Using campaign funds to pay for criminal defense?


#21

The only problem with this is that “collusion” (whatever THAT is) isn’t criminal. It might be “unethical,” but it’s not criminal. ANYONE is perfectly free to have contacts with foreign governments for ANY reason that doesn’t constitute treason or sedition–and not even what the left has been alleging is either. There are laws prohibiting accepting campaign DONATIONS from foreign governments–which the Clintons did literally dozens of times without consequence except having to return them, which they didn’t even bother to do in 2016.


#22

Few thoughts

I have no idea why what the Clintons did or did not do has any bearing on this question. If you are a person of principle, it shouldn’t matter if other people have gotten away with an act. It is either right or wrong.

Having said that, do you believe that the investigation is limited to collusion?

Lastly, Trump has blatantly lied over, and over again. There is mounting evidence that he was working a deal on a project in Moscow while on the campaign trail saying he had no deals in Russia.

Illegal? Perhaps not, but, if confirmed, unethical and immoral? The likes of which this nation has never seen.


#23

???

Lemme’ get this straight:

When a conservative says “wrong”, it’s laughable.

But when YOU say “wrong”, it’s not.

OK . . .


#24

You really need to go back and read the contents of those statements again. Your reply makes no sense what so ever.


#25

First of all, it is not for criminal defense as the title of this thread states. Donald Trump Jr. is not charged with anything. He has personal resources to provide for his own legal counsel but why the F should he? Would your opinion change if he didn’t have these personal resources? Is it OK to financially ruin a person because he works in the White House for an administration that you don’t like?

I don’t know who is paying Bob Menendez’s legal fees but if it is from campaign funds, more power to him. He is also a victim of political prosecution.

I haven’t researched it but do you believe that Hillary, Susan Rice, Clapper, Comey or Lynch are all paying their legal counsel out of their own pockets?


#26

Lying to Congress is a crime, under oath or not. Don Jr. will have to defend the statements he made or he can be charged. That’s why he is paying attorneys.

For my part, I said a few posts back that I take no issue with the using of donor money for legal defense (criminal or otherwise), but if it turns out they are lying and found criminally guilty, then I think they should have to repay it. If you broke the law and proceed by declaring your innocence (when you know you lied) then you deserve whatever you get IMO.

I agree that no one should be bankrupted just because they are serving the country faithfully and given the costs of legal fees, opponents could simply mount false allegations against people just to cost them money.

As far as Clinton, Rice etc…

I really don’t know, but the point isn’t that people are taking donations to pay legal fees, its that people are donating with the belief that their money will be used for re/elections and it ends up being used for criminal defense lawyers. If Clinton et. all used election funds to defend themselves, as I said, I only take issue with it if they are found guilty of knowingly breaking the law or attempting to obstruct it.


#27

Yet aren’t YOU one of those liberals who thinks that people are convicted of crimes they didn’t commit all the time? What if he IS “convicted” but didn’t really do what he’s accused of? Would that justify in your mind using campaign funds for his defense? Neither President Trump NOR his son are being accused of a crime. The Dimwits are accusing them of “colluding” with the Russians in order to “steal” the election from Hillary. As far as I know, even if they DID such a thing–and there’s literally NO EVIDENCE that they did–it’s not a “crime.” It might be “unethical”, but it’s not “criminal.” Speaking to Russians–or Japanese, Koreans or Moldavians, for that matter–isn’t a “crime.”


#28

Yet aren’t YOU one of those liberals who thinks that people are convicted of crimes they didn’t commit all the time?

Examples?

I have no idea what “crimes” you’re talking about, but that’s a pretty weak argument.

Tell me of similar crimes that other people have committed that I defended and we can talk.

What if he IS “convicted” but didn’t really do what he’s accused of?

He needs to get evidence to exonerate himself. Or someone needs to show he was falsely convicted (in which case someone else needs to be punished if they knowingly fabricated evidence).

Neither President Trump NOR his son are being accused of a crime.

Since you left that rather open-ended, I’d argue there are LOTS of people accusing Trump and his son of crimes. If you meant to say, formally accused, then yes I would agree, however, that doesn’t mean that, right now, that charges aren’t being investigated and simply haven’t been formally presented. Something that is routine in an investigation.

Have you ever accused Hillary of breaking the law? Has she been formally charged with a crime?

See the hypocrisy?

Dimwits are accusing them of “colluding” with the Russians in order to “steal” the election from Hillary.

For the record, I’ve never made that accusation. Do I think it’s possible, even probable, yes, but have I seen anything that would convince me to the point that I would make that accusation publically? No, not yet. Even if it’s the case that it’s true, I haven’t seen anything to convince me it’s a crime.

But just like Bill took a BJ in the oval from an intern, something I called highly unethical and immoral at the time, I wasn’t aware of any laws that it was a crime (just the cover-up). But the fact that it wasn’t a crime doesn’t mean that Mr. Clinton didn’t lose my support as a voter, as a father and as a person who considers the character of a person to be one of the most important traits a President can have.

As far as I know, even if they DID such a thing–and there’s literally NO EVIDENCE that they did–it’s not a “crime.” It might be “unethical”, but it’s not “criminal.”

You sound EXACTLY like the liberals trying to justify what Bill did with the intern. Oh, the irony.

How do you know there is “NO EVIDENCE”? Using your logic I should ask you, have you had a conversation with Mr. Muller lately? How about the House or Senate investigators?

I thought not. So the correct phrasing is; we’re not aware of any evidence at this time.

Speaking to Russians–or Japanese, Koreans or Moldavians, for that matter–isn’t a “crime.”

Lying about it on an SF-86 is. And I’m surprised, many of you served and a few that served worked in sensitive areas. I know I’ve filled out an SF-86 in my work for the government. You know lying on that form is a crime, or is it only a crime of people that you disagree politically lie on those forms.

For DJT and Don Jr, who, I don’t believe had to fill out SF-86’s, their legal jeopardy comes in other varieties.

For Don Jr., it would be (might be) lying to members of Congress and for DJT it’s probably going to come in the form of obstruction and if I had to guess, illicit financial dealings, but don’t quote me on that second one.

I’m willing to wait till the end of the investigation. We can circile back and discuss the outcome them.


#29

In today’s media “climate” do you REALLY believe that IF there was any evidence of criminality that could even be REMOTELY attached to President Trump we wouldn’t already know about it??? The investigations have been going on for well over a year now. The way a criminal investigation is SUPPOSED to be conducted is (1) Evidence of a crime has been found. (2) An investigation is conducted to discover who the guilty party is (are). What’s going on now is, “We think a crime MAY have occurred and we’re going to find out what that crime is.”


#30

First, an absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence.

Second, I doubt you frequent the same sources I do. If you watch Fox, then I do frequent some of the same sources you do. Even if you don’t, I read conservative media, I understand why most on the right have no idea what’s going on. They don’t report it.

Now, I like Mike Wallace, I think he’s one of the few on Fox that gets’s to the truth. Brett, sometimes, but he is prone to reporting things that are unsubstantiated and are later retracted (but honestly I have no idea how much control he has over what he reports).

As far as leaks, there has been a ton of evidence of unethical behavior, how much of it is a crime, we’ll have to wait and see.

I can agree to table this and revisit it when the investigation is over.

*Bookmarked


#31

Please! The ONLY reason this is going on is that the left is pissed that Hillary lost an election they were CERTAIN she had “in the bag.” Their “polls” were all wrong and they can’t conceive of how that could be. I know. Whenever I detect that a “pollster” calling me is asking me from a liberal perspective (not to hard to do if you’ll just LISTEN), I LIE.


#32

It is when you have the FBI, CIA, NSA, IRS, and half of the investigative reporters in the country working around the clock for over a year searching for evidence. Evidence? They can’t even find a crime to have evidence for.

If the same herculean effort was made looking at Susan Rice, Hilary Clinton, James Comey, Samantha Powers, James Clapper and John Brennan they would all be wearing orange jump suits today.


#33

How many hours of testimony did Clinton give?

How many months did the FBI investigate her?

What level of effort did right-wing media spend trying to uncover wrongdoing?

The right has dominated Congress, Governorships and has +2 seats in the Senate, yet the “political right” is so inept that it can’t find obvious wrongdoing by “Susan Rice, Hilary Clinton, James Comey, Samantha Powers, James Clapper and John Brennan”?

Wow, the right either has its "s**t together or they are completely inept, so which is it?


#34

I don’t recall…I can’t remember… :rofl: :

Did they act on their findings?

A lot of effort and they have and continue to highlight the many serious crimes of the Obama administration which makes the Nixon administration look like choir boys.

Completely inept.

Maybe I’ll be surprised and one day soon and Jeff Sessions will announce indictments for Susan Rice, Hilary Clinton, James Comey, Samantha Powers, James Clapper and John Brennan. I doubt it.


#35

I see brown is back and still fighting the losing battle. Not a Trump fan and no it does not bother me. I didn’t lose any sleep over the things Obama did and I wont over anything Trump does.


#36

I see brown is back and still fighting the losing battle. Not a Trump fan and no it does not bother me. I didn’t lose any sleep over the things Obama did and I wont over anything Trump does.

I missed you too…


#37

Did they act on their findings?

I’m curious, what findings do you think they’ed act on?

A lot of effort and they have and continue to highlight the many serious crimes of the Obama administration which makes the Nixon administration look like choir boys.

And Trump’s administration makes Obama’s Administration look like a bunch of wet nurses. /shrug


#38

How about obvious felonies?


#39

As far as to the legality of using campaign funds for legal defense.

Remember Senator Larry Craig? Ya know the Republican Senator who was arrested for soliciting a male undercover police officer for sexual activity.

Now, I really don’t want to adjudicate the matter, not really the point (regardless of the irony given his stance on homosexuality, but I digress…)

The point is that he used campaign funds to pay for his criminal attorney…The US Treasury demanded its money back.

Craig fought that for years and eventually he lost and was forced to repay the Treasury $242k.

Now, I’m not suggesting that’s what’s going to happen with Trump. As it turns out, Trump’s inauguration campaign raised $107 million dollars, twice as much as Obama in his last term. Given that Obama’s inauguration day was twice as large, they paid for it with 1/2 the money. So I’m certain there is a HUGE slush fund with over $50 million dollars in it. Too bad Trump won’t share it with people like Pence, Flynn, Megan, and Spicer (just to name a few) who are all going to need attorneys before this is over.

So I suspect that no matter what happens, Trump has donor money to use as inauguration money isn’t regulated at all.

But there is the case of Don Jr. He’s not part of the campaign and was never given an official roll. My guess is that the RNC (especially) giving Don Jr. money is illegal, but, I admit I’m no lawyer, so we’ll see how it plays out.


#40

Try not to be obtuse, Brown. First of all, Larry Craig did NOT have to “reimburse” the treasury the money he used in his own defense because THE TREASURY DIDN’T PAY FOR HIS DEFENSE. Neither campaign donations NOR donations to an inauguration come from the “Treasury”. They come from DONORS and are given directly to the politician involved. Craig was forced to pay that money as a FINE, supposedly to reimburse the government for its costs in his prosecution when he was convicted or as some sort of “penalty.” Nobody has come up with any CRIME that President Trump might have committed, let alone a conviction. This whole witch-hunt is a search FOR a crime…not for evidence of a crime they already know about.