Last edited:
General / Off-Topic Trump: Legal Issues (was The Testimony of James Comey)
- Thread starter Robin of Spiritwood
- Start date
- Status
Deleted member 115407
D
Yes. He said he did.
What information were they willing to share, and how was obtained "illegally"? The email chain makes no mention of the alleged information being illegal. As a matter of fact, it specifically mentions that the alleged material was in regards to Hillary's dealings with Russia, which could be any kind of information that could prove harmful to her, and freely available to Russia.
Describing the information as "illegally acquired" without knowing what the information was is complete speculation.
Sure. Why not? There's is nothing illegal or untoward about the president meeting with a foreign dignitary.
I have no way of knowing what the contents of the conversation were. Neither do you or anyone else who wasn't present for the conversation, and the President has no obligation to reveal the contents of that conversation. As a matter of fact, when he's confronted by a hostile press demanding to know, it is well within the scope of his office obfuscate that information.
"Oh, uh... Adoptions, same conversation Jr. had."
Have you people ever considered that that was just a brilliant troll move by Trump? He might as well have been giving you the middle finger while he said it.
And you people took it happily... hook, line, and sinker.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yep...
In this case, he did.
Again
We've already covered Treason in depth - you might want to review.
Minonian
Banned
Why is that?
Minonian
Banned
Let me assure you i don't we don't you of course keep denying it but we stick with our opinion.
Actually, The President has stated that he spoke about adoptions with Putin. The reaction to this in the press and here is a clear indication that the agenda is to prevent The President from executing his duties as he sees fit. It's all nothing more than an attempt to delegitimize the election results and remove The President by means of an organized non-violent coup - at least non-violent to this point.
I'm delighted that we finally have a President unbowed by the press and the armchair lawyers. It demonstrates that he will continue to exercise his authority as The President of The United States without prior approval from his critics, BRAVO!
And of course the most delicious irony of all is remembering when HRC asked The President if he would accept the election results. Echoes of when he was asked about endorsing the winner of the primaries and all his opponents swore they would endorse the winner - until the results were in.
Blatant hypocrisy
Deleted member 115407
D
Right, he said so. And aside from the understanding that the conversation was notionally about Adoptions, we have no way of knowing what the conversation was entailed.
The opposition here still hasn't produced a single statute that would make such a conversation illegal, anyway. Well, all except for Boomers overly-broad application of "thing of value" in the campaign finance law.
Seriously, why don't you people (not you, GJ51) campaign to have the wording of the law changed to "stuff"? You could catch so many political opponents with a campaign finance law that prevented people from accepting "stuff" from foreign governments.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bypassing the legislature and imposing their will by short-cutting the process has been their tactic for several decades. Legislating from the bench and the executive branch federal agencies is the current strategy, which is why they keep losing ground in most elections.
Deleted member 115407
D
The way they legislate from the bench is the worst of all. Again... astounding.
Astounding how much arbitrary power people are willing to give over to the supreme court just so they can have their special interests met.
Can you come up with a legal definition of "thing of value"?
There's a few sources which do share quite a few characteristics.
I just want to say that IMHO "You cant prove it is technically speaking illegal, yet." is about as weak a defense as it gets. Normally supporters of a politician provide arguments why whatever happened is a good thing. Why is it a good thing to work with foreign agencies in a national election? Why is it a good thing to fire a prosecutor, and then brag about how it removed pressure? Why is it a good thing to then have a whole series of proven lies about a meeting? Why is it a good thing to then meet, in sercret, with the leader of the country involved in the investigation while relying on a Russian translator?
This is absurd, and noone here would accept if from a democrat President. But now its a Republican some here go all the way down to "You cant prove its a crime, for sure, yet." As if that makes it perfectly fine. These double standards are interesting.
This is absurd, and noone here would accept if from a democrat President. But now its a Republican some here go all the way down to "You cant prove its a crime, for sure, yet." As if that makes it perfectly fine. These double standards are interesting.
It's a joke.
Deleted member 115407
D
The point is you have people screaming on here about illegality, but haven't produced any evidence that an actual crime has been committed, or any statute by which the activities are proscribed.
Regarding "your no one here" comment - I'm not going to speak for anyone but myself. I certainly have never jumped up and down about the criminality of a President's actions without having knowledge of a specific law that prohibits their actions and hard evidence that prohibited actions have been taken.
Every time Obama signed an executive order or met with another head of state, I didn't jump up and down yelling "TREASON!!! TREASON!!!" and start scouring the internet for reference to any law that has a word in it that might vaguely be applied to prohibit the action in question.
Trump Jr met with a Russian who said they had juice info... OK? So now what?
Trump Sr. met with Putin and supposedly discussed adoptions... OK? So now what?
Well we're not committed to a global scam that allows other countries to plunder our treasury in the name of the environment.
That's pretty great, IMO.
Last edited by a moderator:
You seem to deliberately cherry-pick what you want to acknowledge. The emails clearly mention official governmental support of Russia for Trump during the election, that the Trump campaign was explicitly aware of. He lied about that for a long time. They also lied that the meeting never happened, than that they didnt know what it was for, then they lied about the real topic, then they lied about not knowing whom they met, then they lied about the other people in the room.
So how large was the amount of money the US has agreed to pay into the Green Climate Fund again?
so nothing, in times of need people grasp at straws ... and it sometimes works. in the end al capone was jailed for ... tax evasion! and berlusconi finally ousted for hosting orgies ...
The betrayal was not against America but against the left.
Now the left is trying to wish POTUS Trump out of office by magic thoughts. What's left is a small cult, and it is a religion. It is getting smaller every day. I do believe it is just a handful left of what is left.
Don't be left behind, be right.
I am pretty sure I am right.
Now the left is trying to wish POTUS Trump out of office by magic thoughts. What's left is a small cult, and it is a religion. It is getting smaller every day. I do believe it is just a handful left of what is left.
Don't be left behind, be right.
I am pretty sure I am right.
Last edited:
Deleted member 115407
D
Trump has no redeeming features, but his loyal snake-oil-addicted fans will only desert him when somebody even worse shows up.
- Status