The One Question No One So Far Can Answer

[Slade3200]

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Interesting question, and outside of saying "there has to be SOME kind of law being broken", I definitely don't know. So let's try this from the opposite angle:

What if Hillary had won, and all the same accusations were made about her campaign and China?

Certainly the GOP would be all over it, but what would be their reason?
.

The GOP would be all over it. The MSM would take Hillary's side and call it a witch hunt. There would be hearing until it is called old news. It would simply be part of the right wing conspiracy against the Clintons.

If Hillary won there would be hearing after hearing going after her for the email server and Clinton foundation accusations

And the MSM would take her side....not investigate. Clinton and the MSN would pronounce it an old story and move on.

Probably, just as the conservative media would cover it 24/7, just like Benghazi. We live in a grossly partisan and divided country and it is polluting our political system.

 

[OKTexas]

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?

.

A lot of haters get remarkably fuzzy when it comes to this, but they're absolutely certain that "the Russians hacked the election" and Trump is guilty of something. That's usually all it takes for them to demand he be impeached.

Naturally, none of them are considering the ramifications of a Pence presidency. If they think Trump is going to appoint conservative justices...

That's why I posed the question.

.

 

[hadit]

But, since it's the only reason for Hillary to have lost the election....

You think the DNC being exposed as filled with racists, sexists, homophobes, and anti-Semites AND the DNC having to help Hillary defeat Sanders to acquire the nomination is the only reason for Hillary to have lost?

View attachment 126136

She was the 1st (Female) candidate to ever be allowed to remain in a campaign despite being under multiple FBI investigations - for crimes we now know she WAS guilty of, according to FBI Director Comey's testimony.

She had more baggage than the state of Georgia all going on vacation at one time.

She proved she couldn't beat Sanders, a 105yo Socialist Party member, without help from the DNC.

She ran the worst campaign ever, refusing to campaign in Wisconsin and only minimally in Michigan, which bit her in the ass...

She knowingly, willingly allowed 4 Americans to die needlessly then lied her ass off about it to save her career

She was an ENABLER to a career sexual deviant who sexually assaulted, sexually harassed, and raped women - she spent years demonizing, victimizing, and silencing them to protect her future / career

She was the worst candidate to run for President in US history!

You cut off the rest of my quote. The very next words are,

"that does not involve Hillary being a terrible candidate and their ideas to be unappealing to the electorate"

 

[easyt65]

But, since it's the only reason for Hillary to have lost the election....

You think the DNC being exposed as filled with racists, sexists, homophobes, and anti-Semites AND the DNC having to help Hillary defeat Sanders to acquire the nomination is the only reason for Hillary to have lost?

View attachment 126136

She was the 1st (Female) candidate to ever be allowed to remain in a campaign despite being under multiple FBI investigations - for crimes we now know she WAS guilty of, according to FBI Director Comey's testimony.

She had more baggage than the state of Georgia all going on vacation at one time.

She proved she couldn't beat Sanders, a 105yo Socialist Party member, without help from the DNC.

She ran the worst campaign ever, refusing to campaign in Wisconsin and only minimally in Michigan, which bit her in the ass...

She knowingly, willingly allowed 4 Americans to die needlessly then lied her ass off about it to save her career

She was an ENABLER to a career sexual deviant who sexually assaulted, sexually harassed, and raped women - she spent years demonizing, victimizing, and silencing them to protect her future / career

She was the worst candidate to run for President in US history!

You cut off the rest of my quote. The very next words are,

"that does not involve Hillary being a terrible candidate and their ideas to be unappealing to the electorate"

Sorry...

 

[Slade3200]

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?

.

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

If spreading false in formation to win an election was a crimes, then every Democrat in the country would be in prison.

Sent from my SM-G935P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

Dems and Reps that spread false information while campaigning should be held accountable. This situation involved more extreme measures that do break laws like hacking and the theft of private information. Also goes into trolling and the spreading of false news Stories

 

[OKTexas]

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?

.

It's called the 'Logan Act'. Google it yourself.

Please quote the law and explain how it applies.

.

Since your question is hypothetical and not fact based, what is the point of it?

It has as much substance as any claims you folks have made. If there was coordination between the campaign on the release of information the Russians or Wikileaks already had, I want to know what crime you are claiming was committed and what law includes that crime. It's a simple question, if you can't answer it maybe you folks should just be quiet until you can. Or just admit it's nothing but partisan hackery.

.

 

[federalist50]

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?

.

Never try to reason with irrational people! The left is clearly unhinged and even more insane than most of us had previously believed!

 

[OKTexas]

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?

.

In question is if you have reasonably known that the emails were stolen and went along with a conspiracy, perhaps lying later about it and attempting to obstruct justice by...well how about firing the head of FBI.

And even if intent would not be fully proven, even if the lying was not under oath, even if obstruction would not be established, the damage to this White House would still be crippling politically. They would be in the public conscience firmly as a house of crooks who ARE the swamp.

So you don't have an answer, just opinion. Thanks for playing.

.

Something is terribly wrong in the head with you right wingers.

Here you go

18 U.S. Code § 1343 - Fraud by wire, radio, or television

18 U.S. Code § 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States

18 U.S. Code § 1505 - Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees

18 U.S. Code § 1503 - Influencing or injuring officer or juror generally

Now please explain how any of those apply to my scenario.

.

 

[Rambunctious]

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?

.

I don't think that would be unlawful, unseemly but not unlawful. I also don't believe that happened. The whole thing is made up. Fake. This investigation needs to end. If it goes on all the way through Trump's full term it will be obvious to everyone that it is not a real investigation it's just a political witch hunt.

 

[sartre play]

Don't know where you get your information, but I don't know if Trump was involved in Russian interference with the election. but there does seem to be enough info to say Russia sure tried to. why they would prefer Trump, don't know that answer either. NO one knows. we just guess & say that's the truth.

 

[OKTexas]

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?

.

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

If spreading false in formation to win an election was a crimes, then every Democrat in the country would be in prison.

Sent from my SM-G935P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

Most republican also.

.

 

[Rambunctious]

The whole Russian connection story is meant to slow down or halt Trump's presidency and the entire swamp is behind it. Both left and right members of the federal swamp. Comey was the swamps defender, now he is gone.

 

[yiostheoy]

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?

.

A lot of haters get remarkably fuzzy when it comes to this, but they're absolutely certain that "the Russians hacked the election" and Trump is guilty of something. That's usually all it takes for them to demand he be impeached.

Naturally, none of them are considering the ramifications of a Pence presidency. If they think Trump is going to appoint conservative justices...

That's why I posed the question.

.

I answered your rhetorical question for you.

 

[OKTexas]

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?

.

quid :releasing info helping one candidate by damaging the other candidate.

quo:????

Like the media, or people like Harry Reid lying about Romney not paying any taxes. Then admitting it was false and laughing about it, saying it worked didn't it. So now show me the law that was violated.

.

You are blabbering.

And you didn't provide any legal justification on your ignorance, every time you buy something in a store there is a quid pro quo, but no laws are broken.

.

 

[Aries]

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?

.

Seeing as nothing crazy was released in said emails Hillary's evilness is obviously not the motive. The more likely motive is that Putin wanted someone in office who would get rid of Obama placed sanctions because it hurt their economy immensely. Putin wanted an easily manipulated puppet in our WH, which he clearly found in Trump.

US defines treason as levying war against our nation or providing aid and comfort to any enemy.

The answer is treason. Donnie should rot in jail like the traitor he is.

 

[Rambunctious]

Remember...this is not a "CRIMINAL" investigation. Because no laws were broken even if the accusations are true which they are not.

 

[Camp]

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?

.

Conspiracy

 

[OKTexas]

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?

.

Never try to reason with irrational people! The left is clearly unhinged and even more insane than most of us had previously believed!

I'm not trying to reason with anyone. I simply posed a question and am looking for a justifiable response.

.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

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?

.

The Information was obtained by breaking the law by hacking the DNC servers...

To then use that to gain advantage is collusion with that crime.

Really, if the police bust a burglar and he has stolen material that implicates someone else in a crime and they use it to prosecute the third party, did they collude in the burglary? In this case the Russians already had the material all the representative did was coordinate the release to the public, they never took possession of it and offered nothing in return.

So what law was broken, quote the law.

.

Collusion is an agreement between two or more parties, sometimes illegal and therefore secretive, to limit open competition by deceiving, misleading, or defrauding others of their legal rights, or to obtain an objective forbidden by law typically by defrauding or gaining an unfair market advantage.

Thanks.

No law broken.

Time to move on.

 

[candycorn]

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?

.

I'm not sure it breaks any laws in the way you described.

However, what you're leaving out is whether or not the Russian representative broke the law to acquire the "really bad shit". If you're aware of US Laws being broken and do nothing about it and, in fact, seek to benefit from it...the electorate should be made aware that you have no respect for the law.

In this case, Roger Stone, a Trump Associate admits to interaction with Guccifer (the Russian hacker US intel concludes hacked Ms .Clinton's e-mails) and even tweeted that her campaign manager will "have his turn in the barrel" six weeks prior to the release of his hacked files. Why a man with the President's ear is chatting with a hacker is mind boggling in and of itself.... That the hacker is probably responsible for breaking the law and Mr. Stone and Mr. Trump did nothing about it...tells you all you need to know about how seriously they take our electoral process.

Right, like news organizations accepting classified information from a confidential informants and publishing the information knowing it was passed illegally?

Well the PRTK is long accepted by nearly everyone.

Also you might want to look up the jurisprudence on a private citizens duty to report, simply stated, there is no such duty.

.

You may be right about that.

But is that what you really want from the President??? Someone who is willing to use criminals to win? Seriously...why does one of the President's top advisor even remotely know a Russian Hacker? But getting back to expectations... I'm sure your standards are incredibly low for what you expect; the ends justify the means.

What Makes America Great is that the means matter a great deal to most real Americans. It's not something that Trump or his enablers will ever understand.

I'm trying to keep this thread focused on legality, morality can be discussed another time. But that said, remind us again who's techniques your dear leader taught and the hildabitch wrote her senior thesis on.

.

So yet again, the defense of Trump boils down to “others did it too”; i.e. Trump is no different than Clinton, Obama, Bush … Are you ready to sacrifice the BS that he is “different” because as soon as anyone questions your messiah, the rationalization is crying about Obama (which is in bounds I guess) but Clinton hasn’t been in office in nearly 2 decades. Time to turn the page.

If you’re trying to keep the thread focused on legality; why does one of the President’s top advisors keep tabs on Guccifer 2.0 (a Russian Hacker)? How does one of the President’s Men (to introduce the Nixonian parlance because that seems to be where we’re going) know six months ahead of the fact that John Podesta is going to be hacked?

Hacking a computer is illegal.