Will Republicans Sweep Treason Under The Rug?

[Tom]

You used Obama and ethics in the same sentence!

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by maddog42

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...rump-jr-240445

From the link:

“Eisen is chairman and Painter is vice chairman of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. “The promised Russian ‘documents and information’ would have been an illegal campaign contribution from a foreign government — and a priceless one.”

Others, including a more prominent and more liberal legal authority, Alan Dershowitz, have said that accepting the documents would not be a crime unless Trump paid for them.

All of which is moot, because there were no documents and nothing happened. Hence the phrase "would have been an illegal campaign contribution". Again, libs are making the accusation of a thought crime.

[maddog42]

Originally Posted by Clocker

From the link:

Others, including a more prominent and more liberal legal authority, Alan Dershowitz, have said that accepting the documents would not be a crime unless Trump paid for them.

All of which is moot, because there were no documents and nothing happened. Hence the phrase "would have been an illegal campaign contribution". Again, libs are making the accusation of a thought crime.

National Review says Trump Jr. attempted to collude with Russia.


http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...llusion-russia

[fast4522]

Originally Posted by maddog42

National Review says Trump Jr. attempted to collude with Russia.

Be very real, any opponent will take a meeting that looks like it holds a dagger to the heart of the opposition. Nothing transpired when the meeting turned out to be "Fake data" much like Fake News. You people have absolutely nothing and with truly honest review you people will have nothing in years to come, at this point in time your running on vapors period.

[whodoyoulike]

Originally Posted by Tom

OMG, are you for real?
The ONLY facts of ANY crimes all along has been that the LEFT has stolen and reveled classified information.

Let me tell, aiding and abetting the enemy mean helping HILLARY, who is the enemy.

Serious questions I have.

Have you read any of the newspaper articles which included what DT jr. provided and has stated what he did?

Or, are you basing your remarks based on what the others have stated on here?

Why don't you address what is currently going on instead of making things up?

Unless this is the way you always form your opinions.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by maddog42

National Review says Trump Jr. attempted to collude with Russia.


http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...llusion-russia

From that article:

The word “collusion” doesn’t have precise legal meaning. It’s largely a political term that refers to claims and allegations that the Trump team worked in some way with Russians as part of the alleged Russian effort to elect Trump. In other words, to claim that Trump officials colluded with Russians is not the same thing as claiming that they violated the law. As with many political operations, including dealings with foreign governments, their actions can be unsavory without being illegal.

Indeed, that seems to be the case here. Yes, the left side of the Internet is lighting up with claims that receiving information is the same thing as receiving an unlawful foreign campaign contribution, but the argument (based on current facts) is frivolous. The law is designed to capture contributions of definable value, like money or other assets. What is the definable value of “information”? Defining speech as a reportable or even illegal “thing of value” would raise serious constitutional concerns.

In short, "collusion" in and of itself is not a crime, let alone treason as the left has been screaming.

This particular type of collusion may be naive, petty, sleazy, disgusting, or embarrassing, but it is not criminal. And it shows once again that the Trump family members are in over their heads in big time politics.

[whodoyoulike]

Originally Posted by Clocker

From the link:

Others, including a more prominent and more liberal legal authority, Alan Dershowitz, have said that accepting the documents would not be a crime unless Trump paid for them.

All of which is moot, because there were no documents and nothing happened. Hence the phrase "would have been an illegal campaign contribution". Again, libs are making the accusation of a thought crime.

How about forgetting about this treason controversy?

Say you had three people who were T, E and C.

Let's make up some names for these, say they are Tom, Elkabong and Clocker for visual effects.

Tom comes up with an idea to rob a bank. He plans and presents the plan to Elkabong and Clocker. They both agree with Tom but only Elkabong and Clocker go to the bank to rob it and of course Tom is holed up somewhere else far away.

As the two enter the bank, Clocker drops his gun on the floor and it so happens 15 FBI agents just happen to be cashing or withdrawing money because it's their payday.

They immediately arrest Elkabong and Clocker. Now, they never actually presented their bank robbery note to anyone but the FBI found it on Elkabong.

Now, is Tom guilty of bank robbery?

Remember he was hiding at another location and for him it's really a thought crime.

Now should Tom also go to prison he's concerned because his lily white ass would be like a beacon in the prison's dark shower room.

Is Clocker guilty?

Is Elkabong guilty?

[barn32]

It's a big mistake to scratch a scab. There is so much more to this than anyone on this site is even talking about.

You guys can throw out all of the red herrings that you like, but this is a major, major big deal and it affects the entire Trump administration.

Jared Kushner, Trump Jr., Paul Manafort and even Jeff Sessions all have a lot of explaining to do.

The scab has just been scratched and it's starting to bleed. A Band-Aid will not fix it. It won't be long before someone is thrown under the bus.

It's only going to get worse, and it's not going to go away.

[davew]

Originally Posted by Clocker

From the link:

Others, including a more prominent and more liberal legal authority, Alan Dershowitz, have said that accepting the documents would not be a crime unless Trump paid for them.

All of which is moot, because there were no documents and nothing happened. Hence the phrase "would have been an illegal campaign contribution". Again, libs are making the accusation of a thought crime.

exactly, like the DNC helping to pay Ukraine for anti-Trump info...

https://www.rt.com/usa/395984-dnc-ukraine-white-house/

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by maddog42

National Review says Trump Jr. attempted to collude with Russia.


http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...llusion-russia

The leaders of the "never Trump" movement?

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by barn32

It's a big mistake to scratch a scab. There is so much more to this than anyone on this site is even talking about.

You guys can throw out all of the red herrings that you like, but this is a major, major big deal and it affects the entire Trump administration.

Jared Kushner, Trump Jr., Paul Manafort and even Jeff Sessions all have a lot of explaining to do.

The scab has just been scratched and it's starting to bleed. A Band-Aid will not fix it. It won't be long before someone is thrown under the bus.

It's only going to get worse, and it's not going to go away.

Keep hoping........

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by whodoyoulike

How about forgetting about this treason controversy?

You are the one that has been beating that dead horse for some time. I'm just along for the ride, having fun pointing out that the emperor has no clothes.

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by whodoyoulike

How about forgetting about this treason controversy?

Say you had three people who were T, E and C.

Let's make up some names for these, say they are Tom, Elkabong and Clocker for visual effects.

Tom comes up with an idea to rob a bank. He plans and presents the plan to Elkabong and Clocker. They both agree with Tom but only Elkabong and Clocker go to the bank to rob it and of course Tom is holed up somewhere else far away.

As the two enter the bank, Clocker drops his gun on the floor and it so happens 15 FBI agents just happen to be cashing or withdrawing money because it's their payday.

They immediately arrest Elkabong and Clocker. Now, they never actually presented their bank robbery note to anyone but the FBI found it on Elkabong.

Now, is Tom guilty of bank robbery?

Remember he was hiding at another location and for him it's really a thought crime.

Now should Tom also go to prison he's concerned because his lily white ass would be like a beacon in the prison's dark shower room.

Is Clocker guilty?

Is Elkabong guilty?

A horribly misguided analogy. In your example, it's called a conspiracy to commit a crime. In the real life example, it's called poor judgment. Why you may ask? Because nothing of value was presented. Using your example, Tom invites the other two over under the claim that he wants to rob a bank. However instead, he talks horse racing the entire time. If Elk and Clicker still go out to rob the bank, Tom is innocent of conspiracy since he had no part in the act.

[Fager Fan]

Originally Posted by barn32

It's a big mistake to scratch a scab. There is so much more to this than anyone on this site is even talking about.

You guys can throw out all of the red herrings that you like, but this is a major, major big deal and it affects the entire Trump administration.

Jared Kushner, Trump Jr., Paul Manafort and even Jeff Sessions all have a lot of explaining to do.

The scab has just been scratched and it's starting to bleed. A Band-Aid will not fix it. It won't be long before someone is thrown under the bus.

It's only going to get worse, and it's not going to go away.

Really? Tell us exactly how much more there is to this that we're not talking about. I'm dying to hear it.

So far we know that Russia supposedly tried to affect our election. So what? This is surprising to anyone? We try to affect elections too, so if it's that wrong, then we have to point a finger at ourselves too. Have we made a statement that we see the terribleness of our ways and will not ever try to impact another nation's elections anymore? No, of course not. Let's stop being stupid and acting like Russia or anyone else attempting to affect our election is a big deal. If anything is a big deal, it's that our intelligence doesn't do their job correctly and stop it from happening. Guess what guys? Countries spy on and try to afffect each other to their benefit. It's the way it has been, is, and always will be.

How did Russia supposedly affect our election? By disclosing hacked emails from Posesta's computer. Except Assange says it wasn't the Russian gov.

What else do we have? That someone was willing to listen to potential dirt on another candidate? No! No one would do that, right?! Come on. They do and always will, and I don't even see where anyone should say that's unethical or sleazy. That dirt could be important. It could be something that the American public should know when making their selection for President. Again, this is no big deal and is just part of politics (and business and life).

Finally, what is collusion? It is having a secret pact to work together for a particular goal. There is zero evidence that anyone in Trump's camp did anything to work with Russia to obtain or release Podesta's emails. Zero. Even if that did, is that a crime? As best I know, the only collusion that is illegal has to do with antitrust laws or price fixing.

So, please, one of you libs, tell me where I'm wrong.

[chadk66]

pretty hard to collude with a foreign country when the person your supposedly colluding with has nothing to do with said countries government