Tag Archives: Michael Cohen

There’s a lot of excitement in the press about the Michael Cohen plea deal, but it should be made clear that there is no suggestion at this point that President Trump is in any legal jeopardy, though he may have lied to the American people when he suggested he had avoided business dealings with the Russians.

Unfortunately, not the first fib by the First Fibber.

Cohen, Trump’s former attorney, is cooperating with special prosecutor Mueller and pleaded guilty to lying about his contacts with the Russians about building a hotel in Moscow.

And apparently, he was keeping then-candidate Donald Trump informed the whole time. Because Trump had been trying for two decades to build the damned thing.

It’s not a good idea for a presidential candidate to be dealing with a foreign power, particularly an adversary, since it could affect his policies and approach to the other country.

But building hotels is not illegal.

Yes, Politico. Personally, I find Politico a little less biased than some of the other liberal mainstream outlets. And I worked with the reporter on this story, Josh Gerstein, at the White House for several years. Unlike some of my colleagues there, I never had any idea what his political leanings were.

Anyway, Gerstein has written a brave story given the current climate, reporting – yeah, actually reporting – that attorneys say Trump would have to have known that the payments to his alleged mistresses violated campaign law.

I’m nearly certain Trump on his own would not have known. And I’m willing to bet Cohen, who was tasked with handling Trump’s personal garbage and not campagin stuff, didn’t know either. And if he did know, there’s probably no proof that he informed Trump, if that’s what he did, which I kind of doubt he would.

Anyway, as I’ve mentioned, if it even occurred to Cohen that the payments might be illegal, he may well have determined they were not, given that even a former FEC chair wrote today that they probably were not campaign expenses.

From the Politico piece:

Cohen’s admission that he violated campaign finance law while acting at Trump’s direction is far from rock-solid proof that the president is also guilty, even if Cohen is being entirely truthful, these lawyers said.

“The fact Cohen did something illegal doesn’t mean Trump did anything illegal,” said Jan Baran, a longtime Republican campaign finance lawyer . . .

A very high legal standard that is applied in criminal cases involving alleged campaign finance violations means Trump might not be guilty even if his lawyer is.

“Under the law, it’s quite easy for two people involved in the same act to have different criminal consequences,” said Andy Grewal, a University of Iowa law professor.

That distinction is particularly critical in campaign finance cases because the law limits criminal prosecutions on those charges to instances where someone “knowingly and willfully” defied legal requirements.

As a lawyer, Cohen could be assumed to have some familiarity with federal election law. Prosecutors may well have proof in emails or other documents that he regularly discussed compliance with such statutes.

Proving that Trump knew at the time that the payouts were intended to influence the presidential race, and that he knew they were illegal, could be much harder. Perhaps such records exist, or maybe Cohen is prepared to say that he told Trump the way they were handling it was illegal, but the lawyer never said that in court on Tuesday.

“In order to prove criminal intent, you have to point to evidence that the actors knew or had reason to know what they were doing was illegal,” said Baran, the GOP campaign finance lawyer.

It doesn’t matter, of course, if Democrats win the House. They will use this to impeach him. The party is already being run my Maxine Waters and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

But it is important if Republicans take the House, because they will have to justify not proceeding with impeachment. So far, there are no grounds for it. It’s unlikely Trump committed a crime here, and even if he did, a campaign finance violation hardly constitutes a “high crime and misdemeanor.”