Jump to content

This tweet is interesting


AUDub

Recommended Posts





a good many of them are....but he keeps on punching them out.   :dunno:   who knows ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

............“Donald Trump is every attorney’s worst nightmare,” said Rick Wilson, a Republican political consultant and prominent Trump critic. “He combines a complete lack of personal discipline with an impulse to place himself at ever greater risk of prosecution. He’s the ‘Bad Idea Jeans’ of presidents.”

Just a half hour after Trump’s new tweet, Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow admitted that he had put out falsehoods last year when he also claimed that the meeting was about adoption.

“I had bad information at that time and made a mistake in my statement,” he said on ABC’s “This Week” program, before continuing attacks on the integrity of special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into Russian interference in U.S. politics, a strategy Trump personally began from the time he took office.

Sekulow ― whose career has made him an expert on school voucher and religious freedom cases, not criminal law – claimed that meeting with Russians tied to their country’s government with the goal of getting assistance to win a U.S. election was not illegal.

“The question is how would it be illegal?” Sekulow said. “The question is, what law, statute or rule or regulation has been violated? No one has pointed to one.”

In reality, numerous criminal lawyers have pointed out that colluding with a foreign power to win an election or even attempting to do so may constitute conspiracy against the United States.......

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-russia-sekulow_us_5b670c6ce4b0fd5c73dab466

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, homersapien said:

In reality, numerous criminal lawyers have pointed out that colluding with a foreign power to win an election or even attempting to do so may constitute conspiracy against the United States....

What do they mean by “colluding?” 

Also - if I have a drink and then I drive, doing so may constitute driving while intoxicated. I would think it would depend upon whether or not I consumed an intoxicating beverage as well as the amount of said beverage consumed. Until the latter are established, the point just seems minute to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

What do they mean by “colluding?” 

 

Well, you'd have to ask them. 

Personally, I'd say agreeing to knowingly accept information from a foreign country would suffice.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Well, you'd have to ask them. 

Personally, I'd say agreeing to knowingly accept information from a foreign country would suffice.

 

Steel dossier

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, homersapien said:

Well, you'd have to ask them. 

Personally, I'd say agreeing to knowingly accept information from a foreign country would suffice.

 

 

 

6 hours ago, sandyclawedtiger said:

Steele Dossier

that's funny right there! | I DON'T CARE WHO YA ARE THAT'S FUNNY RIGHT THERE | image tagged in larry the cable guy,funny | made w/ Imgflip meme maker

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, sandyclawedtiger said:

Steel dossier

How so? 

The Steele dossier was a private intelligence report composed by an investigator working for Fusion GPS, a private investigation firm. 

There was no foreign government involved in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

34 minutes ago, homersapien said:

How so? 

The Steele dossier was a private intelligence report composed by an investigator working for Fusion GPS, a private investigation firm. (Paid to use his old contacts with the Russian Govt to gather evdence for the Corporate DNC & HRC Campaigns.)

There was no foreign government involved in it.

 

image.jpeg

Uh..the ENTIRE contents of the Dossier was given to Steele by Russians, a substantial number of whom work or worked for the Russian Govt.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, homersapien said:

How so? 

The Steele dossier was a private intelligence report composed by an investigator working for Fusion GPS, a private investigation firm. 

There was no foreign government involved in it.

Who did Steele supposedly get his information from. Oh my god the Russians! Who actually paid for the dossier (Hillary Clinton's campaign through a law firm)

Steele being a former British Spy makes him a foreign entity providing information on a candidate during a  United States federal election. If you disagree with this being illegal then Trump's son shouldn't have a worry.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, homersapien said:

Well, you'd have to ask them. 

Personally, I'd say agreeing to knowingly accept information from a foreign country would suffice.

 

Thank you for the answer. I appreciate it. Please do not take presume my inquiry to be in jest. 

This is interesting. Is it accurate for me to characterize your position as follows: Collusion requires "agreement." In other words, you would draw the line beyond mere "contact." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Thank you for the answer. I appreciate it. Please do not take presume my inquiry to be in jest. 

This is interesting. Is it accurate for me to characterize your position as follows: Collusion requires "agreement." In other words, you would draw the line beyond mere "contact." 

Colluding to do what?    still waiting to see what illegal act they were conspiring to commit?     Have I missed something.?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, homersapien said:

How so? 

The Steele dossier was a private intelligence report composed by an investigator working for Fusion GPS, a private investigation firm. 

There was no foreign government involved in it.

The media has largely ignored that Hillary Clinton and her campaign spent a huge amount of money to fund the efforts of former British spy Christopher Steele to gather dirt on Trump, including information from the Russian government and intelligence figures. All of the outcries and expressions of shock by Democratic leaders over the Trump Tower meeting ignores the more extensive contacts and efforts by the Clinton campaign.

 The irony is that the Clintons showed how this is “done all the time” with cutouts and third parties like Steele. Indeed, despite denials during and after the campaign, the Clinton team only admitted to funding the dossier after the media stumbled onto the paper trail long after the election. When caught, they simply declared it was done all the time as “opposition research.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2018 at 9:45 PM, sandyclawedtiger said:

Steel dossier

What the Clinton campaign did may skirt the line, but it was legal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

The media has largely ignored that Hillary Clinton and her campaign spent a huge amount of money to fund the efforts of former British spy Christopher Steele to gather dirt on Trump, including information from the Russian government and intelligence figures. All of the outcries and expressions of shock by Democratic leaders over the Trump Tower meeting ignores the more extensive contacts and efforts by the Clinton campaign.

 The irony is that the Clintons showed how this is “done all the time” with cutouts and third parties like Steele. Indeed, despite denials during and after the campaign, the Clinton team only admitted to funding the dossier after the media stumbled onto the paper trail long after the election. When caught, they simply declared it was done all the time as “opposition research.”

Again, there was no foreign government involved with the Steele dossier.  Clinton never conspired with a foreign government.  Trump did.  He's even admitted it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Thank you for the answer. I appreciate it. Please do not take presume my inquiry to be in jest. 

This is interesting. Is it accurate for me to characterize your position as follows: Collusion requires "agreement." In other words, you would draw the line beyond mere "contact." 

I think my response was sufficient.  

In Trump Jr's case, he certainly agreed to receive information gathered by the Russian government, as Trump only recently admitted.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, AU64 said:

Colluding to do what?    still waiting to see what illegal act they were conspiring to commit?     Have I missed something.?

To receive information from the Russian government on a political opponent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

 

Uh..the ENTIRE contents of the Dossier was given to Steele by Russians, a substantial number of whom work or worked for the Russian Govt.

 

I don't think that's true.  Did the Russian government approach Steele with information intended for Clinton's campaign?

(Please stop with the gif's. Save them for trash talking.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, WDavE said:

Who did Steele supposedly get his information from. Oh my god the Russians! Who actually paid for the dossier (Hillary Clinton's campaign through a law firm)

Steele being a former British Spy makes him a foreign entity providing information on a candidate during a  United States federal election. If you disagree with this being illegal then Trump's son shouldn't have a worry.

 

 

I don't know how Steele got his information.  Probably from a Russian, which is not the same as "the Russians" (government).

There is nothing illegal about hiring a former British spy for research. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it’s only wrong if YOU identify the source as openly Russian Govt. I don’t recall anyone contacting any of the people at the meeting at Trump Tower as claiming to represent the Russian Govt. The lady was an attorney working for an individual as best I can recall.  I don’t see how Steele’s Contacts weren’t exclusively govt or former govt. He was hired because of his contacts within the GOVT intelligence community. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DKW 86 said:

So it’s only wrong if YOU identify the source as openly Russian Govt. I don’t recall anyone contacting any of the people at the meeting at Trump Tower as claiming to represent the Russian Govt. The lady was an attorney working for an individual as best I can recall.  I don’t see how Steele’s Contacts weren’t exclusively govt or former govt. He was hired because of his contacts within the GOVT intelligence community. 

I didn't realize you were there. <_<

Clearly, Trump had no issues with appealing to the Russian government: 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/trump-calls-russia-help-find-missing-clinton-emails-n617946

And again, hiring a former British spy is not the same as hiring the British government.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...