Quote:
Originally Posted by elphenor
so basically you read something in Politico written by the editor of National Review (conservative opinion magazine)
and that juicy confirmation bias kicked in and you got to turn your brain off
|
Maybe if you cared more about the argument being made (and the details of said argument) and less about who made it, you'd have the opportunity to make a good case.
It has already been established that Trump has a habit of paying off women + getting people to sign NDAs + squashing stories whether an election is going on
or not. We know this because Stormy Daniels claimed she was threatened by a Trump Organization person about going public
years before he ever ran for office. I bolded these things because they're very important in the context of campaign finance law.
Therefore, we have a clear track record of Trump using his own money and resources and people but being hands-off in regards to how any of it actually gets done...which is why Cohen going away for 3 years doesn't give prosecutors a strong case at all. All Trump has to do is claim ignorance about the finer details of campaign finance law and pin the whole thing on Cohen making bad decisions of his own volition rather than being directed.
Even with the National Enquirer cooperating, the bar is still extremely high if they want to prove intent. And that's because of the John Edwards case a few years ago, which despite various media outlets trying to minimize the relevance of that event....it is a clear precedent.
Even your fellow Communists over at Vice think it's a waste of time to go after Trump for similar reasons as shown in that Politico article, which is why 2020 is a better timeframe if you really want to walk that road.
Vice - Everyone's Favorite Pot Brownie Enthusiasts