Democrats May Pay a Few Dollars for Homeless Votes But Trump Paid Thousands to Porn Star

It wasn’t very long ago that Republicans were accusing Democrats of either paying a few dollars to the homeless for votes or giving them a pack of cigarettes. But with Donald Trump, it’s obvious he paid $130,000 to an adult-film star in exchange for her silence last October and just before the general election. In doing so, did he and his lawyers not only try to illegally influence the ballots and vote but disenfranchise millions of voters who should’ve had to right to know about the true character of their candidate?

Corrupt Character Corrupts the Vote
Since it’s a human problem, corrupting the vote through concealing the truth is not a new problem. But among a people or candidates who are generally corrupt freedom and liberty cannot long exist. Consequently, paying-off Stormy Daniels during the election with a controversial non-disclosure statement to remain quiet about their encounters, and then threatening to take legal action to stop her interview with Anderson Cooper on “60 Minutes,” shows that Donald Trump is not only corrupt but seeks to conceal the truth.

Discriminating Against the “Right to Know”
It’s also evident that Donald Trump may have disenfranchised millions of voters. To be sure, discrimination can take many forms, including discriminating against the right to know. Without the right to know, in this case about his extramarital affair with Stormy Daniels, voters were unable to make a sound decision. In the end, if the people cannot trust their candidate with integrity and transparency or the public’s trust, the temptation to abuse one’s status and position of power to enrich oneself is likely to get worse.

Campaign Contributions and Bribery
Another controversial issue with Donald Trump paying hush money to Stormy Daniels is the source of the money. Was the payment from his own account-or from a lawyer-or from campaign donations. If the money was from campaign contributions, it’s definitely a violation of the Federal Elections Campaign Act (FECA), specifically since FECA prohibits campaign funds for “personal use.” If it was from a lawyer, it may be argued that it was a donation. But it also appears as a bribe, and a bribe to bribe a voter.

When Money Determines Politics
There’s also the problem that in a true democratic republic, money should never determine politics or political morality. Neither should influencing elections or manipulating voters go the highest bidder, such as what Donald Trump did. This is especially true since the effects of corruption run far beyond the damage it inflicts on the internal health of a country-let alone it’s democratic institutions. High levels of corruption and lack of transparency are moreover a way to disadvantage voters and legislation.

A Lesson from Abraham Lincoln
History, too, questions Donald Trump’s $130,000 payment to censor Stormy Daniels. President Abraham Lincoln believed “no man is good enough to govern another man without that other’s consent.” Although his quote was in the context of slavery, could it be applied to how a billionaire propertied class influences legislators to write favorable laws? Or how votes and elections are purchased just like property? Consent can take many forms, and consent that is dishonest or engineered is hardly self-government.

If Fools and Knaves Have the Same Chance
There’s Noah Webster too who wrote, “What do men gain by elective governments, if fools and knaves have the same chance to obtain the highest office, as honest men?” He was concerned about unintelligent or cunning individuals being elected to public office. It’s obvious he could have added billionaires like Donald Trump. With enough money, a cunning and dishonest person can bully bribe, cover-up, extort, rig, and pay for election fraud. In such a corrupt voting environment, the “one person one vote” is broken.

Ballot Fraud and Rigging
There’s also a history of officials who’ve been fined or imprisoned for diverting campaign contributions for personal use or for buying votes. Others have been punished for ballot fraud and ballot rigging-determining the outcome of an election by altering the ballot or controlling the vote count. Did Donald Trump commit ballot fraud by paying Stormy Daniels hush money so as to determine the election by altering the ballots? Did he try to control the vote-and voters who would otherwise have not voted for him-too?

Trickle Down Voting Fraud
Political Bosses used to say “It’s not the vote that counts but who counts the vote.” Today, in some cases the vote still doesn’t count. But what’s changed is who has enough money to bribe a voter or pay for the vote. Neither is Donald Trump alone. To be sure, there’s been an increase in candidates and public officials whose corrupt dealings are by their very nature secretive and perverse-and it continues once in office. The insidious way in which ballot corruption seeps into the fabric of our electorate thus “trickles down.”

Best Defense to Corrupt Voting
Bess Myerson’s warning may consequently be the best defense to such a corrupt electoral system. The New York politician said: “The accomplice to the crime of corruption is frequently our own indifferences.”

Dallas Darling is the author of Politics 501: An A-Z Reading on Conscientious Political Thought and Action, Some Nations Above God: 52 Weekly Reflections On Modern-Day Imperialism, Militarism, And Consumerism in the Context of John’s Apocalyptic Vision, and The Other Side Of Christianity: Reflections on Faith, Politics, Spirituality, History, and Peace. He is a correspondent for www.WN.com. You can read more of Dallas’ writings at www.beverlydarling.com and www.WN.com//dallasdarling.