in what was filed yesterday. It was paid as an regular expense; the only difference is the OEG wanted it filed as LIABILITY =/= campaign expenditure.

Oh the HUMANITY !!!

Doesn't mean ****....

 

Uh, yes there is.

https://www.npr.org/2018/03/25/5968...-daniels-may-have-broken-campaign-finance-law

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...violated-election-law/?utm_term=.565bc9117975

https://www.publicintegrity.org/201...egal-contribution-fec-ruling-could-take-years

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligence...ormy-daniels-payoff-may-still-be-illegal.html

 

All the opinions of IDIOTS. The funds did not come from his campaign.

NONE of those are "CASE LAW" claiming that one's PERSONAL EXPENDITURES = "campaign finances".

Try reading the nonsense you post before you post it, and spare yourself this emnarrassment….

 

Well,

First, Trump tried to pretend that he didn't know anything about any payoffs.

Then, they tried to pretend that Cohen actually went out and borrowed against his home to make a payoff to a porn star days before an election out of the goodness of his heart.

Then Trump admits publicly on TV that Cohen represented him with regard to Stormy Daniels, directly contradicting his own statements.

Then he has his mouthpiece Guliani tell Fox that Trump did know aobut the payments.
ur
Then, Guliani tried to pretend that the payoffs were reimbursed via a standing retainer arrangement, which would be ethically questionable at best.

Then Cohen's financial records indicate that Cohen ran this hush money thorugh the same account he was using to shake down large corporations in return for access to Trump.

Then the Trump team belatedly files a disclosure form, burying it in a footnote, effectively admitting that they had violated the regulations by failing to disclose these payments when they were originally were supposed to be reported.

There is nothing consistant about any of this. They are all running around making stuff up.

 

It doesn't matter whether the funds came from the campaign. Besides, you don't know whether that is true or not. You just made it up.

 

Is this important? I thought Stormy was going to be enough to impeeeeech Trump?

 

First, as it was just part of his normal monthly expenses, why would he?

He became aware of it after Mouthanatti ill-advised his poor, duped "client" to break the agreement she SIGNED and go to the media to do it.

Second, whatever of is own personal accounts Cohen used is irrelevant.

Third...NONE are the Trump Campaign.

Der...

 

Bullshit. That is the ONLY BASIS for it being "campaign finance" violation.

I didn't makeup ****; it was paid via Trump's regular retainer, so say the PEOPLE INVOLVED, and there is no evidence otherwise.

Keep grasping at straws...it's funny to watch your TDS reaching fever pitch.

 

LOL

Thank you for your opinion. It's always the epitome of objective reasoning everyone should accept as fact.

On the other hand settling a matter that has been ongoing for years wouldn't fit your fantasy..... (Emphasis added)

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps...en-the-president-and-the-porn-star-1521561532​

Since 2011, Stormy Daniels and Trump lawyer Michael Cohen have battled over her allegations of an affair, a standoff that has now reached the White House.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...l-story-sex-Trump-200-000-weeks-election.html

Stormy Daniels's manager made the rounds of celebrity magazines, television shows, and websites in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election, hoping someone would bite.

She promised a story of Stormy's titillating sexcapade with the man who would soon be in the Oval Office.

But with polling day getting ever closer, and her chances of a payday getting more remote as Trump appeared doomed to lose to Hillary Clinton, Daniels gave up on her money chase and accepted the $130,000 that Trump attorney Michael Cohen had dangled in front of her in a bid to keep the story quiet.
​

 

C'mon ... what'd you expect in reaction to the news that Mueller couldn't indict Trump? Liberals would get over 2016? How many times were they cautioned about their unrealistic expectations? Here's a definitive article on the harsh reality of FEC prosecutions. Liberals should brace themselves for disappointment. https://www.bna.com/fec-rarely-votes-n17179934048/ It's way past time that liberals transition from "resistance" to "acceptance" where Trumps presidency is concerned, he's not going anywhere.