Trump Could Be Indicted for Same Thing Clinton Was Fined For

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg says Hillary Clinton’s campaign may be using essentially the same legal theory to prosecute former President Donald Trump, who was fined. Former U.S. Attorney Brett Tolman claimed.

Tolman said on Saturday that Bragg’s legal theory that Trump used a then-lawyer to pay porn star Stormy Daniels $130,000 in hush money before the 2016 presidential election was a sign that her campaign was an election. claimed that it would have been applied to Clinton when he hid the payment of funds. Fake Russian pee documents against Trump as “legal fees”.

Former New York City police officer and conservative pundit John Cardillo tweeted, “Bill Clinton paid Paula Jones $850,000 and no one cared.” Tallman responded by tweeting, “And the Hillary campaign was actually fined for hiding the Steele Dossier payment under ‘Attorney’s Fees.’ It’s essentially the same legal theory that drives the Trump criminal investigation.”

In fact, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) announced in March 2022 that fined Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee failed to properly disclose the so-called piss paperwork payments that the DOJ and FBI relied on to investigate Trump for alleged Russian collusion.

Campaigns are required to report costs over $200 and disclose the purpose of the costs. However, the Clinton campaign and his DNC funneled payments for documents totaling over $1 million through the Democratic law firm Perkins Coie.

Perkins Coie paid opposition research firm Fusion GPS more than $1 million in 2016 and filed documents, according to the FEC. Then in July 2016 and in August he was paid $175,000 by the Clinton campaign and about $850,000 by the DNC. Around the same time the FBI claimed to have opened an investigation into the Trump campaign.

The payment was not disclosed until then-Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Devin Nunes (R-California), lead investigator Kash Patel.

The FEC fined the Clinton campaign $8,000 and the DNC $105,000, reporting the payments as “legal services” and “legal and compliance consulting” rather than investigating dissent, the FEC said.

Jonathan Turley, a law professor and criminal defense attorney at George Washington University, also said in a recent column on possible indictments against Trump that “Hillary Clinton faced dissimilar campaign finance allegations.” .he wrote The Hill:

Last year, the Federal Election Commission fined the Clinton campaign for funding the Steele dossier for legal costs. The campaign previously denied funding documents used in 2016 to push false claims of collusion with Russia against Mr Trump, putting the money in the campaign’s statutory budget. But in Washington or New York, there was no color or cry for this kind of prosecution.

Bragg cannot indict Trump for violating federal law, but Turley Said he could bring in a state charge under section 175 For falsifying business records, based on allegations that Trump hid hush money as “legal costs” for violating federal election law.

As Turley noted, Section 175 charges are usually misdemeanors, but Bragg states that “intent to commit fraud includes intent to commit another crime or to assist or cover up the commission of it.” By demonstrating that, they may try to turn it into a felony. Turley speculated that the crime was federal election fraud, and he noted that the Justice Department had previously declined to prosecute.

Epoch Times host Hans Mahnke (who tracked the Russian collusion hoax closely) also agreed with Tolman. Hillary claimed Steele’s report was attorney’s fees. Not only is it essentially the same as what Trump is being charged with, it is the same. ”

“Why wasn’t Hillary arrested?” he tweeted to Bragg.

Follow Kristina Wong on Breitbart News twitter, real societyor on Facebook.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *