[rnjesus]

yeah, paying money to someone to keep them quiet isn’t necessarily illegal (i think.. a lawyer’s knowledge would be appreciated here), but trying to write it off as legal fees seems to be the issue. i imagine there are tax implications, as well as what pool of cash the money was paid from (i.e. if it was from campaign money). it’s impossible to say for certain what the exact issue is until the charges are revealed

[hedora]

The legal fee thing is a case of misdemeanor falsification of business records on its own.

The fact that it was done to cover up a second crime (breaking federal campaign finance law) arguably converts it to a felony according to New York state law.

[zaroth]

But NY can’t charge for that felony. It’s an absurd combination and nothing like it has ever been brought.

It reeks of a targeted campaign, well because it is. It’s why the DA was elected and exactly what he said he would do. So that’s really not a good look, no matter who it’s against.

[hindsightbias]

It’s just so classless. Back in the day you just turned to a rich supporter and they wrote the check directly (Kennedy, Nixon, Reagan, Clinton, Bush). No need to need to circumvent paperwork with Federal declarations on them.

Capone gotta Capone…

[t-3]

Actually... https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/mar/31/hillary-clin...

[RoyGBivCap]

IANAL but I know that a lot of companies when they lay people off give them various "parachutes" in the form of money and included are anti-disparagement clauses, that if broken you have to return the money.

And a lot of settlement cases could be argued to do the same thing. Using campaign money to do it might be illegal. Again, not a lawyer.

And then there's the whole "a DA can indict a ham sandwich" notion.

I don't pretend to know how this is going to shake out, but I've got my popcorn.