• 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!

What About Collusion?

bubbabgone said:
You think Hillary is not responsible for using Russians to damage Trump because she didn't personally speak to them herself.
Strange that an adult would actually think that's how laws work here in the USA.

And I take the campaign finance complaint filed wit the FEC against Hillary's campaign makes you uncomfortable and that's why you didn't respond to it?
Click to expand...

The Clinton & DNC purchase from an American firm was legal.
 
haymarket said:
The Clinton & DNC purchase from an American firm was legal.
Click to expand...

And I take the campaign finance complaint filed wit the FEC against Hillary's campaign makes you uncomfortable and that's why you didn't respond to it?
 
bubbabgone said:
And I take the campaign finance complaint filed wit the FEC against Hillary's campaign makes you uncomfortable and that's why you didn't respond to it?
Click to expand...

Please fill me in on the details that one. It really cannot make me uncomfortable util I first know about it.
 
LowDown said:
Not a scintilla of evidence has come out...
Click to expand...

Not much evidence at all has been released yet. The investigation is still ongoing.

But you knew that from the jump. Just playing the silly Trump is an angel game.
 
LowDown said:
Not a scintilla of evidence has come out that justifies and supports Mueller's continued activities with regard to his original mandate as special prosecutor.
Click to expand...



Office of the Deputy Attorney General
Washington, D.C. 20538
ORDER NO> 3915-2017
APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL
TO INVESTIGATE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE WITH THE
2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND RELEATED MATTERS

By virtue of the authority vested in me as Acting Attorney General, including 28 U.S.C.
509,510 and 515, in order to discharge my responsibility to provide supervision and management of the Department of Justice, and to ensure a full and thorough investigation of the Russian Government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, I hereby order as follows:

(a) Robert S. Mueller III is appointed to serve as Special Counsel for the United States Department of Justice.
(b) The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James B. Comey in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including.
i. any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and
ii. any matters that arose or man arise directly from the investigation; and
iii. any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. 600.4(a)
(c) If The Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate, the Special Counsel is authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters.
(d) Sections 600.4 through 600.10 of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations are applicable to the Special Counsel.


5/17/17 __________________
Date Rod J. Rosenstein
Acting Attorney General
Click to expand...

LowDown said:
It's almost like that was nothing more than an excuse to get the machinery working that would be used to remove a duly and legally elected President by whatever means necessary.

It's no use saying that Mueller has a collusion indictment in the works. If he had anything we'd have seen it by now.
Click to expand...

You don't know a 'scintilla" of what you're talking about.
 
smallvoice said:
We'd love to see your inside information.
Click to expand...

Don Jr's meeting with the Russians is well documented. It's not a secret and even he admits that he went to get information purported to come from the Russian government.
 
bubbabgone said:
Countless areas of our economy? Extending that concept to our national elections is like saying hiring a hitman is just another area of our economy.
If it was illegal for Trump it was illegal for Hilary.
What foreign power did Trump collaborate with that Hillary did not?
And what FEC law might Hillary have violated doing it?
Click to expand...

Fine, investigate her too. It doesn't make Trump clean.
 
haymarket said:
Please fill me in on the details that one. It really cannot make me uncomfortable util I first know about it.
Click to expand...

CLC*filed a complaint with the FEC alleging the Democratic National Committee*and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign committee violated campaign finance law. They failed to accurately disclose the purpose and recipient of payments for the dossier of research alleging connections between then-candidate Donald Trump and Russia, effectively hiding these payments from public scrutiny, contrary to the requirements of federal law.
Click to expand...

FEC Complaint: Hillary for America & DNC Failure to Disclose | Campaign Legal Center
 
haymarket said:
much ado about nothing. I worry not in the least about it as the purchase was entirely legal.
Click to expand...

This complaint was filed with the FEC.
Election campaign finance law.
 
bubbabgone said:
Outsource information? That's so cute.
Tell me, for whom is there more evidence of working with Russians against their opponent during the 2016 election? Trump? or Clinton?
Click to expand...

Who did it illegally and lied about it and tried to keep all contacts secret, and who when they received their report promptly turned it over to the proper authorities?

See the difference?

One was legal, one was not...
 
bubbabgone said:
This complaint was filed with the FEC.
Election campaign finance law.
Click to expand...

And it will be dismissed shortly, as nothing out of order occured.

Now the stolen emails, and hacks into Facebook aquired by the trump campaign is illegal and is actually being looked at by a criminal prosecutor, not some frivelous complaint.
 
GDViking said:
And it will be dismissed shortly, as nothing out of order occured.

Now the stolen emails, and hacks into Facebook aquired by the trump campaign is illegal and is actually being looked at by a criminal prosecutor, not some frivelous complaint.
Click to expand...

what stolen emails and hacks acquired by the Trump campaign?
 
GDViking said:
And it will be dismissed shortly, as nothing out of order occured.

Now the stolen emails, and hacks into Facebook aquired by the trump campaign is illegal and is actually being looked at by a criminal prosecutor, not some frivelous complaint.
Click to expand...

how do you know that? the policy is not to comment until the complaint is resolved.
not reporting the campaign spending is out of order.
 
GDViking said:
Who did it illegally and lied about it and tried to keep all contacts secret, and who when they received their report promptly turned it over to the proper authorities?

See the difference?

One was legal, one was not...
Click to expand...

That would be Hillary and the DNC.
Steele turned it over to the FBI.
 
bubbabgone said:
This complaint was filed with the FEC.
Election campaign finance law.
Click to expand...

And since you are much more aware of this than I am and take it far more seriously, what would be the legal result if the complaint is held up as valid?
 
haymarket said:
And since you are much more aware of this than I am and take it far more seriously, what would be the legal result if the complaint is held up as valid?
Click to expand...

you don't take campaign finance law violations seriously?
Even if there were Trump violations?
Hard to accept you believe that but I'll try to keep that in mind.
 
bubbabgone said:
you don't take campaign finance law violations seriously?
Even if there were Trump violations?
Hard to accept you believe that but I'll try to keep that in mind.
Click to expand...

Oh I take the law seriously.... I just to not take this complaint seriously as the transaction was legal.

Thats a really assbackwards way to answer my question. Again....what would be the legal result if the complaint is held up as valid?
 
haymarket said:
Oh I take the law seriously.... I just to not take this complaint seriously as the transaction was legal.

Thats a really assbackwards way to answer my question. Again....what would be the legal result if the complaint is held up as valid?
Click to expand...

If spending isn't reported it's not legal.

as for the penalty ...
"... the Commission should determine and impose appropriate sanctions for any and all violations, should enjoin the
respondents from any and all violations in the future, and should impose such additional
remedies as are necessary and appropriate to ensure compliance with the FECA. "
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom