George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley on Thursday skewered former first lady Hillary Clinton for attacking former President Donald Trump over his alleged payment to porn star Stormy Daniels.
clinton Appeared On Morning Joe, while discussing Trump’s trial on a 34-count indictment secured by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, she said that the $130,000 she paid Daniels in 2016 was a “campaign payment” by the Trump campaign. It was a form of “obstruction”. The 2016 Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee, through the Perkins Coy law firm, will pay a $113,000 fine for failing to report funding for the now debunked Steele dossier. Agreed.
Turley ridiculed Clinton’s claims, citing the actions of her 2016 campaign. (Related article: ‘Hillary Clinton…did the same thing’: Fox legal analyst says Trump’s hush money case was judged by a ‘different’ standard)
clock:
“They’re saying they rigged elections and races that have already taken place, and that doesn’t make sense to us,” Turley said. “What’s funny about the earlier clip about Hillary Clinton is that she’s actually making the case for Trump, because when she says, ‘How dare you withhold information from the public,’ the Clinton campaign Because they lied to the media about funding the Steele dossier. How did they hide it? They said it was legal fees with Marc Elias. And they’re going to get fined. When it got to that point, they filed a lawsuit and said, “No, this is really just legal fees.” In short, her campaign did exactly what she is proposing here before the election. ”
The Steele dossier was a key source of information in the FBI’s investigation into allegations that the Trump campaign engaged in Russian election interference in 2016. In October 2016, the FBI offered the document’s author, Christopher Steele, $1 million to support the claims made in the document. According to FBI Supervisory Analyst Brian Auten.
Auten testified that Steele ultimately failed to “prove the allegations.”
“What Mr. Trump is accused of is that after the election ended, he made false statements that may have had nothing to do with Mr. Trump, even though they influenced the election in some way. ” Turley said. “The fact that Judge Juan Melchan allowed this case to proceed based on these contradictory elements of doctrine is one of the biggest complaints I have against him. Most of the cases A public official would have approached this case very differently, and many judges would not have done so.”The case went to trial. ”
All content produced by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent, nonpartisan news distribution service, is available free of charge to legitimate news publishers with large audiences. All republished articles must include our logo, reporter byline, and DCNF affiliation. If you have any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact us at licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
