In a letter of complaint to the Federal Election Commission (FEC), the Connecticut Working Families Party's executive director, Lindsay Farrell, cited an Oct. 9 Courant article — which reported that Greenberg's campaign committee hadn't listed many rent
payments on campaign finance reports from late 2013 into the first part of 2014.
Not exact matches
«Any
payment by a person such as Cohen
on behalf of or in consultation with a candidate to influence an election is an in - kind «contribution'to the candidate under
campaign finance law subject to a $ 2,700 limit and disclosure requirements,» he said.
On Wednesday, Giuliani said Trump was aware of the
payment arrangement and that it did not constitute a
campaign finance violation.
He suggested that there would be a violation of
campaign finance laws if Trump and Cohen structured the
payment «in a way to avoid detection or in an effort to make it appear to be something that it was not, namely, a retainer
payment as opposed to $ 130,000 reimbursement, that may involve money laundering depending
on how it was handled.»
On Wednesday night, Giuliani argued that the
payment to Daniels could not have violated
campaign finance laws because no
campaign money was involved.
If the allegations are true, the
payment should have been disclosed
on Trump's federal
campaign -
finance reports, Ryan said.
Any
payment by a person such as Cohen
on behalf of or in consultation with a candidate to influence an election is an in - kind «contribution» to the candidate under
campaign finance law subject to a $ 2,700 limit and disclosure requirements.
Later, Giuliani clarified that his purpose was to put to rest persistent allegations that Cohen's
payment could be construed as a
campaign finance violation, and Trump knew that Giuliani would be torpedoing the president's farcical narrative about this entire episode
on national television.
The
campaign finance watchdog group Common Cause has argued that the hush money
payment was made in service of Trump's presidential
campaign because it bought silence
on a controversy that could have hurt his prospects.
10:00 AM — Public meeting of the New York City
Campaign Finance Board (CFB) to vote
on the 2nd round of public funds
payments, The Joseph A. O'Hare, S.J. Board Room, -LSB-...]
He electronically submitted the amended reports after The Courant raised questions with him about an apparent lack of rent
payments or obligations listed
on campaign finance reports from late 2013 into the first part of 2014.
10:00 AM — Public meeting of the New York City
Campaign Finance Board (CFB) to vote
on the 2nd round of public funds
payments, The Joseph A. O'Hare, S.J. Board Room, at 100 Church Street,
on the 12th Floor, Manhattan.
An amendment to state
campaign finance law months before the 2014
campaign season began allowed state political parties to make unlimited
payments on behalf of most candidates for organizational expenses.
To conceal the
payments, the state also said Maziarz and others falsely reported the expenditures
on five separate
campaign finance filings with the Board of Elections.