What Campaign Finance Lawyers Are Saying About Giuliani's Stormy Comments
"They funneled through a law firm, and the president repaid it," Giuliani told Hannity last night, setting off a storm of debate over the $130,000 payment. We've rounded up some observations from campaign finance lawyers.
May 03, 2018 at 12:03 PM
7 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
Rudy Giuliani speaks at a Federalist Society convention in Washington in 2007. Credit: Diego M. Radzinschi/ NLJ
Rudy Giuliani was defiant Wednesday night on Sean Hannity's Fox News program, telling the host something he did not know: President Donald Trump repaid his lawyer Michael Cohen for his $130,000 payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels.
“They funneled through a law firm, and the president repaid it,” Giuliani said. Up until that point, Trump had denied knowing about the payment, which silenced Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, from talking about her alleged affair with Trump. Clifford, represented by Michael Avenatti, is suing Trump over that nondisclosure agreement.
Giuliani's acknowledgement set off a firestorm of controversy, raising questions about whether Trump lied to the public about denying knowing about the payment and whether the payment itself violated campaign finance laws. Giuliani, who's on leave from Greenberg Traurig to work for Trump, said Trump repaid Cohen, a Trump Organization lawyer, over several months. Giuliani and Trump both denied the money was campaign-related.
Mr. Cohen, an attorney, received a monthly retainer, not from the campaign and having nothing to do with the campaign, from which he entered into, through reimbursement, a private contract between two parties, known as a non-disclosure agreement, or NDA. These agreements are…..
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 3, 2018
➤➤ And then there's George Conway, the Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz lawyer and husband of White House aide Kellyanne Conway. George Conway, of counsel in the firm's litigation department, on Thursday tweeted a link to Federal Election Commission guidance he clearly viewed as applicable to the $130,000 payment and Trump's reimbursement. According to the guidance, any gift or loan meant to influence an election is “considered a contribution from the donor to the campaign, subject to the per-election limit and reportable by the campaign.” Conway occasionally has used his Twitter account to rebut some statements or positions of Trump administration officials.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
2 minute read
Financial Watchdog Alleges Walmart Forced Army of Gig-Worker Drivers to Receive Pay Through High-Fee Accounts
Trending Stories
- 1The Evolution of a Virtual Court System
- 2New Acquitted Conduct Guideline: An Analysis
- 3Considering the Implications of the 2024 Presidential Election for Jurors in White Collar Cases
- 42024 in Review: Judges Met Out Punishments for Ex-Apple, FDIC, Moody's Legal Leaders
- 5What We Heard From Litigation Leaders in 2024
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
