Quote Originally Posted by Rogar View Post
I suppose if us common citizens would just take a plea deal for a reduced charge.

I'm not a legal authority, but I'm just guessing the intended use of the illegal coverups to influence an election were part of what elevated the charges and what specifically the jury convicted him of.
What illegal coverups would that be? The charge against him was claiming monies paid to his lawyer as a legal expense. Of course those monies were then used to purchase a non-disclosure agreement with a porn star, but there's nothing illegal about that.

If the claim is that it is illegal to do legal things to influence an election, I'm curious to see what type of Pandora's box we've opened. Our current President constantly lies about things such as the rate of inflation when he took office any how many jobs he's created, all in an effort to influence an upcoming election. Do you think we should charge him for that?