Reply With Quote
Steele worked with the FBI as a source. Sorry nothing illegal.Jesus, you're dumb as a rock.
Jesus, you're dumb as a rock.
Steele worked with the FBI as a source. Sorry nothing illegal.Jesus, you're dumb as a rock.
This quote is from the article you posted.
“It is illegal for a campaign to accept help from a foreign individual or government”
Is Christopher Steele a foreign individual?
Into the weeds we go!
Is Christopher Steele a foreign individual?
Yes. As he was a subcontractor of a PR company a law firm in the hire of the Clinton campaign, I'm not sure that counts as the kind of contribution you want it to be.
I'm open to seeing the laws regarding such an arrangement.
Do you have them handy?
Then trying to declare the two situations as completely equal is silly.
Wtf?
I thought little Trump claimed the meeting was about adoption restrictions of Russian children?
So it was not... when will these people stop lying?
5. So is there any real difference in what the two campaigns did?
Yes, experts say there are significant legal differences.
"One side is a private investigator under contract and the other involves alleged collaboration with a hostile government seeking to meddle in the U.S. election," said Andrew Wright, an associate professor at Savannah Law School in Georgia and former staff director of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
The Trump campaign's actions could put it at odds with federal election law, Wright said.
"Campaign finance laws prohibit soliciting or receiving a 'thing of value' from a foreign en y because that would cons ute an illegal campaign contribution," he said. "Information could amount to an illegal in-kind contribution from a foreign government. Russia repeatedly dangled information in order to get its hooks into the Trump campaign."
In contrast, Wright said, "Fusion GPS was paid for opposition research services at arms-length. As such, it was not a campaign contribution but rather contracted services."
The fact that Steele ended up talking to a couple of Russian sources to compile his dossier doesn't change that, experts said.
Charles Tiefer, a professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law and the special deputy chief counsel for the House Iran-Contra Committee's investigation of the Reagan administration, said the actions by the two campaigns "could not be more different."
"Steele was British, but there is no reason to believe Britain ... was meddling in the election," Tiefer said. "In contrast, the Russian effort to interfere in the U.S. election connected in a number of ways with (Russian President Vladimir) Putin and his network. The Russian effort was very active on many election fronts, such as hacking, publicizing hacked materials, placing ads in social media with undisclosed iden ies, and seeking to work directly with the Trump campaign
Was Steele under contract when he was feeding Bruce Ohr?
Contracted. Lordy!
Or are we changing the subject again?
YES IT WAS ILLEGAL BUT THEY DID IT FIRST!
The Day Trump Told Us There Was Attempted Collusion with Russia
August 5, 1974, was the day the Nixon Presidency ended.
On that day, Nixon heeded a Supreme Court ruling and released the so-called smoking-gun tape,
a recording of a meeting, held two years earlier, with his chief of staff, H. R. Haldeman.
Many of Nixon’s most damaging statements came in the form of short, monosyllabic answers and near-grunts—“um huh,” the official transcript reads, at one point—
as he responds to Haldeman’s idea of asking the C.I.A. to
tell the F.B.I. to “stay the out of” the Watergate investigation.
The coverup is clearly of Haldeman’s design.
Nixon’s words are simple: “All right. Fine.” Then, “Right, fine.”
Listening to the tape today, it’s hard not to imagine an alternate strategy, one that Nixon’s aide, Roger Ailes—hired at Haldeman’s request—would surely have endorsed.
On August 5, 2018, precisely forty-four years after the collapse of the Nixon Presidency, another President, Donald Trump, made his own public admission.
In one of a series of early-morning tweets, Trump addressed a meeting that his son Donald, Jr., held with a Russian lawyer affiliated with the Russian government.
Donald Trump, Jr.,’s original statementabout the case was inaccurate enough to be considered a lie.
“This was a meeting to get information on an opponent,
totally legal and
done all the time in politics - and
it went nowhere,” he wrote.
“I did not know about it!”
It is unclear why,
if the meeting were entirely proper,
it was important for the President to declare “I did not know about it!” or
to tell the Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, to “stop this Rigged Witch Hunt right now.”
The President’s Sunday-morning tweet should be seen as a turning point.
it ends any possibility of an alternative explanation. We can all move forward understanding that there is a clear fact pattern about which there is no dispute:
- The President’s son and top advisers knowingly met with individuals connected to the Russian government, hoping to obtain dirt on their political opponent.
- Do ents stolen from the Democratic National Committee and members of the Clinton campaign were later used in an overt effort to sway the election.
- When the Trump Tower meeting was uncovered, the President instructed his son and staff to lie about the meeting, and told them precisely which lies to use.
The President is attempting to end the investigation into this meeting and other instances of attempted collusion between his campaign staff and representatives of the Russian government.
Was this a case of successful or only attempted collusion?
Is attempted collusion a crime?
What legal and moral responsibilities did the President and his team have when they realized that the proposed collusion was underway
when the D.N.C. e-mails were leaked and published?
And, crucially,
what did the President know before the election,
after it,
and when he instructed his son to lie?
https://www.newyorker.com/news-desk/swamp-chronicles/the-day-trump-told-us-there-was-attempted-collusion-with-russia
So much lying, story changing, protestations of innocence, telling JeBo to shut it down, obstruction of Mueller, firing of Yates and Comey
Trash and his mafiya, along with Julie Annie knowing about the stolen DNC info before Assange/Pootin started leaking it (as Trash announcing an announcement about DNC/Hillary, are ing guilty, which explains their behavior.
go back to your mama's closet and play dress up.
Trump lawyer says he had 'bad information' when he denied Trump involvement in Trump Tower statement
Trump attorney Jay Sekulow tried his level best to avoid saying that
Donald Trump directly lied to him about his involvement in crafting a statement downplaying the significance of the 2016 Trump Tower meeting between Russian government-sent intermediaries and the topmost members of the Trump campaign,
a meeting that Trump now admits was set up as an effort to "get information on" his election opponent.
Sekulow starts out distancing himself from the mess by saying that by golly,
he had just gotten there when all this awkwardness took place.
But his main personal defense to this charge of lying is that
he "had bad information at that time", and
there's only one place information about whether Donald Trump did or did not conspire to draft a misleading excuse for the Trump Tower meeting:
His client, the Oval Office garbage fire.
Sekulow wants to make very sure to emphasize that when Trump's team did find out the facts were not as Donald Trump had previously claimed them to be,
his lawyers let the Office of Special Counsel know that they needed a do-over on that one.
We may have lied to the American people, and boy howdy did we ever,
but we corrected it once it was clear investigators had found us out.
his closing assertion, that over time, facts develop, is a humdinger.
Did Trump help write it, or did he not?
We soon learned he did,
but Trump's legal team may have been the last to know.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1786094
Flynn, Comey, and Mueller: What Trump Knew and When He Knew It
Previously undisclosed evidence in the possession of Special Counsel Robert Mueller—
including highly confidential White House records and testimony by some of President Trump’s own top aides—
provides some of the strongest evidence to date implicating the president of the United States in an obstruction of justice.
Several people who have reviewed a portion of this evidence say that, based on what they know,
they believe it is now all but inevitable that
the special counsel will complete a confidential report presenting evidence that President Trump violated the law.
https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2018/07/31/what-trump-knew-and-when-he-knew-it/
the special counsel will complete a confidential report presenting evidence that President Trump violated the law.
..for the US Congress to POOP ON!
NOT FAKE
lol Macron's popularity in the ter
lol Merkel's
I DON'T DO THE TROLL THING
There are currently 7 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 7 guests)
Posting Permissions
