Trump pledges $430,000 to help cover aides’ legal costs related to Russia probes

[Virginiá]

Trump pledges at least $430,000 of his own money to help cover aides’ legal costs related to Russia probes

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/10/21/trump-pledges-to-spend-at-least-430000-of-his-own-money-to-cover-aides-legal-costs-related-to-russia-probes/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Some commentary:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[GeorgiaModerate]

I have mixed feelings about this.  On one hand, the point you quoted from Walter Shaub is valid.  OTOH, many of these people may be completely innocent but wind up with crippling legal bills.  From that perspective, it's good that they're getting some financial help.

[TheSaint250]

I have mixed feelings about this.  On one hand, the point you quoted from Walter Shaub is valid.  OTOH, many of these people may be completely innocent but wind up with crippling legal bills.  From that perspective, it's good that they're getting some financial help.

[Virginiá]

I have mixed feelings about this.  On one hand, the point you quoted from Walter Shaub is valid.  OTOH, many of these people may be completely innocent but wind up with crippling legal bills.  From that perspective, it's good that they're getting some financial help.

I do have sympathy for them myself, but in this case, it seems to present a substantial legal issue. Depending on how you view the whole Russia-Trump scandal, this could be construed as "keep your mouth shut and we'll help you through this" or "thank goodness these innocent people won't drown under the weight of never-ending legal bills."

I think it would be better if a neutral party organized financial assistance for these people, as opposed to who is arguably one of the primary targets of Mueller's investigation. If Trump is in any way connected to the legal aid, then it is nearly impossible to prevent the implicit expectation of loyalty.

[Zioneer]

I have mixed feelings about this.  On one hand, the point you quoted from Walter Shaub is valid.  OTOH, many of these people may be completely innocent but wind up with crippling legal bills.  From that perspective, it's good that they're getting some financial help.

Aren't most of them... pretty rich?

[Santander]

Loyalty - this is why I love Trump.

[IceSpear]

But the Trump supporters and suspiciously pro-Russia leftists told me this was fake news!

[Badger]

Loyalty - this is why I love Trump.

Loyalty to the fuhrer, but disloyalty the country. This is why I loathe Trump.

[Badger]

I have mixed feelings about this.  On one hand, the point you quoted from Walter Shaub is valid.  OTOH, many of these people may be completely innocent but wind up with crippling legal bills.  From that perspective, it's good that they're getting some financial help.

I do have sympathy for them myself, but in this case, it seems to present a substantial legal issue. Depending on how you view the whole Russia-Trump scandal, this could be construed as "keep your mouth shut and we'll help you through this" or "thank goodness these innocent people won't drown under the weight of never-ending legal bills."

I think it would be better if a neutral party organized financial assistance for these people, as opposed to who is arguably one of the primary targets of Mueller's investigation. If Trump is in any way connected to the legal aid, then it is nearly impossible to prevent the implicit expectation of loyalty.

Judging just from The Superficial facts of, you know, every manner of what Trump has ever done or said in his entire career, it is clearly the keep your mouth shut and will help you scenario. Again, these people are pretty rich.

[Indy Texas]

I have mixed feelings about this.  On one hand, the point you quoted from Walter Shaub is valid.  OTOH, many of these people may be completely innocent but wind up with crippling legal bills.  From that perspective, it's good that they're getting some financial help.

Aren't most of them... pretty rich?

We're not talking about his Cabinet.

We're talking about staffers and aides and Deputy Assistant Secretary of XYZ who's in their 30s, has never made more than $150K in their life, has a mortgage and student loans and could be financially ruined trying to afford a $1,000-an-hour DC defense attorney.

[Maxwell]

isn't he using RNC money to cover his own legal fees? is that what he means?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Of course helping others in the midst of a witch-hunt is appropriate.  This concern trolling isn't.

[Virginiá]

Of course helping others in the midst of a witch-hunt is appropriate.  This concern trolling isn't.

I don't know if I'd call it trolling. There are some of his aides who I could care less about, but the lesser-known ones who might just have politics I disagree with, I wouldn't wish for them to be buried with crippling debt, particularly if they did nothing wrong.

My question to you is, do you actually think it's appropriate for Trump or people Trump bosses around to pay off part or even all of these legal bills? You don't see a conflict of interest there? Come on Grumps. You can't honestly be that oblivious to this issue:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Of course helping others in the midst of a witch-hunt is appropriate.  This concern trolling isn't.

I don't know if I'd call it trolling. There are some of his aides who I could care less about, but the lesser-known ones who might just have politics I disagree with, I wouldn't wish for them to be buried with crippling debt, particularly if they did nothing wrong.

My question to you is, do you actually think it's appropriate for Trump or people Trump bosses around to pay off part or even all of these legal bills? You don't see a conflict of interest there? Come on Grumps. You can't honestly be that oblivious to this issue:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Those bills should not be paid until the person in question is no longer under investigation and exonerated. Then it's fine as some are caught in the web not of their own doing. Does that sound unreasonable? (Honest question to you )

[Virginiá]

Those bills should not be paid until the person in question is no longer under investigation and exonerated. Then it's fine as some are caught in the web not of their own doing. Does that sound unreasonable? (Honest question to you )

Well, any promise of financial relief from Trump or people in Trump's orbit, like his family, lawyers, etc, would still create the same conflict of interest. If people know he will swoop in and cover their debts afterwards, they would be more willing to tow the line for him. It makes no difference if he pays now or pays after, so long as they feel it is assured.

The only situation where I don't see a problem with Trump or those under his thumb paying the legal bills of these lowly aides/former campaign people is if Trump/others did it after all the investigations have concluded, and most importantly, by surprise. They can't know it's going to happen, otherwise they are much more likely to do whatever they think Trump wants.

And even though I'm talking about Trump here, this seems like a pretty generic problem. You could apply this to anyone in a similar situation.