Friday, 14 Dec 2018
News

The government implicates Trump and the Trump campaign in federal finance violations

President Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen exits federal court in New York after entering a guilty plea Nov. 29. (Andrew Kelly / Reuters) Philip Bump National Corresponds to the subject of the political agenda December 7 at 6:27 PM Late Friday, the US attorney for the Southern District of New York filed a document arguing that Michael Cohen, until last year President Trump's personal attorney, should receive a Cohen admitted guilt in August. Cohen should receive. It has also been put in place for the first time by government prosecutors themselves directly implicated in the breach of the law. Trump before his running for president. In August 2016, Playboy model Karen McDougal reached an agreement with American Media Inc., publishers of the National Enquirer, who would not share her story about a lengthy relationship she'd be engaged in with Trump. In October of that year, adult movie actress Stormy Daniels received $ 130,000 to similarly stay quiet. Both of these were facilitated by Cohen, as he admitted in August. Since Cohen was an agent of the Trump campaign – Cohen was a public sur excess of federal limits. That one payment came from AMI that cohen had solicited an illegal corporate contribution as well. Cohen pleaded guilty to two campaign-finance-related charges in August, saying in court that he's doing the actions at Trump's behest. Cohen making a claim in the back. The government making the same allegation in a court filing is another. And on Friday, the government made that allegation. "With respect to both payments," Cohen commented on the influence of the 2016 presidential election, "the filing reads. "Cohen is coordinating his actions with one or more members of the campaign, including through meetings and phone calls, about the fact, nature, and timing of the payments. In particular, and as Cohen himself, with respect to both payments, he is in charge of coordinating with the direction of individual-1. "We know from the broader context of the document that" Individual-1 "is the person serving as president of the United States. What's more, the document explains that it is not only Cohen's word that applies. Cohen recorded conversations between himself and others, including Trump, in which the payments were discussed. "[A]Cohen took credit for the payment and assured that it was "all over" the transaction, "the document reads. year.) "And after making the payment to the second woman, and after Individual-1 was elected President, Cohen privately bragged to friends and reporters, including in recorded conversations, that he had made the payment to spare Individual-1 from damaging press and embarrassment. "Trump is one of the defenses that may have been offered by the United States. This article is only available in French and English. at the direction "of the candidate bolsters the evidence que la McDougal and Daniels payments Were not just run-of-the-mill behavior. Given that they were appointed to the leadership of Trump, Lawrence Noble, a general counsel for the Federal Election Commission, told The Post, "There is little question Cohen, the campaign and the Unemployed by the new filings, contributions to the name of another, failure to report, soliciting the illegal contributions, excessive contributions, illegal corporate contributions and acceptance of illegal contributions. These charges may be subject to civil war or criminal penalties, depending on context, and would often focus on the treasurer. But this case is exceptional. "In this case, you're dealing with a situation where they actually broke the law and that Trump knew about it," Noble said. "This is something that was clearly considered for criminal prosecution" of Trump – were he not president. Department of Justice guidelines indicate that a sitting president can not be indicted. For Trump to be charged – if he were not president – it would need to be a "knowing and willful violation," Noble said. This does not mean, though, that Trump would need to know the specific statutes that his actions were violating. It would have been enough to make it clear that it was not enough and that it was clearly not, and that the payments were made to influence the election. That Cohen and Trump went to great pains to obscure the payments bolsters the latter point. (Cohen) "une service des contracts de la communication et des engagements de la communication et de la communication". leaked recording from this year, Trump mentions a payment in cash, which would shield the payment from scrutiny. (His legal team insisted that he was saying, "What's unusual is you?" – Cohen – " candidate knew about it, "Noble said." That's what North American senator John Edwards, who faced criminal charges for accepting contributions. Cohen Implicating Edwards (Edited by Edwards) Rick Hasen, Professor of Law and Political Science at University of California at Irvine, warned that criminal charges would be similarly tricky to proves a doubt, regardless of Cohen's involvement. matically guilty as well, "Hasen said. "The government cited" Trump could claim he intended to keep the payments secret for personal, not campaign, reasons, and it would be up to a jury to determine the credibility of such an argument. Cohen's attempts to hide these payments in his call for a stiff prison sentence. "Our system of voluntary compliance would be undermined," the filing reads, "if wealthy and successful individuals such as Cohen come to believe that the most severe penalties that they will face, in the relatively unlikely case that they are caught cheating on their taxes , are the payment of back taxes, interest, and penalties. "No mention is made about the implications of successful candidates for office not facing any recriminations for their legal dubious actions.

Post Comment

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

%d bloggers like this: