{"id":2221039,"date":"2024-04-15T03:34:02","date_gmt":"2024-04-15T07:34:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/trumps-strongest-new-york-defense-has-nothing-to-do-with-alvin-bragg-or-judge-merchan\/"},"modified":"2024-04-15T03:37:36","modified_gmt":"2024-04-15T07:37:36","slug":"trumps-strongest-new-york-defense-has-nothing-to-do-with-alvin-bragg-or-judge-merchan","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/trumps-strongest-new-york-defense-has-nothing-to-do-with-alvin-bragg-or-judge-merchan\/","title":{"rendered":"Trump&#8217;s Best Defense in New York Doesn&#8217;t Involve Alvin Bragg or Judge Merchan"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">26<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Ftrumps-strongest-new-york-defense-has-nothing-to-do-with-alvin-bragg-or-judge-merchan%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2221039&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>The forthcoming Trump trial in New York centers on \u2062allegations of \u200dmisreporting payments to Stormy Daniels as &#8220;legal fees&#8221; \u200cinstead of <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/dccc-chair-spent-big-on-travel-as-he-urged-constituents-to-stay-home-and-stop-spreading-the-virus\/\" title=\"DCCC Chair Spent Big on Travel as He Urged Constituents to \u2018Stay Home\u2019 and \u2018Stop Spreading the Virus\u2019\">campaign expenses<\/a>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/pa-gubernatorial-candidate-lou-barletta-launches-tv-ad-highlighting-his-record\/\" title=\"PA Gubernatorial Candidate Lou Barletta Launches TV Ad Highlighting His Record\">potentially violating campaign finance laws<\/a>. Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg&#8217;s\u200b pursuit\u2063 of felony charges raises questions about the \u200dinterpretation of campaign expenditures under the Federal Election Campaign Act. The case hinges\u2063 on distinguishing legitimate campaign expenses from\u200d personal use\u2063 expenditures.  <\/p>\n<p class=\"readmore\">\n    <button onclick=\"showReadMore()\" id=\"readmorebtn\">Read more&#8230;<\/button>\n<\/p>\n<hr id=\"line\">\n<span id=\"more\"><\/p>\n<p><?xml encoding=\"utf-8\" ?><?xml encoding=\"utf-8\" ?><?xml encoding=\"utf-8\" ?><\/p>\n<div class=\"article-content\">\n<p>The first Trump trial is here, set to begin on Monday, with the allegation being that the former president violated New York law by having his company misreport payments to Stormy Daniels as \u201clegal fees\u201d rather than campaign expenditures. <\/p>\n<p>Much of the commentary on the case \u2014 at least from those defending the former president \u2014 has consisted of accusations that Manhattan District Attorney (DA) Alvin Bragg is abusing his power on a political vendetta and that Judge Juan Merchan is a biased partisan. These accusations go to the heart of the rule of law and should not be made lightly. But equally important, they do not address whether Trump is actually guilty as charged, and that is the question soon to be before a jury.\u00a0Better, then, to assume the good faith and professionalism of the public officials involved and explain why the DA\u2019s case is wrong as a matter of law.<\/p>\n<div class=\"fdrlst__b89e9-paragraph-2-long d-flex justify-content-center\" style=\"margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center; \" id=\"fdrlst__b89e9-861486412\">\n<div id=\"div-gpt-ad-1379703300879-0\" class=\"mb-30\"><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"fdrlst__b89e9-753f52491800d08d2668a47fdd8c4b8c fdrlst__b89e9-paragraph-2\" id=\"fdrlst__b89e9-753f52491800d08d2668a47fdd8c4b8c\"><\/div>\n<p>Misreporting business expenses is normally, at most, a misdemeanor. Bragg seeks to ratchet it up to a felony here by arguing that the misreporting was done to cover up a crime. That alleged crime is a violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA). The theory is that Trump\u2019s payments to Daniels were campaign expenditures and thus needed to be publicly reported as such. By not reporting the expenditure, the theory goes, Trump prevented the public from knowing information that might have influenced their votes. <\/p>\n<p>There is one big problem with this theory: The payments to Daniels were not campaign payments. <\/p>\n<p>In Bragg\u2019s defense, FECA does define a campaign expenditure as any payment, \u201cfor the purpose of influencing an election.\u201d And there is certainly some evidence that Trump agreed to a nondisclosure deal with Daniels, at least in part, to keep her from telling her story during the closing days of the campaign \u2014 i.e., to \u201cinfluence an election.\u201d <\/p>\n<p>But let\u2019s think about this for a minute. Political candidates do things all the time that are \u201cfor the purpose of influencing an election,\u201d but that, nonetheless, are not considered campaign expenditures. For example, a candidate cannot buy a new suit, get his teeth whitened, or pay for cosmetic surgery with campaign funds, even if he does so for the purpose of looking good on the campaign trail. <\/p>\n<div class=\"fdrlst__b89e9-c898cde0f678c7cddda221e17fdcf2da fdrlst__b89e9-paragraph-6\" id=\"fdrlst__b89e9-c898cde0f678c7cddda221e17fdcf2da\"><\/div>\n<p>That\u2019s because, in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/google-expands-security-efforts-ahead-of-2022-elections\/\" title=\"Google Expands Security Efforts Ahead of 2022 Elections\">campaign finance law<\/a>, these types of expenditures are known as \u201cpersonal use.\u201d FECA specifically prohibits the conversion of campaign funds to personal use, defined as any expenditure \u201cused to fulfill any commitment, obligation, or expense that would exist irrespective of the candidate\u2019s election campaign.\u201d <\/p>\n<p>The provision is a core part of the law. A candidate cannot use a campaign contribution to buy an expensive watch, no matter how good it will make him look on the campaign trail or how much it will help him stay on schedule. He can\u2019t buy a cashmere top coat, even if he feels he needs it for door-to-door campaigning in the wintry cold of the New Hampshire primary. Campaign contributions must be used for obligations that exist solely because of the campaign \u2014 think campaign staff and headquarters, advertising, travel to campaign events, polling, focus groups, speech writers, and such. They can\u2019t be used to buy the candidate anything that might in some way be helpful to his campaign. <\/p>\n<p>The Federal Election Commission\u2019s regulations emphasize that the standard for determining if something is \u201cfor the purpose of influencing an election\u201d is an objective one. It is the nature of the expense, not the subjective intent of the candidate in making the expense, that determines if something is a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/ethics-watchdog-calls-for-fec-investigation-into-democrat-rep-marie-newman\/\" title=\"Ethics Watchdog Calls for FEC Investigation into Democrat Rep. Marie Newman\">legitimate campaign expense<\/a> or an illegal \u201cpersonal use.\u201d <\/p>\n<p>Closer to home, a business man\/candidate could not use campaign funds to pay bonuses to employees, even if his primary purpose was to burnish his image as a benevolent employer to enhance his electoral prospects. A candidate cannot use campaign funds to pay a lawyer to seal divorce records or settle lawsuits against companies he might own, even if the primary purpose is to keep information out of the limelight \u201cfor the purpose of influencing the election.\u201d<\/p>\n<div class=\"fdrlst__b89e9-da58d923a07beefe30664f6735a1d0d2 fdrlst__b89e9-paragraph-10\" id=\"fdrlst__b89e9-da58d923a07beefe30664f6735a1d0d2\"><\/div>\n<p>This approach is common sense. Does anyone really think a candidate should be able to use campaign funds to settle lawsuits, or threatened lawsuits, arising from activities that occurred long before his candidacy? It\u2019s stressful being a candidate, and a little relaxation may make the candidate more effective on the stump. Does that mean your campaign contribution should pay for a candidate massage? How about a country club membership, or tickets to the Super Bowl (after all, the candidate might take along a potential donor)? <\/p>\n<p>All of these things should be personal use, despite the candidate deciding to make the purchase or expenditure because it might help with the campaign. If they are not personal use, however, then they can be paid with campaign funds. Is that what we want? Campaign donors buying the candidate club memberships, tickets to athletic events, and expensive new wardrobes? Or paying for nondisclosure agreements to settle civil matters?<\/p>\n<p>Herein lies the most frightening part of this prosecution: Had Trump made these payments with campaign funds, it seems a near certainty he would now be facing criminal charges for a knowing and willful diversion of campaign funds to pay personal obligations. If Bragg\u2019s prosecution is successful, it will mean a candidate can use campaign funds to pay almost any obligation that, the candidate might argue, would benefit his candidacy. Perhaps worse, zealous prosecutors could get a candidate coming or going \u2014 falsification of records if campaign funds are not used, and illegal personal use if campaign funds are used. <\/p>\n<p>It is Trump, not Bragg or Merchan, who is about to go on trial. He has a defense on the merits, and his supporters should use it.<\/p>\n<div class=\"fdrlst__b89e9-91770831daafe36e22cf38b7a26eb94d fdrlst__b89e9-after-post-content\" id=\"fdrlst__b89e9-91770831daafe36e22cf38b7a26eb94d\"><\/div>\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator\">    \t\t\t\t\t   \t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Trump&#8217;s initial trial starts Monday, alleging he violated NY law by misreporting payments to Stormy Daniels. Commentary on the case, especially from Trump&#8217;s defenders, scrutinizes the legal distinction between &#8220;legal fees&#8221; and campaign expenses. The trial marks a significant development in Trump&#8217;s legal battles and could have far-reaching implications for his future legal challenges<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3069,"featured_media":2221040,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Donald-Trump.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[546],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2221039","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-federalist"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/Donald-Trump.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2221039","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3069"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2221039"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2221039\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2221040"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2221039"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2221039"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2221039"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}