Donald Trump and US politics

"

deathflower schrieb:

He is stupid and morally wrong not legally wrong. It is something like a killer intend to kill someone but the person is not home. So he called it off. He has the intention but No crime is committed.

"

ScrotieMcB schrieb:

Spoiler

The appropriate inference to make is that Lionel is aware of that law and doesn't deem it worthy of discussion.

Consider the following...

Evidence 1: email
From: Mr. B
To: Mr. A
I just talked to Ms. C and she's willing to fuck you at tonight's party for $200. See you there.

From: Mr. A
To: Mr. B
I'll be there.

Evidence 2: meeting
Mr. A arrives at the party only to find out that it is actually an intervention for his alcoholism, not a chance at have sex. Ms. C is present.

Evidence 3: lie
When later asked about the leadup to the meeting, Mr. A lies to the press.

Now given those three points, explain to me how Mr. A is guilty of soliciting prostitution.

"

Spoiler

"So getting opposition research or dirt on Hillary Clinton, or however they tried to portray it, would constitute a contribution both on the definition of a contribution and on the foreign national contribution ban," he said. "And then solicitation: Did Trump Jr. solicit the contribution? I think there the answer is also yes."

That leads to the second key passage, which reads: "No person shall knowingly solicit, accept, or receive from a foreign national any contribution or donation prohibited by" the law.

Regardless of whether Trump Jr. received any information, which he insists he did not, the solicitation of the meeting violates this statute, Ryan said.

"Whether or not he actually received that information does not matter in the eyes of the law," Ryan said. "Trump’s solicitation of the information is what constitutes the violation."

"

Aim_Deep schrieb:

Spoiler

We have diplomatic and trade relations with Russia. A Russian lawyer providing opposition research is no different than a former MI-6 guy doing same.

Politico‘s Kenneth Vogel and David Stern reported in early January that the DNC contacted officials from the Ukrainian government for their own oppo research efforts. These contacts did not involve cut-outs, as Veselnitskaya may or may not have been, but did directly assist in searching for damaging information that could be used in the election.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446

Where is investigation? Calls of Treason here?

This is just more nothing burger by hysterical liberal media

"

soneka101 schrieb:

And you

"

deathflower schrieb:

"

soneka101 schrieb:

And you

Nice Ad Hominem attack. People need to have the intention and an action on that intention to be convicted of a crime. Crime of attempt or Planning to murder someone might be another crime but you must prove they taken "substantial step" in committing that crime. Donald Trump Jr. tried to sought information from someone with no meaningful information. The evidence of this "substantial step" is fairly weak and flimsy.

"

soneka101 schrieb:

Ad hominem? I wrote "you" and quoted you, and then I wrote "and you" and quoted scrotie, then I proceeded to say that both of you are making a point that xavderion already made. Where is the Ad Hominem?

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/trump-jr-scandal-puts-his-father-in-greater-risk-on-obstruction-993311811977

https://youtu.be/HO2c_2XAXMw?t=3m37s

On both videos they talk about the same law, that one shouldn't solicit accept or receive money or anything of value from foreign officials.

"Want some damaging information on HRC as courtesy from the Russian government?"

"I love it" *Goes to the meeting*

He did not receive the info, but do you really think there is an strong argument to say he didn't solicit, or accepted?

So, there was no intent or action to solicit or accept the info?

"

soneka101 schrieb:

You

"

deathflower schrieb:

He is stupid and morally wrong not legally wrong. It is something like a killer intend to kill someone but the person is not home. So he called it off. He has the intention but No crime is committed.

And you

"

deathflower schrieb:

Context. If it is misunderstanding, I apologize.

"

soneka101 schrieb:

"

deathflower schrieb:

Context. If it is misunderstanding, I apologize.

No worries, the way I wrote too wasn't very clear either.

About your PS, you have your right to be skeptical about this, that is your opinion and I respect that. I just want to mention that until this is over no one knows the result for sure. In my opinion there's a good chance he will be charged for this, and I only became vocal about my opinion here after doing some reading on the matter, so I disagree that I'm "being led by my nose". There are 2 possibilities and I chose one based on what I've read, and that's it.