He is almost certainly talking about this:
Which is nothing like what he did, but he is an idiot.
It actually depends - for most things ignorance is no defense, but IIRC it is for certain tax violations. Here’s a little bit about that. I have no idea what applies to campaign finance law.
So this goes a bit to @Mark_Asher asked, regarding ignorance of the law for Trump’s payoff money. That isn’t an excuse, but with this particular issue of campaign violations, there’s one REALLY tough bar to clear that keeps this sort of thing from being charged very often: the prosecution has to show the intent was to influence the outcome of an election. Showing that intent is typically very, very difficult.
And so what folks like John Edwards have done when charged with this is to instead point out that the payoff was made to prevent personal embarrassment, etc, but NOT with the intent of influencing an election outcome.
So here’s why Trump is in trouble on this, in concise terms:
In other words, both Michael Cohen, who pleaded guilty for the payouts and has been sentenced, and also American Media (the National Enquirer) in a non-prosecution deal have both explicitly stated that the payoffs were made for political reasons to influence the outcome of an election.
(Homer Simpson)Then everything is wrapped up in a neat little package? … No really, I mean that. Sorry if it sounded sarcastic.(/Homer Simpson)
The latest Opening Arguments makes a good point about the plea deal with National Enquirer publisher AMI. Segment starts ~48:30, but to try to summarize…
AMI admitted breaking federal campaign laws, in exchange for a no-prosecution agreement. As we know, corporations are people (my friends), and can be indicted. The DOJ guidelines say:
Corporations are “legal persons,” capable of suing and being sued, and capable of committing crimes. Under the doctrine of respondeat superior, a corporation may be held criminally liable for the illegal acts of its directors, officers, employees, and agents. To be held liable for these actions, the government must establish that the corporate agent’s actions (i) were within the scope of his duties and (ii) were intended, at least in part, to benefit the corporation.
AMI has pled to the fact that the $150k they paid to catch and kill the story was promised by Cohen to be reimbursed. But this is not a “benefit to the corporation” - at best, the corporation would have it’s expenses paid, so no net benefit. The case law surrounding this requires that there is this benefit, in order to insulate corporations from being responsible for self-interested criminal actions of their agents. (Such as a CEO helping out a friend politically, for instance…)
If there was no extra benefit, then AMI’s team of very expensive lawyers would have easily argued that Pecker was acting alone, and the corporation as a whole was not liable.
So what was this benefit? Did Trump promise something more in exchange for helping him out? The benefit would have to apply to AMI as a whole, not just Pecker. It will be fascinating to find out if whatever it is opens Trump up to (yet) more legal jeopardy. I wonder if anyone in the Whitehouse is currently researching whether the President can pardon corporations?
Also noteworthy - the meeting between Trump, Pecker and Cohen happened in August 2015, so basically one of the first official actions of Trump’s campaign.
Dark as a tomb, where it happens.
Probably the same benefit that any contributor to a campaign sees… Likely more, in the form of access.
Maybe. But to count as a benefit, I guess the amount of access promised would need to outweigh the potential profits of running the (pretty huge) story before the election? Either way, something worth keeping an eye on.
This is my shocked face.
Avenatti charged with a new federal crime of defrauding Stormy Daniels. He is, to put it mildly, in deep shit.
He is also not a good person. He’s a swindling fraudster.
Yep.
Remember when folks were like, “This dude should be the Democratic nominee for 2020!”
(no one here, just random idiots on the internet)
The appeal of Avenatti is in many ways very similar to the appeal of Trump. Folks just want someone who they feel will punch the “other team”. They just want someone willing to fight and do harm to their enemies, and any actual benefit to themselves is secondary.
Idiots voted for Trump “to pwn the libtards”, and idiots loves Avenatti because they thought he was gonna “pwn Trump”.
Eh, it’s also the appeal of the magical deus ex machina to fix things, something that happens in mediocre movies and lousy novels. It’s the “Oh yeah??? Well here’s our big bully to fight our fight for us!!” appeal.
Avenatti? Yep. Trump before him? yep.
But also Wikileakes. Before that, Anonymous.
Trust none of them.
Agreed, this is very much a thing.
Could this not be broadened to some extent to include just about any public figure in any type of leadership role? Where do you draw the line? (There are probably some good quotes along those lines.)
If anybody cares. Pretty sure nobody that matters actually cares.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/17/politics/trump-organization-hush-money-filing/index.html
Federal prosecutors in New York have ended their investigation into the Trump Organization’s role in hush money payments made to women who alleged affairs with President Donald Trump and have been ordered by a judge to release additional information connected to their related probe of former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen, according to court documents filed Wednesday.
CNN reported Friday that the Manhattan US Attorney’s office had approached the end of its investigation of the Trump Organization and wasn’t poised to charge any executives involved in the company’s effort to reimburse Cohen for money he paid to silence one of the women. That payment constituted an illegal campaign contribution, according to prosecutors. Trump has denied the affair allegations.
“The campaign finance violations discussed in the Materials are a matter of national importance,” US District Court Judge William Pauley wrote in his decision. “Now that the Government’s investigation into those violations has concluded, it is time that every American has an opportunity to scrutinize the Materials.”
From the click through on the earlier article:
In January, one month after Cohen was sentenced to three years in prison, prosecutors requested interviews with executives at the company, CNN reported. But prosecutors never followed up on their initial request, people familiar with the matter said, and the interviews never took place.
Meanwhile, there has been no contact between the Manhattan US Attorney’s office and officials at the Trump Organization in more than five months, one person familiar with the matter said.
They didn’t talk to anyone. No interviews, etc. which smells really fishy to me. One wonders what the Judge’s document dump will reveal.
Arise! The state of New York cares:
I was just talking to someone today about how we both like that New York State, where we live, is acting like such a foil to Lil Racist Donny.
Yeah, it’s like Captain America fighting the Nazis all by his lonesome. Go Captain New York!
Summer Zervos lawsuit proceeding… with Discovery and Trump’s deposition scheduled in the next 2 months: