Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
That doesn't change the fact that she wasn't arrested for what she thought. She was arrested for what she did.
No, it doesn't matter what the candidates position on NATO is today. What is relevant is their position at the time of the election and the hacking.No, FARA covers political activity.If it happened just as you said, possibly the Trump Associate could be charged with not registering as a Foreign Agent. If the Trump associate had just said, that would be helpful without giving him any instruction on when to release the information, there would probably be no charge. However, it is likely that either this person would have lied or misrepresented the situation to salvage his career to the FBI or Congress . And that is illegal. Also, if there had been any quid pro quo arrangement, it would have been illegal.I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.
Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.
Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.
Any takers?
.
However, the damage would not be an associate of Trump found guilty but rather the political fall out of confirmation that the Russians helped Trump win the election which a lot of Trump supporters do not believe.
OK, let's look at this. The FARA deals with representing the interest of a foreign government to influence the US government or one of its agencies. I don't think it would apply to private parties or private political campaigns. And why would anyone need to CYA when no laws were broken? Also I have yet to see any proof that the supposed Russian effort wasn't just to hurt the bitch and coincidentally aid anyone who was her opponent. Do you seriously think Wikileaks wouldn't have released the emails regardless if her opponent was Jeb, Cruz or anyone else? It's about time you folks disengage your political animosity and engage you brain for a change.
.
"FARA is a disclosure statute that requires persons acting as agents of foreign principals in a political or quasi-political capacity to make periodic public disclosure of their relationship with the foreign principal, as well as activities, receipts and disbursements in support of those activities.
Clinton has always been a strong supporter of NATO, an organization that Putin has acknowledge as an enemy of the Russia People. Trump as a candidate states that NATO is obsolete and the U.S. might no longer be a part of the alliance. So if a member of the Trump campaign works with Russia to disclose information to defeat Clinton and elect Donald Trump, it would be clear violation of the statue of 1938 as well as the 1966 revision.
Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA)
Considering Trump has reconsidered his position on NATO I think that would be difficult to prove and so far everyone with knowledge of the investigation says there is no evidence of any such activity at this point. Since the election was 6 months ago if there were evidence you'd think they would know about it. I think that scenario is a bit of a stretch, but if it were proven you might have a point.
This is the definition of political activity under FARA and for it to apply it would have to include your scenario of something very similar.
(o) The term ‘‘political activities’’ means any activity that the person engaging in believes will, or that the person intends to, in any way influence any agency or official of the Government of the United States or any section of the public within the United States with reference to formulating, adopting, or changing the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or with reference to the political or public interests, policies, or relations of a government of a foreign country or a foreign political party; (p) The term ‘‘political consultant’’ means any person who engages in informing or advising any other person with reference to the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or the political or public interest, policies, or relations of a foreign country or of a foreign political party.
Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA)
.
BothFrom a legal standpoint, what Tuesday it might be is irrelevant. What is relevant would be the Trump associate telling the Russian when to release the damaging information to defeat Hillary.Since the Trump associate was working with the Russian by requesting the release of the information on the Tuesday of the election, he was operating as an agent for a foreign power and would be required to register as such an agent and make periodic full disclosure. The punish is a fine of up to $10,000 and/or 5 years in prison.In your scenario, probably no law is being broken. If they were complicit in spreading false Informstion to influence an election then they are probably flirting with treason. If they told the Russians not to react to sanctions because the new administration will be more forgiving then I'm guessing that's a violation... not sure which exact law it's breaking though. Perhaps treason as well. Undermining our governmentI've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.
Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.
Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.
Any takers?
.
Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA)
Excuse me, the term "Tuesday" is the generic term, election day was NOT part of it. That's one of the flaws of you regressives, you like to read things into everything that really isn't there.
.
But the real question is who's interest would the Trump associate be trying to advance? Trump or the Russians?
.
Yeah, if you are being honest you'd recognize that CNN has moved much closer to MSNBC both in their news programs in with their online articles. You make a fair point that they are simply reporting on Trumps lies, but they also load panels with 5 against 1 and then spend a whole hour attacking Trump while the 1 surrogate tries and stick up for him.Most the media is against Trump but the biggest cable news network in the USA is Fox and they definately lean Right and play defense for Trump. .
The media isn't against Trump, They're against the orange con-man who can't tell the truth about anything. All they do is point out how Trump lied about (fill in the blank) , and you view it as them being against Trump.
No, it doesn't matter what the candidates position on NATO is today. What is relevant is their position at the time of the election and the hacking.No, FARA covers political activity.If it happened just as you said, possibly the Trump Associate could be charged with not registering as a Foreign Agent. If the Trump associate had just said, that would be helpful without giving him any instruction on when to release the information, there would probably be no charge. However, it is likely that either this person would have lied or misrepresented the situation to salvage his career to the FBI or Congress . And that is illegal. Also, if there had been any quid pro quo arrangement, it would have been illegal.I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.
Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.
Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.
Any takers?
.
However, the damage would not be an associate of Trump found guilty but rather the political fall out of confirmation that the Russians helped Trump win the election which a lot of Trump supporters do not believe.
OK, let's look at this. The FARA deals with representing the interest of a foreign government to influence the US government or one of its agencies. I don't think it would apply to private parties or private political campaigns. And why would anyone need to CYA when no laws were broken? Also I have yet to see any proof that the supposed Russian effort wasn't just to hurt the bitch and coincidentally aid anyone who was her opponent. Do you seriously think Wikileaks wouldn't have released the emails regardless if her opponent was Jeb, Cruz or anyone else? It's about time you folks disengage your political animosity and engage you brain for a change.
.
"FARA is a disclosure statute that requires persons acting as agents of foreign principals in a political or quasi-political capacity to make periodic public disclosure of their relationship with the foreign principal, as well as activities, receipts and disbursements in support of those activities.
Clinton has always been a strong supporter of NATO, an organization that Putin has acknowledge as an enemy of the Russia People. Trump as a candidate states that NATO is obsolete and the U.S. might no longer be a part of the alliance. So if a member of the Trump campaign works with Russia to disclose information to defeat Clinton and elect Donald Trump, it would be clear violation of the statue of 1938 as well as the 1966 revision.
Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA)
Considering Trump has reconsidered his position on NATO I think that would be difficult to prove and so far everyone with knowledge of the investigation says there is no evidence of any such activity at this point. Since the election was 6 months ago if there were evidence you'd think they would know about it. I think that scenario is a bit of a stretch, but if it were proven you might have a point.
This is the definition of political activity under FARA and for it to apply it would have to include your scenario of something very similar.
(o) The term ‘‘political activities’’ means any activity that the person engaging in believes will, or that the person intends to, in any way influence any agency or official of the Government of the United States or any section of the public within the United States with reference to formulating, adopting, or changing the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or with reference to the political or public interests, policies, or relations of a government of a foreign country or a foreign political party; (p) The term ‘‘political consultant’’ means any person who engages in informing or advising any other person with reference to the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or the political or public interest, policies, or relations of a foreign country or of a foreign political party.
Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA)
.
Clearly at that time the Russians would rather have Trump and not Clinton in the Oval Office. Their reason for doing so would clearly be to influence actions of US government under the next president. If any member of Trump campaign helped the Russians in anyway, they would be violating the statue.
- Russia's policy toward NATO is well known. They have consider NATO an obsolete relic of postwar Europe and should be disbanded and have steadfastly worked toward that goal, politically, militarily, and economically.
- Clinton was a strong advocate of long standing US policy to support the NATO and has clashed with Putin several times over that policy.
- Trump during the election process said the UN was obsolete and threaten to take the US out the alliance which would destroy it as a political and military force. Also before the election, Trump was making statements about improving relations with Russia and how good it would be to have them as ally.
BothFrom a legal standpoint, what Tuesday it might be is irrelevant. What is relevant would be the Trump associate telling the Russian when to release the damaging information to defeat Hillary.Since the Trump associate was working with the Russian by requesting the release of the information on the Tuesday of the election, he was operating as an agent for a foreign power and would be required to register as such an agent and make periodic full disclosure. The punish is a fine of up to $10,000 and/or 5 years in prison.In your scenario, probably no law is being broken. If they were complicit in spreading false Informstion to influence an election then they are probably flirting with treason. If they told the Russians not to react to sanctions because the new administration will be more forgiving then I'm guessing that's a violation... not sure which exact law it's breaking though. Perhaps treason as well. Undermining our government
Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA)
Excuse me, the term "Tuesday" is the generic term, election day was NOT part of it. That's one of the flaws of you regressives, you like to read things into everything that really isn't there.
.
But the real question is who's interest would the Trump associate be trying to advance? Trump or the Russians?
.
Trump's policy at the time was Pro-Russian compared to the Clinton policy. Russia certainly had reason to work toward defeating Clinton and the Trump associates certainly had reason to help them. One of the primary goals of the investigation will be to determine whether the Trump campaign associates did or did not help them. If they did, they are going to be in deep shit.
A lot depends on what was said and done by the Trump associates. I don't see much happening legally unless something really new is uncovered. At most somebody pleads guilty to a lesser charge and is put on probation. The problem will be the political ramifications of a real investigation that confirms the Russians helped elect Trump. That's something that a lot of Trump supporters don't accept.No, it doesn't matter what the candidates position on NATO is today. What is relevant is their position at the time of the election and the hacking.No, FARA covers political activity.If it happened just as you said, possibly the Trump Associate could be charged with not registering as a Foreign Agent. If the Trump associate had just said, that would be helpful without giving him any instruction on when to release the information, there would probably be no charge. However, it is likely that either this person would have lied or misrepresented the situation to salvage his career to the FBI or Congress . And that is illegal. Also, if there had been any quid pro quo arrangement, it would have been illegal.
However, the damage would not be an associate of Trump found guilty but rather the political fall out of confirmation that the Russians helped Trump win the election which a lot of Trump supporters do not believe.
OK, let's look at this. The FARA deals with representing the interest of a foreign government to influence the US government or one of its agencies. I don't think it would apply to private parties or private political campaigns. And why would anyone need to CYA when no laws were broken? Also I have yet to see any proof that the supposed Russian effort wasn't just to hurt the bitch and coincidentally aid anyone who was her opponent. Do you seriously think Wikileaks wouldn't have released the emails regardless if her opponent was Jeb, Cruz or anyone else? It's about time you folks disengage your political animosity and engage you brain for a change.
.
"FARA is a disclosure statute that requires persons acting as agents of foreign principals in a political or quasi-political capacity to make periodic public disclosure of their relationship with the foreign principal, as well as activities, receipts and disbursements in support of those activities.
Clinton has always been a strong supporter of NATO, an organization that Putin has acknowledge as an enemy of the Russia People. Trump as a candidate states that NATO is obsolete and the U.S. might no longer be a part of the alliance. So if a member of the Trump campaign works with Russia to disclose information to defeat Clinton and elect Donald Trump, it would be clear violation of the statue of 1938 as well as the 1966 revision.
Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA)
Considering Trump has reconsidered his position on NATO I think that would be difficult to prove and so far everyone with knowledge of the investigation says there is no evidence of any such activity at this point. Since the election was 6 months ago if there were evidence you'd think they would know about it. I think that scenario is a bit of a stretch, but if it were proven you might have a point.
This is the definition of political activity under FARA and for it to apply it would have to include your scenario of something very similar.
(o) The term ‘‘political activities’’ means any activity that the person engaging in believes will, or that the person intends to, in any way influence any agency or official of the Government of the United States or any section of the public within the United States with reference to formulating, adopting, or changing the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or with reference to the political or public interests, policies, or relations of a government of a foreign country or a foreign political party; (p) The term ‘‘political consultant’’ means any person who engages in informing or advising any other person with reference to the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or the political or public interest, policies, or relations of a foreign country or of a foreign political party.
Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA)
.
Clearly at that time the Russians would rather have Trump and not Clinton in the Oval Office. Their reason for doing so would clearly be to influence actions of US government under the next president. If any member of Trump campaign helped the Russians in anyway, they would be violating the statue.
- Russia's policy toward NATO is well known. They have consider NATO an obsolete relic of postwar Europe and should be disbanded and have steadfastly worked toward that goal, politically, militarily, and economically.
- Clinton was a strong advocate of long standing US policy to support the NATO and has clashed with Putin several times over that policy.
- Trump during the election process said the UN was obsolete and threaten to take the US out the alliance which would destroy it as a political and military force. Also before the election, Trump was making statements about improving relations with Russia and how good it would be to have them as ally.
Only thing you're forgetting is the proof that they were knowingly doing it to advance Russia's interest and not Trumps. I think that would require very specific verbiage and I seriously doubt anyone would do that. A simple, "we're going to review all current policies", wouldn't do it, because every president does that.
.
A lot depends on what was said and done by the Trump associates. I don't see much happening legally unless something really new is uncovered. At most somebody pleads guilty to a lesser charge and is put on probation. The problem will be the political ramifications of a real investigation that confirms the Russians helped elect Trump. That's something that a lot of Trump supporters don't accept.No, it doesn't matter what the candidates position on NATO is today. What is relevant is their position at the time of the election and the hacking.No, FARA covers political activity.OK, let's look at this. The FARA deals with representing the interest of a foreign government to influence the US government or one of its agencies. I don't think it would apply to private parties or private political campaigns. And why would anyone need to CYA when no laws were broken? Also I have yet to see any proof that the supposed Russian effort wasn't just to hurt the bitch and coincidentally aid anyone who was her opponent. Do you seriously think Wikileaks wouldn't have released the emails regardless if her opponent was Jeb, Cruz or anyone else? It's about time you folks disengage your political animosity and engage you brain for a change.
.
"FARA is a disclosure statute that requires persons acting as agents of foreign principals in a political or quasi-political capacity to make periodic public disclosure of their relationship with the foreign principal, as well as activities, receipts and disbursements in support of those activities.
Clinton has always been a strong supporter of NATO, an organization that Putin has acknowledge as an enemy of the Russia People. Trump as a candidate states that NATO is obsolete and the U.S. might no longer be a part of the alliance. So if a member of the Trump campaign works with Russia to disclose information to defeat Clinton and elect Donald Trump, it would be clear violation of the statue of 1938 as well as the 1966 revision.
Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA)
Considering Trump has reconsidered his position on NATO I think that would be difficult to prove and so far everyone with knowledge of the investigation says there is no evidence of any such activity at this point. Since the election was 6 months ago if there were evidence you'd think they would know about it. I think that scenario is a bit of a stretch, but if it were proven you might have a point.
This is the definition of political activity under FARA and for it to apply it would have to include your scenario of something very similar.
(o) The term ‘‘political activities’’ means any activity that the person engaging in believes will, or that the person intends to, in any way influence any agency or official of the Government of the United States or any section of the public within the United States with reference to formulating, adopting, or changing the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or with reference to the political or public interests, policies, or relations of a government of a foreign country or a foreign political party; (p) The term ‘‘political consultant’’ means any person who engages in informing or advising any other person with reference to the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or the political or public interest, policies, or relations of a foreign country or of a foreign political party.
Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA)
.
Clearly at that time the Russians would rather have Trump and not Clinton in the Oval Office. Their reason for doing so would clearly be to influence actions of US government under the next president. If any member of Trump campaign helped the Russians in anyway, they would be violating the statue.
- Russia's policy toward NATO is well known. They have consider NATO an obsolete relic of postwar Europe and should be disbanded and have steadfastly worked toward that goal, politically, militarily, and economically.
- Clinton was a strong advocate of long standing US policy to support the NATO and has clashed with Putin several times over that policy.
- Trump during the election process said the UN was obsolete and threaten to take the US out the alliance which would destroy it as a political and military force. Also before the election, Trump was making statements about improving relations with Russia and how good it would be to have them as ally.
Only thing you're forgetting is the proof that they were knowingly doing it to advance Russia's interest and not Trumps. I think that would require very specific verbiage and I seriously doubt anyone would do that. A simple, "we're going to review all current policies", wouldn't do it, because every president does that.
.
I don't think think real people care that much nor do I think you accurately forecast the future. Just look at the last too politicized "investigations" that the Right did to discredit Hillary... Benghazi and the Email server. Two nothing burgers... are you really gonna say that the Clinton benefited in the end? No, both investigations turned up nothing but she took a big hit.A lot depends on what was said and done by the Trump associates. I don't see much happening legally unless something really new is uncovered. At most somebody pleads guilty to a lesser charge and is put on probation. The problem will be the political ramifications of a real investigation that confirms the Russians helped elect Trump. That's something that a lot of Trump supporters don't accept.No, it doesn't matter what the candidates position on NATO is today. What is relevant is their position at the time of the election and the hacking.No, FARA covers political activity.
"FARA is a disclosure statute that requires persons acting as agents of foreign principals in a political or quasi-political capacity to make periodic public disclosure of their relationship with the foreign principal, as well as activities, receipts and disbursements in support of those activities.
Clinton has always been a strong supporter of NATO, an organization that Putin has acknowledge as an enemy of the Russia People. Trump as a candidate states that NATO is obsolete and the U.S. might no longer be a part of the alliance. So if a member of the Trump campaign works with Russia to disclose information to defeat Clinton and elect Donald Trump, it would be clear violation of the statue of 1938 as well as the 1966 revision.
Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA)
Considering Trump has reconsidered his position on NATO I think that would be difficult to prove and so far everyone with knowledge of the investigation says there is no evidence of any such activity at this point. Since the election was 6 months ago if there were evidence you'd think they would know about it. I think that scenario is a bit of a stretch, but if it were proven you might have a point.
This is the definition of political activity under FARA and for it to apply it would have to include your scenario of something very similar.
(o) The term ‘‘political activities’’ means any activity that the person engaging in believes will, or that the person intends to, in any way influence any agency or official of the Government of the United States or any section of the public within the United States with reference to formulating, adopting, or changing the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or with reference to the political or public interests, policies, or relations of a government of a foreign country or a foreign political party; (p) The term ‘‘political consultant’’ means any person who engages in informing or advising any other person with reference to the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or the political or public interest, policies, or relations of a foreign country or of a foreign political party.
Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA)
.
Clearly at that time the Russians would rather have Trump and not Clinton in the Oval Office. Their reason for doing so would clearly be to influence actions of US government under the next president. If any member of Trump campaign helped the Russians in anyway, they would be violating the statue.
- Russia's policy toward NATO is well known. They have consider NATO an obsolete relic of postwar Europe and should be disbanded and have steadfastly worked toward that goal, politically, militarily, and economically.
- Clinton was a strong advocate of long standing US policy to support the NATO and has clashed with Putin several times over that policy.
- Trump during the election process said the UN was obsolete and threaten to take the US out the alliance which would destroy it as a political and military force. Also before the election, Trump was making statements about improving relations with Russia and how good it would be to have them as ally.
Only thing you're forgetting is the proof that they were knowingly doing it to advance Russia's interest and not Trumps. I think that would require very specific verbiage and I seriously doubt anyone would do that. A simple, "we're going to review all current policies", wouldn't do it, because every president does that.
.
And what happens when it turns up to be one giant nothing burger? The best I'm seeing at this point is Flynn may get busted for not reporting a payment properly, not for any collusion. Stone and Manafort are cooperating, that should tell you something. It won't look good for the commiecrats, the media or the intel agencies if this thing just fizzles or it turns out Seth Rich really was the leak. And all those red State Trump voters won't let you forget. The midterm massacre may be your own.
.
How about people who are extremely careless with classified information and leave it easily available to be perused by unauthorized people? Should they face harsh treatment too?That's what you get when you call up criminals, terrorists, or others subject to FISA and criminal wiretaps. Hint - if you dial 911, your phone is being recorded. Obama isn't wiretaping your house.
Yeah, the maobama regime and hold overs breaking espionage laws. How hard are you going to cry when their identities are revealed and they're prosecuted.
.
I don't defend criminals. If they released classified material, they have to pay the piper. In fact, anyone who gives classified material to our enemies should face even harsher treatment.
I don't think think real people care that much nor do I think you accurately forecast the future. Just look at the last too politicized "investigations" that the Right did to discredit Hillary... Benghazi and the Email server. Two nothing burgers... are you really gonna say that the Clinton benefited in the end? No, both investigations turned up nothing but she took a big hit.A lot depends on what was said and done by the Trump associates. I don't see much happening legally unless something really new is uncovered. At most somebody pleads guilty to a lesser charge and is put on probation. The problem will be the political ramifications of a real investigation that confirms the Russians helped elect Trump. That's something that a lot of Trump supporters don't accept.No, it doesn't matter what the candidates position on NATO is today. What is relevant is their position at the time of the election and the hacking.Considering Trump has reconsidered his position on NATO I think that would be difficult to prove and so far everyone with knowledge of the investigation says there is no evidence of any such activity at this point. Since the election was 6 months ago if there were evidence you'd think they would know about it. I think that scenario is a bit of a stretch, but if it were proven you might have a point.
This is the definition of political activity under FARA and for it to apply it would have to include your scenario of something very similar.
(o) The term ‘‘political activities’’ means any activity that the person engaging in believes will, or that the person intends to, in any way influence any agency or official of the Government of the United States or any section of the public within the United States with reference to formulating, adopting, or changing the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or with reference to the political or public interests, policies, or relations of a government of a foreign country or a foreign political party; (p) The term ‘‘political consultant’’ means any person who engages in informing or advising any other person with reference to the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or the political or public interest, policies, or relations of a foreign country or of a foreign political party.
Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA)
.
Clearly at that time the Russians would rather have Trump and not Clinton in the Oval Office. Their reason for doing so would clearly be to influence actions of US government under the next president. If any member of Trump campaign helped the Russians in anyway, they would be violating the statue.
- Russia's policy toward NATO is well known. They have consider NATO an obsolete relic of postwar Europe and should be disbanded and have steadfastly worked toward that goal, politically, militarily, and economically.
- Clinton was a strong advocate of long standing US policy to support the NATO and has clashed with Putin several times over that policy.
- Trump during the election process said the UN was obsolete and threaten to take the US out the alliance which would destroy it as a political and military force. Also before the election, Trump was making statements about improving relations with Russia and how good it would be to have them as ally.
Only thing you're forgetting is the proof that they were knowingly doing it to advance Russia's interest and not Trumps. I think that would require very specific verbiage and I seriously doubt anyone would do that. A simple, "we're going to review all current policies", wouldn't do it, because every president does that.
.
And what happens when it turns up to be one giant nothing burger? The best I'm seeing at this point is Flynn may get busted for not reporting a payment properly, not for any collusion. Stone and Manafort are cooperating, that should tell you something. It won't look good for the commiecrats, the media or the intel agencies if this thing just fizzles or it turns out Seth Rich really was the leak. And all those red State Trump voters won't let you forget. The midterm massacre may be your own.
.
Problem for you is the tables are turned now and Trump is Clinton.
Also Finkle is Einhorn
Depends on what you call nothing. Most probably no one is going to go to jail. The investigation is not likely to help republican in midterms because republicans winning an election with the help of the Russians is not going to win any votes. However, I think what happens with healthcare, tax cuts, immigration, and how democrats spin it is going to be a big deal. Of course, there is always our unpredictable president.A lot depends on what was said and done by the Trump associates. I don't see much happening legally unless something really new is uncovered. At most somebody pleads guilty to a lesser charge and is put on probation. The problem will be the political ramifications of a real investigation that confirms the Russians helped elect Trump. That's something that a lot of Trump supporters don't accept.No, it doesn't matter what the candidates position on NATO is today. What is relevant is their position at the time of the election and the hacking.No, FARA covers political activity.
"FARA is a disclosure statute that requires persons acting as agents of foreign principals in a political or quasi-political capacity to make periodic public disclosure of their relationship with the foreign principal, as well as activities, receipts and disbursements in support of those activities.
Clinton has always been a strong supporter of NATO, an organization that Putin has acknowledge as an enemy of the Russia People. Trump as a candidate states that NATO is obsolete and the U.S. might no longer be a part of the alliance. So if a member of the Trump campaign works with Russia to disclose information to defeat Clinton and elect Donald Trump, it would be clear violation of the statue of 1938 as well as the 1966 revision.
Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA)
Considering Trump has reconsidered his position on NATO I think that would be difficult to prove and so far everyone with knowledge of the investigation says there is no evidence of any such activity at this point. Since the election was 6 months ago if there were evidence you'd think they would know about it. I think that scenario is a bit of a stretch, but if it were proven you might have a point.
This is the definition of political activity under FARA and for it to apply it would have to include your scenario of something very similar.
(o) The term ‘‘political activities’’ means any activity that the person engaging in believes will, or that the person intends to, in any way influence any agency or official of the Government of the United States or any section of the public within the United States with reference to formulating, adopting, or changing the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or with reference to the political or public interests, policies, or relations of a government of a foreign country or a foreign political party; (p) The term ‘‘political consultant’’ means any person who engages in informing or advising any other person with reference to the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or the political or public interest, policies, or relations of a foreign country or of a foreign political party.
Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA)
.
Clearly at that time the Russians would rather have Trump and not Clinton in the Oval Office. Their reason for doing so would clearly be to influence actions of US government under the next president. If any member of Trump campaign helped the Russians in anyway, they would be violating the statue.
- Russia's policy toward NATO is well known. They have consider NATO an obsolete relic of postwar Europe and should be disbanded and have steadfastly worked toward that goal, politically, militarily, and economically.
- Clinton was a strong advocate of long standing US policy to support the NATO and has clashed with Putin several times over that policy.
- Trump during the election process said the UN was obsolete and threaten to take the US out the alliance which would destroy it as a political and military force. Also before the election, Trump was making statements about improving relations with Russia and how good it would be to have them as ally.
Only thing you're forgetting is the proof that they were knowingly doing it to advance Russia's interest and not Trumps. I think that would require very specific verbiage and I seriously doubt anyone would do that. A simple, "we're going to review all current policies", wouldn't do it, because every president does that.
.
And what happens when it turns up to be one giant nothing burger? The best I'm seeing at this point is Flynn may get busted for not reporting a payment properly, not for any collusion. Stone and Manafort are cooperating, that should tell you something. It won't look good for the commiecrats, the media or the intel agencies if this thing just fizzles or it turns out Seth Rich really was the leak. And all those red State Trump voters won't let you forget. The midterm massacre may be your own.
.
Depends on what you call nothing. Most probably no one is going to go to jail. The investigation is not likely to help republican in midterms because republicans winning an election with the help of the Russians is not going to win any votes. However, I think what happens with healthcare, tax cuts, immigration, and how democrats spin it is going to be a big deal. Of course, there is always our unpredictable president.A lot depends on what was said and done by the Trump associates. I don't see much happening legally unless something really new is uncovered. At most somebody pleads guilty to a lesser charge and is put on probation. The problem will be the political ramifications of a real investigation that confirms the Russians helped elect Trump. That's something that a lot of Trump supporters don't accept.No, it doesn't matter what the candidates position on NATO is today. What is relevant is their position at the time of the election and the hacking.Considering Trump has reconsidered his position on NATO I think that would be difficult to prove and so far everyone with knowledge of the investigation says there is no evidence of any such activity at this point. Since the election was 6 months ago if there were evidence you'd think they would know about it. I think that scenario is a bit of a stretch, but if it were proven you might have a point.
This is the definition of political activity under FARA and for it to apply it would have to include your scenario of something very similar.
(o) The term ‘‘political activities’’ means any activity that the person engaging in believes will, or that the person intends to, in any way influence any agency or official of the Government of the United States or any section of the public within the United States with reference to formulating, adopting, or changing the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or with reference to the political or public interests, policies, or relations of a government of a foreign country or a foreign political party; (p) The term ‘‘political consultant’’ means any person who engages in informing or advising any other person with reference to the domestic or foreign policies of the United States or the political or public interest, policies, or relations of a foreign country or of a foreign political party.
Foreign Agents Registration Unit (FARA)
.
Clearly at that time the Russians would rather have Trump and not Clinton in the Oval Office. Their reason for doing so would clearly be to influence actions of US government under the next president. If any member of Trump campaign helped the Russians in anyway, they would be violating the statue.
- Russia's policy toward NATO is well known. They have consider NATO an obsolete relic of postwar Europe and should be disbanded and have steadfastly worked toward that goal, politically, militarily, and economically.
- Clinton was a strong advocate of long standing US policy to support the NATO and has clashed with Putin several times over that policy.
- Trump during the election process said the UN was obsolete and threaten to take the US out the alliance which would destroy it as a political and military force. Also before the election, Trump was making statements about improving relations with Russia and how good it would be to have them as ally.
Only thing you're forgetting is the proof that they were knowingly doing it to advance Russia's interest and not Trumps. I think that would require very specific verbiage and I seriously doubt anyone would do that. A simple, "we're going to review all current policies", wouldn't do it, because every president does that.
.
And what happens when it turns up to be one giant nothing burger? The best I'm seeing at this point is Flynn may get busted for not reporting a payment properly, not for any collusion. Stone and Manafort are cooperating, that should tell you something. It won't look good for the commiecrats, the media or the intel agencies if this thing just fizzles or it turns out Seth Rich really was the leak. And all those red State Trump voters won't let you forget. The midterm massacre may be your own.
.
Probably the most important thing that will come out of this investigation is to what extent Russians actually interfered in the election and how they did it. I think this really is a more serious issue than most people believe. Russians, planting false stories in media and interference in key congressional elections have been mentioned. The Russians have been doing this in other countries for years, possible even the US. Also, what steps can be taken to keep the Russians or other foreign countries from meddling in our elections.
Im sorry man, i've read pages of this but the whole "No evidence" thing is getting real old. There have been several reputable and bi partisan congressmen and intel officials that have actually seen the intelligence who all justify the collusion investigation. True there has been no hard evidence presented to the public... To use the cliche... There is a ton of smoke, you see the smoke right? You are asking to see the fire... The fire hasn't been found yet, but that doesn't mean you don't follow the smoke.Depends on what you call nothing. Most probably no one is going to go to jail. The investigation is not likely to help republican in midterms because republicans winning an election with the help of the Russians is not going to win any votes. However, I think what happens with healthcare, tax cuts, immigration, and how democrats spin it is going to be a big deal. Of course, there is always our unpredictable president.A lot depends on what was said and done by the Trump associates. I don't see much happening legally unless something really new is uncovered. At most somebody pleads guilty to a lesser charge and is put on probation. The problem will be the political ramifications of a real investigation that confirms the Russians helped elect Trump. That's something that a lot of Trump supporters don't accept.No, it doesn't matter what the candidates position on NATO is today. What is relevant is their position at the time of the election and the hacking.
Clearly at that time the Russians would rather have Trump and not Clinton in the Oval Office. Their reason for doing so would clearly be to influence actions of US government under the next president. If any member of Trump campaign helped the Russians in anyway, they would be violating the statue.
- Russia's policy toward NATO is well known. They have consider NATO an obsolete relic of postwar Europe and should be disbanded and have steadfastly worked toward that goal, politically, militarily, and economically.
- Clinton was a strong advocate of long standing US policy to support the NATO and has clashed with Putin several times over that policy.
- Trump during the election process said the UN was obsolete and threaten to take the US out the alliance which would destroy it as a political and military force. Also before the election, Trump was making statements about improving relations with Russia and how good it would be to have them as ally.
Only thing you're forgetting is the proof that they were knowingly doing it to advance Russia's interest and not Trumps. I think that would require very specific verbiage and I seriously doubt anyone would do that. A simple, "we're going to review all current policies", wouldn't do it, because every president does that.
.
And what happens when it turns up to be one giant nothing burger? The best I'm seeing at this point is Flynn may get busted for not reporting a payment properly, not for any collusion. Stone and Manafort are cooperating, that should tell you something. It won't look good for the commiecrats, the media or the intel agencies if this thing just fizzles or it turns out Seth Rich really was the leak. And all those red State Trump voters won't let you forget. The midterm massacre may be your own.
.
Probably the most important thing that will come out of this investigation is to what extent Russians actually interfered in the election and how they did it. I think this really is a more serious issue than most people believe. Russians, planting false stories in media and interference in key congressional elections have been mentioned. The Russians have been doing this in other countries for years, possible even the US. Also, what steps can be taken to keep the Russians or other foreign countries from meddling in our elections.
There's already been testimony that the Russians have been meddling in our elections for decades and short of proof that republicans have been complicit with it there will no impact. At this point there is more evidence of commiecrat dirty tricks and outright lies to influence voters, even minorities are getting wise.
.
A thousand posts and this guy is still pretending no one can answer his question?
Goddam that's funny.
Im sorry man, i've read pages of this but the whole "No evidence" thing is getting real old. There have been several reputable and bi partisan congressmen and intel officials that have actually seen the intelligence who all justify the collusion investigation. True there has been no hard evidence presented to the public... To use the cliche... There is a ton of smoke, you see the smoke right? You are asking to see the fire... The fire hasn't been found yet, but that doesn't mean you don't follow the smoke.Depends on what you call nothing. Most probably no one is going to go to jail. The investigation is not likely to help republican in midterms because republicans winning an election with the help of the Russians is not going to win any votes. However, I think what happens with healthcare, tax cuts, immigration, and how democrats spin it is going to be a big deal. Of course, there is always our unpredictable president.A lot depends on what was said and done by the Trump associates. I don't see much happening legally unless something really new is uncovered. At most somebody pleads guilty to a lesser charge and is put on probation. The problem will be the political ramifications of a real investigation that confirms the Russians helped elect Trump. That's something that a lot of Trump supporters don't accept.Only thing you're forgetting is the proof that they were knowingly doing it to advance Russia's interest and not Trumps. I think that would require very specific verbiage and I seriously doubt anyone would do that. A simple, "we're going to review all current policies", wouldn't do it, because every president does that.
.
And what happens when it turns up to be one giant nothing burger? The best I'm seeing at this point is Flynn may get busted for not reporting a payment properly, not for any collusion. Stone and Manafort are cooperating, that should tell you something. It won't look good for the commiecrats, the media or the intel agencies if this thing just fizzles or it turns out Seth Rich really was the leak. And all those red State Trump voters won't let you forget. The midterm massacre may be your own.
.
Probably the most important thing that will come out of this investigation is to what extent Russians actually interfered in the election and how they did it. I think this really is a more serious issue than most people believe. Russians, planting false stories in media and interference in key congressional elections have been mentioned. The Russians have been doing this in other countries for years, possible even the US. Also, what steps can be taken to keep the Russians or other foreign countries from meddling in our elections.
There's already been testimony that the Russians have been meddling in our elections for decades and short of proof that republicans have been complicit with it there will no impact. At this point there is more evidence of commiecrat dirty tricks and outright lies to influence voters, even minorities are getting wise.
.
Here's one you lying sack of shit that fit your hypothetical scenario that you performed backflips and lies and then obfuscations and lies and finally lies and then more lies just to look like you knew what the fuck you were talking about! 18 U.S. Code § 953A thousand posts and this guy is still pretending no one can answer his question?
Goddam that's funny.
So what's you answer there skippy?
.
I guess we will have to wait and see. The only thing that people like you and I should know is that we are NOT in the know.Im sorry man, i've read pages of this but the whole "No evidence" thing is getting real old. There have been several reputable and bi partisan congressmen and intel officials that have actually seen the intelligence who all justify the collusion investigation. True there has been no hard evidence presented to the public... To use the cliche... There is a ton of smoke, you see the smoke right? You are asking to see the fire... The fire hasn't been found yet, but that doesn't mean you don't follow the smoke.Depends on what you call nothing. Most probably no one is going to go to jail. The investigation is not likely to help republican in midterms because republicans winning an election with the help of the Russians is not going to win any votes. However, I think what happens with healthcare, tax cuts, immigration, and how democrats spin it is going to be a big deal. Of course, there is always our unpredictable president.A lot depends on what was said and done by the Trump associates. I don't see much happening legally unless something really new is uncovered. At most somebody pleads guilty to a lesser charge and is put on probation. The problem will be the political ramifications of a real investigation that confirms the Russians helped elect Trump. That's something that a lot of Trump supporters don't accept.
And what happens when it turns up to be one giant nothing burger? The best I'm seeing at this point is Flynn may get busted for not reporting a payment properly, not for any collusion. Stone and Manafort are cooperating, that should tell you something. It won't look good for the commiecrats, the media or the intel agencies if this thing just fizzles or it turns out Seth Rich really was the leak. And all those red State Trump voters won't let you forget. The midterm massacre may be your own.
.
Probably the most important thing that will come out of this investigation is to what extent Russians actually interfered in the election and how they did it. I think this really is a more serious issue than most people believe. Russians, planting false stories in media and interference in key congressional elections have been mentioned. The Russians have been doing this in other countries for years, possible even the US. Also, what steps can be taken to keep the Russians or other foreign countries from meddling in our elections.
There's already been testimony that the Russians have been meddling in our elections for decades and short of proof that republicans have been complicit with it there will no impact. At this point there is more evidence of commiecrat dirty tricks and outright lies to influence voters, even minorities are getting wise.
.
Feinstein: No Evidence Of Russian Collusion With Trump Campaign, But There Are Rumors
Sanders: May Be No Evidence of 'Collusion' Between Russia, Trump Camp
'No evidence' Trump campaign aides recruited by Russia, former spy chief says
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-st...nce-so-far-of-trump-campaign-russia-collusion
Intel Chairman Nunes: ‘No Evidence of Collusion’ Between Trump Campaign and Russia
Schiff Can't Say There's Evidence of Trump Campaign Colluding With Russia
I could go on. The investigation has been going since July, after 10 months what is there to uncover?
.
A thousand posts and this guy is still pretending no one can answer his question?
Goddam that's funny.
So what's you answer there skippy?
.
