18 U.S.C Section 371

[Orygun]

@wiley8425

Uh huh. Sure he would have

Sessions: It would take “a factual basis that meets the standard of a special counsel” for the Justice Department to make such an appointment,

https://www.google.com/amp/thehill.com/policy/national-security/360292-sessions-wed-need-factual-basis-for-second-special-counsel-for%3Famp

[SottoVoce]

@WildRose

Of course not but it would perhaps be helpful if you actually read them first.

I did. Your stated:

@WildRose

There has to be an underlying crime to charge under the statute. If you can’t prove a conspiracy to actually commit a crime it’s going nowhere.

I posted US criminal law that could conceivably be used as the crime conspired to commit, if not charged outright itself.

[WildRose]

Not on the part of Trump. You’d be laughed out of the Grand Jury.

[Hellsbane]

Never get a conviction under that charge. The crime has to be against the US specifically. Hell, prolly never even get to trial, unless they pull the usual judge shopping.

[WildRose]

They’d never even get it past a grand jury.

[wiley8425]

And that has what to do with him saying he would recuse himself in an investigation?

[SottoVoce]

@WildRose

Not on the part of Trump. You’d be laughed out of the Grand Jury.

Your blind allegiance is noted. I’ll wait until the facts are presented and charges, if any, are brought forth.

[WildRose]

@SottoVoce

@WildRose

Not on the part of Trump. You’d be laughed out of the Grand Jury.

Your blind allegiance is noted. I’ll wait until the facts are presented and charges, if any, are brought forth.

There has as yet been no evidence of collusion between Trump and the Russians, that’s simply a fact.

[SottoVoce]

@WildRose

@SottoVoce

@WildRose

Not on the part of Trump. You’d be laughed out of the Grand Jury.

Your blind allegiance is noted. I’ll wait until the facts are presented and charges, if any, are brought forth.

There has as yet been no evidence of collusion between Trump and the Russians, that’s simply a fact.

Unless any of us here are part of the investigation, we don’t know what evidence there may or may not be. That’s simply a fact.

[WildRose]

And we’re discussing what is publicly known at this time.

[ZeroBravoPorkchop]

Wont be conspiracy.
Will be Obstruction, Tax Evasion, Russian Mob Laundering. Conspiracy was just the probable cause for the Feds to start digging into wanna be John Gotti’s finances.

[SottoVoce]

@WildRose

And we’re discussing what is publicly known at this time.

And I’m not willing to dismiss the possibility of potential future charges based on what is currently known by the public.

[WildRose]

I’m not either but then I’m not the one saying we can indict him on any specific charge, you are.

[SottoVoce]

@WildRose

I’m not either but then I’m not the one saying we can indict him on any specific charge, you are.

I gave an example of a potential charge which would fit with an investigation looking into election interference by a foreign government.

[WildRose]

You cited a statute that doesn’t even apply. An election is not a controversy nor is there any provable harm to the gov’t in having such contacts with foreign gov’ts.

If it did apply you’d have to charge every candidate who has ever had contact with foreign representatives during their faces.

[SottoVoce]

@WildRose

You cited a statute that doesn’t even apply. An election is not a controversy nor is there any provable harm to the gov’t in having such contacts with foreign gov’ts.

If it did apply you’d have to charge every candidate who has ever had contact with foreign representatives during their faces.

Seriously? If a candidate secretly works with a foreign government to influence an election, to the benefit of the candidate and foreign government, that’s OK and somehow doesn’t apply?

[WildRose]

@SottoVoce

@WildRose

You cited a statute that doesn’t even apply. An election is not a controversy nor is there any provable harm to the gov’t in having such contacts with foreign gov’ts.

If it did apply you’d have to charge every candidate who has ever had contact with foreign representatives during their faces.

Seriously? If a candidate secretly works with a foreign government to influence an election, to the benefit of the candidate and foreign government, that’s OK and somehow doesn’t apply?

It would be dependent on what is done to that end.

Candidates meet with foreigng dignitaries frequently, many make trips to visit with them in their native countries to build up their “foreign policy chops”. At those meetings they discuss future relations and policies. No problem.

They use those meetings to promote themselves, no problem.

Now if you could produce a conspiracy in which say Trump met with Russians and conspired to have them hack the DNC and Hillary’s emails that would be a crime, that is a problem.

The frequent candidate migrations to Israel are a great example of how it is done legally and no one but a few Israeli/Jew hating nuts ever has a problem with it.

The Russians attend for example both conventions and meet with the candidates discussing future relationships and policies, that’s never been the least bit controversial until some of the Trump team did so in spite of the fact the Hillary Team met with the very same “Russian Agents”.

[wiley8425]

But the episode underscores the special ethical challenges presented by the Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy as secretary of state, presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation’s donors

Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal (Published 2015)

Yeah but the Russians paid Bill half a million for a speech and the Clinton Foundation was awash in foriegn money so that’s completely ok.

[sikofit]

Colorado’s state Capitol

[Orygun]

@SottoVoce

Seriously? If a candidate secretly works with a foreign government to influence an election, to the benefit of the candidate and foreign government, that’s OK and somehow doesn’t apply?

Of course its not ok. Lets review.

• Trump Jr. lied about the meeting vociferously (saying it was about adoptions, etc).

• Trump Sr. took part in the coverup and dictated Trump Jr.'s fake story about it.

• When the emails came out they said: “Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday.” And then…“This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr Trump" And that it includes “official documents and information” about Democrat Hillary Clinton. And finally Trump Jr. said- "If it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer”

• Bannon called it “treasonous”- and grounds to “call the FBI immediately.”

• Trump Jr. made numerous calls to blocked numbers before and after the meeting- almost certainly to Trump Sr. The recipients of these calls is undoubtedly known by Mueller.

• Trump gave a speech a couple days before the meeting in which he said he would have dirt on Hillary.

• Trump has lied about not knowing about it since day one

• Trumps personal lawyer said that Trump knew and approved of the meeting- and that other witnesses were present to that as well.