The One Question No One So Far Can Answer

[NYcarbineer]

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.

.

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.

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.

.

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.

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?

.

There was no evidence of Clinton's alleged perjury until 5 years into that investigation.

 

[OKTexas]

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?

.

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 § 953

But being the dishonest, lying sack of shit you are you would rather weasel out of admitting it than acknowledging the criminal behavior in your hypothetical scenario, you piece of lying garbage!

18 U.S. Code § 953

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Ok Einstein, explain to the class what disputes or controversies with the US or measures of the US were they trying to defeat. You do know the bitch and the DNC are private entities and not the US, right?

.

 

[OKTexas]

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?

.

Read your thread and you'll find it. If you want it spoon fed to you, have your caregiver do it.

Must not have been very good if it isn't memorable.

.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

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?

.

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 § 953

But being the dishonest, lying sack of shit you are you would rather weasel out of admitting it than acknowledging the criminal behavior in your hypothetical scenario, you piece of lying garbage!

18 U.S. Code § 953

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Ok Einstein, explain to the class what disputes or controversies with the US or measures of the US were they trying to defeat. You do know the bitch and the DNC are private entities and not the US, right?

Here again is the Statute for easy reference;

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Here is your hypothetical too;

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.

This was gone over several times before and you rejected it because it ruined your boast! Of course one is a political party not associated with the US, which is a moot point because the DNC was not part of your hypothetical, fool! Clinton is a private US citizen. BUT, neither are a party to the collusion between the Trump Associate, the US person of interest, and the Russian representative, the foreign representative of interest. You don't seem cognizant of your own bloody hypothetical event.

The unlawful action under 18 U.S. Code § 953 took place between the Trump rep and the Russian rep! The offer by the Russian and the acceptance of that offer by the Trump rep was the ACTION TAKEN against US interests in a free and fair election for the purpose of destabilizing that election, that MEASURE in question, would have been violative of the statute you claim doesn't apply! Waltzing around that with all your quibbling will NOT CHANGE THE FACTS, TEX!

The two ACTING PARTIES of your hypothetical would, indeed, be colluding to hinder an important government process and that cooperation with the foreign entity by the Trump rep would violate the statute. Q.E.D. Now will you man up, or will your stupid pride keep you from admitting error?

 

[OKTexas]

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?

.

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 § 953

But being the dishonest, lying sack of shit you are you would rather weasel out of admitting it than acknowledging the criminal behavior in your hypothetical scenario, you piece of lying garbage!

18 U.S. Code § 953

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Ok Einstein, explain to the class what disputes or controversies with the US or measures of the US were they trying to defeat. You do know the bitch and the DNC are private entities and not the US, right?

Here again is the Statute for easy reference;

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Here is your hypothetical too;

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.

This was gone over several times before and you rejected it because it ruined your boast! Of course one is a political party not associated with the US, which is a moot point because the DNC was not part of your hypothetical, fool! Clinton is a private US citizen. BUT, neither are a party to the collusion between the Trump Associate, the US person of interest, and the Russian representative, the foreign representative of interest. You don't seem cognizant of your own bloody hypothetical event.

The unlawful action under 18 U.S. Code § 953 took place between the Trump rep and the Russian rep! The offer by the Russian and the acceptance of that offer by the Trump rep was the ACTION TAKEN against US interests in a free and fair election for the purpose of destabilizing that election, that MEASURE in question, would have been violative of the statute you claim doesn't apply! Waltzing around that with all your quibbling will NOT CHANGE THE FACTS, TEX!

The two ACTING PARTIES of your hypothetical would, indeed, be colluding to hinder an important government process and that cooperation with the foreign entity by the Trump rep would violate the statute. Q.E.D. Now will you man up, or will your stupid pride keep you from admitting error?

So in your opinion, it's ok for officials of the US federal government and US media to put their thumbs on the scales of free and fair elections in the US, and no one else. Remember the talking head on CNN, we've helped the bitch all we can? The US government is made up of politicians and not one of them are interested in free and fair elections, most of them have no problem lying, cheating or stealing to gain an advantage. They just want you to think they want things fair. If there were damaging RNC emails being released you would have been right in there pushing the crap out of them.

But since the US government doesn't conduct elections, your example won't fly legally. Guess what, some of the brightest democrat legal minds agree with my assessment.

.

 

[Slade3200]

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?

.

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 § 953

But being the dishonest, lying sack of shit you are you would rather weasel out of admitting it than acknowledging the criminal behavior in your hypothetical scenario, you piece of lying garbage!

18 U.S. Code § 953

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Ok Einstein, explain to the class what disputes or controversies with the US or measures of the US were they trying to defeat. You do know the bitch and the DNC are private entities and not the US, right?

Here again is the Statute for easy reference;

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Here is your hypothetical too;

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.

This was gone over several times before and you rejected it because it ruined your boast! Of course one is a political party not associated with the US, which is a moot point because the DNC was not part of your hypothetical, fool! Clinton is a private US citizen. BUT, neither are a party to the collusion between the Trump Associate, the US person of interest, and the Russian representative, the foreign representative of interest. You don't seem cognizant of your own bloody hypothetical event.

The unlawful action under 18 U.S. Code § 953 took place between the Trump rep and the Russian rep! The offer by the Russian and the acceptance of that offer by the Trump rep was the ACTION TAKEN against US interests in a free and fair election for the purpose of destabilizing that election, that MEASURE in question, would have been violative of the statute you claim doesn't apply! Waltzing around that with all your quibbling will NOT CHANGE THE FACTS, TEX!

The two ACTING PARTIES of your hypothetical would, indeed, be colluding to hinder an important government process and that cooperation with the foreign entity by the Trump rep would violate the statute. Q.E.D. Now will you man up, or will your stupid pride keep you from admitting error?

So in your opinion, it's ok for officials of the US federal government and US media to put their thumbs on the scales of free and fair elections in the US, and no one else. Remember the talking head on CNN, we've helped the bitch all we can? The US government is made up of politicians and not one of them are interested in free and fair elections, most of them have no problem lying, cheating or stealing to gain an advantage. They just want you to think they want things fair. If there were damaging RNC emails being released you would have been right in there pushing the crap out of them.

But since the US government doesn't conduct elections, your example won't fly legally. Guess what, some of the brightest democrat legal minds agree with my assessment.

.

I know i've been arguing most points with OKTexas on this thread but he does make an interesting point. There is a tremendous amount of outrage about Russia interfering with the election. The hacking is obviously a crime, but the other stuff they are accused of... Trolling and releasing fake news etc. That is all stuff that our media outlets do as well. Look at the Breitbarts/Infowars and and the Slates/Guardians etc.

It seems that if releasing fake information and trolling to favor a political candidate is a crime then many in our media is guilty. Maybe opening up a can for a new discussion about how to deal with this problem, if it is deemed a crime

 

[OKTexas]

So what's you answer there skippy?

.

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 § 953

But being the dishonest, lying sack of shit you are you would rather weasel out of admitting it than acknowledging the criminal behavior in your hypothetical scenario, you piece of lying garbage!

18 U.S. Code § 953

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Ok Einstein, explain to the class what disputes or controversies with the US or measures of the US were they trying to defeat. You do know the bitch and the DNC are private entities and not the US, right?

Here again is the Statute for easy reference;

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Here is your hypothetical too;

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.

This was gone over several times before and you rejected it because it ruined your boast! Of course one is a political party not associated with the US, which is a moot point because the DNC was not part of your hypothetical, fool! Clinton is a private US citizen. BUT, neither are a party to the collusion between the Trump Associate, the US person of interest, and the Russian representative, the foreign representative of interest. You don't seem cognizant of your own bloody hypothetical event.

The unlawful action under 18 U.S. Code § 953 took place between the Trump rep and the Russian rep! The offer by the Russian and the acceptance of that offer by the Trump rep was the ACTION TAKEN against US interests in a free and fair election for the purpose of destabilizing that election, that MEASURE in question, would have been violative of the statute you claim doesn't apply! Waltzing around that with all your quibbling will NOT CHANGE THE FACTS, TEX!

The two ACTING PARTIES of your hypothetical would, indeed, be colluding to hinder an important government process and that cooperation with the foreign entity by the Trump rep would violate the statute. Q.E.D. Now will you man up, or will your stupid pride keep you from admitting error?

So in your opinion, it's ok for officials of the US federal government and US media to put their thumbs on the scales of free and fair elections in the US, and no one else. Remember the talking head on CNN, we've helped the bitch all we can? The US government is made up of politicians and not one of them are interested in free and fair elections, most of them have no problem lying, cheating or stealing to gain an advantage. They just want you to think they want things fair. If there were damaging RNC emails being released you would have been right in there pushing the crap out of them.

But since the US government doesn't conduct elections, your example won't fly legally. Guess what, some of the brightest democrat legal minds agree with my assessment.

.

I know i've been arguing most points with OKTexas on this thread but he does make an interesting point. There is a tremendous amount of outrage about Russia interfering with the election. The hacking is obviously a crime, but the other stuff they are accused of... Trolling and releasing fake news etc. That is all stuff that our media outlets do as well. Look at the Breitbarts/Infowars and and the Slates/Guardians etc.

It seems that if releasing fake information and trolling to favor a political candidate is a crime then many in our media is guilty. Maybe opening up a can for a new discussion about how to deal with this problem, if it is deemed a crime

But it also includes politicians, political packs and others spreading half truths and outright lies. Harry Reid is a prime example, his lie about Romney's taxes was something he bragged about. Didn't see anyone calling him a traitor for trying to improperly influence the election. Commiecrats don't mind politics being a contact sport till they lose.

.

 

[Slade3200]

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 § 953

But being the dishonest, lying sack of shit you are you would rather weasel out of admitting it than acknowledging the criminal behavior in your hypothetical scenario, you piece of lying garbage!

18 U.S. Code § 953

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Ok Einstein, explain to the class what disputes or controversies with the US or measures of the US were they trying to defeat. You do know the bitch and the DNC are private entities and not the US, right?

Here again is the Statute for easy reference;

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Here is your hypothetical too;

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.

This was gone over several times before and you rejected it because it ruined your boast! Of course one is a political party not associated with the US, which is a moot point because the DNC was not part of your hypothetical, fool! Clinton is a private US citizen. BUT, neither are a party to the collusion between the Trump Associate, the US person of interest, and the Russian representative, the foreign representative of interest. You don't seem cognizant of your own bloody hypothetical event.

The unlawful action under 18 U.S. Code § 953 took place between the Trump rep and the Russian rep! The offer by the Russian and the acceptance of that offer by the Trump rep was the ACTION TAKEN against US interests in a free and fair election for the purpose of destabilizing that election, that MEASURE in question, would have been violative of the statute you claim doesn't apply! Waltzing around that with all your quibbling will NOT CHANGE THE FACTS, TEX!

The two ACTING PARTIES of your hypothetical would, indeed, be colluding to hinder an important government process and that cooperation with the foreign entity by the Trump rep would violate the statute. Q.E.D. Now will you man up, or will your stupid pride keep you from admitting error?

So in your opinion, it's ok for officials of the US federal government and US media to put their thumbs on the scales of free and fair elections in the US, and no one else. Remember the talking head on CNN, we've helped the bitch all we can? The US government is made up of politicians and not one of them are interested in free and fair elections, most of them have no problem lying, cheating or stealing to gain an advantage. They just want you to think they want things fair. If there were damaging RNC emails being released you would have been right in there pushing the crap out of them.

But since the US government doesn't conduct elections, your example won't fly legally. Guess what, some of the brightest democrat legal minds agree with my assessment.

.

I know i've been arguing most points with OKTexas on this thread but he does make an interesting point. There is a tremendous amount of outrage about Russia interfering with the election. The hacking is obviously a crime, but the other stuff they are accused of... Trolling and releasing fake news etc. That is all stuff that our media outlets do as well. Look at the Breitbarts/Infowars and and the Slates/Guardians etc.

It seems that if releasing fake information and trolling to favor a political candidate is a crime then many in our media is guilty. Maybe opening up a can for a new discussion about how to deal with this problem, if it is deemed a crime

But it also includes politicians, political packs and others spreading half truths and outright lies. Harry Reid is a prime example, his lie about Romney's taxes was something he bragged about. Didn't see anyone calling him a traitor for trying to improperly influence the election. Commiecrats don't mind politics being a contact sport till they lose.

.

I never liked Reid and agree that those types of comments and actions should not be accepted from our leadership. Im glad he is out. Now we have somebody that is even worse than Reid running our country. I don't see any way for this situation to get better. Trump is dumping gasoline all over it and the Dems/MSM are fanning the flames.

 

[OKTexas]

18 U.S. Code § 953

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Ok Einstein, explain to the class what disputes or controversies with the US or measures of the US were they trying to defeat. You do know the bitch and the DNC are private entities and not the US, right?

Here again is the Statute for easy reference;

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Here is your hypothetical too;

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.

This was gone over several times before and you rejected it because it ruined your boast! Of course one is a political party not associated with the US, which is a moot point because the DNC was not part of your hypothetical, fool! Clinton is a private US citizen. BUT, neither are a party to the collusion between the Trump Associate, the US person of interest, and the Russian representative, the foreign representative of interest. You don't seem cognizant of your own bloody hypothetical event.

The unlawful action under 18 U.S. Code § 953 took place between the Trump rep and the Russian rep! The offer by the Russian and the acceptance of that offer by the Trump rep was the ACTION TAKEN against US interests in a free and fair election for the purpose of destabilizing that election, that MEASURE in question, would have been violative of the statute you claim doesn't apply! Waltzing around that with all your quibbling will NOT CHANGE THE FACTS, TEX!

The two ACTING PARTIES of your hypothetical would, indeed, be colluding to hinder an important government process and that cooperation with the foreign entity by the Trump rep would violate the statute. Q.E.D. Now will you man up, or will your stupid pride keep you from admitting error?

So in your opinion, it's ok for officials of the US federal government and US media to put their thumbs on the scales of free and fair elections in the US, and no one else. Remember the talking head on CNN, we've helped the bitch all we can? The US government is made up of politicians and not one of them are interested in free and fair elections, most of them have no problem lying, cheating or stealing to gain an advantage. They just want you to think they want things fair. If there were damaging RNC emails being released you would have been right in there pushing the crap out of them.

But since the US government doesn't conduct elections, your example won't fly legally. Guess what, some of the brightest democrat legal minds agree with my assessment.

.

I know i've been arguing most points with OKTexas on this thread but he does make an interesting point. There is a tremendous amount of outrage about Russia interfering with the election. The hacking is obviously a crime, but the other stuff they are accused of... Trolling and releasing fake news etc. That is all stuff that our media outlets do as well. Look at the Breitbarts/Infowars and and the Slates/Guardians etc.

It seems that if releasing fake information and trolling to favor a political candidate is a crime then many in our media is guilty. Maybe opening up a can for a new discussion about how to deal with this problem, if it is deemed a crime

But it also includes politicians, political packs and others spreading half truths and outright lies. Harry Reid is a prime example, his lie about Romney's taxes was something he bragged about. Didn't see anyone calling him a traitor for trying to improperly influence the election. Commiecrats don't mind politics being a contact sport till they lose.

.

I never liked Reid and agree that those types of comments and actions should not be accepted from our leadership. Im glad he is out. Now we have somebody that is even worse than Reid running our country. I don't see any way for this situation to get better. Trump is dumping gasoline all over it and the Dems/MSM are fanning the flames.

We're only 120 days in, I think Trump will get better, the commiecrats will never let up, even when they find they're wrong.

.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

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?

.

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 § 953

But being the dishonest, lying sack of shit you are you would rather weasel out of admitting it than acknowledging the criminal behavior in your hypothetical scenario, you piece of lying garbage!

18 U.S. Code § 953

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Ok Einstein, explain to the class what disputes or controversies with the US or measures of the US were they trying to defeat. You do know the bitch and the DNC are private entities and not the US, right?

Here again is the Statute for easy reference;

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Here is your hypothetical too;

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.

This was gone over several times before and you rejected it because it ruined your boast! Of course one is a political party not associated with the US, which is a moot point because the DNC was not part of your hypothetical, fool! Clinton is a private US citizen. BUT, neither are a party to the collusion between the Trump Associate, the US person of interest, and the Russian representative, the foreign representative of interest. You don't seem cognizant of your own bloody hypothetical event.

The unlawful action under 18 U.S. Code § 953 took place between the Trump rep and the Russian rep! The offer by the Russian and the acceptance of that offer by the Trump rep was the ACTION TAKEN against US interests in a free and fair election for the purpose of destabilizing that election, that MEASURE in question, would have been violative of the statute you claim doesn't apply! Waltzing around that with all your quibbling will NOT CHANGE THE FACTS, TEX!

The two ACTING PARTIES of your hypothetical would, indeed, be colluding to hinder an important government process and that cooperation with the foreign entity by the Trump rep would violate the statute. Q.E.D. Now will you man up, or will your stupid pride keep you from admitting error?

So in your opinion, it's ok for officials of the US federal government and US media to put their thumbs on the scales of free and fair elections in the US, and no one else. Remember the talking head on CNN, we've helped the bitch all we can? The US government is made up of politicians and not one of them are interested in free and fair elections, most of them have no problem lying, cheating or stealing to gain an advantage. They just want you to think they want things fair. If there were damaging RNC emails being released you would have been right in there pushing the crap out of them.

But since the US government doesn't conduct elections, your example won't fly legally. Guess what, some of the brightest democrat legal minds agree with my assessment.

.

But since the US government doesn't conduct elections, your example won't fly legally. Guess what, some of the brightest democrat legal minds agree with my assessment.

Your first paragraph is more of your usual bullshit and not even worth discussing given it's just another ploy to deflect. Your second paragraph is quite entertaining. Of course the several States conduct the elections. However, I doubt that you have any idea of the dual sovereignty doctrine so I suggest you edify thyself, Tex.

The National elections are conducted under Federal legal auspices also, fool, and any federal legal improprieties in a Presidential election fall under Federal law! For instance, see 18 USC §§ 591-611 for just a few more examples. To make the claim you have made is absurd and displays your desperation, fool! You are wrong and it's past time for you own up to your errors, Tex. Man up or shut the fuck up.

 

[OKTexas]

So what's you answer there skippy?

.

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 § 953

But being the dishonest, lying sack of shit you are you would rather weasel out of admitting it than acknowledging the criminal behavior in your hypothetical scenario, you piece of lying garbage!

18 U.S. Code § 953

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Ok Einstein, explain to the class what disputes or controversies with the US or measures of the US were they trying to defeat. You do know the bitch and the DNC are private entities and not the US, right?

Here again is the Statute for easy reference;

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Here is your hypothetical too;

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.

This was gone over several times before and you rejected it because it ruined your boast! Of course one is a political party not associated with the US, which is a moot point because the DNC was not part of your hypothetical, fool! Clinton is a private US citizen. BUT, neither are a party to the collusion between the Trump Associate, the US person of interest, and the Russian representative, the foreign representative of interest. You don't seem cognizant of your own bloody hypothetical event.

The unlawful action under 18 U.S. Code § 953 took place between the Trump rep and the Russian rep! The offer by the Russian and the acceptance of that offer by the Trump rep was the ACTION TAKEN against US interests in a free and fair election for the purpose of destabilizing that election, that MEASURE in question, would have been violative of the statute you claim doesn't apply! Waltzing around that with all your quibbling will NOT CHANGE THE FACTS, TEX!

The two ACTING PARTIES of your hypothetical would, indeed, be colluding to hinder an important government process and that cooperation with the foreign entity by the Trump rep would violate the statute. Q.E.D. Now will you man up, or will your stupid pride keep you from admitting error?

So in your opinion, it's ok for officials of the US federal government and US media to put their thumbs on the scales of free and fair elections in the US, and no one else. Remember the talking head on CNN, we've helped the bitch all we can? The US government is made up of politicians and not one of them are interested in free and fair elections, most of them have no problem lying, cheating or stealing to gain an advantage. They just want you to think they want things fair. If there were damaging RNC emails being released you would have been right in there pushing the crap out of them.

But since the US government doesn't conduct elections, your example won't fly legally. Guess what, some of the brightest democrat legal minds agree with my assessment.

.

But since the US government doesn't conduct elections, your example won't fly legally. Guess what, some of the brightest democrat legal minds agree with my assessment.

Your first paragraph is more of your usual bullshit and not even worth discussing given it's just another ploy to deflect. Your second paragraph is quite entertaining. Of course the several States conduct the elections. However, I doubt that you have any idea of the dual sovereignty doctrine so I suggest you edify thyself, Tex.

The National elections are conducted under Federal legal auspices also, fool, and any federal legal improprieties in a Presidential election fall under Federal law! For instance, see 18 USC §§ 591-611 for just a few more examples. To make the claim you have made is absurd and displays your desperation, fool! You are wrong and it's past time for you own up to your errors, Tex. Man up or shut the fuck up.

All elections fall under federal law to a point, tell us, which section was violated?

• § 591 - Repealed. Pub. L. 96–187, title II, § 201(a)(1), Jan. 8, 1980, 93 Stat. 1367]
• § 592 - Troops at polls
• § 593 - Interference by armed forces
• § 594 - Intimidation of voters
• § 595 - Interference by administrative employees of Federal, State, or Territorial Governments
• § 596 - Polling armed forces
• § 597 - Expenditures to influence voting
• § 598 - Coercion by means of relief appropriations
• § 599 - Promise of appointment by candidate
• § 600 - Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity
• § 601 - Deprivation of employment or other benefit for political contribution
• § 602 - Solicitation of political contributions
• § 603 - Making political contributions
• § 604 - Solicitation from persons on relief
• § 605 - Disclosure of names of persons on relief
• § 606 - Intimidation to secure political contributions
• § 607 - Place of solicitation
• § 608 - Absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters
• § 609 - Use of military authority to influence vote of member of Armed Forces
• § 610 - Coercion of political activity
• § 611 - Voting by aliens
• § 612.. - Repealed. Pub. L. 94–283, title II, § 201(a), May 11, 1976, 90 Stat. 496]

Once again, no elections are conducted by the feds, they are all State elections, even for president.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

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 § 953

But being the dishonest, lying sack of shit you are you would rather weasel out of admitting it than acknowledging the criminal behavior in your hypothetical scenario, you piece of lying garbage!

18 U.S. Code § 953

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Ok Einstein, explain to the class what disputes or controversies with the US or measures of the US were they trying to defeat. You do know the bitch and the DNC are private entities and not the US, right?

Here again is the Statute for easy reference;

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Here is your hypothetical too;

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.

This was gone over several times before and you rejected it because it ruined your boast! Of course one is a political party not associated with the US, which is a moot point because the DNC was not part of your hypothetical, fool! Clinton is a private US citizen. BUT, neither are a party to the collusion between the Trump Associate, the US person of interest, and the Russian representative, the foreign representative of interest. You don't seem cognizant of your own bloody hypothetical event.

The unlawful action under 18 U.S. Code § 953 took place between the Trump rep and the Russian rep! The offer by the Russian and the acceptance of that offer by the Trump rep was the ACTION TAKEN against US interests in a free and fair election for the purpose of destabilizing that election, that MEASURE in question, would have been violative of the statute you claim doesn't apply! Waltzing around that with all your quibbling will NOT CHANGE THE FACTS, TEX!

The two ACTING PARTIES of your hypothetical would, indeed, be colluding to hinder an important government process and that cooperation with the foreign entity by the Trump rep would violate the statute. Q.E.D. Now will you man up, or will your stupid pride keep you from admitting error?

So in your opinion, it's ok for officials of the US federal government and US media to put their thumbs on the scales of free and fair elections in the US, and no one else. Remember the talking head on CNN, we've helped the bitch all we can? The US government is made up of politicians and not one of them are interested in free and fair elections, most of them have no problem lying, cheating or stealing to gain an advantage. They just want you to think they want things fair. If there were damaging RNC emails being released you would have been right in there pushing the crap out of them.

But since the US government doesn't conduct elections, your example won't fly legally. Guess what, some of the brightest democrat legal minds agree with my assessment.

.

But since the US government doesn't conduct elections, your example won't fly legally. Guess what, some of the brightest democrat legal minds agree with my assessment.

Your first paragraph is more of your usual bullshit and not even worth discussing given it's just another ploy to deflect. Your second paragraph is quite entertaining. Of course the several States conduct the elections. However, I doubt that you have any idea of the dual sovereignty doctrine so I suggest you edify thyself, Tex.

The National elections are conducted under Federal legal auspices also, fool, and any federal legal improprieties in a Presidential election fall under Federal law! For instance, see 18 USC §§ 591-611 for just a few more examples. To make the claim you have made is absurd and displays your desperation, fool! You are wrong and it's past time for you own up to your errors, Tex. Man up or shut the fuck up.

All elections fall under federal law to a point, tell us, which section was violated?

• § 591 - Repealed. Pub. L. 96–187, title II, § 201(a)(1), Jan. 8, 1980, 93 Stat. 1367]
• § 592 - Troops at polls
• § 593 - Interference by armed forces
• § 594 - Intimidation of voters
• § 595 - Interference by administrative employees of Federal, State, or Territorial Governments
• § 596 - Polling armed forces
• § 597 - Expenditures to influence voting
• § 598 - Coercion by means of relief appropriations
• § 599 - Promise of appointment by candidate
• § 600 - Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity
• § 601 - Deprivation of employment or other benefit for political contribution
• § 602 - Solicitation of political contributions
• § 603 - Making political contributions
• § 604 - Solicitation from persons on relief
• § 605 - Disclosure of names of persons on relief
• § 606 - Intimidation to secure political contributions
• § 607 - Place of solicitation
• § 608 - Absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters
• § 609 - Use of military authority to influence vote of member of Armed Forces
• § 610 - Coercion of political activity
• § 611 - Voting by aliens
• § 612.. - Repealed. Pub. L. 94–283, title II, § 201(a), May 11, 1976, 90 Stat. 496]

Once again, no elections are conducted by the feds, they are all State elections, even for president.

Now you're being fucking STUPID, but that's what you want to deflect from your bullshit position being unwilling to admit your fucking error! I cited 18 USC §§ 591-611 as an example of election related law enforced by the National Government you bloody asshole as I stated and you conveniently ignored. The fact that States conduct elections does not in any way preclude Federal law from impacting two parties from being prosecuted under 18 U.S. Code § 953 for colluding to interfere with National elections.

If the DOJ didn't have the power of prosecution regarding elections issues such as the example in your hypothetical scenario, why is there a massive investigation going on right now by both houses of Congress, multiple intelligence agencies, the FBI, and a Special Prosecutor investigating that very thing. If it wasn't illegal, why is all the time, effort and money being expended? It's not just for shits and giggles, Tex! Gawd, but you're a pitiful devious little shit!

Do you have any other baseless bullshit? if not, you lose, Tex. I've proven several times over that 18 U.S. Code § 953 is the statute that would be violated by the Trump associate in you hypothetical, and you've come up with nothing but bullshit dissembling to keep from admitting your errors. What a tiny little pissant of a man you are, Tex! Not a fucking honest bone in your body!

 

[OKTexas]

18 U.S. Code § 953

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Ok Einstein, explain to the class what disputes or controversies with the US or measures of the US were they trying to defeat. You do know the bitch and the DNC are private entities and not the US, right?

Here again is the Statute for easy reference;

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Here is your hypothetical too;

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.

This was gone over several times before and you rejected it because it ruined your boast! Of course one is a political party not associated with the US, which is a moot point because the DNC was not part of your hypothetical, fool! Clinton is a private US citizen. BUT, neither are a party to the collusion between the Trump Associate, the US person of interest, and the Russian representative, the foreign representative of interest. You don't seem cognizant of your own bloody hypothetical event.

The unlawful action under 18 U.S. Code § 953 took place between the Trump rep and the Russian rep! The offer by the Russian and the acceptance of that offer by the Trump rep was the ACTION TAKEN against US interests in a free and fair election for the purpose of destabilizing that election, that MEASURE in question, would have been violative of the statute you claim doesn't apply! Waltzing around that with all your quibbling will NOT CHANGE THE FACTS, TEX!

The two ACTING PARTIES of your hypothetical would, indeed, be colluding to hinder an important government process and that cooperation with the foreign entity by the Trump rep would violate the statute. Q.E.D. Now will you man up, or will your stupid pride keep you from admitting error?

So in your opinion, it's ok for officials of the US federal government and US media to put their thumbs on the scales of free and fair elections in the US, and no one else. Remember the talking head on CNN, we've helped the bitch all we can? The US government is made up of politicians and not one of them are interested in free and fair elections, most of them have no problem lying, cheating or stealing to gain an advantage. They just want you to think they want things fair. If there were damaging RNC emails being released you would have been right in there pushing the crap out of them.

But since the US government doesn't conduct elections, your example won't fly legally. Guess what, some of the brightest democrat legal minds agree with my assessment.

.

But since the US government doesn't conduct elections, your example won't fly legally. Guess what, some of the brightest democrat legal minds agree with my assessment.

Your first paragraph is more of your usual bullshit and not even worth discussing given it's just another ploy to deflect. Your second paragraph is quite entertaining. Of course the several States conduct the elections. However, I doubt that you have any idea of the dual sovereignty doctrine so I suggest you edify thyself, Tex.

The National elections are conducted under Federal legal auspices also, fool, and any federal legal improprieties in a Presidential election fall under Federal law! For instance, see 18 USC §§ 591-611 for just a few more examples. To make the claim you have made is absurd and displays your desperation, fool! You are wrong and it's past time for you own up to your errors, Tex. Man up or shut the fuck up.

All elections fall under federal law to a point, tell us, which section was violated?

• § 591 - Repealed. Pub. L. 96–187, title II, § 201(a)(1), Jan. 8, 1980, 93 Stat. 1367]
• § 592 - Troops at polls
• § 593 - Interference by armed forces
• § 594 - Intimidation of voters
• § 595 - Interference by administrative employees of Federal, State, or Territorial Governments
• § 596 - Polling armed forces
• § 597 - Expenditures to influence voting
• § 598 - Coercion by means of relief appropriations
• § 599 - Promise of appointment by candidate
• § 600 - Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity
• § 601 - Deprivation of employment or other benefit for political contribution
• § 602 - Solicitation of political contributions
• § 603 - Making political contributions
• § 604 - Solicitation from persons on relief
• § 605 - Disclosure of names of persons on relief
• § 606 - Intimidation to secure political contributions
• § 607 - Place of solicitation
• § 608 - Absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters
• § 609 - Use of military authority to influence vote of member of Armed Forces
• § 610 - Coercion of political activity
• § 611 - Voting by aliens
• § 612.. - Repealed. Pub. L. 94–283, title II, § 201(a), May 11, 1976, 90 Stat. 496]

Once again, no elections are conducted by the feds, they are all State elections, even for president.

Now you're being fucking STUPID, but that's what you want to deflect from your bullshit position being unwilling to admit your fucking error! I cited 18 USC §§ 591-611 as an example of election related law enforced by the National Government you bloody asshole as I stated and you conveniently ignored. The fact that States conduct elections does not in any way preclude Federal law from impacting two parties from being prosecuted under 18 U.S. Code § 953 for colluding to interfere with National elections.

If the DOJ didn't have the power of prosecution regarding elections issues such as the example in your hypothetical scenario, why is there a massive investigation going on right now by both houses of Congress, multiple intelligence agencies, the FBI, and a Special Prosecutor investigating that very thing. If it wasn't illegal, why is all the time, effort and money being expended? It's not just for shits and giggles, Tex! Gawd, but you're a pitiful devious little shit!

Do you have any other baseless bullshit? if not, you lose, Tex. I've proven several times over that 18 U.S. Code § 953 is the statute that would be violated by the Trump associate in you hypothetical, and you've come up with nothing but bullshit dissembling to keep from admitting your errors. What a tiny little pissant of a man you are, Tex! Not a fucking honest bone in your body!

Well child, in order to declare free and fair elections are a "measure" of the federal government, you must define the word in the context of election laws, to show how actions taken somehow attempted to defeat that "measure". Your inability to point to a "measure" in the election law says it all.

meas·ure

NOUN

1. a plan or course of action taken to achieve a particular purpose:
   "cost-cutting measures"

Maybe this proud hildabitch voter can splain it to ya.



.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

Here again is the Statute for easy reference;
Here is your hypothetical too;
This was gone over several times before and you rejected it because it ruined your boast! Of course one is a political party not associated with the US, which is a moot point because the DNC was not part of your hypothetical, fool! Clinton is a private US citizen. BUT, neither are a party to the collusion between the Trump Associate, the US person of interest, and the Russian representative, the foreign representative of interest. You don't seem cognizant of your own bloody hypothetical event.

The unlawful action under 18 U.S. Code § 953 took place between the Trump rep and the Russian rep! The offer by the Russian and the acceptance of that offer by the Trump rep was the ACTION TAKEN against US interests in a free and fair election for the purpose of destabilizing that election, that MEASURE in question, would have been violative of the statute you claim doesn't apply! Waltzing around that with all your quibbling will NOT CHANGE THE FACTS, TEX!

The two ACTING PARTIES of your hypothetical would, indeed, be colluding to hinder an important government process and that cooperation with the foreign entity by the Trump rep would violate the statute. Q.E.D. Now will you man up, or will your stupid pride keep you from admitting error?

So in your opinion, it's ok for officials of the US federal government and US media to put their thumbs on the scales of free and fair elections in the US, and no one else. Remember the talking head on CNN, we've helped the bitch all we can? The US government is made up of politicians and not one of them are interested in free and fair elections, most of them have no problem lying, cheating or stealing to gain an advantage. They just want you to think they want things fair. If there were damaging RNC emails being released you would have been right in there pushing the crap out of them.

But since the US government doesn't conduct elections, your example won't fly legally. Guess what, some of the brightest democrat legal minds agree with my assessment.

.

But since the US government doesn't conduct elections, your example won't fly legally. Guess what, some of the brightest democrat legal minds agree with my assessment.

Your first paragraph is more of your usual bullshit and not even worth discussing given it's just another ploy to deflect. Your second paragraph is quite entertaining. Of course the several States conduct the elections. However, I doubt that you have any idea of the dual sovereignty doctrine so I suggest you edify thyself, Tex.

The National elections are conducted under Federal legal auspices also, fool, and any federal legal improprieties in a Presidential election fall under Federal law! For instance, see 18 USC §§ 591-611 for just a few more examples. To make the claim you have made is absurd and displays your desperation, fool! You are wrong and it's past time for you own up to your errors, Tex. Man up or shut the fuck up.

All elections fall under federal law to a point, tell us, which section was violated?

• § 591 - Repealed. Pub. L. 96–187, title II, § 201(a)(1), Jan. 8, 1980, 93 Stat. 1367]
• § 592 - Troops at polls
• § 593 - Interference by armed forces
• § 594 - Intimidation of voters
• § 595 - Interference by administrative employees of Federal, State, or Territorial Governments
• § 596 - Polling armed forces
• § 597 - Expenditures to influence voting
• § 598 - Coercion by means of relief appropriations
• § 599 - Promise of appointment by candidate
• § 600 - Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity
• § 601 - Deprivation of employment or other benefit for political contribution
• § 602 - Solicitation of political contributions
• § 603 - Making political contributions
• § 604 - Solicitation from persons on relief
• § 605 - Disclosure of names of persons on relief
• § 606 - Intimidation to secure political contributions
• § 607 - Place of solicitation
• § 608 - Absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters
• § 609 - Use of military authority to influence vote of member of Armed Forces
• § 610 - Coercion of political activity
• § 611 - Voting by aliens
• § 612.. - Repealed. Pub. L. 94–283, title II, § 201(a), May 11, 1976, 90 Stat. 496]

Once again, no elections are conducted by the feds, they are all State elections, even for president.

Now you're being fucking STUPID, but that's what you want to deflect from your bullshit position being unwilling to admit your fucking error! I cited 18 USC §§ 591-611 as an example of election related law enforced by the National Government you bloody asshole as I stated and you conveniently ignored. The fact that States conduct elections does not in any way preclude Federal law from impacting two parties from being prosecuted under 18 U.S. Code § 953 for colluding to interfere with National elections.

If the DOJ didn't have the power of prosecution regarding elections issues such as the example in your hypothetical scenario, why is there a massive investigation going on right now by both houses of Congress, multiple intelligence agencies, the FBI, and a Special Prosecutor investigating that very thing. If it wasn't illegal, why is all the time, effort and money being expended? It's not just for shits and giggles, Tex! Gawd, but you're a pitiful devious little shit!

Do you have any other baseless bullshit? if not, you lose, Tex. I've proven several times over that 18 U.S. Code § 953 is the statute that would be violated by the Trump associate in you hypothetical, and you've come up with nothing but bullshit dissembling to keep from admitting your errors. What a tiny little pissant of a man you are, Tex! Not a fucking honest bone in your body!

Well child, in order to declare free and fair elections are a "measure" of the federal government, you must define the word in the context of election laws, to show how actions taken somehow attempted to defeat that "measure". Your inability to point to a "measure" in the election law says it all.

meas·ure

NOUN

1. a plan or course of action taken to achieve a particular purpose:
   "cost-cutting measures"

Maybe this proud hildabitch voter can splain it to ya.



.

You've defeated your own bloody argument, fool! First you say, "...in order to declare free and fair elections are a "measure" of the federal government, you must define the word in the context of election laws, to show how actions taken somehow attempted to defeat that "measure"". Then you give a generic definition measure as, "a plan or course of action taken to achieve a particular purpose: "cost-cutting measures"

ONE "plan or course of action" under Constitutional law is to have free, unfettered elections to fill the various vacancies in the National government. The "plan or course of action" OR the MEASURE taken is the myriad National elections. The Constitutions is chock full of these plans or courses of action or MEASURES, you bloody fool!

You've gotten to the point Bill Clinton did when he speculated about the definition of "is". But at least he put some thought in that bit of dance and deflection, and didn't do the dim bulb thang like defeat his own argument like your dumb ass! You've not been able to show that the statute I cited does not apply to your hypothetical. You lose, Tex.

The unlawful action under 18 U.S. Code § 953 took place between the Trump rep and the Russian rep! The offer by the Russian and the acceptance of that offer by the Trump rep was the ACTION TAKEN against US interests in a free and fair election for the purpose of destabilizing that election, that MEASURE in question, would have been violative of the statute you claim doesn't apply! Waltzing around that with all your quibbling will NOT CHANGE THE FACTS, TEX!

The two ACTING PARTIES of your hypothetical would, indeed, be colluding to hinder an important government process and that cooperation with the foreign entity by the Trump rep would violate the statute. Q.E.D. Now will you man up, or will your stupid pride keep you from admitting error?

 

[OKTexas]

So in your opinion, it's ok for officials of the US federal government and US media to put their thumbs on the scales of free and fair elections in the US, and no one else. Remember the talking head on CNN, we've helped the bitch all we can? The US government is made up of politicians and not one of them are interested in free and fair elections, most of them have no problem lying, cheating or stealing to gain an advantage. They just want you to think they want things fair. If there were damaging RNC emails being released you would have been right in there pushing the crap out of them.

But since the US government doesn't conduct elections, your example won't fly legally. Guess what, some of the brightest democrat legal minds agree with my assessment.

.

But since the US government doesn't conduct elections, your example won't fly legally. Guess what, some of the brightest democrat legal minds agree with my assessment.

Your first paragraph is more of your usual bullshit and not even worth discussing given it's just another ploy to deflect. Your second paragraph is quite entertaining. Of course the several States conduct the elections. However, I doubt that you have any idea of the dual sovereignty doctrine so I suggest you edify thyself, Tex.

The National elections are conducted under Federal legal auspices also, fool, and any federal legal improprieties in a Presidential election fall under Federal law! For instance, see 18 USC §§ 591-611 for just a few more examples. To make the claim you have made is absurd and displays your desperation, fool! You are wrong and it's past time for you own up to your errors, Tex. Man up or shut the fuck up.

All elections fall under federal law to a point, tell us, which section was violated?

• § 591 - Repealed. Pub. L. 96–187, title II, § 201(a)(1), Jan. 8, 1980, 93 Stat. 1367]
• § 592 - Troops at polls
• § 593 - Interference by armed forces
• § 594 - Intimidation of voters
• § 595 - Interference by administrative employees of Federal, State, or Territorial Governments
• § 596 - Polling armed forces
• § 597 - Expenditures to influence voting
• § 598 - Coercion by means of relief appropriations
• § 599 - Promise of appointment by candidate
• § 600 - Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity
• § 601 - Deprivation of employment or other benefit for political contribution
• § 602 - Solicitation of political contributions
• § 603 - Making political contributions
• § 604 - Solicitation from persons on relief
• § 605 - Disclosure of names of persons on relief
• § 606 - Intimidation to secure political contributions
• § 607 - Place of solicitation
• § 608 - Absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters
• § 609 - Use of military authority to influence vote of member of Armed Forces
• § 610 - Coercion of political activity
• § 611 - Voting by aliens
• § 612.. - Repealed. Pub. L. 94–283, title II, § 201(a), May 11, 1976, 90 Stat. 496]

Once again, no elections are conducted by the feds, they are all State elections, even for president.

Now you're being fucking STUPID, but that's what you want to deflect from your bullshit position being unwilling to admit your fucking error! I cited 18 USC §§ 591-611 as an example of election related law enforced by the National Government you bloody asshole as I stated and you conveniently ignored. The fact that States conduct elections does not in any way preclude Federal law from impacting two parties from being prosecuted under 18 U.S. Code § 953 for colluding to interfere with National elections.

If the DOJ didn't have the power of prosecution regarding elections issues such as the example in your hypothetical scenario, why is there a massive investigation going on right now by both houses of Congress, multiple intelligence agencies, the FBI, and a Special Prosecutor investigating that very thing. If it wasn't illegal, why is all the time, effort and money being expended? It's not just for shits and giggles, Tex! Gawd, but you're a pitiful devious little shit!

Do you have any other baseless bullshit? if not, you lose, Tex. I've proven several times over that 18 U.S. Code § 953 is the statute that would be violated by the Trump associate in you hypothetical, and you've come up with nothing but bullshit dissembling to keep from admitting your errors. What a tiny little pissant of a man you are, Tex! Not a fucking honest bone in your body!

Well child, in order to declare free and fair elections are a "measure" of the federal government, you must define the word in the context of election laws, to show how actions taken somehow attempted to defeat that "measure". Your inability to point to a "measure" in the election law says it all.

meas·ure

NOUN

1. a plan or course of action taken to achieve a particular purpose:
   "cost-cutting measures"

Maybe this proud hildabitch voter can splain it to ya.



.

You've defeated your own bloody argument, fool! First you say, "...in order to declare free and fair elections are a "measure" of the federal government, you must define the word in the context of election laws, to show how actions taken somehow attempted to defeat that "measure"". Then you give a generic definition measure as, "a plan or course of action taken to achieve a particular purpose: "cost-cutting measures"

ONE "plan or course of action" under Constitutional law is to have free, unfettered elections to fill the various vacancies in the National government. The "plan or course of action" OR the MEASURE taken is the myriad National elections. The Constitutions is chock full of these plans or courses of action or MEASURES, you bloody fool!

You've gotten to the point Bill Clinton did when he speculated about the definition of "is". But at least he put some thought in that bit of dance and deflection, and didn't do the dim bulb thang like defeat his own argument like your dumb ass! You've not been able to show that the statute I cited does not apply to your hypothetical. You lose, Tex.

The unlawful action under 18 U.S. Code § 953 took place between the Trump rep and the Russian rep! The offer by the Russian and the acceptance of that offer by the Trump rep was the ACTION TAKEN against US interests in a free and fair election for the purpose of destabilizing that election, that MEASURE in question, would have been violative of the statute you claim doesn't apply! Waltzing around that with all your quibbling will NOT CHANGE THE FACTS, TEX!

The two ACTING PARTIES of your hypothetical would, indeed, be colluding to hinder an important government process and that cooperation with the foreign entity by the Trump rep would violate the statute. Q.E.D. Now will you man up, or will your stupid pride keep you from admitting error?

Another long wordy FAIL. No where in the Constitution is a "national election" mentioned, yet you keep insisting on using the term. Also your "assumption" that the Trump rep was in the least interested in advancing the Russian agenda and not that of Trump is laughable. That's all you folks have are assumptions, speculations and wishes. I'm going to laugh my ass off when you folks come up empty handed.

But what I find most amusing is your intentional disregard for all the lies and dirty tricks your party uses to try to influence free and fair elections. I guess it's only bad when the other side does it. So run along and enjoy your conspiracy theory, at least till it falls on it's face for lack of evidence, and I'll enjoy the laughs.

.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

Another long wordy FAIL. No where in the Constitution is a "national election" mentioned, yet you keep insisting on using the term.

You can't fucking read, asshole?

ONE "plan or course of action" under Constitutional law is to have free, unfettered elections to fill the various vacancies in the National government.

Further you fucking ignorant twit, Article 1 § 4;

The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators.

What the Hell was the result of that Article and section, shit for brains? Do we have "National Election" established by the Constitution and codified in law? Hell yes we do!

Also your "assumption" that the Trump rep was in the least interested in advancing the Russian agenda and not that of Trump is laughable.

I have no fucking idea what you're driving at since you didn't quote what you claim you're referencing, fool! The action the Trump rep took in your hypothetical would have the effect of unsettling effects and impacts to the US National election process. AGAIN READ THE FOLLOWING YOU DIM BULB!

The unlawful action under 18 U.S. Code § 953 took place between the Trump rep and the Russian rep! The offer by the Russian and the acceptance of that offer by the Trump rep was the ACTION TAKEN against US interests in a free and fair election for the purpose of destabilizing that election, that MEASURE in question, would have been violative of the statute you claim doesn't apply! Waltzing around that with all your quibbling will NOT CHANGE THE FACTS, TEX!

The two ACTING PARTIES of your hypothetical would, indeed, be colluding to hinder an important government process and that cooperation with the foreign entity by the Trump rep would violate the statute. Q.E.D. Now will you man up, or will your stupid pride keep you from admitting error?

 

[radical right]

Another long wordy FAIL. No where in the Constitution is a "national election" mentioned, yet you keep insisting on using the term. Also your "assumption" that the Trump rep was in the least interested in advancing the Russian agenda and not that of Trump is laughable. That's all you folks have are assumptions, speculations and wishes. I'm going to laugh my ass off when you folks come up empty handed.
.

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of
America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together
with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct,
a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives
to which the State may be entitled in the Congress:

The Congress may determine the Time of choosing the Electors, and the Day on
which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the
United States.

 

[OKTexas]

Another long wordy FAIL. No where in the Constitution is a "national election" mentioned, yet you keep insisting on using the term.

You can't fucking read, asshole?

ONE "plan or course of action" under Constitutional law is to have free, unfettered elections to fill the various vacancies in the National government.

Further you fucking ignorant twit, Article 1 § 4;

The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators.

What the Hell was the result of that Article and section, shit for brains? Do we have "National Election" established by the Constitution and codified in law? Hell yes we do!

Also your "assumption" that the Trump rep was in the least interested in advancing the Russian agenda and not that of Trump is laughable.

I have no fucking idea what you're driving at since you didn't quote what you claim you're referencing, fool! The action the Trump rep took in your hypothetical would have the effect of unsettling effects and impacts to the US National election process. AGAIN READ THE FOLLOWING YOU DIM BULB!

The unlawful action under 18 U.S. Code § 953 took place between the Trump rep and the Russian rep! The offer by the Russian and the acceptance of that offer by the Trump rep was the ACTION TAKEN against US interests in a free and fair election for the purpose of destabilizing that election, that MEASURE in question, would have been violative of the statute you claim doesn't apply! Waltzing around that with all your quibbling will NOT CHANGE THE FACTS, TEX!

The two ACTING PARTIES of your hypothetical would, indeed, be colluding to hinder an important government process and that cooperation with the foreign entity by the Trump rep would violate the statute. Q.E.D. Now will you man up, or will your stupid pride keep you from admitting error?

Once again you fail to understand that the the actions taken were against an opposing candidate and party, not the US. And all they did was insert truth and facts into the process with the emails. But I guess truth and facts are the enemy of a candidate and party who's bread and butter are lies and dirty tricks. Admit it, you're not interested in free and fair elections, all you're concerned with is winning at any costs. That includes calling the folks that beat you cheaters when they used the words and deeds of your own candidate and party against you. LOL

Maybe you should concentrate your efforts in making your party transparent and fair, then you don't have to worry about skeletons in the closet coming out and biting you on the ass.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Another long wordy FAIL. No where in the Constitution is a "national election" mentioned, yet you keep insisting on using the term. Also your "assumption" that the Trump rep was in the least interested in advancing the Russian agenda and not that of Trump is laughable. That's all you folks have are assumptions, speculations and wishes. I'm going to laugh my ass off when you folks come up empty handed.
.

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of
America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together
with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct,
a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives
to which the State may be entitled in the Congress:

The Congress may determine the Time of choosing the Electors, and the Day on
which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the
United States.

And your point would be? General elections happen on the same day also, doesn't make them a national election just because they are choosing representatives to the federal government. Electors are State representatives.

.

 

[radical right]

Another long wordy FAIL. No where in the Constitution is a "national election" mentioned,
.

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of
America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together
with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct,
a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives
to which the State may be entitled in the Congress:

The Congress may determine the Time of choosing the Electors, and the Day on
which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the
United States.

And your point would be? General elections happen on the same day also, doesn't make them a national election just because they are choosing representatives to the federal government. Electors are State representatives.

.

The constitution mentions the presidential election, which is a NATIONAL ELECTION. You claimed the Constitution said nothing about it.