Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

two laws

conspiracy to distort a US election

a campaign soliciting a thing of value from a foreign national

plus all the disclosure forms that were filled out incorrectly, somehow forgetting to disclose the many meetings with Russians. How did they all coincidentally forget to mention their meetings with the Russians?

Anyway, I think it is against the law to hide info when filling out disclosure docs. I'm not sure.

And Mueller hasn't even reported back to us. He'll find financial crimes here there and everywhere. But that's for the future.

DiscoGary wrote:

eric a blair wrote:

lord I hate the 'everyone does it' defense. What does that say about your soul? Rump campaign actively and illegaly solicits info on a former sec state and senator and your response is some lie about charitable contributions. Good luck man.

Anyway, here's the law. And it's not 'accepted' - it's 'solicited'.

https://www.vox.com/world/2017/7/10/15950590/donald-trump-jr-new-york-times-illegal

Nope. Nothing there. That law is referring to campaign contributions and things of value, like the money poured into Hillary's foundations from foreign governments, not political dirt, rumors, or hearsay.

Swing and a miss, again. I wonder what the next conspiracy theory will be?

A contribution is anything of value. Opposition research can be incredibly valuable and worth more than millions in campaign ads.

Non-cash contributions are referred to as "in-kind" contributions. They are often even more valuable than money.

Gary Is A Sad Panda wrote:

We can make excuses. Or we can hold ourselves to the standard we spent years wishing for.

We don't get to say "everything is OK until people in the past are held accountable."

We don't get to say "Well, the people we don't like did id this way, and we hated it, so let's do it their way now when it benefits us."

No. We are men. We are the party of responsible adults who are willing to be held to account for our actions regardless of whether other people are held account to theirs.

No excuses. No exceptions.

I wish this was the standard regardless of personal politics. (Right/Left)

Geeze. Where is the intellectual integrity here? Rumors and hearsay are not the same as campaign contributions no matter how valuable you think they are. The law can't work that way, and if it did then no one would be able to talk to anyone during a campaign because someone MIGHT say something of "value" to one of the campaigns and violate this law. The "value" part is clearly material value as in a gold watch, etc. C'mon guys. Could we have just one single moment where you admit this has gone too far?

DiscoGary wrote:

It doesn't matter. The law doesn't apply here at all. It's just another anti-Trump rant from the left.

The law can't possibly work the way the Dems are going to spin it. What if the Dems had gone down to Panama to find out if McCain was really born there and asked for help from the government to find records, etc. According to today's spin, that would be illegal.

It can't work that way. This is just crazy talk from people who can't accept the election results. I feel sorry for them.

The law does work that way. If McCain's birthplace were in dispute and someone in the Panamanian government helped to find information not publicly available then that person provided a service to the campaign. It would be illegal to solicit or accept such a service.

DiscoGary wrote:

Right. Very inspirational. I agree. But no laws were broken here. The Dems are making up crap. Move on.

You mean the IRS targeting controversy?

When it's people you like, they get every benefit of the doubt.

When it's people you can't stand, they're always guilty.

Like Trump, Jr.'s attorney, you can argue that damaging information about a political opponent is not "a thing of value." Even though political campaigns find that kind of thing incredibly valuable. But everyone gets their day in court in the US. Let them decide.

But in an interview Tuesday morning on NBC’s “Today” show, Veselnitskaya denied possessing any “damaging or sensitive information” about Clinton, remarking that “it was never my intention to have” such information.

“It’s quite possible that maybe they were longing for such information,” she added. “They wanted it so badly.”

American exceptionalism meets planning, coordination and discipline.

They wanted it so bad....

And it's very likely absolutely true Trump himself knew next to nothing about it. Every single person surrounding the idiot however...

I thought this was fake news guys? The Dear Leader got into office, likely unknowingly, by very high crimes. Which is exactly what one can expect from an impulsive idiot.

Are you happy? What now?

Fat hurts wrote:

DiscoGary wrote:

It doesn't matter. The law doesn't apply here at all. It's just another anti-Trump rant from the left.

The law can't possibly work the way the Dems are going to spin it. What if the Dems had gone down to Panama to find out if McCain was really born there and asked for help from the government to find records, etc. According to today's spin, that would be illegal.

It can't work that way. This is just crazy talk from people who can't accept the election results. I feel sorry for them.

The law does work that way. If McCain's birthplace were in dispute and someone in the Panamanian government helped to find information not publicly available then that person provided a service to the campaign. It would be illegal to solicit or accept such a service.

So when the NYTimes puts 20 reporters on Trump's team to dig up dirt and then hands it to the Dems (which happens all the time), it counts as a campaign contribution? I agree that there is a YUGE amount of value there, but I don't see any laws being broken, just unethical media practices.

In fact, I can't see how the first amendment and the freedom of the press would work if we tried to implement this law vigorously.

Gary, I make in-kind contributions to charities every year and I take a tax deduction for it. It would be for a court to decide what is valuable and what is not. But the concept is well established in the law.

Campaigns pay big bucks for opposition research. It's definitely valuable.

If the Trump campaign were just soliciting idle rumors and hearsay then that would not be deemed as valuable. No crime there.

But that's not what was happening. The emails reveal that Trump Jr. believed he was getting information from Russia that was credible and was damaging to the Clintons. That's a crime.

DiscoGary wrote:

Geeze. Where is the intellectual integrity here?

Awfully convenient of you to bring it up now.

DiscoGary wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

The law does work that way. If McCain's birthplace were in dispute and someone in the Panamanian government helped to find information not publicly available then that person provided a service to the campaign. It would be illegal to solicit or accept such a service.

So when the NYTimes puts 20 reporters on Trump's team to dig up dirt and then hands it to the Dems (which happens all the time), it counts as a campaign contribution? I agree that there is a YUGE amount of value there, but I don't see any laws being broken, just unethical media practices.

In fact, I can't see how the first amendment and the freedom of the press would work if we tried to implement this law vigorously.

you have no proof of this NYT accusation

and there is a major diff between foreign donors to campaigns and domestic

DiscoGary wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

The law does work that way. If McCain's birthplace were in dispute and someone in the Panamanian government helped to find information not publicly available then that person provided a service to the campaign. It would be illegal to solicit or accept such a service.

So when the NYTimes puts 20 reporters on Trump's team to dig up dirt and then hands it to the Dems (which happens all the time), it counts as a campaign contribution? I agree that there is a YUGE amount of value there, but I don't see any laws being broken, just unethical media practices.

In fact, I can't see how the first amendment and the freedom of the press would work if we tried to implement this law vigorously.

If they provided unpublished research and they were foreign nationals it would be against the law.

Otherwise, it would be considered a normal campaign contribution.

But you are assuming that the reporters are giving the Dems secret research that is not published and is useful to the campaign. If they are just digging up dirt for a story then they are exercising their rights as journalists.

They would get more value if they just put it on page one. Which is happening now. I don't understand how you can be mad at the NYT for reaching for low-hanging fruit. The level of corruption in this administration is only matched by their arrogance and sloth in hiding it.

It seems impossible for you to objective. If a foreign representative offers something of value a member of a presidential campaign, it's the campaign's responsibility to contact federal authorities. I can believe that Trump, Jr. was completely ignorant to 52 USC 30121, 36 USC 510, but ignorance is no excuse.

Russian state media can publish whatever they want. That has no bearing on First Amendment rights. What they can't do is give something value to presidential campaign.

I wish the thumpers would just step back for a second and realize that they gave trump the benefit of the doubt, and trump took advantage of that. Like he always does.

You have been lied to, his campaign has collaborated with a hostile country, there have been numerous ethical lapses, he has alienated allies and befriended tyrants...

You people are like the banks that trusted trump and then he went bankrupt to avoid paying you back. You are like the contractors who trusted trump but never got paid for their work, You are like the students who trusted trump but were just getting ripped off.

The RepubliKKKans on talk radio are avoiding this Lil Donnie story like the plague. Rush L wanted to talk about every subject but this story. The S Hannity guest host was talking about the JFK assasination, lol.😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂Phucking hallarious!

Yes, lets move on....

No lock her up

No wall ( "you better believe it")

No health care ( "repeal and replace day 1")

No Muslim ban

No jobs increase

No bombing of ISIS ("so fast your head will spin")

No withdrawal from NATO

No Russian partnership (to fight ISIS)

No Flynn ("a great man")

No good approval rating ("best ever, you just can't believe the polls")

No avoiding a special investigation

No Chinese currency manipulation pushback

Yes, she bitch slapped my hand away. Lowest character POTUS of all time! Yippee!!

GHBTP!

Looooooooooooooser! We the American people can't take al the winning

Jeff Wigand wrote:

It seems impossible for you to objective.

It is indeed. This is how fascism works.

It's how Trump still has 30-something approval ratings, slightly higher in his party.

Rufus Muhammad wrote:

The RepubliKKKans on talk radio are avoiding this Lil Donnie story like the plague. Rush L wanted to talk about every subject but this story. The S Hannity guest host was talking about the JFK assasination, lol.😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂Phucking hallarious!

Really? They have no defense at all? I expected them to at least pull out the "Don Jr. didn't know what he was doing" defense.

Fat hurts wrote:

Rufus Muhammad wrote:

The RepubliKKKans on talk radio are avoiding this Lil Donnie story like the plague. Rush L wanted to talk about every subject but this story. The S Hannity guest host was talking about the JFK assasination, lol.😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂Phucking hallarious!

Really? They have no defense at all? I expected them to at least pull out the "Don Jr. didn't know what he was doing" defense.

Give them a day or two to find something new to say about Clinton or Obama to rally the mindless hordes.