trump organization when it comes to brokering these kinds of deals. democrats on the house judiciary committee sent a letter to cohen in regards to stormy daniels saying that it raises questions of potential federal campaign law and income tax laws. can you explain how this may be an election law violation. the election laws are very broad and any sort of benefit or payment to that that benefits the campaign in this context could potentially be a violation. in other words, if a completely third party if michael cohen was acting just as a friend and not as a part of the trump organization, had he paid stormy daniels and had stormy daniels given her silence, given her withholding of information that could be perceived under the law as a benefit to the campaign. her silence. because the law clearly contemplates that a benefit to the campaign doesn t have to be dollars. it can be pamphlets.
i do feel like a lot of people use personal e-mail for business and business e-mail for personal things. so i m not sure that the e-mail usage in and of itself gets us close of her it does seem highly unlikely that the president didn t know. but to me, i don t know that the e-mail usage really, really gets us there, unless the trump organization has, you know, a far more detailed policy of reviewing its e-mails and bringing them to the attention of trump himself than most organizations do. there are democrats on the house judiciary committee who have sent a letter to cohen in regards to stormy daniels saying the payment raises questions relating to potential violations of federal campaign finance and income tax laws. can you explain how this could be an election law violation? sure. so any contribution to a campaign has to be reported. and there are limits on individual contributions. so whether and this would be an in-kind contribution, right? the benefit to the campaign is not
diverted to other projects, which benefited christie politically. the da is investigating if that deal legally bypassed law makers or violated securities or income tax laws. i want to go to representative wean berg. food for thought here. it does seem to be that samson, having worked for the governor, does benefit from some of these decisions made out of trenton. well, david samson was the former attorney general of the state of new jersey, so i m assuming that as a very well educated attorney and the former attorney general he knows what the laws are of the state of new jersey, and those laws include not voting on something as the commissioner on the port authority that you or your clients might benefit from. and apparently according to public reports, mr. samson said that inadvertently. he really meant not to vote for it. and they were trying to correct these based upon somebody s notes. so it sounds like they re
a $1 billion development deal to rebuild a transit hub. taking over the new york city airport which benefited the commission commissioner s private law firm. christie appointee david samson. the massive multibillion dollar rebuilding of the world trade center itself. he s a long standing client of samson s law firm. and then there s $1.8 billion in port authority funds that were diverted to other projects, which benefited christie political politically. the da is investigating if that deal legally bypassed law makers or violated securities or income tax laws. i want to go to representative wean berg. food for thought here. it does seem to be that samson, having worked for the governor, does benefit from some of these decisions made out of trenton. well, david samson was the former attorney general of the state of new jersey, so i m assuming that as a very well
of the party that s dominating the national conversation in a really divisive way. part of the reason why we are so thrilled to work with steve, he ll help us identify folks in the field who with a little bit of help and with some solidarity from folks like steve, give them cover to come out. i was struck by steve when he came out in 2009, not an easy time, way before our president, spoke out for marriage equality. that s when he popped on my screen. and when we were clear that we won the doma case in the supreme court, edie windsor was our client. we knew we d have to fight state by state. we said we have to work with republicans. not work around or talk at. that s when we reached out to steve and said can you help us. i actually think there s much more power of some of these arguments. make the business argument for a second. why would i as a small business owner sitting in virginia with a bed and breakfast decide to keep my business and my money in virginia if i could move to wash