- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: So Don Jr. Exchanged Messages with Wikileaks; Someone Explain to Me The Issue
Posted on 11/14/17 at 9:48 am to cave canem
Posted on 11/14/17 at 9:48 am to cave canem
Ken Starr was investigating Whitewater and obstruction of justice/perjury in the Paula Jones lawsuit. Very clear allegations of violations of the law. Mueller is investigating "collusion" which isn't in of itself against the law. Mueller may eventually find an impeachable offense somewhere but the two investigations actually aren't at all alike when it comes to the actual allegations of wrongdoing that lead to each investigstion
0
Posted on 11/14/17 at 9:53 am to Chisholm
WikiLeaks loses a lot of credibility here.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 10:24 am to Chisholm
A not yet live Dem attack site was compromised. Getting onto it needed a password. Anyone who used the password without having permission to go on the site committed a crime. Having a password doesn't entitle you to log into other people's shite.
ETA: some of the messages are referencing the site, Jnr may have done what I outlined above.
ETA: some of the messages are referencing the site, Jnr may have done what I outlined above.
This post was edited on 11/14/17 at 10:25 am
Posted on 11/14/17 at 10:48 am to Govt Tide
quote:
This very basic cornerstone of law is completely lost on NT and all the other stop at nothing to overthrow this President anti-Trumpers out there. A year in and none of them can name a specific crime being alleged. Meanwhile there is actual proof of specific crimes involving Russian collusion and other crimes that Clinton and the DNC are alleged to have committed and we're suppose to just let that go simply because she lost the election. The hypocrisy and double standard is mind boggling.
I get that you and GT23 and a lot of others wish there was nothing to see and want this to go away. I’m sorry. That’s not an argument.
And FWIW, this probe has produced three criminal indictments totaling a few dozen charges. Specific crimes have been more than alleged.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 10:51 am to Chisholm
Chisholm
sup comrade.
sup comrade.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 10:55 am to Navytiger74
quote:
And FWIW, this probe has produced three criminal indictments totaling a few dozen charges. Specific crimes have been more than alleged.
From what period of time? At least in the case of Manafort and Gates?
Posted on 11/14/17 at 11:07 am to Navytiger74
quote:No no no. You don’t get to say that these allegations matter even they were discovered in an investigation that should have never taken place and then in the same thread say that the info provided by Wikileaks don’t matter because Wikileaks should have never been able to access that information in the first place. You’re very inconsistent.
I get that you and GT23 and a lot of others wish there was nothing to see and want this to go away. I’m sorry. That’s not an argument.
And FWIW, this probe has produced three criminal indictments totaling a few dozen charges. Specific crimes have been more than alleged.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 11:08 am to Navytiger74
I have no problem with the SC investigating until they're blue in the face. I'm talking about specific allegations against the President HIMSELF. A year in and 3 people who worked for the campaign are arrested for things almost completely related to the 2016 election. It just seems like a never ending fishing expedition to find some kind of gotcha "crime" committed by Trump to overturn the last election. Meanwhile the Clinton campaign is allowed to cheat their asses off with at least as damning proof of Russian collusion and it's totally ok because she lost the election. You have a special prosecutor who was the FBI director when the Uranium One somehow got approved despite the criminal activity found in the deal apparently refusing to look into that potentially highly illegal deal while going after the person who best her in the election. If that's not a conflict of interest I don't know what is.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 11:12 am to Govt Tide
The issue is that WikiLeaks has been basically verified to be a Russian-supported outlet. The fact that they communicated with DJT Jr. lends credibility to the left's Russian collusion argument.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 11:14 am to icheerforgeorgia
quote:Maybe you and I have a different definition of verify. I haven’t seen any proof. Sorry if I don’t take seriously our intelligence community who gets hacked on a daily basis and allows millions of Americans personal information into the hands of our enemies because of their incompetence.
The issue is that WikiLeaks has been basically verified to be a Russian-supported outlet.
quote:What were the results of those conversations?
The fact that they communicated with DJT Jr. lends credibility to the left's Russian collusion argument.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 11:15 am to Chisholm
Collusion is not a crime
Conspiracy is a crime
US outlets helping to influence an election is not a crime
Using foreign outlets/sources to influence the election is a crime
Wikileaks is considered a foreign outlet
Conspiracy is a crime
US outlets helping to influence an election is not a crime
Using foreign outlets/sources to influence the election is a crime
Wikileaks is considered a foreign outlet
This post was edited on 11/14/17 at 11:17 am
Posted on 11/14/17 at 11:16 am to icheerforgeorgia
quote:
The issue is that WikiLeaks has been basically verified to be a Russian-supported outlet. The fact that they communicated with DJT Jr. lends credibility to the left's Russian collusion argument.
I guess that's why Assange has been homesteading in that Ecuadorian embassy in London for five years, seeing how Assange and Russia are buds?
Posted on 11/14/17 at 11:18 am to MizzouBS
quote:I don’t think you really want to go there. Almost every foreign media outlet openly supported Hillary. I’ll guarantee you beyond any shadow of a doubt that there were emails and phone calls and meetings with numerous foreign media outlets and the Hillary campaign.
Using foreign outlets/sources to influence the election is a crime
Posted on 11/14/17 at 11:20 am to ABearsFanNMS
Yes she did say that about killing him.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 11:21 am to Chisholm
4 pages of this shite after he released everything and it was nothing?
Leftists are sick.
Leftists are sick.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 11:28 am to SSpaniel
quote:
From what period of time? At least in the case of Manafort and Gates?
Four counts cover his time with or after the Trump campaign. The rest are before, which though legally exculpatory on its face, raises a lot of interesting questions.
Count 1: Conspiracy Against US—In or about and between 2006 and 2017. That’s the lying/impeding investigation charge.
Count 2: Conspiracy to Launder Money—In or about and between 2006 and 2016.
Count 11: False and Misleading FARA Statements — 2016-2017 (all after he left the campaign.)
Count 12: False statement: 2016-2017 (after he left the campaign)
Posted on 11/14/17 at 11:29 am to Navytiger74
Wait...so you are turning legally exculpatory evidence into a negative? Color me shocked.
This post was edited on 11/14/17 at 11:31 am
Posted on 11/14/17 at 11:35 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
No no no. You don’t get to say that these allegations matter even they were discovered in an investigation that should have never taken place and then in the same thread say that the info provided by Wikileaks don’t matter because Wikileaks should have never been able to access that information in the first place. You’re very inconsistent.
Crimes discovered during the course of a legal criminal investigation are and should be prosecutable. If I serve a warrant on you for suspected possession with intent to distribute and happen to find a body in your basement, I can't really walk away from that.
Not quite the same as a criminal breaking into your house and finding out that you like furry porn and wine coolers and then strategically leaking it to your friends and the public to aid equally douchey people who just don't like you.
This post was edited on 11/14/17 at 11:43 am
Posted on 11/14/17 at 11:36 am to BBONDS25
quote:How many known or suspected major white collar criminals have you hired lately, BBOND.
Wait...so you are turning legally exculpatory evidence into a negative? Color me shocked.
Oh, you're Louisiana through and through. Don't answer that.
Posted on 11/14/17 at 11:39 am to Navytiger74
quote:
Coordinating the employment or appropriation of stolen information is a crime (just as it would be for doing the same with stolen goods). Receiving something of value in furtherance of one's candidacy from a foreign government is a crime. Offering concessions to a foreign government as a quid pro quo for something of value in support of one's candidacy is a crime. Conspiracy to do any of this, even if unsuccessful, could constitute a crime.
Holy Frick ppl in DC
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News