Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Trump and a “Man For All Seasons”
To my never-Trump friends: This National Review piece by Bradley Smith is important. He outlines the reasons why there is no campaign finance violation to which Cohen is, nonetheless, pleading guilty. It is an instructive read in toto, but please also focus on this cautionary summary:
In short, Michael Cohen is pleading guilty to something that isn’t a crime. Of course, people will do that when a zealous prosecutor is threatening them with decades in prison. But his admissions are not binding on President Trump, and Trump should fight these charges ferociously.
Many Americans have convinced themselves that Trump is a uniquely dangerous and bad man, such that any available tool should be used to expel him from office. But in that way lies the bigger threat to our democracy and rule of law.
In A Man for All Seasons, Sir Thomas More’s future son-in-law, Roper, states that he would “cut down every law in England” if it would enable him to catch the devil. To which More responds,
And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ’round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!
We do ourselves no service by distorting and misapplying our campaign-finance laws in the hope of bagging Donald Trump.
When those of us who are railing against the Mueller investigation post it is too often regarded as “Trump lovers” protecting “their guy”. That is not true of me. I want to protect the constitutional system that, it appears, too many are willing to jettison just to get Trump.
Published in General
Umm, you did mean, campaign, didn’t you? (Unless one borrowed way too much to pay for camping gear in the state of New York, that is…).
Thought-engendering read, thank you!
I quibble here:
The campaign finance rules make no sense to me, common or otherwise. So applying common sense to the law, well…yeah.
Corrected. (Damn auto-correct!)
Fair quibble if that is all Smith wrote. I think he did a good job in justifying his common sense comment through illustration. I thought his example of an entrepreneur declaring a candidacy and collecting campaign money to pay off private judgements made his point quite well.
Someone made a point that Congress has a secret slush fund for paying off women to avoid election issues and by the Mueller standard, all of those voting for that law, using that fund, or maybe even just knowing about that fund are felons. We are gonna need a bigger jail!
Well except none of you constitution “lovers” were there worrying about the abuses by over zealous prosecutors when they targeted Dems in the past. So you can see why I yawn at your fretting about the tattering of our founding document. Trump is being nailed with the same crimes John Edwards was run through with. He had his day in court, Trump can have his.
For thirty years I’ve told anyone who would listen about the problem. Didn’t matter to me if it was Mueller or Giuliani. It all stinks. Three Felonies A Day: How The Feds Target The Innocent (2011) by Harvey Silverglate spells much of it out in a non-partisan manner.
That’s a pretty broad “you”, @valiuth.
Yeah… the constituents aren’t a staid or stable force.
I was 15 for Clinton and MAYBE 22-23 for Edwards.
What is different between Edwards and Trump, though, is that one was Trump’s money. How he uses his money is his business.
Didn’t Edwards actually use donated campaign funds? I don’t think Edward’s paying out of his own pocket would have gained the same scrutiny.
Again, I may have that mixed up. I wasn’t exactly paying close attention to that particular scandal.
Here’s another conservative, Rich Lowry, explaining in 2012 why what John Edwards did was not a crime.
Thank you so much for the hyperlink. It was well-written and persuasive, and it convincingly rebuts the meme on MSNBC that Trump committed a crime, per se.
I think that, if true, it could be deemed to be an impeachable offense, but I am inclined to say that Trump would be found not guilty if he were tried for this as a crime after his term of office. (I strongly oppose the prosecution of political figures. Just as I was sick over the chants of “Lock Her Up,” I am also sick over the chants on the Left of “Lock Him Up.”)
Great hyperlink. Thanks.
Nope he meant that they forgot to put the money in the envelope for the camping site’s honor system collection box.
That is a serious bad infraction for the outdoor tree huggers contingent.
It is possible to believe “Trump is a uniquely dangerous and bad man” and the US Attorney for the Southern District of NY is misapplying the law in this case. A major problem in this particular case is the dysfunction at the top levels of the Justice Department, dysfunction for which Trump has largely himself to blame.
A great quote from a great movie.
How could this possibly be an impeachable offense? Stormy Daniels and her creepy porn lawyer committed an actual crime: Blackmail. Paying off a blackmailer is not a crime, although it is awesomely stupid as the blackmailer always comes back for more. Heck, paying off a blackmailer isn’t even a misdemeanor. Lord knows how many men would go to prison if the women with whom they committed adultery engaged in blackmail and were paid to keep quiet.
Now I suppose a tortured claim could be made that Trump paid hush money, and he clearly did. But that’s not a crime either unless it is paid to hide an underlying crime. So what then is Trump’s crime?
I suppose a truly twisted argument could be made that when Trump paid Daniels his tryst was transformed into an act of prostitution, but that seems to strain credulity to the breaking point. Besides this was a ex post facto act. And after all, prostitutes get their money up front.
Over my years of practice I drafted who knows how many settlement releases which included a confidentiality clause. I guess I could be charged with a crime for “silencing” plaintiffs. But there would be far fewer settlements which, if every case had to be tried, would all but destroy the system. The courts would be so overwhelmed with unsettled cases that we’d either have to increase the number of judges by 100 fold, or shut the process down.
Except he was doing it through a cut out? Wasn’t it the Enquirers money for the catch and kill? And then Cohen paid them off and then Trump paid him back? And Cohen has testified under oath in his plea deal that he did this all at the instruction of Trump. Why all the obfuscation and laundering of the payment through all these intermediaries and shell companies just do do a simple leagal contract? Seem to me there was plenty of intent to avoid the reporting laws, that also involved conspiring with people to violate the donation limits as well to get this done?
Is there enough proof to hold up in court before a jury? I don’t know I ain’t no lawyer nor am I being presented with all the facts. Seems to me though there is plenty in there to have reasonable cause to indict people and hold a trial to resolve the matter. That is what they did with Edwards. Seems fair to do it with Trump too. Also if Trump has lied under oath about these payments, then he deserves to have the perjury charges thrown in his face just like Clinton.
If Clinton lying about Monica is impeachable, Trump lying about this should be impeachable if it happened. So if Gingrich and all the Republicans now want to apologize to slick Willy about their overzealous impeachment I can live with that. But I want to see them own it. Conversely I’d like to see the Dems admit what soulless weasels they were to bandy about legalisms in defense of Clinton, and that they have seen the error of their ways now with Trump.
I was fine with burning Clinton to the ground over his violations and I’m fine with Trump being burned to the ground likewise. This land is indeed planted thick with laws, confusing contradictory, easily manipulable laws. And when they seem to favor us we like to hide behind them and when they hinder us we want to chop them down. Is Trump the devil we are chasing who will turn on us or is he the one who will be Turned on when it is all laid flat? I guess both. Depending on where you stand.
It starts with outdoor tree hugging, then indoor. Next thing you know, Louis C. K. can’t get gigs anymore.
We have a different name for that in Chicago.
There are three reasons this whole thing is an outrage to me:
1) the charges have always been a farce and witch hunt.
2) while the farce is pursued, real matters of interest with far more known actual evidence go unaddressed. It’s a big deal to me, and should be to all of us, how almost all arms of federal IC and law enforcement were weaponizized for base political purposes. It’s a big deal what HRC did (deleting 30,000 subpoenaed emails alone is major).
3) I’m all for enforcing the law and high standards. However, it has to be applied evenly and impartially and reasonably. Either the law applies to everyone equally or its no law at all and the Republicans’ fecklessness is all the more a failure than I previously thought.
I don’t see how President Trump is responsible for the bad actors both out of government and still in place. How do we go from an environment where even meeting with the FBI director is somehow a breech to Trump could clear all of this up on his own?
I agree that there are some things I don’t undwrstand. Howver, like those “waiting for the Mueller report” I’m willing to see how things play out. There are likely things behind the scenes none of us know of.
Campaign finance regulation in general and the faux-concern about such things by the beltway class in particular have been a complete farce perpetrated on the American public since at least the 1996 presidential election cycle. (This goes double for the faux-concern about foreign influence on our elections.) Illegal foreign campaign contributions heavily influenced the re-election of Clinton-Gore then as well as both Obama-Biden cycles…and barely a peep was ever heard from our media criers for rule of law.
To the extent that We the People allow any of this nonsense to alter the course of the ship of state, the shame is on us for an overwhelming collective and willful ignorance. (Much of which is on display in postings and comment sections like this way too much these days.)
He’s not. The corruption within the DoJ and the FBI has been in place for decades, just as @valiuth so aptly observes. I see no path to blaming Trump for this. The ‘get Trump’ path was created within the Obama Administration and since they were aware of the Russian intelligence efforts to disrupt elements of the election as always, Obama chose to do nothing and use Russia collusion as the method to ‘get Trump’. Mueller is running on empty, having gotten nowhere with the fabricated narrative, and now we must wait while the Trump Administration figures out how to say ‘enough is enough’. It’s really hard to tell just how many felons Mueller is protecting by keeping this farce going. The Trump Administration must challenge this fabricated narrative by either shutting down the Special Counsel so the true crimes can be properly investigated or just go forward with that investigation without dealing with the SC.
The saddest part of the whole drama is the Never-Trumpers helping the radical Left in their efforts to take down our Constitution.
Sad, yes. Infuriating too; let’s not forget that part. The Republicans wasted two years in Congress and now it’s too late – the Dems are set to amp up the weaponization since so far there has been absolutely no cost to them for doing it. Where was berserker Lindsay Graham two years ago when it could have come in handy? Why wasn’t Paul Ryan challenged by competent leadership two years ago? Where were the other Republicans to join and support Nunes?
At this point, for most of them, I just assume it was on purpose. Especially being from Illinois where the Republican party has been broken for decades, the R’s are going to have to persuade me that they’re no longer timid, incompetent, and duplicitous. No more benefit of the doubt from me.
Trump is directly responsible for the dysfunction at the top of the DOJ. The people he put there to run the department were undermined by him. Sessions was appointed by Trump and then subjected by him to the most juvenile abuse I have ever witnessed. Rosenstein was appointed by Trump and then put in an impossible position when Trump publicly stated he fired Comey because of the Russia investigation necessitating appointment of a special counsel.
It is also important to remember the Cohen case was brought not by the special counsel but by the US Attorney in NY, another Trump appointee. In a properly run DOJ, one where the senior leadership was not regularly verbally abused by the President, it is questionable whether these charges implicating Trump would have been brought
How is Mueller protecting felons?
There is an entire DOJ, under the leadership of Trump appointees capable of investigating whatever “true crimes” you believe deserve investigating.
Wasted two years? What did they neglect to do?
100% agree. The supposed reason for campaign finance laws is to prevent some rich guy from “buying” the election. But the willful ignorance of the middle half (politically speaking) of the country ensures that every election must be bought.
Special Counsel Mueller is an obstacle to President Trump himself either ending that investigation or causing an initiation of other investigations into Obama Administration DoJ and Intelligence Agency unlawful actions. The reason for this is the piece of the Special Counsel charge that included the ‘obstruction’ element and all congressional types beyond those supporting the POTUS joining the ‘obstruction’ chorus. Certainly the Trump DoJ is capable and I expect can do the multiplicity of jobs they need to do in months rather than the years Mueller has chosen for his single limited charge to be done with unlimited resources. The true crimes needing investigation are lies to congress and DoJ officials, leaks of classified and other sensitive material to the press, and abuses of power by federal government officials. I trust that you have been paying enough attention that I don’t need to name names.
Are you really arguing Mueller is somehow preventing the DOJ from investigating crimes out of fear he may charge someone with obstruction for conducting an investigation?
Also, Mueller cannot be an obstacle to Trump ending the investigation.
No, he is only exploiting a politically fragile landscape — just as Comey did.