Leftist Shark-fest over Manafort-Cohen Guilt Verdicts-Pleas


John R. Houk

© August 22, 2018

 

Yesterday guilty verdicts came to light against Paul Manafort and Michael Cohen, both have a connection to President Trump. If you were paying attention to the Leftist MSM you would think blood was in the water stirring a shark frenzy was erupting with bloodthirsty glee. They all believe Trump association to guilty parties means Trump’s Administration is about to come tumbling down.

 

The poor delusional Left are forgetting to report the guilty verdicts have ZERO to do with collusion between Trump and Russia to manipulate the 2016 election.

 

Manafort was found accused of 18 counts but the jury could only agree on eight counts of guilt:

 

In a verdict announced at the same hour as President Trump’s longtime fixer pleaded guilty to other financial charges, Manafort was convicted of filing a false tax return in each of the years from 2010 to 2014, failing to report a foreign bank account in 2012, and two counts of bank fraud.

 

 

But the panel of six men and six women deciding Manafort’s fate in Alexandria, Virginia, deadlocked on 10 counts. U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis III declared a mistrial on those charges.

 

 

The 10 deadlocked charges were three instances of failing to file a foreign bank account in 2011, 2013 and 2014, two counts of bank fraud, and five counts of conspiracy to commit bank fraud.

 

… (Paul Manafort guilty on eight counts in first trial conviction from Mueller probe; By Jeff Mordock; Washington Times; 8/21/18)

 

Michael Cohen chose a guilty plea deal rather than face a jury:

 

Cohen pled guilty to eight felonies. While the five counts of failure to pay taxes on over $4 million in income are the most consequential to him, most significant to the country are two counts of illegal “in kind” campaign contributions. …

 

… The media narrative suggests that these payments violate federal law because they were made to influence the outcome of the election. That is not quite accurate. It was not illegal to pay hush money to the two women — Karen McDougal and Stephanie Clifford (a.k.a. “Stormy Daniels”). It was illegal for Michael Cohen to make in-kind contributions (which is what these pay-offs were) in excess of the legal limit. (Bold text by blog Editor)

 

… (What to Make of the Cohen Plea and Manafort Convictions; By ANDREW C. MCCARTHY; National Review; 8/22/18 10:28 AM)

 

So what’s the deal with the press? Why the shark-fest of glee? Could it be because the Left is planting Fake News against Trump to stir-up hatred to enhance future impeachment sentiment and plant more Dems in Congress for such a proceeding?

 

JRH 8/22/18 (Hat Tip Elvis Knot in G+ Community The Resistance)

Please Support NCCR

*************************

MUST SEE: Former Head of Federal Elections Says Cohen Payment IS NOT an In Kind Campaign Contribution (AUDIO)

 

By Jim Hoft

August 21, 2018

The Gateway Pundit

 

Cohen-Trump

 

Conservative author and radio-TV host Mark Levin interviewed the former FEC Chairman on his show.

 

Professor Bradley Smith said the payment Cohen pled guilty to DO NOT qualify as campaign violations.

 

Last night Mark Levin interviewed a former FEC Chairman who explained why a hush money payment to Stormy Daniels cannot be considered an in kind contribution to the Trump campaign, thus violating campaign finance law.

 

Via The Right Scoop:

 

“When the FEC wrote the regulation that says what constitutes campaign expenditures and what constitutes personal use, it rejected specifically the idea that a campaign expenditure was anything related to a campaign, and instead says it has to be something that exists only because of the campaign and solely for that reason.”

 

Here’s the audio:

 

VIDEO of Audio: Levin Lays Out a Case That There is no Campaign Violation

 

[Posted by TheNewsCommenter

Published on Aug 21, 2018]

 

Professor Bradley Smith wrote about this in the Wall Street Journal in April.

 

Shortly before the 2016 election, one of President Trump’s lawyers, Michael Cohen, arranged a $130,000 payment to the porn star in return for silence about a 2006 affair she claimed to have had with Mr. Trump. (Both the president and Mr. Cohen have denied the affair; Mr. Trump has said he did not know of the payment to Ms. Daniels until this February.)

 

Not satisfied with an old-fashioned sex scandal—perhaps because the president seems impervious to that—some want to turn this into a violation of campaign-finance law. Trevor Potter, a former member of the Federal Election Commission told “60 Minutes” the payment was “a $130,000 in-kind contribution by Cohen to the Trump campaign, which is about $126,500 above what he’s allowed to give.” The FBI raided Mr. Cohen’s office, home and hotel room Monday. They reportedly seized records related to the payment and are investigating possible violations of campaign-finance laws.

 

But let’s remember a basic principle of such laws: Not everything that might benefit a candidate is a campaign expense.

 

Campaign-finance law aims to prevent corruption. For this reason, the FEC has a longstanding ban on “personal use” of campaign funds. Such use would give campaign contributions a material value beyond helping to elect the candidate—the essence of a bribe.

 

FEC regulations explain that the campaign cannot pay expenses that would exist “irrespective” of the campaign, even if it might help win election. At the same time, obligations that would not exist “but for” the campaign must be paid from campaign funds.

 

If paying hush money is a campaign expense, a candidate would be required to make that payment with campaign funds. How ironic, given that using campaign funds as hush money was one of the articles of impeachment in the Watergate scandal, which gave rise to modern campaign-finance law.

++++++++++++++++++

Fmr head of the FEC blows up media narrative that Trump broke the law, by referring to the actual law

 

By Frieda Powers 

August 22, 2018 

BizPac Review

 

No sooner had Michael Cohen pleaded guilty than a Democrat lawmaker called for a new investigation to determine if President Donald Trump committed a crime.

 

Rep. Joaquin Castro accused Trump of being an “unindicted co-conspirator” and called on Congress to launch a probe into possible criminal action by the president.

 

VIDEO: Michael Cohen Pleads Guilty, Implicates Trump – MSNBC

 

“And now the question is what will the US Congress do about that,” Castro, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, said. “I believe that the judiciary committee in both the House and the Senate should open an investigation tomorrow morning.”

 

But conservative author and radio-TV host Mark Levin provided a hard lesson in how the law actually works, noting how what the president is accused of doing is not even illegal.

 

“I want to help the law professors, the constitutional experts, the criminal defense lawyers, the former prosecutors and of course the professors and I want to help them understand what the law is,” Levin told Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Tuesday.

 

VIDEO: Mark Levin slams Michael Cohen’s plea deal

 

[Posted by Fox News

Published on Aug 21, 2018

 

‘Life, Liberty & Levin’ host Mark Levin says Lanny Davis had Michael Cohen plead guilty to two counts of criminality that don’t exist on ‘Hannity’.

 

FOX News Channel (FNC) is a 24-hour all-encompassing news service dedicated to delivering breaking news as well as political and business news. The number one network in cable, FNC has been the most watched television news channel for more than 15 years and according to a Suffolk University/USA Today poll, is the most trusted television news source in the country. Owned by 21st Century Fox, FNC is available in more than 90 million homes and dominates the cable news landscape, routinely notching the top ten programs in the genre.]

 

The general counsel for the Clinton mob family Lanny Davis, he had his client plead to two counts of criminality that don’t exist,” he added. “It is a plea bargain between a prosecutor and criminal. A criminal who doesn’t want to spend the rest of his life in prison. That is not precedent. That applies only to that specific case. Nobody cites plea bargains for precedent.”

 

“Just because a prosecutor says that somebody violated a campaign law doesn’t make it so. He is not the judge. He is not the jury. We didn’t adjudicate anything,” Levin argued, using an example to drive home his point.

 

“Say a candidate had said we owe vendors a whole lot of money. We have had disputes with them. But I want you to go ahead and pay them. I’m a candidate, I don’t want the negative publicity. So he says to the private lawyer, you pay them, I’ll reimburse you, get it done,” Levin explained. “Is that illegal? It’s perfectly legal. Yet according to the prosecution of the Southern District of New York, it’s paid at the direction of the candidate to influence the election. Yes, Mr. Prosecutor, how stupid is your point?”

 

The former head of the Federal Election Commission, appearing on Levin’s show, also clarified how Cohen’s alleged “hush” payment to porn star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 election is not an in kind contribution to the Trump campaign or a violation of campaign finance law.

 

VIDEO of Audio: Levin Lays Out a Case That There is no Campaign Violation [SEE ABOVE in The Gateway Pundit post]

 

“When the FEC wrote the regulation that says what constitutes campaign expenditures and what constitutes personal use, it rejected specifically the idea that a campaign expenditure was anything related to a campaign, and instead says it has to be something that exists only because of the campaign and solely for that reason,” Professor Bradley Smith told Levin Tuesday.

 

The expenditures alleged by Cohen, Smith explained, are not violations of campaign finance law even though they “might incidentally benefit your campaign,”

 

“The argument seems to be, and it hasn’t changed,” Levin summed up, “is that, if I spend money to make myself look better, or to take away negative issues in my private life, my business life, my employment life and use my own money, then somehow that is a campaign contribution…which it is not.”

____________________

Leftist Shark-fest over Manafort-Cohen Guilt Verdicts-Pleas

John R. Houk

© August 22, 2018

___________________

MUST SEE: Former Head of Federal Elections Says Cohen Payment IS NOT an In Kind Campaign Contribution (AUDIO)

 

© 2018 The Gateway Pundit – All Rights Reserved.

_________________

Fmr head of the FEC blows up media narrative that Trump broke the law, by referring to the actual law

 

Copyright © 2018. All Rights Reserved. BizPac Review

Author: oneway2day

I am a Neoconservative Christian Right blogger. I also spend a significant amount of time of exposing theopolitical Islam.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.