• villainy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    7 months ago

    using campaign funds to manage public relations problems seems a legitimate use

    It is.

    What he did was try to hide payments made to benefit his campaign. Would you consider illegally financing a campaign to be election interference?

    • spongebue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 months ago

      Not just the financing, but hiding the Stormy Daniels story during the election. They were using the National Enquirer (yes, I know) to promote Trump, make up stories to bring down his opponents, and hide the Stormy Daniels story (which was needed when the “grab them by the pussy” video leak caused chaos and arguably almost sunk the campaign). THAT’S where the election interference came into play.

      • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        They were using the National Enquirer (yes, I know) to promote Trump, make up stories to bring down his opponents, and hide the Stormy Daniels story (which was needed when the “grab them by the pussy” video leak caused chaos and arguably almost sunk the campaign)

        Isn’t this part a normal election strategy in the US? And not illegal itself?

        • Wiz@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          If it’s something of a monetary value that benefits the campaign, it must be reported. And it definitely has a monetary value, since he paid money for it.

        • spongebue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          Honestly, I’m not sure how exactly the law is written. I believe that was a factor out of several that raised the misdemeanor of falsification into a felony (by doing so to conceal a crime). The judge’s instructions to the jury was that they needed to be unanimous that a crime was being concealed, but they didn’t have to agree on which one(s). Unless some members of the jury go to the media (for their sake, I sure hope they don’t) and that gets brought up, we’ll probably never know which way that wind was blowing.

          • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            7 months ago

            Thanks.

            In the future I’m sure politicians on all sides will be paying people to keep certain facts quiet. I was just trying to confirm what is legal and what is illegal.