Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > NDAs of Thunder

NDAs of Thunder (Page 3)
Thread Tools
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2018, 08:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
Isn't this like 3 threads you've posted this Hannity video to?
What, you expect him to explain his reasoning? (I thought it was three threads too but I'm not sure what the third is)

Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
"clinton mob family"

ya no.
The projection is real.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2018, 08:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Trump organization CFO granted immunity per WSJ.

That's a really big one


Use immunity. Sounds like it was tied to charging Cohen.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2018, 09:41 PM
 
So, will any of the 17 million paid out be treated as "in kind contributions" meant to "affect the outcome of elections?"
https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/16/polit...ent/index.html
On Thursday, the Office of Compliance released additional information indicating that it has paid victims more than $17 million since its creation in the 1990s. That includes all settlements, not just related to sexual harassment, but also discrimination and other cases.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2018, 09:43 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
What, you expect him to explain his reasoning? (I thought it was three threads too but I'm not sure what the third is)
Two. Twice in this one and once in the so called collusion thread.

The projection is real.
The only ones projecting are the D's in Congress. Don't forget, as you cats chase Trump's laser pointer, Huber is off in Utah working behind the scenes.
( Last edited by Chongo; Aug 25, 2018 at 01:07 PM. )
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2018, 10:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
So, will any of the 17 million paid out be treated as "in kind contributions" meant to "affect the outcome of elections?"
https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/16/polit...ent/index.html
Those payments appear to be disclosed to the public. And non-partisan. They could use more disclosure - I'd be in favor of full disclosure. There's also no reason to believe the settlements follow any particular schedule, such as election schedules.

Making payments to hush things does not work if you disclose the payment took place. Hence why they did the runaround, with Cohen paying, and Trump later reimbursing. It benefited only the Trump campaign (no benefit to Hillary, Johnson, or Stein). Like cutting through a corner gas station to avoid public disclosure waiting at a red light, then turning. Which is illegal in CA, btw.

Also, posting video links to Fox News is not an ideal response, as many people refuse to watch anything on Fox News. Perhaps you could explain your reasoning in words, and use links for sources.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 24, 2018, 11:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
Those payments appear to be disclosed to the public. And non-partisan. They could use more disclosure - I'd be in favor of full disclosure. There's also no reason to believe the settlements follow any particular schedule, such as election schedules.

Making payments to hush things does not work if you disclose the payment took place. Hence why they did the runaround, with Cohen paying, and Trump later reimbursing. It benefited only the Trump campaign (no benefit to Hillary, Johnson, or Stein). Like cutting through a corner gas station to avoid public disclosure waiting at a red light, then turning. Which is illegal in CA, btw.

Also, posting video links to Fox News is not an ideal response, as many people refuse to watch anything on Fox News. Perhaps you could explain your reasoning in words, and use links for sources.
Those payments were not made public until last year, over a decade after they began.
How about the former FEC chief that wrote the rules?
Those payments to women were unseemly. That doesn’t mean they were illegal.

However, regardless of what Cohen agreed to in a plea bargain, hush-money payments to mistresses are not really campaign expenditures. It is true that “contribution” and “expenditure” are defined in the Federal Election Campaign Act as anything “for the purpose of influencing any election,” and it may have been intended and hoped that paying hush money would serve that end. The problem is that almost anything a candidate does can be interpreted as intended to “influence an election,” from buying a good watch to make sure he gets to places on time, to getting a massage so that he feels fit for the campaign trail, to buying a new suit so that he looks good on a debate stage. Yet having campaign donors pay for personal luxuries — such as expensive watches, massages and Brooks Brothers suits — seems more like bribery than funding campaign speech.
Suppose, for example, that Trump had told his lawyers, “Look, these complaints about Trump University have no merit, but they embarrass me as a candidate. Get them settled.” Are the settlements thus “campaign expenses”? The obvious answer is no, even though the payments were intended to benefit Trump as a candidate.
If the opposite were true and they were considered campaign expenses, then not only could Trump pay them with campaign funds, but also he would be required to pay these business expenses from campaign funds. Is that what campaign donations are for?
But let’s go in that direction. Suppose Trump had used campaign funds to pay off these women. Does anyone much doubt that many of the same people now after Trump for using corporate funds, and not reporting them as campaign expenditures, would then be claiming that Trump had illegally diverted campaign funds to “personal use”? Or that federal prosecutors would not have sought a guilty plea from Cohen on that count? And that gets us to a troubling nub of campaign finance laws: Too often, you can get your target coming or going.

Yes, those payments were unseemly, but unseemliness doesn’t make something illegal. At the very least, the law is murky about whether paying hush money to a mistress is a “campaign expense” or a personal expense. In such circumstances, we would not usually expect prosecutors to charge the individuals with a “knowing and willful” violation, leading to criminal charges and possible jail time. A civil fine would be the normal response.

But Cohen is not the normal defendant, and prosecutors almost certainly squeezed him to plead guilty on these charges, in part, for the purpose of building a case for possible criminal or impeachment charges against the president, or even, daresay, “influencing the reelection” of Trump.

Laws, once stretched from their limited language and proper purpose, are difficult to pound back into shape. We should proceed with caution here.
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2018, 12:00 AM
 
If Trump had actually paid off the mistresses with campaign funds (and disclosed as required) I would not consider that illegal. I wouldn't count it as a personal expense (during an election campaign). But it would be embarrassing of course.

The best action would be to not pay anyone off, not hush anyone. Let facts come out as they may, and the voters can decide what is relevant.

Edit - after further thought, we're talking about using money. To keep candidate information from voters. During an election. Think about that, and how a functioning democracy requires informed voters.

On 2nd thought, I don't have a problem with nabbing such a person whichever way they do the payoff. They deserve heat for what they really did - cripple voter knowledge when it counts. And I'd feel the same way if Hillary paid off some gigolos. Or if Jill Stein did. Or Johnson. A candidate paying hush money is shameful and hurts our elections.
( Last edited by reader50; Aug 25, 2018 at 02:40 AM. )
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2018, 11:53 AM
 
Speaking of NDAs... https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/24/polit...ami/index.html
A former Trump World Tower doorman who says he has knowledge of an alleged affair President Donald Trump had with an ex-housekeeper, which resulted in a child, is now able to talk about a contract he entered with American Media Inc. that had prohibited him from discussing the matter with anyone, according to his attorney.
The contract appears to have been signed on Nov. 15, 2015, and states that AMI has exclusive rights to Sajudin's story but does not mention the details of the story itself beyond saying, "Source shall provide AMI with information regarding Donald Trump's illegitimate child..."
Sajudin's allegation that Trump fathered a child out of wedlock has not been independently confirmed by any of the outlets that have investigated the story.
This is related to National Enquirer guy, which is why it might be noteworthy. I question why they would let him out, however.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 25, 2018, 04:49 PM
 
Keep chasing that dot.
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2018, 03:05 PM
 
Meanwhile, @GOP headquarters:
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2018, 03:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Keep chasing that dot.
How would you analogize your continued concern over the Clintons?
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 27, 2018, 03:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
How would you analogize your continued concern over the Clintons?
My concerns were alleviated when Billary was not sworn in as POTUS. If I were you, I would be worried about what Huber has in all those sealed indictments.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2018, 10:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
My concerns were alleviated when Billary was not sworn in as POTUS. If I were you, I would be worried about what Huber has in all those sealed indictments.
Really? Because I'm seeing about 75 hits for "Clinton" in your posts from the last 18 months, several hits for "Uranium One," and another 60-70 hits for "Hillary." For someone whose fears were alleviated, you've sure spent a lot of time obsessing about her since the election.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 17, 2019, 07:55 PM
 
This is probably the best thread for this. Doesn't directly involve Russia, nor is it exactly official.


Cohen Hired IT Firm to Rig Early CNBC, Drudge Polls to Favor Trump
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:22 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,