Attn foreign spies: The 2020 US election is open for business

[davew]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Tell us what law does it violate? is it common law or a statute? If you are going to say it is illegal you need to point at the law, which classifies the action as being illegal.

All the opinions in the cited articles some how never support their assertion with an actual law.

progressive laws are open to interpretation by the judges they select


An actual law on the books would need bills to be passed. Who has time to pass bills when there is so much investigating to do?

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Tell us what law does it violate? is it common law or a statute? If you are going to say it is illegal you need to point at the law, which classifies the action as being illegal.

All the opinions in the cited articles some how never support their assertion with an actual law.

You want facts...from DAN?!
Just take the selfie he just posted and let it go at that.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Tell us what law does it violate? is it common law or a statute? If you are going to say it is illegal you need to point at the law, which classifies the action as being illegal.

All the opinions in the cited articles some how never support their assertion with an actual law.

I already did and cited case law......

http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?r...edition:prelim)

52 USC 30121: Contributions and donations by foreign nationals Text contains those laws in effect on June 15, 2019
From Title 52-VOTING AND ELECTIONSSubtitle III-Federal Campaign FinanceCHAPTER 301-FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGNSSUBCHAPTER I-DISCLOSURE OF FEDERAL CAMPAIGN FUNDS
Jump To: Source CreditCodificationPrior ProvisionsAmendmentsEffective Date

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by hcap

I already did and cited case law......

http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?r...edition:prelim)

52 USC 30121: Contributions and donations by foreign nationals Text contains those laws in effect on June 15, 2019
From Title 52-VOTING AND ELECTIONSSubtitle III-Federal Campaign FinanceCHAPTER 301-FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGNSSUBCHAPTER I-DISCLOSURE OF FEDERAL CAMPAIGN FUNDS
Jump To: Source CreditCodificationPrior ProvisionsAmendmentsEffective Date

See post #9. You cited a statute. You did not cite case law of any kind to support your opinion.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

See post #9. You cited a statute. You did not cite case law of any kind to support your opinion.

You skipped over my #25.....

Come on. You're whistling past the graveyard. Once again countless legal experts more qualified than you disagree with your legalese.

Try to drop your losing company line.

https://www.fec.gov/updates/foreign-nationals/

Relevant citations

22 U.S.C. § 611(b)
Foreign principal definition

52 U.S.C. § 30121
Contributions and donations by foreign nationals

11 CFR 100.74
Uncompensated services by volunteers

11 CFR 103.3(b)
Deposit of receipts and disbursements

11 CFR 110.20
Prohibition on contributions, donations, expenditures, independent expenditures, and disbursements by foreign nationals (52 U.S.C. § 30121, 36 U.S.C. § 510)

Wouldn't the controlling LAW be considered a "Black letter law"?

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by hcap

You skipped over my #25.....


Wouldn't the controlling LAW be considered a "Black letter law"?

My apologies, somehow I missed it.

According to the rulings about foreign nationals and their activities.

Volunteer activity

Generally, an individual (including a foreign national) may volunteer personal services to a federal candidate or federal political committee without making a contribution. The Act provides this volunteer "exemption" as long as the individual performing the service is not compensated by anyone. The Commission has addressed applicability of this exemption to several situations involving volunteer activity by a foreign national, as explained below.

In AO 2014-20 (Make Your Laws PAC), the Commission concluded that a political action committee could accept assistance from a foreign national in developing intellectual property for the PAC, such as trademarks, graphics, and website design because the services accepted by the PAC would fall under the volunteer exemption. Similarly, in AO 2004-26 (Weller), the Commission held that a foreign national could attend, speak at campaign events for a federal candidate, and solicit contributions to the campaign. However, the Commission cautioned that the foreign national could not manage or participate in any of the campaign committee’s decision-making processes. See also AOs 2007-22 (Hurysz) and 1987-25 (Otaola).

In MUR 5987, the Commission examined a situation in which a foreign national provided an uncompensated musical concert performance as a volunteer for a federal candidate’s campaign as part of a fundraising event. The candidate’s campaign had paid all of the costs of hosting the concert, including the rental of the venue and equipment and providing security. The performer had merely provided his uncompensated volunteer services to the campaign and had not participated in any of the campaign’s decision-making. Based on these facts, the Commission found no reason to believe that the foreign national or the federal candidate’s committee had violated the Act’s foreign national prohibition. [emphasis added]

The foreign national may provide services as long as they are uncompensated.


A foreign citizen who provides services/information to a candidate is not violating the law, as long as the foreign citizen is not compensated. Even though services, may have a value, the providing of the service, e.g. a musical performance, solicit funds, etc these services do not qualify as a donation of money or some other thing of value per the statute.

Thus the law, per the opinion, uncompensated donation of services/information by a foreign national are not a violation of the Act.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by Tom

You want facts...from DAN?!
Just take the selfie he just posted and let it go at that.

The selfie he posted. Tom, your biting humor is stellar.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

My apologies, somehow I missed it.

According to the rulings about foreign nationals and their activities.

Volunteer activity

Generally, an individual (including a foreign national) may volunteer personal services to a federal candidate or federal political committee without making a contribution. The Act provides this volunteer "exemption" as long as the individual performing the service is not compensated by anyone. The Commission has addressed applicability of this exemption to several situations involving volunteer activity by a foreign national, as explained below.

In AO 2014-20 (Make Your Laws PAC), the Commission concluded that a political action committee could accept assistance from a foreign national in developing intellectual property for the PAC, such as trademarks, graphics, and website design because the services accepted by the PAC would fall under the volunteer exemption. Similarly, in AO 2004-26 (Weller), the Commission held that a foreign national could attend, speak at campaign events for a federal candidate, and solicit contributions to the campaign. However, the Commission cautioned that the foreign national could not manage or participate in any of the campaign committee’s decision-making processes. See also AOs 2007-22 (Hurysz) and 1987-25 (Otaola).

In MUR 5987, the Commission examined a situation in which a foreign national provided an uncompensated musical concert performance as a volunteer for a federal candidate’s campaign as part of a fundraising event. The candidate’s campaign had paid all of the costs of hosting the concert, including the rental of the venue and equipment and providing security. The performer had merely provided his uncompensated volunteer services to the campaign and had not participated in any of the campaign’s decision-making. Based on these facts, the Commission found no reason to believe that the foreign national or the federal candidate’s committee had violated the Act’s foreign national prohibition. [emphasis added]

The foreign national may provide services as long as they are uncompensated.


A foreign citizen who provides services/information to a candidate is not violating the law, as long as the foreign citizen is not compensated. Even though services, may have a value, the providing of the service, e.g. a musical performance, solicit funds, etc these services do not qualify as a donation of money or some other thing of value per the statute.

Thus the law, per the opinion, uncompensated donation of services/information by a foreign national are not a violation of the Act.

Pretty vague not knowing Quid pro quo.

Do you believe all the Russian agents implicated in the Mueller report weould not have a defininitive motive in providing their quo? Like maybe helping one canditate over another for political payback. Which in fact was what Mueller said in Putin wanting Trump?

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by hcap

Pretty vague not knowing Quid pro quo.

Do you believe all the Russian agents implicated in the Mueller report weould not have a defininitive motive in providing their quo? Like maybe helping one canditate over another for political payback. Which in fact was what Mueller said in Putin wanting Trump?

Not vague at all. Services which have a value, that are donated by a foreign citizens who are not compensated, for the value, do not meet the criteria of monetary or other thing of value per the statute.

The ruling is very straight froward, clear and a well established legal rule.

The issue is the question and response of the President about listening to a foreign citizen's information relating to a political opponent.

Do you think China giving V.P.Biden's son Hunter's equity firm a billion and half dollars that China had no quid per quo expectations? How about the Ukrainian energy company who gave V.P. Biden's son, Hunter, a monthly retainer to be its compliance officer. Do you think there was no expectation of quid pro quo?

But i regress.

Bottom line President Trump or any other politician listening to information from an uncompensated foreign citizen does not qualify as a donation as contemplated per the statute.

[hcap]

I asked...

"Wouldn't the controlling LAW be considered a "Black letter law"?

Meaning so straightforward, no need for interpretation?

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by hcap

I asked...

"Wouldn't the controlling LAW be considered a "Black letter law"?

Meaning so straightforward, no need for interpretation?

Black letter law means there is no reasonable dispute over its interpretation.

An example of black letter law is that, some criteria, for a contract to be valid there has to be an offer and an acceptance and consideration. Can there be a reasonable dispute over what constitutes an offer, an acceptance and consideration, of course, and it is settled through case law/ statute and the case law, etc regarding the interpretation of the statute.

To summarize, there is no reasonable dispute that an offer, an acceptance and consideration is needed to make a contract valid, but what constitutes these elements can be reasonably disputed.

Of course there are other requirements for a contract to be valid.

[woodtoo]

Never underestimate VSG PTrump in his little Georgie Stephanopoulos interview to be shown tonight on ABC.

PTrump has already said he would "listen" to foreign governments and then maybe alert FBI, well nearly all the leftys have come out swinging saying that is an outright crime and he MUST alert FBI immediately as it would be treasonous, well he now has their statements all on tape to be played back to them later when it is shown that THEY knew of the "insurance policy" all along and they themselves did not alert the FBI of Russian information coming their way.
The perfect sting operation, a set up by a VSGenius.

Trust me this will come back to bite them. Fools they are, the whole lot.

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally Posted by woodtoo

Never underestimate VSG PTrump in his little Georgie Stephanopoulos interview to be shown tonight on ABC.

PTrump has already said he would "listen" to foreign governments and then maybe alert FBI, well nearly all the leftys have come out swinging saying that is an outright crime and he MUST alert FBI immediately as it would be treasonous, well he now has their statements all on tape to be played back to them later when it is shown that THEY knew of the "insurance policy" all along and they themselves did not alert the FBI of Russian information coming their way.
The perfect sting operation, a set up by a VSGenius.

Trust me this will come back to bite them. Fools they are, the whole lot.

Let's parse this against hcap's favorite statute.

Does Steele qualify as a foreign national, per the statute? Yes

Did Steele do work on behalf of a candidate? Yes

Was the work voluntary service or compensated? Compensated by HRC campaign and the DNC for his efforts. The campaign and DNC provided substantial assistance of making an expenditure. Steele expended money to gather information from other foreign citizens and his expenditures were reimbursed.

Was the compensated service performed related to election activity election? Yes

Very interesting indeed.

[woodtoo]

Originally Posted by Show Me the Wire

Let's parse this against hcap's favorite statute.

Does Steele qualify as a foreign national, per the statute? Yes

Did Steele do work on behalf of a candidate? Yes

Was the work voluntary service or compensated? Compensated by HRC campaign and the DNC for his efforts. The campaign and DNC provided substantial assistance of making an expenditure. Steele expended money to gather information from other foreign citizens and his expenditures were reimbursed.

Was the compensated service performed related to election activity election? Yes

Very interesting indeed.

Exactly. They did what they accuse PTrump of.

[davew]

Originally Posted by woodtoo

Exactly. They did what they accuse PTrump of.

Some of the candidates are saying Trump should be jailed, I guess that would also apply to Obama.