• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GOP Operative Secretly Raised at Least $100,000 in Search for Clinton Emails

JacksinPA said:
On this season of mushrooming political yard signs, I'd like to get one made up that says 'Helsinki - Shame.'
Click to expand...

And attach one of those Trump baby balloons to it. :mrgreen:
 
hanger4 said:
Actually I asked you a question you refused to answer.

If they do exist, then HRC's server/s were hacked, these GOP Operative/s should pay the penalty of attempting to buy stollen property and what about HRC ??
Click to expand...

What? I said before that there is no evidence that they exist. Then I said that if you do believe that they do exist then they would be stolen property. What part don't you get? And what about HRC? Are you going to look to punish the victim of a crime, or are you going to punish the actors and/or enablers of a crime?
 
JacksinPA said:
On this season of mushrooming political yard signs, I'd like to get one made up that says 'Helsinki - Shame.'
Click to expand...

Please don't say mushroom.:lamo
 
Atomic Kid said:
What? I said before that there is no evidence that they exist. Then I said that if you do believe that they do exist then they would be stolen property. What part don't you get? And what about HRC? Are you going to look to punish the victim of a crime, or are you going to punish the actors and/or enablers of a crime?
Click to expand...

I said "these GOP Operative/s should pay the penalty of attempting to buy stollen property".

*18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information*

*(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.*

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793

"Gross negligence" is prosecutable Atomic Kid and has been numerous times.
 
Atomic Kid said:
Are you saying they do exist? If so Smith's efforts to purchase them would be illegal. Is that what you want to say? There exists no evidence that she was successfully hacked. But there is evidence that the Russians did attempt to hack Hilary's office servers within hours after Trump had said on TV; "Russia if you're listening. I hope you can find those 33,000 missing emails." Apparently they were listening.
Click to expand...

Why would buying the emails be illegal? I feel like this is a catch 22.
 
Blue_State said:
Why would buying the emails be illegal? I feel like this is a catch 22.
Click to expand...

If you knowingly buy the emails, that you know were stolen by illegal means from the person that stole them, than yes it is illegal. It would be the same situation as someone who knowingly bought a car that someone stole.
 
Blue_State said:
Why would buying the emails be illegal? I feel like this is a catch 22.
Click to expand...

Because it would have been an attempt to purchase stollen gov property, regardless of whether or not they exist.
 
JacksinPA said:
He was trying to influence the results of the election. That's against Federal law.

18 U.S. Code § 597 - Expenditures to influence voting

Whoever makes or offers to make an expenditure to any person, either to vote or withhold his vote, or to vote for or against any candidate; and

Whoever solicits, accepts, or receives any such expenditure in consideration of his vote or the withholding of his vote—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if the violation was willful, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
Click to expand...

This statute it totally and utterly inapplicable to the situation you are bringing up. This statute is specifically an anti-bribery statute that makes it illegal to bribe someone to vote or not vote in a particular manner, or for the person to accept bribes in exchange for voting or not voting in a particular manner. While there may be a statute that makes it illegal to purchase stolen government emails held on a private server, this certainly is not it.
 
Praxas said:
If you knowingly buy the emails, that you know were stolen by illegal means from the person that stole them, than yes it is illegal. It would be the same situation as someone who knowingly bought a car that someone stole.
Click to expand...

hanger4 said:
Because it would have been an attempt to purchase stollen gov property, regardless of whether or not they exist.
Click to expand...

Got it. Makes absolute sense.
 
Blue_State said:
Why would buying the emails be illegal? I feel like this is a catch 22.
Click to expand...

Unauthorized access of computer/server/network for the purpose of stealing documents, data, email, etc, is a crime. So emails stolen via a cyber crime, such as email hacking, is illegal and those emails could be considered stolen goods.
 
Blue_State said:
Got it. Makes absolute sense.
Click to expand...

Here's the fun part Blue_State, what if the GOP Operative/s intent was to turn them in to the FBI. Assuming they were authentic, it would be infinitely more devastating to HRC. The DoJ would have had to proscute under 18 U.S. Code § 793
 
hanger4 said:
Here's the fun part Blue_State, what if the GOP Operative/s intent was to turn them in to the FBI. Assuming they were authentic, it would be infinitely more devastating to HRC. The DoJ would have had to proscute under 18 U.S. Code § 793
Click to expand...

Ya, that is what I was thinking when I wrote catch 22. It is laughable. Do the right thing, and turn in the emails. Arrested. Do the wrong thing and turn them over to Wikileaks, maybe not arrested.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom