Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Trump Tries to Deny His Crime With Cohen, Confesses by Mistake [View all]FakeNoose
(39,968 posts)58. When Cohen got reimbursed they made a fake invoice from a dummy company
Mueller figures that was how they tried to make it look like a real campaign expense.
But Underpants made the point above that none of that was necessary if Cheeto had just said, yes I authorized this and it's a private matter not related to the campaign. Instead they tried to pass it off as a campaign expense. Cheeto told Cohen to pay the $130K out of his pocket, and get reimbursed on the sly later. Cohen had to take out a 2nd mortgage to swing that cash, as I understand it.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
68 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Yep. Fortunately for rump there are a minimum of FORTY FIVE MILLION Americans
Eliot Rosewater
Aug 2018
#27
This Vox article has the 50 second video. If it's campaign related - Either way it's illegal.
underpants
Aug 2018
#5
From my reading/understanding- the source doesn't matter because it was campaign related
underpants
Aug 2018
#30
If the rabbit were related to the campaign, say, a mascot, it would be legal but have to be
Fred Sanders
Aug 2018
#56
Well said...Did the RNC know and approve? Also unindicted co-conspirators?
Fred Sanders
Aug 2018
#57
I doubt a defense of "I was afraid my wife would find out" would work to well though given
cstanleytech
Aug 2018
#41
Thank you- it's simply been policy based on past WH occupants. It's not law.
bettyellen
Aug 2018
#11
I truly think that policy depends on the crime. If he murdered someone on TV no one would argue
bettyellen
Aug 2018
#20
Probably. But it would still take Congress impeaching him to remove him from office.
onenote
Aug 2018
#54
I think congress might change their tune and be amenable to at least threatening to impeach
bettyellen
Aug 2018
#59
Perhaps its time to take the DOJ out from under the executive branch and create one for it?
cstanleytech
Aug 2018
#44
And they want to count this as an "election year" for Mueller but not Kavanaugh's appointment ...
bettyellen
Aug 2018
#47
I'm not sure it's in the system. It's my understanding there's no consensus on this issue.
Garrett78
Aug 2018
#53
big fail presenting as fact the republican claim that sitting presidents can't be indicted.
unblock
Aug 2018
#8