3 ms·

> This was long before any of the bad things he did. The reason Trump is now a convicted felon is due to conduct that happened while he ran for office. Are we

> This was long before any of the bad things he did. The reason Trump is now a convicted felon is due to conduct that happened while he ran for office. Are we not allowed to call into question the legitimacy of someone who commits crimes to get elected, and then uses his position to cover up for those crimes?

JamesBarney 2y ago
What crimes did he commit to get elected? Trump is a crook but his crimes are almost all sleazy real estate and tax fraud. He didn't commit any crimes to get elected before his first term.
- ModernMech 2y ago
  Did you follow the trial? He committed election fraud by paying a porn star hush money in order to buy her silence, an expense which he didn't report, lied about, and then covered up with business fraud. For this he was charged and convicted with 34 felonies.
  - rayiner 2y ago
    What makes it election fraud?
    - loeg 2y ago
      He used campaign funds to do it.
      - ModernMech 2y ago
        Moreover, the payments should have been reported as a campaign expenses, but they were not because doing so would have defeated their purpose. So the payments were fraudulently misrepresented to be lawyer fees, and when it was discovered, Trump lied about the scheme.
        rayiner 2y ago
        > the payments should have been reported as a campaign expenses You have it exactly backward. The law is clear that "campaign expenses" cannot have any personal component. That makes sense, because the focus of the law is to prevent candidates from calling things "campaign expenses" that are actually for personal benefit. John Edwards was prosecuted for using campaign funds to keep his mistress silent because hiding an affair has a personal component in addition to a political component. If Trump had been charged with a campaign-finance violation, his straightforward defense under well-established precedent would be that paying off Stormy Daniels had a personal component (avoiding personal embarrassment and his wife finding out), in addition to whatever effect it had on the campaign. The prosecution would have been required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump's marriage was so dysfunctional that the only reason he would have paid off Stormy Daniels was the election. That's why prosecutors didn't charge him with a campaign finance violation.
        ModernMech 2y ago
        Whatever you're trying to say here is lost in the weeds. You also can't have your personal lawyer take out a loan and spend it on expenses for your campaign and not report that as a campaign expense. If you're running for public office, you can't commit fraud to hide things from the electorate because you don't want them to find out. That can't be allowed in free and fair elections. If you get elected doing that, people have every reason to question your legitimacy. If you get caught and lie about it, expect people not to trust you. If you get charged with a crime related to that conduct, don't be surprised when a jury finds you guilty, because it's shady af. This is all very straightforward stuff.
        rayiner 2y ago
        > Whatever you're trying to say here is lost in the weeds. No, I’m talking about the law. You’re wrong about what you think campaign finance law says. > You also can't have your personal lawyer take out a loan and spend it on expenses for your campaign and not report that as a campaign expense. The law is the exact opposite. You cannot call something a “campaign expense” if it is an expense you would incur “irrespective of the campaign.” (That’s the magic phrase in FEC regulations.) If you pay off your mistress and call it a campaign expense, you’ll be prosecuted for campaign finance violations, because the prosecutor would say that you could have non-campaign reasons to do that. John Edwards was prosecuted for doing exactly that. The New York federal prosecutor (SDNY) investigated the exact theory you are talking about: charging Trump with a campaign finance violation. They didn’t bring the case because all Trump would have to do is prove that he would have paid off Stormy Daniels “irrespective of the campaign.”
      - rayiner 2y ago
        How could it be about "campaign funds" when the charge was about the Trump organization's business records? What you're describing is a straightforward campaign finance violation, which he could have been charged with if it were true.
  - yadaeno 2y ago
    34 felonies for paying someone not to talk about something? That sounds like the mundane, everyday activity I can possibly imagine at the highest level of politics. Meanwhile we’re sending billions of dollars to obliterate a people in the Middle East which is a crime that will someday result in violence on our doorstep. Bill Clinton is on record flying to Epsteins island, and I could go on about the insane things our government has got away with. I dont know anything about politics but that’s my reaction when people bring up “34 felonies”.
    - ModernMech 2y ago
      "I dont know anything about politics" ... "activity I can possibly imagine at the highest level of politics." So you don't know what you're talking about and you're just making up scenarios in your head?
rayiner 2y ago
What were the crimes? At the debate, Biden said Trump was convicted for “sleeping with a porn star while his wife was pregnant.”
- ModernMech 2y ago
  34 counts of falsification of business records.
  - rayiner 2y ago
    Which is a misdemeanor outside the statute of limitations, right?
    - CyberDildonics 2y ago
      I don't know what this is supposed to mean, but here is a detailed list of all 34 felony convictions. https://www.npr.org/2024/05/30/g-s1-1848/trump-hush-money-trial-34-counts https://www.npr.org/2024/05/30/g-s1-1848/trump-hush-money-tr...
    - ModernMech 2y ago
      If you have a point just make it.
      - rayiner 2y ago
        You’re throwing around “34 felonies,” I’m trying to understand what you think was the legal theory he was convicted on.
        ModernMech 2y ago
        Then you should have just asked that. My knowledge about the convictions comes from the court proceedings, not the debate. If you need info about the the charges you should read the transcripts.
    - deleted 2y ago

JamesBarney 2y ago

What crimes did he commit to get elected? Trump is a crook but his crimes are almost all sleazy real estate and tax fraud. He didn't commit any crimes to get elected before his first term.

ModernMech 2y ago
Did you follow the trial? He committed election fraud by paying a porn star hush money in order to buy her silence, an expense which he didn't report, lied about, and then covered up with business fraud. For this he was charged and convicted with 34 felonies.
- rayiner 2y ago
  What makes it election fraud?
  - loeg 2y ago
    He used campaign funds to do it.
    - ModernMech 2y ago
      Moreover, the payments should have been reported as a campaign expenses, but they were not because doing so would have defeated their purpose. So the payments were fraudulently misrepresented to be lawyer fees, and when it was discovered, Trump lied about the scheme.
      - rayiner 2y ago
        > the payments should have been reported as a campaign expenses You have it exactly backward. The law is clear that "campaign expenses" cannot have any personal component. That makes sense, because the focus of the law is to prevent candidates from calling things "campaign expenses" that are actually for personal benefit. John Edwards was prosecuted for using campaign funds to keep his mistress silent because hiding an affair has a personal component in addition to a political component. If Trump had been charged with a campaign-finance violation, his straightforward defense under well-established precedent would be that paying off Stormy Daniels had a personal component (avoiding personal embarrassment and his wife finding out), in addition to whatever effect it had on the campaign. The prosecution would have been required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump's marriage was so dysfunctional that the only reason he would have paid off Stormy Daniels was the election. That's why prosecutors didn't charge him with a campaign finance violation.
        ModernMech 2y ago
        Whatever you're trying to say here is lost in the weeds. You also can't have your personal lawyer take out a loan and spend it on expenses for your campaign and not report that as a campaign expense. If you're running for public office, you can't commit fraud to hide things from the electorate because you don't want them to find out. That can't be allowed in free and fair elections. If you get elected doing that, people have every reason to question your legitimacy. If you get caught and lie about it, expect people not to trust you. If you get charged with a crime related to that conduct, don't be surprised when a jury finds you guilty, because it's shady af. This is all very straightforward stuff.
        rayiner 2y ago
        > Whatever you're trying to say here is lost in the weeds. No, I’m talking about the law. You’re wrong about what you think campaign finance law says. > You also can't have your personal lawyer take out a loan and spend it on expenses for your campaign and not report that as a campaign expense. The law is the exact opposite. You cannot call something a “campaign expense” if it is an expense you would incur “irrespective of the campaign.” (That’s the magic phrase in FEC regulations.) If you pay off your mistress and call it a campaign expense, you’ll be prosecuted for campaign finance violations, because the prosecutor would say that you could have non-campaign reasons to do that. John Edwards was prosecuted for doing exactly that. The New York federal prosecutor (SDNY) investigated the exact theory you are talking about: charging Trump with a campaign finance violation. They didn’t bring the case because all Trump would have to do is prove that he would have paid off Stormy Daniels “irrespective of the campaign.”
    - rayiner 2y ago
      How could it be about "campaign funds" when the charge was about the Trump organization's business records? What you're describing is a straightforward campaign finance violation, which he could have been charged with if it were true.
- yadaeno 2y ago
  34 felonies for paying someone not to talk about something? That sounds like the mundane, everyday activity I can possibly imagine at the highest level of politics. Meanwhile we’re sending billions of dollars to obliterate a people in the Middle East which is a crime that will someday result in violence on our doorstep. Bill Clinton is on record flying to Epsteins island, and I could go on about the insane things our government has got away with. I dont know anything about politics but that’s my reaction when people bring up “34 felonies”.
  - ModernMech 2y ago
    "I dont know anything about politics" ... "activity I can possibly imagine at the highest level of politics." So you don't know what you're talking about and you're just making up scenarios in your head?

rayiner 2y ago

What were the crimes? At the debate, Biden said Trump was convicted for “sleeping with a porn star while his wife was pregnant.”

ModernMech 2y ago
34 counts of falsification of business records.
- rayiner 2y ago
  Which is a misdemeanor outside the statute of limitations, right?
  - CyberDildonics 2y ago
    I don't know what this is supposed to mean, but here is a detailed list of all 34 felony convictions. https://www.npr.org/2024/05/30/g-s1-1848/trump-hush-money-trial-34-counts https://www.npr.org/2024/05/30/g-s1-1848/trump-hush-money-tr...
  - ModernMech 2y ago
    If you have a point just make it.
    - rayiner 2y ago
      You’re throwing around “34 felonies,” I’m trying to understand what you think was the legal theory he was convicted on.
      - ModernMech 2y ago
        Then you should have just asked that. My knowledge about the convictions comes from the court proceedings, not the debate. If you need info about the the charges you should read the transcripts.
  - deleted 2y ago