F.B.I raids the office of Trump’s personal lawyer.

[columbus]

That could be, although Nixon spent his whole life in the public sector and still thought he was above it all.

Nixon didn't screw around on his wife, and expect "his people" to shut up his whores and keep it secret.

Nixon didn't promise to release his financial information, then reneg.

Nixon didn't accuse the sitting president of wiretapping his campaign headquarters.

Nixon didn't have a bunch of employees and appointees compromised by Russia, who then lied about it.

Comparing Nixon to Trump is almost as nonsensical as comparing Trump to Hitler.
Tim

 

[tytlyf]

Meanwhile, the US has a president working under added stress, in an already stressful job. And people wonder why he seems to not be thinking clearly at times!

What added stress? Knowing you probably committed crimes? Trump hasn't thunk clearly his entire life. Did you know who Trump was prior to the election?

He's a confidence man. Has been his whole life.

 

[SkepticThinker]

If this involves the porn star, both Cohen and Trump assert that Cohen was acting on his own. If so, just who is the 'privileged' client?

Oooh, good point.

 

[Subduction Zone]

He wasn't thinking clearly before. Why should he now?

But this type of stress is part of the job (yes, even under investigation). If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

I knew that when he first introduce the claim that "Mexico will pay for it" in the first debate. I thought that he was merely there to make a rather lackluster group of candidates look better in comparison.

 

[Nous]

I am saying its difficult to justify such a gamble otherwise. After all what would be the consequence of proving a case of illegal campaign contribution to silence a porn star? It does not invalidate the election, nor is it an issue that can be sold as a reason for impeachment to the Republican base. Not enough gains to raid Trump's lawyer.

Point taken.

Of course, prosecutors like to prosecute crimes--and sometimes they like to prosecute even when there is no crime or criminal, or when there was a crime but don't have the criminal. If there are adequate grounds to establish that Cohen's payment to Daniels was an illegal campaign contribution, then it's purpose was by definition not to silence a porn star but to (try to) influence an election with corrupt intent.

 

[Riders]

Today I read that FBI is going after records of Trump paying women from FBI raid. Wonder if theyre talking about paying prostitutes.

 

[Riders]

Any president.

What did that impeachment accomplish? Nothing. (Clinton couldn’t run again.)

It accomplished he couldn't run again and we had a Republican president win the next 8 years and the whole entire country voted Republican for every office. That's a huge deal.

 

[Father Heathen]

Chuck Grassley: 'Suicide for the President to fire' Mueller - CNNPolitics

 

[Father Heathen]

Meanwhile, the US has a president working under added stress, in an already stressful job. And people wonder why he seems to not be thinking clearly at times!

Yes, the presidency is a stressful job, which is why the person in that position needs to be able to handle the pressure in a rational and dignified manner.

Trump clearly cannot.

 

[idav]

He can pardon himself. So he is.

The way that works is the Vice President (new president) pardons the former impeached president. Ford pardoned Nixon even without Nixon being under indictment. I am sure Pence would be a stand up guy and not do that LOL.

 

[sayak83]

Point taken.

Of course, prosecutors like to prosecute crimes--and sometimes they like to prosecute even when there is no crime or criminal, or when there was a crime but don't have the criminal. If there are adequate grounds to establish that Cohen's payment to Daniels was an illegal campaign contribution, then it's purpose was by definition not to silence a porn star but to (try to) influence an election with corrupt intent.

But how would it be proved to be related to the campaign? Can't Trump simply argue it was done for private reasons (like saving his marriage?).

 

[Stevicus]

Nixon didn't screw around on his wife, and expect "his people" to shut up his whores and keep it secret.

Nixon didn't promise to release his financial information, then reneg.

Nixon didn't accuse the sitting president of wiretapping his campaign headquarters.

Nixon didn't have a bunch of employees and appointees compromised by Russia, who then lied about it.

Comparing Nixon to Trump is almost as nonsensical as comparing Trump to Hitler.
Tim

I wasn't really comparing them, just commenting on similarities. Still, I don't think it comes anywhere close to comparing Trump to Hitler.

 

[idav]

But how would it be proved to be related to the campaign? Can't Trump simply argue it was done for private reasons (like saving his marriage?).

US court systems only need to prove reasonable doubt. Evidence has to be overwhelming honestly.

 

[roger1440]

I am not at all favorable to Trump, but I wonder where the attorney-client privilege has gone here.

The FBI just proved Donald Trump wrong on attorney-client privilege - CNNPolitics

 

[Nous]

But how would it be proved to be related to the campaign? Can't Trump simply argue it was done for private reasons (like saving his marriage?).

In a case where corrupt intent must be proved, one of the most common methods is to show that the defendant has been deceptive about his intent or about the act. From this one can infer the defendant's awareness of having engaged in wrongdoing.

If the suspected crime motivating the search involves Cohen's payment to Daniels and campaign finance law (which, again, may be entirely wrong), it doesn't make much sense for Cohen to claim that he paid off Daniels in order to try to save Trump's marriage, given that both he and Trump have claimed that Trump didn't know about the payment. It's hardly plausible that Cohen spent $130,000 out of his own pocket to try to secretly salvage Trump's marriage. And if Melania already knew about Trump and Daniels or about the payment, it plainly shows that that alleged reason for the payment to be a lie. There seem to be few options for Cohen to claim that the payment had nothing to do with Trump's campaign.

 

[Nous]

Ford pardoned Nixon even without Nixon being under indictment.

Which didn't help Ford in his effort to be elected President. I think that was identified as one of the primary reasons people didn't vote for Ford.

 

[Nous]

US court systems only need to prove reasonable doubt.

? Say what?

 

[Shaul]

If this involves the porn star, both Cohen and Trump assert that Cohen was acting on his own. If so, just who is the 'privileged' client?

Non sequitur. Just because the attorney acted on his own, without the client’s afore knowledge, doesn’t mean he wasn’t acting in the client’s behalf in his role as an advocate.

 

[columbus]

Non sequitur. Just because the attorney acted on his own, without the client’s afore knowledge, doesn’t mean he wasn’t acting in the client’s behalf in his role as an advocate.

Do you honestly believe that it's plausible that Cohen popped for $130K, and got the agreement with her, and Trump was unaware of any of it?

I don't. I don't see how anyone could believe that is plausible.
Tom

 

[Shaul]

Do you honestly believe that it's plausible that Cohen popped for $130K, and got the agreement with her, and Trump was unaware of any of it?

I don't. I don't see how anyone could believe that is plausible.
Tom

It is both plausible and understandable. Trump was a major client that he knew was facing embarrassment. Fronting $130,000 would be small potatoes, keep his client happy, and be more than made up for in future work from Trump. Keeping Trump out of the loop also served his client’s interests.