Re: Nobody said there is *no* evidence of collusion
If there was anything to find they'd have found something after all this time, they've found NOTHING.
Rethinking that statement yet?
Isn't it ironic that the very day you posted that the WSJ broke a brand-new story that could turn out to be the smoking gun (or could be nothing; we won't know unit it's thoroughly investigated)?
Re: Nobody said there is *no* evidence of collusion
It's no setup. Unless, of course, you have evidence of such. Until then a criminal investigation is required.
Don Jr. lied on his security clearance application. That's a felony. But It's OK If You're A Republican, right?
There's definitely an argument that his actions constituted solicitation of a non-monetary contribution to the campaign. That's solidly illegal.
It does not matter if she didn't have information. He thought she had information from the Russian government from their attempt to influence our election. I.e he intended collusion. Who's to say what further information will come?
Re: Nobody said there is *no* evidence of collusion
And he did not list the meeting on his application for a security clearance. And campaign representatives, including Mike pence, steadfastly denied any meetings between campaign staff and Russians.
Re: Nobody said there is *no* evidence of collusion
According to the only one talking about the meeting itself (namely, Donald Jr), it turned out that the whole meeting was to talk about the Magnitsky Act.
According to the emails he posted, he expected to meet an agent of the Russian government who had incriminating information about Hillary and receive that information. If that information is determined to be something of value, soliciting such information from a foreign national is a violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act. There are differing legal opinions on this particular case but it's definitely worth testing in a court of law.
Of course not mentioning his meeting on his original application for a security clearance is a felony.
quote: (a) ProhibitionIt shall be unlawful for (1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make (A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election; (B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or (C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title); or (2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.
Did Don Jr.'s and other's attendance at the meeting constitute soliciting a thing of value from a foreign national in connection with a Federal election?
It's definitely possible and, IMH and non-lawerly opinion, likely.
It requires more investigation, and that will happen.
Re: ItRe: Nobody said there is *no* evidence of collusion
Frantically trying to change an embarrassing subject,, I see.
What do you have to say, if anything, about the legality or lack thereof of Don Jr.'s actions? No fact-free rants, please.
{Way OT, but I am compelled to point out it's easy to count the credible evidence hinting at any illegality by Hillary; there is none despite decades of right-wing efforts and hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars spent on repeating previous investigations.}
Re: ItRe: Nobody said there is *no* evidence of collusion
US law begs to differ with you. It has yet to be adjudicated but I've proven that there really is something to adjudicate several times in this thread. Ignoring reality doesn't change it.
I see you've abandoned the "Don's crime is OK because I think somebody else did something bad" defense. Congratulations on achieving some wisdom.
Re: ItRe: Nobody said there is *no* evidence of collusion
It's not possible to prosecute the right-wing fantasies about her, and there's no evidence that the real Hillary has committed any crimes, despite decades of right-wing efforts and wasting millions of dollars on repeating investigations.
So, be specific. What is a liberal lie in Don's emails, and why is it a lie? Did Don and Paul and Jared meet with a Russian national expecting to get dirt on Hillary? Is that all stuff that actually happened, has been confirmed by the participants, and has previously been lied about by multiple official spokeslizards?
Re: ItRe: Nobody said there is *no* evidence of collusion
The Hillary forces, the Leftist machine, Soros etc., engineered it all, including getting Hillary off the hook from her truly egregious crimes.
Yeah, right. Decades of repetitive widely covered investigations, most of them leaky as a sieve, most of them run and staffed by Republicans who would love nothing more than to take her down.
Is there oxygen in the air on your planet?
Of course, to you, a few obvious felonies by Don Jr., Donald's son-in-law, and the then campaign manager... acknowledged as having happened by the participants... is no big deal, amirite?
™ Version 4.2
(1)