You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Trump Jr Beats Fake News Media To The Punch With Email Release
this is the law I am talking about https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20
if they prosecute they have to prove intent, Trump Jr pretty much incriminated himself in those emails, because he knew he was meeting with a foreign national to get information on Hillary, so he broke the law I linked. Even though he did not get info does not matter, all that has to be proven in court is that he intended to break the law...
the law you linked talks about "contributions, donations, expenditures, independent expenditures, and disbursements", or simply put money. Information is not money. Please try better.
Meanwhile here's a nice meme that's spot on for you:
The law also says no one is allowed to "solicit, accept, or receive" any thing of value from a foreign national to help a candidate. Information has value, but again that is for the courts to decide if he is prosecuted.
You do remember the fake dossier on Trump that the DNC paid a foreign agent for?
ok... not sure what that has to do with Turm Jr emails... but yes if the DNC broke the law and there is evidence to prove it they should also be prosecuted, I am not defending the DNC nor Clinton, in my opinion both Trumps and Clintons are corrupt corporatists... all I am doing is pointing out the blatant evidence in Trump Jr's owns emails that he released himself that show he broke the above law I linked.
The same clowns behind the fake dossier are also behind the Russian spy setup. Their tangled webs are becoming unraveled.
haha, dont know what clowns you are talking about, but if someone like Trump can become president anything is possible in US politics ;)
meanwhile, Former senior counsel for the FEC confirms Don Jr DID NOT break election law. I am sure her credentials are better that yours
I think you are making a huge mental gap, but as you said it's up to the courts to decide. Still, I don't see anything wrong to have a discussion with somebody who has dirt on your political opponent, from an ethical aspect, especially if she is doesn't have any govermental ties., which she didn't.
And let's assume that ok, Trump Jr is the bad guy and what he did was treason (lol) according to the letter of the law. Ok. Why any of you aren't asking the next logical question. What kind of dirt did the russian lawyer have on Hilarry.
The funny thing is that you think this big news story (lol again) will mean the end of Trump. But instead it will backfire so hard on you. Just wait a few weeks
hehe, I did not think this was big news until Trump Jr released his emails... and I am just telling you what the law states "no one is allowed to solicit, accept, or receive any thing of value from a foreign national to help a candidate" and a court would be making the decision if Trump Jr is guilty... but look at the email exchange, it says the lawyer was a Russian gov lawyer with information about Hillary (if she was a Russian gov lawyer or not does not matter Trump Jr thought she was), and Trump Jr happily agreed to meet with her, so just based on that he intended to break the law.... I doubt that he knows that what he was doing is against the law but unfortunately pleading dumb in court does not work... regardless I have no idea if anything will become of this because people like Trump and Clinton are above the law ;)
Imagine it wasn't money, but a stolen car paid gifted by a foreign government.
The car has value and accepting this from a foreign government with the aim to influence the election is illegal. Accepting stolen goods is illegal.
It goes the same with information. Information is valuable, this particular information would be called "opposition research". Campaigns pay for this research, so when a foreign government does it for you and offers it to you, this is a contribution/donation/gift.
Additionally, Trump Jr. said they talked about adoptions and it was a waste of time. She was offering Jr. a deal and he's downplaying it.
Adoptions are a reference to the ban on Americans adopting Russian children. This ban was instituted in retaliation for sanctions imposed on Russia for violating human rights (Magnitsky Act - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnitsky_Act).
She's offering the "opposition research" in exchange for a political favor from Trump in opposing Russian sanctions.
http://www.businessinsider.com/magnitsky-act-russian-adoptions-donald-trump-jr-meeting-2017-7
You are stretching it a lot to prove your point. Before I quoted an election lawyer who has a different opinion than you. Since then, more have come to say the same. Sorry an election lawyer has much better credentials than you. The courts will speak and nothing will happen. Once again, all you have is a nothing burger.