Started By
Message

re: Where did all the liberals go??

Posted on 7/12/17 at 2:37 pm to
Posted by SSpaniel
Germantown
Member since Feb 2013
29658 posts
Posted on 7/12/17 at 2:37 pm to
quote:

Since when has it been confirmed Trump broke campaign finance laws?


They WANT it to be true, therefore it is?
Posted by BBONDS25
Member since Mar 2008
48636 posts
Posted on 7/12/17 at 2:37 pm to
I know. And when that falls apart they will claim "stolen goods". When that falls apart they will say something must still be up and point to the ongoing investigation. It's all so predictable....but with someone like Bama...it's fun to drag them through it.
Posted by LSUnation78
Northshore
Member since Aug 2012
12084 posts
Posted on 7/12/17 at 2:40 pm to
quote:

I can't comprehend the self-deception required to conclude that this story has "fallen apart." I don't care which shitty fantasy political team you follow...this isn't going away.


You're right. Its really hard for a story with no legs to go anywhere.
Posted by Errerrerrwere
Member since Aug 2015
38324 posts
Posted on 7/12/17 at 2:43 pm to
quote:

There are no liberals here, only progs


Nothing could be more true.

True liberals are turning in their graves right now.
Posted by geauxtigahs87
Louisiana
Member since Dec 2008
26267 posts
Posted on 7/12/17 at 2:47 pm to
quote:

It likely was - campaign finance laws are quite specific on in-kind contributions.

Not really

quote:

4. Some are suggesting that Trump Jr. may have violated a campaign finance law with this meeting. He didn't. Rachel Stockman at Law Newz wrote a piece titled "Could This Obscure 1990 FEC Opinion Prove That Trump Jr. Committed a Crime? It Just Might." The campaign finance law cited states that it's illegal to solicit "anything of value" from a foreign national; Stockman then cited a Federal Election Commission (FEC) opinion stating a candidate's friend paying for polling for the campaign counted as "an in-kind contribution" to the campaign.

"What if the purported information did have value, and was paid for by the Russians — say if they paid for hacked emails?" wrote Stockman. "Well, we will never know because the Russian attorney claims she was never in possession of any of it."

There are two problems with this: one, it's based on an opinion from a government agency, rather from a court; only the latter would have serious legal implications. Two, it doesn't seem likely that a court would agree with Stockman's logic, as Turley argues that it would mean that a "wide array of meetings by politicians and their aides with foreign nationals would suddenly become possible criminal violations":

Consider the implications of such an unprecedented extension of the criminal code. The sharing of information — even possible criminal conduct by a leading political figure — would be treated the same as accepting cash. It would constitute a major threat to free speech, the free press and the right of association. It would also expose a broad spectrum of political speech to possible criminal prosecution.

Executive branch officials could then investigate campaigns on any meetings where information or tips might have originated from a foreign source. Such an expansion would likely hit challengers the hardest, since sitting presidents not only control the Justice Department but the government has a myriad of back channels in communicating with foreign officials.


LINK

quote:

But you're responding to someone asking me to define collusion

And you did a fantastic job of defining it. Well done

You're gonna need more than just motive for collusion though. We still don't know what information was passed, if any.

From a legal perspective, this is no different than Hillary/Ukraine.
Posted by TheLSUTiger
Member since Dec 2011
594 posts
Posted on 7/12/17 at 3:12 pm to
I'm here waiting to see Jr, Sr and Jared taken away in handcuffs.
Posted by Jorts R Us
Member since Aug 2013
14856 posts
Posted on 7/12/17 at 3:13 pm to
can I start getting these threads in a spam folder
Posted by BamaAtl
South of North
Member since Dec 2009
21938 posts
Posted on 7/13/17 at 10:49 am to
quote:

What was the in-kind contribution?


Information. Why are you working so hard to prove Don Jr.'s collusion wasn't criminal? Let's wait for Mueller to work that out.
Posted by BamaAtl
South of North
Member since Dec 2009
21938 posts
Posted on 7/13/17 at 10:50 am to
quote:

So what was the secret agreement?


That the Russian govt would help Trump get elected.

quote:

And what was illegal about it?


That has yet to be determined, hence Mueller.

quote:

Who was being deceived by said secret agreement?


Americans.
Posted by LSU Patrick
Member since Jan 2009
73548 posts
Posted on 7/13/17 at 10:50 am to
Most are just rage downvoting these days.
Posted by TxTiger82
Member since Sep 2004
33950 posts
Posted on 7/13/17 at 10:51 am to
quote:

The frick????


They're working real hard on this one.
Posted by Centinel
Idaho
Member since Sep 2016
43386 posts
Posted on 7/13/17 at 10:51 am to
quote:

That the Russian govt would help Trump get elected.


You know this how?
Posted by TxTiger82
Member since Sep 2004
33950 posts
Posted on 7/13/17 at 10:51 am to
quote:

Most are just rage downvoting these days.



Sorry, Soros pays me to do it.
first pageprev pagePage 7 of 7Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram