BREAKING! Trump 2020 Campaign Paying $228,000 in Cohens legal Fees: Witness Tampering
 

Just when you think Trump can't be more stupid! :1orglaugh

Yes, the sitting POTUS is having his donors pay the legal fees of his personal attorney that was raided by the FBI via court order and will soon be indicted.

"Cohen has said that he did not have a formal role in the Trump campaign, and it is illegal to spend campaign funds for personal use – defined by the FEC as payments for expenses “that would exist irrespective of the candidate’s campaign or responsibilities as a federal officeholder."

Trump campaign’s $228,000 payments to Michael Cohen could be ‘witness tampering’: ex-White House ethics chief

The Trump campaign has spent nearly $228,000 to cover some of the legal expenses for President Donald Trump’s personal attorney Michael Cohen, sources familiar with the payments tell ABC News, raising questions about whether the Trump campaign may have violated campaign finance laws.

Federal Election Commission records show three payments made from the Trump campaign to a firm representing Cohen. The “legal consulting” payments were made to McDermott Will and Emery — a law firm where Cohen's attorney Stephen Ryan is a partner — between October 2017 and January 2018.

A spokesperson for the Trump campaign declined to comment on the payments. Ryan, Cohen’s attorney, did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

I support a full investigation.

From the article:

"Federal Election Commission records show three payments made from the Trump campaign to a firm representing Cohen. The “legal consulting” payments were made to McDermott Will and Emery — a law firm where Cohen's attorney Stephen Ryan is a partner — between October 2017 and January 2018."

Cohen's office was raided April 09, 2018.

Here is the kicker.. if Cohen represented Trump for campaign matters then it's 100% legal to use the campaign money for legal fees. However, Trump has specially stated Cohen his well known personal lawyer barely did any work for him, which makes it illegal...

Basically, this is another nail in the coffen.. Trump and his dumb lawyer thought they were being smart to claim he barely did any work for him due to tne Stormy case..Now that lie has blown up in his face...


This is why Storm's case is actually a big deal, because it forces Trump into tryng to fight both directions at once and soon as he lies one way he fucks himself the other...


Trump is fucked.. it's honestly getting old at this point,, they just need to get rid of the piece of shit... There is more than enough to remove him from office... It just need to be done already, I'm sick of seeing his ugly face..

A fine legal analysis if I've ever seen one.

What charges specifically are you going to use to remove him from office?

LOL. We should have an investigation.

Jesus fucking Christ. We will easily spend the next decade unfucking this. The lawsuits that will come out of the Trump campaign and the Trump administration will be staggering.

I think an investigation would be a complete waste of time. However, I support anyone who wants to do it.

I have an extension for Chrome called "Make America Kittens Again". It changes ALL pictures of Trump for Kittens.

Trying to deflect I see. Lame

You conveniently ignore the other part of the story I posted

"Cohen has said that he did not have a formal role in the Trump campaign, and it is illegal to spend campaign funds for personal use – defined by the FEC as payments for expenses “that would exist irrespective of the candidate’s campaign or responsibilities as a federal officeholder."

And we'll see when this quarters report comes out in a few months how much he's paid after the raid, which is irrelevant to the grounds I posted above.

But... butt .... buttt ..... Hilaryyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy !!!!!!

Deflect? I said I support a full investigation. In fact, on this one, I think it is imperative to have one. I was merely pointing out a timeline fact - that whatever these payments were for, they were NOT for lawyer fees he has incurred after the raid on his office.

Your reading comprehension really needs improvement.

Trump’s campaign spent more than $800,000 on legal fees during the first three months of the year, similar to other recent fundraising quarters.
Both Trump’s campaign and the RNC have in the last year acknowledged spending money on lawyers associated with the probes into Russia’s role in the 2016 elections, as well as legal bills affiliated with the 2016 elections and other ongoing issues.
It’s allowable for the campaign to pay legal fees so long as the expenses are incurred from aspects of the investigation related to the campaign.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...ng-2018-525567

Right and Trump & Cohen have both said he hasn't worked on the campaign. Cohrns legal fees are related to paying a pornstar off for Trump.

Stormy Daniels isn't campaign related as her payment wasn't claimed on previous campaign Finance reports.

Cohen wasn't part of the Trump campaign. Or the Trump administration.

Why is the Trump campaign and or Trump administration paying legal fees to an attorney that hasn't worked for the Trump campaign and or Trump administration?

Morons continue moroning

^^ Accurate!

:1orglaugh

Why indeed?

These are good questions, you guys. They should be asked. Questions are how we get answers. It's how truth comes out.

You and asspimple are prime examples!!! Herp da derp fucktards!!

I think Iran may be too complicated for some. Let's try Michael Cohen. What a fascinating case, really.

The lawyer of a sitting President has his office raided and materials confiscated. We'll get into the ramifications of that, but what I found just stunning was the relative lack of disbelief and/or outrage by the parties that would have freaked the fuck out if we were talking about this happening to President Obama. The ACLU would have gone absolutely nuts - and rightly so.

So how was this done? There is a process to get this kind of warrant. It has to go through many channels. What information was used to get the warrant? How was that information obtained?

Questions lead to answers. We should all be asking questions. With open minds.

Asspimple aka Mineistaken aka Onwebcam aka etc. etc. Sad. The troll behind the nice is getting angrier and more personal insulting everyday. Love it :banana

The news breaks

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Some people think our government runs amok and does what it wants. This is not the case when it comes to such high end legal matters.

The FISA warrant is a great example. The FBI does not just go and ask a county judge for a FISA warrant. This is something that has to go through multiple layers of government and our legal system, and has to have a lot of evidence. If I recall correctly the original FISA warrant was sixty pages long.

We all know and understand the concept of attorney client privilege. However, that does not mean an attorney can do whatever it wants. When an attorney directly breaks the law it completely destroys attorney client privilege. At that point the attorney is no longer an attorney, but instead a criminal. Again, in order to violate the attorney client privilege you have to have a lot of evidence and has to go through multiple layers of our justice system.

I think the president is in serious trouble. If there wasn't collusion there was obviously obstruction of justice, and most likely other crimes committed along the way. People are being indicted, and some of them are now working for Mueller. If there is nothing to hide and there was no wrong doing, why are people being indicted and why are people working with Mueller. And... Why doesn't Trump's attorney have his own legal team?

Why would I bother explaining and wasting my time to a fake nick? If you are too stupid to read a newspaper or any of the dozens of publications who have made very reasonable cases for impeachment then you would be a waste of my time..

If you can't read the daily reports on Trum pi and understand just about any of them is an impeachable offense then you are a waste of time..

^^LOL!!!!!! Crockett thinks there's a valid reason to impeach!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

Newsflash: There isn't.

:1orglaugh

Really? Never?

Actually, I sympathize with this line of thinking. I used to think the same, so it would not be fair of me to judge you for it.

The bottom line is our government is composed of people, and some people are very capable of running amok. My purpose here is to shine some light and hope some people can see what I now see. I don't have to convince you and I certainly am and not going to convince individuals who hide behind walls shouting "fake nic" as if it's an argument against the words they have read.

But some people will see what I have seen and I will give those people the words and understanding to tell others. That's how it begins.


The FISA warrant is a great example. What happens if the government omits facts and evidence in the asking for the warrant?

Keep in mind, by the government, I mean PEOPLE that are in the government. An FBI agent is one person. A judge is one person. I hesitate to ask you this question because so far the people that respond don't seem capable of holding possibilities in their heads, but again, this is for the readers that have open minds - is it POSSIBLE that these people might have an agenda? Is it POSSIBLE that somehow a Bladewire type person is an FBI agent and that their mind is so crazed that they would literally tell lie after lie to get what they want? They could be so deluded as to believe that their lies are for the public good. They could have an incredibly bad reading comprehension problem. Could this happen? I'm not saying it happens all the time, or even frequently. But could it happen?


You are exactly right. I agree, if crimes are being committed, then attorney client privilege does not exist. That is not my point. First, you have to some reasonable knowledge that a crime has been committed. You'd have to take that evidence to a judge. He would have to sign a warrant. These layers are not as thick as you seem to think - and I remind you, they are people. Not faceless machines.

So my question to you is: how did they come upon this knowledge? Who were they listening to?

These are the perfect questions to ask. I asked another person and they never responded, so I appreciate this opportunity very much. Which indicted persons would you like to talk about? How about Paul Manafort and Richard Gates? Let's start there.

PLEASE read the indictments: https://www.justice.gov/file/1038391/download

And report back and tell me where this mentions anything to do with Donald Trump? Look at the dates in the indictment and what they say happened and when it happened.

Getting to truth is not easy. A headline is not truth. It's very comfortable to think - hey, someone is indicted, it says so on CNN and this guy worked for Donald Trump for a few months so he has to be guilty.

From ABC news - Timeline of Paul Manafort's role in the Trump campaign - ABC News

"Aug. 14, 2016
The questions didn't die down over subsequent weeks, however. On Aug. 14, The New York Times reported that Manafort's name appears on a list of so-called black ledger accounts made by the since-toppled Ukrainian president amounting to $12.7 million from 2007 to 2012."

Once you read the indictment for yourself (me just telling you does NO good), you will see that this is what the indictment is about. NOT about the campaign of Donald Trump. Notice the dates. 2007 -2012. I think we can agree on who was running things in that time frame and it wasn't Donald Trump.

Once we can agree on what FACTS are in evidence, we can go to the next one. If we can leave our opinions out of this, that would be helpful. Let's stick to FACTS as to what has been alleged by the government and not by CNN. I assure you, this is going to keep coming up but you have to see for yourself, just like I did. I wasn't born with the knowledge - I looked and I read and it's right there for you to read as well. It doesn't require opinion or conjecture - read what the indictment says.

LOL. I don't expect any explaining from you. A simple sentence indicating the charge will be fine. If you understood the position you have taken, it would take less time than everything you typed. I have a feeling you can't do it.

I'm also not seeing what's supposed to get trump impeached? Fucking a pornstar 10 years ago? Besides that, I assume you think Pence would be a much better president given that's who would be taking his place?

This sums it up.

It's really not about the fucking per se - this just makes him a bad husband.

May I ask what it's about, in your opinion?

Serious, honestly meant question, asked with respect.

:1orglaugh

Integrity would be one.

Lying about fucking her and then paying money to keep her quiet then the lawyer lies and said it was his personal money.
If those lies are told to an investigator then it is a crime.

People like you are part of the problem. The reasons have been laid out over and over again (illegal campaign financing being one of them) but people nowadays are obviously too dense and have the attention span of fruitflies and so it ends up like you: writing wall of texts without having an idea what's actually going on. Congrats.

What if they're swingers? :2 cents:

Absolutely, integrity is an issue here. Unless his wives are on board with this, which we don't know, he is a shitty husband.

Lying is another one. I don't know why he's lying since nobody believes that he didn't fuck her.

However, as you said, until he lies under oath, these are not impeachable offenses.

I am not defending Trump's marriage conduct or truth telling ability. I'm saying he can't be impeached for it at this time.

Thank you for the respect. Well played.

So, as you claim to know what's actually going on, please illuminate us. That is the point of the discussion. Not claims on a message board - show us the illegal campaign financing.

Wait for it:

"I'm not going to spend the time blah blah blah blah..."

Looks like he's turning on Cohen. National Enquire is calling Cohen a liar! He probably won't do so publicly, but will have his people do it! Then again he's not that bright and may publicly slam him to muddy the waters of any Cohen testimony

Of course our government is able to "run amok". I have a perfect example here in my hometown. (Our city government decided it could charge us whatever they wanted for our water, and they were very wrong.) But this is not the case here. This is a very serious investigation.

Was information omitted from the FISA warrant request?

Yes, you are going to tell me that this was a Democratic funded opposition research blah blah blah. But it really wasn't, was it? It originated as Republican funded opposition research. This speaks volumes about the research itself. The people who created the dossier didn't care who was paying the bill, but instead they were doing their job. They did their job when the Republicans were paying for, and they did their job when the Democrats were paying for it. They shared the same information they had given to the Republicans with the Democrats.

The Steele dossier was funded by both Republicans and Democrats.

And it was disclosed. In fact, the original FISA warrant was sixty pages long if I recall correctly.

I don't care where the information came from. They got the dossier, started to investigate it, and discovered some of it was very true. Combined with other evidence they had plenty of reason to request a FISA warrant which was granted - multiple times.

Moron On ! :thumbsup :thumbsup

Is there any chance you would be willing to source the statements you have made? I agree with some of it. But if you are willing to source the statements, I think we can have a very good discussion on it. You needn't source the Dossier being funded by both parties, I agree with you there. Can you source the FISA warrant information?

Also, do you have any feelings about FBI Agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page?

do you believe Cohen paid her out of his own pocket just like that? without getting reimbursed by Trump or even talking to him about it?

do you really believe this?

I'm not the DA or Mueller.

But that she got paid, that Cohen claims that he paid it out of his own pocket, that is already confirmed.

That this possibly could be illegal campaign financing since it potentially had influence on the election result is also not news.

The rest is clearly not up to me to judge.

So whos fake nick are you?

He's Matt26z aka Diomed aka xClips Jim

He's made 2 threads about me since yesterday and has the same MO

Wow, you too? This is some weak sauce for sure.

I agree on your statements above. I don't deny she got paid or that Cohen did the payment. If campaign financing was used for it, that will open the door to impeachment.

So - guilty before proven innocent? Is that what I am understanding?

I'm fine with waiting for Mueller's final release. I feel pretty good about it based on the indictments he has brought so far - NONE of them targeting President Trump. We can meet up here again soon and see who was right on what the special counsel has to say. I am man enough to admit when I'm wrong and I hope you will be as well, despite what I am seeing here now.

LOL. Whatever floats your boat, man. I actually did not realize you had this problem and I don't want to cause you any stress. You don't appear to need it and even though you will laugh and say I am not bothering you, we both know that isn't true. I have twenty years of experience at this and I know the type of people I drive insane. Back in the day, I thought it was fun, but now I realize some people are too close to the edge. I'll be whoever you want, it's cool.

I missed this. I don't believe either of those things. Cohen paid her and certainly didn't do it without getting reimbursed. I don't have any friends THAT good.

However, that is not a crime. You know Trump has money, right? Did it HAVE to be paid with campaign financing? I don't understand why that has to be?

you are confusing using campaign money with campaign financing

you really do not understand what is the issue here.

and Trump claimed he didn't know about it and he did not reimburse Cohen

sure thing...

Here is the problem.

Cohen paid Stormy. If he did so as a way of helping Trump's campaign (which we all know is the case) then the $130,000 is considered a campaign contribution. That's a bit more than $2,700 individual max the law allows. Therefore it is an illegal campaign contribution. At this point, Trump may be in the clear. However, if Trump's campaign paid him $228,000 in legal fees and some of those fees were essentially reimbursing him for paying Stormy that too is illegal because you can't use campaign money for personal things like paying off your mistress.

John Edwards did just this when he paid off a mistress and he was charged with 5 felony counts. He got lucky and was able to take the stand and convince the jury that he paid her the money not to help his campaign but to protect his marriage and enough jurors bought it. Trump will have a much harder time making that same argument because the affair happened 10 years ago but he was only worried about her talking when he was about to win the election.