Opinion | Trump Indictment Is a Perversion of Campaign-Finance Law

SGT (Join to see)
In my humble opinion, both Clintons, Obama, Pelosi and the Biden crime syndicate should all be behind bars... BUT they're all "in the club." Trump's not!!!

From everything I have learned from the news and other social media input that what the far left is doing is attacking the Man, trying to take him out of the political arena using the man and building the crime to fit the man... The problem that has arisen is that the pieces to the Democrat Attorney General of New York's do not fit snuggly together, quite the contrary! However that said, the Dems are pushing feverously forward and hope that they can sell the New York grand jury on the issue of the crime being one against Campaign-Finance law...and the puzzle pieces do not fit together...

The facts will speak for themselves and I believe that the scenario will boost allegiance among Trump supporters and it will turn in to a backlash against the Dems who are trying to crush Trump... In any case, it is destroying another piece of our Country's legal system and we look very bad in the eyes of the world and China is taking advantage of the situation around the globe...and this administration is doing nothing to stop the advance... We are in a sorry state of affairs IMHO...

I am not a lawyer. But here is what it looks like to me.

1) A CEO was accused of sexual impropriety.
2) That CEO's lawyer, on behalf of both the company and the CEO, reached an out of court settlement.
3) That out of court settlement included a Non-disclosure Agreement (NDA).

This is a scene that has played out countless times in the last 50 years (increasingly often over the last 20, admittedly).

How is that NOT a legal fee? Well he wasn't acting as CEO, some will claim, therefore it isn't a business expense. But it doesn't really matter - as long as the Company is willing to reach the settlement to keep their good name, and the Company pays it. It would be hard to find a CEO accused of sexual impropriety who WAS acting as CEO - I just don't see "bed the interns" as part of the official duties. They were all acting outside the scope of their duties, and their companies all paid. Why is Trump different?

Having a messy court battle over a sexual impropriety would have been damaging to the Trump brand (and, it was....). $130,000 is a pittance to make it go away, and a sound legal and business decision. Since it made good business sense, and not illegal, it seems to me to be a legal business expense. If not a "legal fee" (which seems to be the general thrust of Bragg's argument), then how exactly should it have been coded?

Unless, of course, Bragg wants to try to argue that since it was an out of court settlement, and not an in court decision, it's not a valid business expense. But I think he would have a VERY hard time with that argument. And no business lawyer would ever speak to him again.