View Full Version : "Cut cut cut act"?!?!?!
RandomGuy
11-02-2017, 04:08 PM
Wow.
Sure there is already a thread about the content.
But the stupid title proposed by Trump deserves it own thread, so we can bask in its glory. :rollin
If you haven't heard, the Speaker of the House let Trump name the bill.
I shit you not, he came up with:
The "Cut cut cut act".
'The Cut Cut Cut Act': Trump, Hill leaders differ on tax overhaul bill's name
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-hill-leaders-disagree-upcoming-tax-reform-bill/story?id=50863220
:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao
Wow.
Sure there is already a thread about the content.
But the stupid title proposed by Trump deserves it own thread, so we can bask in its glory. :rollin
If you haven't heard, the Speaker of the House let Trump name the bill.
I shit you not, he came up with:
The "Cut cut cut act".
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-hill-leaders-disagree-upcoming-tax-reform-bill/story?id=50863220
:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao :lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao
You focus on some really important shit, like how someone disposes of a cigarette and how someone names a bill.
What next, Trump's choice in toothpaste?
Meanwhile you seem to ignore Donna B's bomb about Hillary's campaign controlling the DNC and fucking Bernie, but hey, at least there was some catchy stuff happening.
Chris
11-02-2017, 05:47 PM
You focus on some really important shit, like how someone disposes of a cigarette and how someone names a bill.
What next, Trump's choice in toothpaste?
Meanwhile you seem to ignore Donna B's bomb about Hillary's campaign controlling the DNC and fucking Bernie, but hey, at least there was some catchy stuff happening.
He's trolling, like most of the Libtards on this site. It's so they can say they were trolling all along when the Mueller investigation falls on its face. They are programmed that way unfortunately.
Pavlov
11-02-2017, 05:52 PM
He's trolling, like most of the Libtards on this site. It's so they can say they were trolling all along when the Mueller investigation falls on its face. They are programmed that way unfortunately.Where are the indictments? :lol
Where are the indictments? :lol
I'm sure the target of all the angst in this forum is Manafort and.. hell I cannot even remember the other guy's name.
I'm sure those two are what was meant when someone said Flynn was in trouble.
Pavlov
11-02-2017, 11:22 PM
I'm sure the target of all the angst in this forum is Manafort and.. hell I cannot even remember the other guy's name.
I'm sure those two are what was meant when someone said Flynn was in trouble.Are you saying these will be the only indictments the Special Counsel will file?
Yes or no.
Are you saying these will be the only indictments the Special Counsel will file?
Yes or no.
:lol I don't dance for you.
Pavlov
11-02-2017, 11:34 PM
:lol I don't dance for you.:lol I don't blame you for running from this one.
Spurtacular
11-02-2017, 11:38 PM
You focus on some really important shit, like how someone disposes of a cigarette and how someone names a bill.
What next, Trump's choice in toothpaste?
Meanwhile you seem to ignore Donna B's bomb about Hillary's campaign controlling the DNC and fucking Bernie, but hey, at least there was some catchy stuff happening.
They're still in denial about Hillary's crimes.
:lmao Following politics daily and being in denial about the criminality of Hillary Clinton.
Pavlov
11-02-2017, 11:41 PM
They're still in denial about Hillary's crimes.
:lmao Following politics daily and being in denial about the criminality of Hillary Clinton.Which crimes are those?
I look forward to your list of her crimes.
:lol I don't blame you for running from this one.
Running? So you think if someone doesn't fall into your endless loop of question answering, they ran? Then by default you win regardless, right?
I don't need to make a prediction to be right in this case. No one outside of scoreboarders here give two shits about Manafort or that other clown. Trump is your target. Let me know when you get him.
Spurtacular
11-02-2017, 11:53 PM
Which crimes are those?
I look forward to your list of her crimes.
:lmao Follows politics daily for years and has to be convinced that Hillary is a criminal.
Pavlov
11-02-2017, 11:58 PM
Running? So you think if someone doesn't fall into your endless loop of question answering, they ran? Then by default you win regardless, right?Nope. I just wanted you to commit for once.
I don't need to make a prediction to be right in this case. No one outside of scoreboarders here give two shits about Manafort or that other clown. Trump is your target. Let me know when you get him.:lol another nice narrative attempt. Trump might be totally isolated from all the shenanigans for all I know. I'm fine with his presidency being nominally paralyzed.
Pavlov
11-02-2017, 11:59 PM
:lmao Follows politics daily for years and has to be convinced that Hillary is a criminal.I just want you to list her crimes. This should be really easy for you to do. I have no idea why you would hold back when it comes to her. You're making it look like there are no crimes to list.
Nope. I just wanted you to commit for once.
How is predicting something "committing"?
Are you saying there will be a more important indictment forthcoming? Come on, don't be shy.
:lol another nice narrative attempt. Trump might be totally isolated from all the shenanigans for all I know. I'm fine with his presidency being nominally paralyzed.
The dems cannot keep their house in order and you think Trump, who won the election by grabbing a pussy, is paralyzed? Your side doesn't hold power and still cannot get along with each other. The dems are two parties that do not seam well.
I just want you to list her crimes. This should be really easy for you to do. I have no idea why you would hold back when it comes to her. You're making it look like there are no crimes to list.
What is a crime? Are you defining it by indictment, conviction, what?
Because failing to disclose that the DNC paid for the Russian dossier is a crime. Whether or not it will be prosecuted is another story. The entire Whitewater scandal was criminal as fuck. Using her political power to scare Bill's rape victims into silence is a crime.
You know this already though, it's just that your pigs are more equal than the right side's pigs.
Pavlov
11-03-2017, 12:13 AM
How is predicting something "committing"?
Are you saying there will be a more important indictment forthcoming? Come on, don't be shy.Yes, I think there will be.
See. Nothing to be afraid of.
The dems cannot keep their house in order and you think Trump, who won the election by grabbing a pussy, is paralyzed? Your side doesn't hold power and still cannot get along with each other. The dems are two parties that do not seam well.Considering their domination of the federal government, the Republicans aren't getting much done.
Pavlov
11-03-2017, 12:14 AM
What is a crime? Are you defining it by indictment, conviction, what?
Because failing to disclose that the DNC paid for the Russian dossier is a crime. Whether or not it will be prosecuted is another story. The entire Whitewater scandal was criminal as fuck. Using her political power to scare Bill's rape victims into silence is a crime.
You know this already though, it's just that your pigs are more equal than the right side's pigs.:lol no one was even talking to you about this.
Yes, I think there will be.
See. Nothing to be afraid of.
Considering their domination of the federal government, the Republicans aren't getting much done.
You hedging is nothing new. You asked me for a yes or no answer to a question that did not even mention "I think". Now rationalize that as "of course you have to think to say it" while in reality it's your escape route.
When someone prefaces a statement with "in my opinion" or "I think", it's the same as saying "don't hold me to this but..."
:lol no one was even talking to you about this.
So? This isn't a private message or your facebook page.
Pavlov
11-03-2017, 12:18 AM
You hedging is nothing new. You asked me for a yes or no answer to a question that did not even mention "I think". Now rationalize that as "of course you have to thinking to say it" while in reality it's your escape route.I will amend it to a simple "yes."
Spurtacular
11-03-2017, 12:18 AM
I just want you to list her crimes. This should be really easy for you to do. I have no idea why you would hold back when it comes to her. You're making it look like there are no crimes to list.
What do you think the odds are that Hillary is not a criminal?
I will amend it to a simple "yes."
Once again you are backtracking. Again, nothing new.
Pavlov
11-03-2017, 12:18 AM
So? This isn't a private message or your facebook page.:lmao
Pavlov
11-03-2017, 12:20 AM
Once again you are backtracking. Again, nothing new.
Are you saying there will be a more important indictment forthcoming? Come on, don't be shy.Yes.
So now you can quell the parrot schtick because the crimes are right there. Those are crimes. No one said she was convicted.
Yes.
More important how? Someone currently in office?
Pavlov
11-03-2017, 12:23 AM
So now you can quell the parrot schtick because the crimes are right there. Those are crimes. No one said she was convicted.:lmao
More important how? Someone currently in office?Dunno tbh.
RandomGuy
11-03-2017, 08:57 AM
You focus on some really important shit, like how someone disposes of a cigarette and how someone names a bill.
What next, Trump's choice in toothpaste?
Meanwhile you seem to ignore Donna B's bomb about Hillary's campaign controlling the DNC and fucking Bernie, but hey, at least there was some catchy stuff happening.
Sure I "focus" on that, because one or two passing comments is a huge investment of time. :rolleyes
Which provides evidence that you need some fodder to demonize/diminish me in some way, no matter how weak the criticism. Interesting.
When you see someone work so hard to demonize someone, what do you think that says? Let's focus on that for a bit.
RandomGuy
11-03-2017, 09:00 AM
Meanwhile you seem to ignore Donna B's bomb about Hillary's campaign controlling the DNC and fucking Bernie, but hey, at least there was some catchy stuff happening.
That probably deserves its own thread. I"ll try to get to it on my lunch break.
Unlike a lot of Republicans on this board, I am rather happy to criticize the party I am in, and think such criticism helps improve our democratic process.
RandomGuy
11-03-2017, 09:03 AM
You hedging is nothing new. You asked me for a yes or no answer to a question that did not even mention "I think". Now rationalize that as "of course you have to think to say it" while in reality it's your escape route.
When someone prefaces a statement with "in my opinion" or "I think", it's the same as saying "don't hold me to this but..."
Because there is a large gap between "i have enough information to say for certain" and "I think I have pretty good reasons to think this is true, but allow for the possibility that I am wrong".
Anyone who doesn't do that, probably doesn't think enough about how much they do "know".
It is a form of hedging, but that isn't something undesirable, especially from a critical thinking standpoint.
RandomGuy
11-03-2017, 09:05 AM
What do you think the odds are that Hillary is not a criminal?
I was speeding this morning. I am, therefore a criminal.
What are the odds you are also a criminal in that sense?
Welcome to the wide world of reality, where there is a spectrum of grays between black and white.
RandomGuy
11-03-2017, 09:06 AM
Because failing to disclose that the DNC paid for the Russian dossier is a crime.
What statute was violated?
Be specific.
RandomGuy
11-03-2017, 09:08 AM
The dems cannot keep their house in order and you think Trump, who won the election by grabbing a pussy, is paralyzed? Your side doesn't hold power and still cannot get along with each other. The dems are two parties that do not seam well.
Trump is paralyzed by his own incompetence, narcissism, and quite possibly dementia. Dems are getting along just fine overall, and I can attest to that from first hand experience.
If both parties are so equally bad, in your opinion, what are your criticisms of the Republicans then? Do tell.
Sure I "focus" on that, because one or two passing comments is a huge investment of time. :rolleyes
Which provides evidence that you need some fodder to demonize/diminish me in some way, no matter how weak the criticism. Interesting.
When you see someone work so hard to demonize someone, what do you think that says? Let's focus on that for a bit.
Passing comments? You created two threads about it. :lol
That probably deserves its own thread. I"ll try to get to it on my lunch break.
Unlike a lot of Republicans on this board, I am rather happy to criticize the party I am in, and think such criticism helps improve our democratic process.
Well, it seems this was a thread all it's own. Was this more important than the Clinton campaign rigging the democratic primaries? I guess so, based on how you prioritized your thread starting.
Because there is a large gap between "i have enough information to say for certain" and "I think I have pretty good reasons to think this is true, but allow for the possibility that I am wrong".
Anyone who doesn't do that, probably doesn't think enough about how much they do "know".
It is a form of hedging, but that isn't something undesirable, especially from a critical thinking standpoint.
Then it's pointless.
What statute was violated?
Be specific.
Disclosure
The FECA requires candidate committees, party committees and PACs to file periodic reports disclosing the money they raise and spend. Candidates must identify, for example, all PACs and party committees that give them contributions, and they must identify individuals who give them more than $200 in an election cycle. Additionally, they must disclose expenditures exceeding $200 per election cycle to any individual or vendor.
boutons_deux
11-03-2017, 02:32 PM
Dems are getting along just fine overall
:lol
What Killed the Democratic Party?
A new report offers a bracing autopsy of the 2016 election—and lays out a plan for revitalization.
https://www.thenation.com/article/what-killed-the-democratic-party/
https://democraticautopsy.org/
RandomGuy
11-03-2017, 02:35 PM
Because failing to disclose that the DNC paid for the Russian dossier is a crime.
What statute was violated?
Be specific.
Disclosure
The FECA requires candidate committees, party committees and PACs to file periodic reports disclosing the money they raise and spend. Candidates must identify, for example, all PACs and party committees that give them contributions, and they must identify individuals who give them more than $200 in an election cycle. Additionally, they must disclose expenditures exceeding $200 per election cycle to any individual or vendor.
--that isn't a specific statute.
The "crime", i.e. paying for oppo research on a Republican doesn't even seem to fit what you posted here.
If you don't know how to look up federal statutes, let me know. You said it was a crime. Your claim, your burden of proof.
Pavlov
11-03-2017, 02:37 PM
Disclosure
The FECA requires candidate committees, party committees and PACs to file periodic reports disclosing the money they raise and spend. Candidates must identify, for example, all PACs and party committees that give them contributions, and they must identify individuals who give them more than $200 in an election cycle. Additionally, they must disclose expenditures exceeding $200 per election cycle to any individual or vendor.Not an actual statute, but OK. What's the penalty for violating that BTW?
And wasn't the law firm the entity that got paid?
Hm.
RandomGuy
11-03-2017, 02:44 PM
Then it's pointless.
"you weren't exacting enough in your phrasing here"
Then
"you were too exacting when indicating your level of certainty".
Sound like you are just looking for an excuse to bitch about something.
RandomGuy
11-03-2017, 02:47 PM
Well, it seems this was a thread all it's own. Was this more important than the Clinton campaign rigging the democratic primaries? I guess so, based on how you prioritized your thread starting.
"I hate both parties equally, but only bitch about one of them".
What was that about priorities...? :lol
What statute was violated?
Be specific.
--that isn't a specific statute.
The "crime", i.e. paying for oppo research on a Republican doesn't even seem to fit what you posted here.
If you don't know how to look up federal statutes, let me know. You said it was a crime. Your claim, your burden of proof.
If you cannot connect the two statements, I'm fairly certain you cannot decipher statues either. What, are you going to offer a legal argument? A defense to prosecution for Hillary?
:lol
"Additionally, they must disclose expenditures exceeding 200 per election cycle to any individual or vendor"
They did not disclose that they spent money to have the dossier made.
Not an actual statute, but OK. What's the penalty for violating that BTW?
And wasn't the law firm the entity that got paid?
Hm.
"legal services" isn't full disclosure.
I was speeding this morning. I am, therefore a criminal.
What are the odds you are also a criminal in that sense?
Welcome to the wide world of reality, where there is a spectrum of grays between black and white.
Rationalizing the crimes of the rich and powerful as if they were traffic violations. Typical horseshit from you.
RandomGuy
11-03-2017, 05:17 PM
..
RandomGuy
11-03-2017, 05:19 PM
Because failing to disclose that the DNC paid for the Russian dossier is a crime.
What statute was violated?
Be specific.
Disclosure
The FECA requires candidate committees, party committees and PACs to file periodic reports disclosing the money they raise and spend. Candidates must identify, for example, all PACs and party committees that give them contributions, and they must identify individuals who give them more than $200 in an election cycle. Additionally, they must disclose expenditures exceeding $200 per election cycle to any individual or vendor.
--that isn't a specific statute.
The "crime", i.e. paying for oppo research on a Republican doesn't even seem to fit what you posted here.
If you don't know how to look up federal statutes, let me know. You said it was a crime. Your claim, your burden of proof.
If you cannot connect the two statements, I'm fairly certain you cannot decipher statues either. What, are you going to offer a legal argument? A defense to prosecution for Hillary?
:lol
"Additionally, they must disclose expenditures exceeding 200 per election cycle to any individual or vendor"
They did not disclose that they spent money to have the dossier made.
Again, not an actual statute, or regulation.
It's almost as if you were talking out of your ass when you said a crime was committed. Your claim, your burden of proof. No statute = no crime. This is not rocket science.
.
RandomGuy
11-03-2017, 05:20 PM
Rationalizing the crimes of the rich and powerful as if they were traffic violations. Typical horseshit from you.
Weaksauce strawman. Typical horseshit from you.
.
Pavlov
11-03-2017, 05:53 PM
"legal services" isn't full disclosure.
Does it meet the terms of the statute you didn't cite?
And what is the penalty again?
Just asking. You seem to be super informed on this one.
Does it meet the terms of the statute you didn't cite?
And what is the penalty again?
Just asking. You seem to be super informed on this one.
52 U.S.C. 30109 (a)(1)
Penalties are a red herring. The "crime" doesn't rest on whether or not penalties are issued and I don't even need to know the penalties to know there was a crime.
CosmicCowboy
11-03-2017, 09:37 PM
I,think we can all agree Hillary is a greedy self absorbed kunt.
Most of us can also agree she is never going to jail.
Spurtacular
11-03-2017, 10:16 PM
I was speeding this morning. I am, therefore a criminal.
What are the odds you are also a criminal in that sense?
Welcome to the wide world of reality, where there is a spectrum of grays between black and white.
Way to educate me, dude. Pretty sure people differentiate between felons and traffic law violators. Though, in your snowflake world that line is certainly being blurred. :lmao
Pavlov
11-04-2017, 12:11 PM
52 U.S.C. 30109 (a)(1)
Penalties are a red herring. The "crime" doesn't rest on whether or not penalties are issued and I don't even need to know the penalties to know there was a crime.Wait, is it a civil or criminal violation?
And you didn't answer the first question so I'm going to conclude you just got way over your skis and anything from you will just be personal attacks.
Pavlov
11-04-2017, 12:11 PM
Way to educate me, dude. Pretty sure people differentiate between felons and traffic law violators. Though, in your snowflake world that line is certainly being blurred. :lmaoWhat felony are you saying Hillary committed?
Wait, is it a civil or criminal violation?
And you didn't answer the first question so I'm going to conclude you just got way over your skis and anything from you will just be personal attacks.
d) Penalties; defenses; mitigation of offenses
(1)(A) Any person who knowingly and willfully commits a violation of any provision of this Act which involves the making, receiving, or reporting of any contribution, donation, or expenditure-
(i) aggregating $25,000 or more during a calendar year shall be fined under title 18, or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both; or
(ii) aggregating $2,000 or more (but less than $25,000) during a calendar year shall be fined under such title, or imprisoned for not more than 1 year, or both.
Pavlov
11-04-2017, 01:42 PM
d) Penalties; defenses; mitigation of offenses
(1)(A) Any person who knowingly and willfully commits a violation of any provision of this Act which involves the making, receiving, or reporting of any contribution, donation, or expenditure-
(i) aggregating $25,000 or more during a calendar year shall be fined under title 18, or imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both; or
(ii) aggregating $2,000 or more (but less than $25,000) during a calendar year shall be fined under such title, or imprisoned for not more than 1 year, or both.
So we're clear here -- are you saying that Hillary committed a crime when her campaign failed to "fully report" that the legal firm it hired paid money to Fusion GPS which paid money to Christopher Steele for opposition research?
A yes or no will do.
hater
11-04-2017, 01:54 PM
He's trolling, like most of the Libtards on this site. It's so they can say they were trolling all along when the Mueller investigation falls on its face. They are programmed that way unfortunately.
Sad thing is these retards have 7 more years of trolling :lmao
Poor bastards
So we're clear here -- are you saying that Hillary committed a crime when her campaign failed to "fully report" that the legal firm it hired paid money to Fusion GPS which paid money to Christopher Steele for opposition research?
A yes or no will do.
Statute: Answered (you created a tangent)
Civil or criminal: Answered (you create another tangent)
Keep going around in circles on this.
Pavlov
11-04-2017, 02:45 PM
Statute: Answered (you created a tangent)
Civil or criminal: Answered (you create another tangent)
Keep going around in circles on this.No, you never made yourself clear. I am asking you directly what you are saying.
So we're clear here -- are you saying that Hillary committed a crime when her campaign failed to "fully report" that the legal firm it hired paid money to Fusion GPS which paid money to Christopher Steele for opposition research?
A yes or no will do.
Chris
11-04-2017, 02:45 PM
Sad thing is these retards have 7 more years of trolling :lmao
Poor bastards
I thought stuff was supposed to happen today :lol November 4th :jack
Pavlov
11-04-2017, 02:46 PM
I thought stuff was supposed to happen today :lol November 4th :jack:lol you believed fake news.
Pavlov
11-04-2017, 02:48 PM
:lmao Chris
926492438688096256
Pavlov
11-04-2017, 02:51 PM
Looks like 30 people were in Austin to violently overthrow Trump. :lol
Chris
11-04-2017, 02:54 PM
Looks like the Anti-Trump movement is DEAD despite HEAVY propaganda from MSM and Hollywood :lol
Go home and get your f'in shine box!
Pavlov
11-04-2017, 02:55 PM
Looks like the Anti-Trump movement is DEAD despite HEAVY propaganda from MSM and Hollywood :lol
Go home and get your f'in shine box!Looks like Antifa was never the widespread horrific, murderous threat you and Tucker tried to pimp :lol
Back to the drawing board.
No, you never made yourself clear. I am asking you directly what you are saying.
So we're clear here -- are you saying that Hillary committed a crime when her campaign failed to "fully report" that the legal firm it hired paid money to Fusion GPS which paid money to Christopher Steele for opposition research?
A yes or no will do.
The assumption behind your question is misleading but for the sake of arguendo, let's say that's what happened. The answer would be yes. Since that's not what the accusation is, then your question has no real merit and cannot be answered as if it does.
Pavlov
11-04-2017, 02:58 PM
The assumption behind your question is misleading but for the sake of arguendo, let's say that's what happened. The answer would be yes. Since that's not what the accusation is, then your question has no real merit and cannot be answered as if it does.Great. What are you saying really happened and what crime was committed by Hillary?
You're going to have to be more specific than you like.
Great. What are you saying really happened and what crime was committed by Hillary?
You're going to have to be more specific than you like.
Because... ?
boutons_deux
11-04-2017, 03:13 PM
the antifa armed revolution originally was a JOKE that Fox and other right wing hate media trumpeted to enrage you rightwingnutjob assholes! :lol
Did any of the Trump-fellating Nazi assholes go into the streets today to battle with antifa? :lol
Pavlov
11-04-2017, 03:49 PM
Because... ?Only if you choose to answer.
Looks like you're running away again.
That's OK. It was all bullshit after all.
koriwhat
11-04-2017, 05:00 PM
You focus on some really important shit, like how someone disposes of a cigarette and how someone names a bill.
What next, Trump's choice in toothpaste?
Meanwhile you seem to ignore Donna B's bomb about Hillary's campaign controlling the DNC and fucking Bernie, but hey, at least there was some catchy stuff happening.
randomguy just wants to deepthroat djt already and it's eating him alive!
Only if you choose to answer.
Looks like you're running away again.
That's OK. It was all bullshit after all.
You obviously don't know the difference between legal services and opposition research. Congress knows though.
Pavlov
11-04-2017, 06:25 PM
You obviously don't know the difference between legal services and opposition research. Congress knows though.You obviously don't want to actually say anything here. All made up.
RandomGuy
11-05-2017, 04:34 PM
52 U.S.C. 30109 (a)(1)
Penalties are a red herring. The "crime" doesn't rest on whether or not penalties are issued and I don't even need to know the penalties to know there was a crime.
§30109. Enforcement
(a) Administrative and judicial practice and procedure
(1)
Any person who believes a violation of this Act or of chapter 95 or chapter 96 of title 26 has occurred, may file a complaint with the Commission. Such complaint shall be in writing, signed and sworn to by the person filing such complaint, shall be notarized, and shall be made under penalty of perjury and subject to the provisions of section 1001 of title 18. Within 5 days after receipt of a complaint, the Commission shall notify, in writing, any person alleged in the complaint to have committed such a violation. Before the Commission conducts any vote on the complaint, other than a vote to dismiss, any person so notified shall have the opportunity to demonstrate, in writing, to the Commission within 15 days after notification that no action should be taken against such person on the basis of the complaint. The Commission may not conduct any investigation or take any other action under this section solely on the basis of a complaint of a person whose identity is not disclosed to the Commission.
This doesn't define a crime.
This simply details an administrative procedure.
I'm confused, but then again, I think you said I'd have problems navigating this stuff. Maybe you can help me here.
Did Hillary file some complaint improperly so as to commit some sort of crime?
I can see how that might get nefarious. :lol
RandomGuy
11-05-2017, 05:02 PM
52 U.S.C. 30109 (a)(1)
I don't even need to know the penalties to know there was a crime.
No. You do have to have evidence, and well, figure out which law was broken.
Kind of hard to have a crime without a law that is broken. But hey, I have a hard time deciphering this stuff.
The law you are looking for is:
52 USC §30104 (b)(5)(A)
5) the name and address of each—
(A) person to whom an expenditure in an aggregate amount or value in excess of $200 within the calendar year is made by the reporting committee to meet a candidate or committee operating expense, together with the date, amount, and purpose of such operating expenditure;
So now, all we need to have is, you know, evidence, this was not done.
Can you show me what payment you think was made, but not included in the routine report?
RandomGuy
11-06-2017, 02:00 PM
What I am going to guess:
The payments were made by a law firm to Steele's group. Payments to lawfirm were for consulting fees, and reported as such, appropriately.
I don't think campaigns are responsible for hiring of subcontractors. To say that Hillary Clinton committed a crime because a subcontractor was hired, is risable.
But hey, if someone wants to push the narrative, it is a very easy criminal act to ferret out. Let's have a quick investigation, get a couple of reports, and lists of payments. I could probably fart this kind of audit out in a week or so.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.