They better be able to prove that the pay back to Cohen was out of the campaign account rather than a Trump personal account. Otherwise, they got nothin.’ You won’t learn this on Fox or MSNBC, so here you go:
“The issue of the Cohen payment being an “in kind” campaign contribution is the bottom line question which underpins the charge.
There is no FEC rule or law that says a candidate cannot pay-off an accuser to avoid further issues, a nuisance claim. Paying an accuser to avoid controversy or embarrassment, is no different than a candidate buying an American made car -with personal funds- to gain the beneficial public optics of not driving a foreign car. Neither expense example makes the payment an aspect of am “in kind” campaign contribution.
There is no connected claim that President Trump used campaign funds to repay his attorney for eliminating the nuisance claim. President Trump, a businessman, used his own business income to repay his attorney; an attorney on a monthly retainer.
The entire charge of Cohen making a campaign contribution, or campaign finance violation, is a manufactured claim, made only by the SDNY, for political benefit.
Former FEC Chairman Bradley Smith explains the details of the non-issue to radio host Mark Levin. Watch/Listen:”
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/08/21/michael-cohen-plea-agreement-six-counts-valid-one-count-possibly-invalid-one-count-ridiculous-guess-where-the-media-focus/#more-153144