One thing coming out of the "Hush money trial"

It is if it is used to support a campaign and isn't reported as a campaign contribution.

 

Trump hasn't been convicted of any other crimes. The testimony is prejudicing the jury.

 

That falls under Federal law, not state law.

The law says it's a campaign expenditure if it was money spent only because of the campaign. Trump can easily argue that he would have paid the money to Daniels anyway. The adultery clause in his prenuptial agreement is evidence of that argument.

 

New York has campaign finance laws as well. And the prosecuting is presenting evidence that the motivation was to help the campaign. Wake up. Follow this case. This is sad.

 

State campaign finance laws don't apply to Federal elections.

When a candidate spends money on his campaign it doesn't have to be reported as a contribution. It has to be reported as an expenditure and thats regulated by Federal campaign finance law.

The FEC has exclusive jurisdiction over the civil enforcement of the federal campaign finance law.

https://www.fec.gov/introduction-ca...ction,government agencies or self-submissions.

 

The two crimes were both committed in the jurisdiction of NY State brah, if your position had a semblance of merit it would be already in front of an appeals court both TOGETHER are felonious fraud. You are using talking points that are not present in actual court but being spun on RW "pundit" media. Idiots like Turley that can't argue the facts so the attack from all angles but reality and facts. Give it a rest, the case proceeds and a verdict will be rendered. Then, if it's a guilty one, the RW pundits will continue with the "he's a victim" B/S. Don't play into undermining the Rule of Law for this POS at trial where context, timeline and facts are not in Agent Oranges favor

 

This isn't civil enforcement. This is criminal. And the campaign finance law in question is state. There's a reason you guys copy/paste pet theories that even Trump's own lawyers won't bring up in court.

 

And...state campaign finance laws do not apply to Federal elections. That isn't a theory.

 

One of them isn't a crime because state campaign law doesn't apply to Federal elections.

 

So now the Presidential election is entirely Federal with no state involvement? Interesting theory. Nonsense, but interesting, nonetheless.

 

Campaign finance laws are Federal with no state involvement...

Let me post this again...

The FEC has exclusive jurisdiction over the civil enforcement of the federal campaign finance law.


https://www.fec.gov/introduction-ca...ction,government agencies or self-submissions.

What does "exclusive jurisdiction" mean?

 

You keep making **** up. Of course they are both crimes and together/in conjunction , in NY state, they make a high crime, felonious fraud brah.....tis' stark reality, asile 4 clean up is a really big job. My advice, hope for a sect member on the jury !

 

What does "civil" mean? As opposed to criminal? You can post again, but you still haven't tried thinking. And, since you still refuse to read, I'm talking about STATE laws, not federal. State. Criminal. Not Federal and civil. Do you need me to use shorter sentences?

 

He's had MANY judgements against him an his company for many kinds of fraud. This case is about fraud.

 

so?

Not sure it would matter but, why doesn't he?

Which has nothing to do with the thread topic.

 

I'm not making **** up and I posted supporting information to prove it.

Here's more...

A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.

https://codes.findlaw.com/ny/penal-...s guilty of,or conceal the commission thereof.

 

But, no convictions. Calling them convictions in court would be a lie.

Oh, this case is about fraud, now? @yardmeat says it about campaign finance laws.

 

Lying about an expense being for campaign finance is about both campaign finance laws and fraud. This has been explained to you several times. Please quit playing dumb. Lying for the purpose of crime is fraud. That's literally what fraud means.

 

So...the state can't enforce Federal campaign finance laws.

 

The state is enforcing state laws. Your claims that they can't do so are purely the product of your imagination.

 

Here is the indictment.. please show us the state campaign finance law crime listed in here... don't just tell....please show us...
https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000187-4d9a-dc00-a3d7-4d9f97b40000

 

I've answered your question already. I will not be answering additional ones. If you had addressed my previous responses with intellectual honesty, I'd entertain new questions. I will not be doing so. I'm not playing your shell game. Shifting the goalposts gets old.

 

Who's calling them convictions? You?

I guess we'll see how the trail turns out. But as we see a lifetime of criminal, fraudulent enterprise has caught up with him.

 

I think the State has it's own laws.

 

He paid his lawyer and called it legal fees. That's hardly a false record. It's all so simple. They are making it complicated in an effort to confuse the jury into thinking they must be missing something.