Just switch parties already, for Christ’s sake.

  • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Yeah I didn’t say that I think it’s a mistake, I said I think it’s not a good idea for the democrats to use the convictions as a lane of attack.

    I even said that trump probably systemically doesn’t file paperwork he’s supposed to and that it’s common for people to do that.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      Again, not filing paperwork is not the problem here. He paid a porn star hush money with campaign funds. He was fully aware of it. There was no mistake. There was no oversight. Nothing was overlooked. Nothing happened that he didn’t know about it. This was a very simple case.

      • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        That’s not illegal.

        The crime is not reporting it.

        It’s reported on a filing. Sometimes electronic but paperwork in spirit.

        If the “problem” in your words is the crime, then the problem is paperwork.

        The crimes are falsifying business records, not paying hush money.

        The hush money was paid by trumps attorney who was then reimbursed with campaign funds. The crime is not paying hush money, the crime is covering it up.

        As I said before, I don’t think it’s a very good idea to try to beat trump over the head with the convictions. At best you appeal to reactionary voters who have regressive ideas about crime and justice and at worst you have to reply to questions like “it’s legal to pay hush money out of campaign funds?”

          • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Not in the slightest.

            My understandings is that the convictions were for not keeping records of what he did, not reporting what he did with the money and trying to cover up what he did with the money, not for what he did with the money.

            Falsifying business records are the 34 different counts he was found guilty on.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office’s case went like this: With Trump’s approval, his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, paid adult film star Stormy Daniels $130,000 to stay silent about an alleged sexual encounter so as not to derail Trump’s 2016 campaign. Trump then approved a fraudulent scheme to disguise the reimbursement to Cohen as legal expenses to hide the hush money.

                  In doing so, he ran afoul of election rules, prosecutors said, which amounted to “election fraud, pure and simple.”

                  https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c288wpj1glyo

                  • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 day ago

                    I must be missing something. It sounds from all the articles you posted that the crime was covering up payments.

                    Correct me if I’m wrong, but each of the 34 counts refers to a payment made in an attempt to conceal the hush money as legal expenses. If paying hush money were illegal I bet there would be many fewer out of court settlements…