Quite.
Well I have always doubted that The Trump was paying her 130,000 dollars to vote for him,
and she clearly wasn't an electoral officer in any position to fix any particular voting count.
If an election official is paid to look the other way, that can be fraud, but if an individual
who is under no duty to do anything, is paid not do anything that doesn't seem fraud.
And if she was blackmailing him, then paying off makes The Trump the victim.
My experience of accounting systems often require budgets (with funds in) to be paid from,
account types to exist and payment function codes to be used; and in a hurry if there is no
budget code available (e.g. for perverted sex services), people will use what will work.
That is certainly corrupt use of accounting, but inflexible accounting drives corruption.
There are questionable products and services available that offer to bill your credit card (if you are stupid
enough to give it to them) with perfectly innocuous descriptions that disguise the nature of the product or
service. Does the US justice system habitually prosecute all those involved with false accounting ?
I understand the convoluted logic put forward here by others, but accepting that seem dangerous as
ultimately any payment by any person standing for election to another can be claimed as election fraud.