He has peeked into countless minds & emotions through your post.

That's an undermining thing to suggest. Why say that?

I'm having trouble keeping up with the constantly evolving Russia/presidential election story.

So are liberals mad that someone in the trump camp may have talked to a Russian person who gave them some dirt on Hillary?

Is it the fact that it was a foreigner that is the problem they see (because surely they aren't mad at his camp for trying to find dirt like the US media has tried to for trump)?

I gave you a hint a few posts up to break your cognitive dissonance. Just imagine Obama received espionage from Iran.

Oh sweet, naive mickey who just stepped through a time travel machine from Saturday and hasn't caught up yet.

Yes. It's a federal crime. The details that Jr. has already admitted to fulfill the requirements of the crime (edit: there's no "may have" here). Even if there's no actual dirt given. (cf. soliciting in the statute)

I don't think it should be against the law for a republican to listen to a foreigner who has dirt on his political opponent since dems have the media airing their opponents dirty laundry for them. We should make both legal or both illegal.

Yeah because the Russian government definitively meddling in a US election with the possibility of being owed something from a sitting POTUS is super standard.

Not sure if the Trumpers are more parts dumb, naive or just DGAF.

Interesting. So, if I'm running for a federal office, I can't talk to my foreign friends about my campaign strategy? More specifically, I cannot solicit their advice or information, if that advice or information is a thing of value?

That's the way I read the law, but it seems strange.

What do YOU believe russia did to meddle in the election?

It is not illegal to listen to someone on US soil, no matter where they came from. Also, note Trump Jr. did NOT solicit this information - it was brought to him by the publicist. Donald Trump Jr. is not guilty of violating that law (or any other law).

Unless you support prosecuting Hillary for: Saudi Arabia, China, and the Ukraine:
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...ackfire-233446

You mean like Hillary and the Clinton Foundation receiving millions from the Saudis, Chinese and even the Russians? And then having to fold the entire organization because she could no longer provide pay for play like she did as Secretary of State? And then the DNC STILL ran her as a candidate? That one?

Or what about Obama's "more flexibility with Russia" after the 2012 election? That one?

Hillary alert! Clinton! Clinton! Clinton!

What about is fine. Lets put them all in jail.

As a pre-trial precaution.

Whats funny is by doing that they are defending Hillary's dirty deeds and saying they are not dirty. But they dont know it.

Bahbah feels =! The law

IANAL so I don't know exactly how the courts or prosecutors are likely to interpret the breadth of the law, but I think if someone invited you to a meeting with a foreign national with connections to the government of a different country, offering information to help your campaign on behalf of said foreign government, and you went to the meeting hoping to get that information, then you would absolutely be in violation of this law.

Whether or not it extends as far as "talking to my foreign friend about campaign strategy" I couldn't say.

wil likes to be like "ha ha main forum, their predictions so wrong, mine so right" but one thing the main forum absolutely ****ing nailed was how quickly conservatives would go from "there was no collusion!" to "who cares if they colluded?"

It's happening in this very thread right now!

lol wil, wrong again, still undefeated. When I started posting here regularly in 2017 it was in content threads (remember when those were a thing?), posting news about Trump, while you were still jerking yourself off in the Milo thread attacking anyone and everyone like usual.

The only thing in that email from the publicist (who's job it is to LIE to Trump Jr. to get the meeting) is that they may have information on HILLARY'S dealings with Russia.

So....

1) Trump Jr. did not solicit anything.
2) Trump Jr. did not receive anything of value.

Also note, Trump Jr. did not act on anything in the meeting because there was nothing to act upon. Calling this a nothingburger is an insult to nothingburgers.

That's the only defense from the party that ran the most corrupt candidate in history. Your response was predictable and right on schedule.

This is not my area of expertise, but my point is that this law appears to be super broad and not enforced, or selectively enforced. It appears that you are saying the necessary distinction (that is not in the law) is that the foreign national has connections to a foreign government and the info is offered on behalf of that government.

Not sure if that distinction is meaningful, but to make my next point, it appears that the enforcement of the law has to be based on past experience. In other words, it becomes very relevant when and for what this has been enforced and not enforced in the past.

Thus, we must look at past campaigns and enforcement or lack of enforcement to see if this activity by Trump Jr is illegal (strictly illegal by the letter of the law is not relevant - does past practice show it was enforced).

Fox & Friends walked back their false report about Comey's memos from yesterday



Huh, looks like me and WaPo were right, and Donald Trump retweeted (it's still there!) fake news. So weird how that happens, right? It's just so bizarre that I was able to tell that this article was correct and you were like "what's with the opinion piece bro", just totally unable to discern if there were actual facts and legit arguments present.