got 3 years and he acted at the direction of "Individual 1," how many years does "Individual 1" get?
If Cohen
- Thread starter countryroads89
- Start date
I don't think individual 1 will get anything. Cohen got 3 years for tax evasion and lying to Congress.
He will serve no time for breaking campaign finance laws.
There will have to be an audit on the Trump campaign finances and I highly doubt they find anything taken from the campaign to pay these women.
He will serve no time for breaking campaign finance laws.
There will have to be an audit on the Trump campaign finances and I highly doubt they find anything taken from the campaign to pay these women.
John Edwards took money directly from their campaign to pay off his lover and the doh failed to get a conviction. Trump has paid off women in the past. Now these are different times and democrats only want to stick it to trump no matter what so nothing would surprise me
Are you serious? LOL!
Part of his three-year sentence was for breaking campaign finance laws.
"He added that Mr. Cohen’s particular crimes — breaking campaign finance laws, tax evasion and lying to Congress — implicate a far more insidious harm to our democratic institutions." - Judge William H. Pauley III
They already have all of the financials. Don't you remember them raiding Cohen's office. They have little hands Donnie on audio tape discussing it. He gave Cohen money and he directed it.
You do realize the money doesn't have to actually come from a fund that is designated for campaign purposes to be considered a campaign finance law violation? They have already determined the purpose of the money was to silence two women for campaign purposes. This determination was made in Cohen's plea deal and it is corroborated by AMI.
Trump will see jail time for this. It may not be (most likely won't be) until after his presidency is over, but he will see jail time. He directed the criminal actions of Cohen and Cohen got three years. This judge's statements indicate the seriousness of the crimes and our criminal justice system takes our elections very seriously and vigorously defends and ensures our elections are free from corruption and fraud.
I said after the primaries were decided that whoever won would be a one term president
https://www.wileyrein.com/newsroom-newsletters-item-709.html
Didn't see anything about jail time for violations
Didn't see anything about jail time for violations
Last edited:
You will find them here.
https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/...eased_Penalties_Campaign_Finance_Offenses.pdf
You’re welcome.
This might save you some time.
The second area in which the Commission believes the available statutory maximum punishment constrains imposition of appropriate sentences is for violations under section 322(a)(1) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. Section 322(a)(1) states:
(a) In General. No person who is a candidate for Federal office or an employee or agent of such a candidate shall–
(1) fraudulently misrepresent himself or any committee or organization under his control as speaking or writing or otherwise acting for or on behalf of any other candidate or political party or employee or agent thereof on a matter which is damaging to such other candidate or political party or employee or agent thereof . . .
The typical §322(a)(1) violation is a situation in which one candidate, or someone under his or her control, generates a campaign communication which purports to be from his or her opponent and which attributes to that opponent a view not held by that opponent. Such communications are especially malicious in that they are designed to confuse the electorate to the opponent’s detriment. Staff at the Federal Election Commission have informed the Commission that such offenses, even when less than $25,000 is expended, can have great impact on the outcome of an election. This is particularly true in congressional elections or, to a lesser extent, senatorial elections in less populous states. Accordingly, the Commission recommends that Congress increase the statutory maximum sentence applicable to §322(a)(1) offenses to five years' imprisonment, irrespective of the amount of money involved.
The second area in which the Commission believes the available statutory maximum punishment constrains imposition of appropriate sentences is for violations under section 322(a)(1) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. Section 322(a)(1) states:
(a) In General. No person who is a candidate for Federal office or an employee or agent of such a candidate shall–
(1) fraudulently misrepresent himself or any committee or organization under his control as speaking or writing or otherwise acting for or on behalf of any other candidate or political party or employee or agent thereof on a matter which is damaging to such other candidate or political party or employee or agent thereof . . .
The typical §322(a)(1) violation is a situation in which one candidate, or someone under his or her control, generates a campaign communication which purports to be from his or her opponent and which attributes to that opponent a view not held by that opponent. Such communications are especially malicious in that they are designed to confuse the electorate to the opponent’s detriment. Staff at the Federal Election Commission have informed the Commission that such offenses, even when less than $25,000 is expended, can have great impact on the outcome of an election. This is particularly true in congressional elections or, to a lesser extent, senatorial elections in less populous states. Accordingly, the Commission recommends that Congress increase the statutory maximum sentence applicable to §322(a)(1) offenses to five years' imprisonment, irrespective of the amount of money involved.
Similar threads
