• 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!

Do we need the law proposed by the Dems to make it illegal to accept info from foreign gov.s?

Tanngrisnir said:
No, I'm saying that yet again you don't know what you're talking about and you're comparing apples to oranges.

It's what you do.
Click to expand...

Journalists don't have special priviledges when it comes to the 1st Amendment...lol.
 
apdst said:
Journalists don't have special priviledges when it comes to the 1st Amendment...lol.
Click to expand...

I'm saying that yet again you don't know what you're talking about and you're comparing apples to oranges.

It's what you do.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
I'm saying that yet again you don't know what you're talking about and you're comparing apples to oranges.

It's what you do.
Click to expand...

You'rr saying that journalists do have special priveledges when it comes to the 1st Amendment?...lol
 
Tanngrisnir said:
No, that's not what I'm saying.

Sorry this is so hard for you.
Click to expand...

You stated the law already exist to stop these candidates from receiving dirt on opponents from foreign resources.

Yet Chuck Schumer was on the floor today trying to pass the Foreign Influence Reporting in Elections Act (FIRE Act), legislation that makes receiving dirt from foreign resources illegal and requires candidates to report the activity to the FBI.

So are Democrats trying to pass a law that already exist, or are you wrong?

So which is it?
 
apdst said:
You'rr saying that journalists do have special priveledges when it comes to the 1st Amendment?...lol
Click to expand...

I'm saying that yet again you don't know what you're talking about and you're comparing apples to oranges.

It's what you do.
 
Condor060 said:
You stated the law already exist to stop these candidates from receiving dirt on opponents from foreign resources.

Yet Chuck Schumer was on the floor today trying to pass the Foreign Influence Reporting in Elections Act (FIRE Act), legislation that makes receiving dirt from foreign resources illegal and requires candidates to report the activity to the FBI.

So are Democrats trying to pass a law that already exist, or are you wrong?

So which is it?
Click to expand...

Why don't you EVER know what you're talking about?

§30121. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals
(a) Prohibition

It shall be unlawful for-

(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make-

(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;

(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or

(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title);

What they're trying to pass now is a bill that would make immediate reporting of such contact/offers a legal requirement.

You're just SO bad at all this.
 
vesper said:
This story is laughable considering what the left and our institutions under Obama were involved in during the 2016 election and beyond.
Click to expand...

The Democratic congress is laughable. Never seen a bigger group of depraved hypocrites in my life.
 
trixare4kids said:
The Democratic congress is laughable. Never seen a bigger group of depraved hypocrites in my life.
Click to expand...

But Trix if the poor posters on this forum only viewed MSNBC or primetime on CNN they truly believe their depraved positions are right,
 
independentusa said:
The Dems in the house have sent a bill to the Senate making it illegal to accept or request info on an opponent from a foreign government or agent. Mitch McConnell has said he will not bring the bill for a Senate vote as it helps the Dems? I wonder how it helps the Dems and not the GOP, but keeping the question open on whether accepting or requesting info on an opponent violates present laws does allow Trump to say he does not think it does. It also allows him to request or accept such info and use it through intermediaries such as Wikileaks and claim he has not broken the law. So do we need a law making it specifically illegal to accept or request info from a foreign government or agent, or are you like Trump who believes it is okay?
Click to expand...

That legislation makes every politician a criminal IF they read any newspaper, look at the Internet or watch the MSM - since it is constantly including foreign nationals declaring dirt on candidates.
 
vesper said:
But Trix if the poor posters on this forum only viewed MSNBC or primetime on CNN they truly believe their depraved positions are right,
Click to expand...

And if a Democratic politician they are criminals because MSNBC and CNN constantly have foreign nationals on TV, even as regular commentators, who tell "dirt" on President Trump. Any Democrat you hears that is, therefore, a federal criminal for having received "dirt" on Trump from a foreign national.
 
Condor060 said:
You stated the law already exist to stop these candidates from receiving dirt on opponents from foreign resources.

Yet Chuck Schumer was on the floor today trying to pass the Foreign Influence Reporting in Elections Act (FIRE Act), legislation that makes receiving dirt from foreign resources illegal and requires candidates to report the activity to the FBI.

So are Democrats trying to pass a law that already exist, or are you wrong?

So which is it?
Click to expand...

There is NOTHING Democrats hate more than the truth.

Curious that the Democrats in Congress don't want to prevent the MSM and press from receiving "dirt" from foreign governments and foreign nations. I guess they just accept that the corporate propaganda outlets of the super rich are all inherently traitors - and they like it.
 
The Democrats want to make it illegal to expose the truth - no surprise there.
 
Nickyjo said:
Irrelevant arguments. One can be a “globalist,” whatever that presumed insult means, and support existing law that prohibits accepting aid from a foreign government. After all, he is the law and order president. It can be stopped. The principle in question is as follows: “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands...”. You probably know the rest.

Funny how the president is willing to guard the border but not our sovereignty This is a far greater invasive threat than Central American asylum seekers.
Click to expand...

The Central American asylum seekers are the big fat shiny thing that keeps attention diverted away from stuff like this.
 
Lutherf said:
If you've been paying attention it's starting to look more and more like Papadopolous and Page were being fed information from Simpson associates and then Steele used those contacts to prime pump at the FBI.
Click to expand...

Too much Fox News. Of course with Barr leading the way for Trump, he is Trump's lawyer, I am sure they will find something wrong with the investigation and then the Russian's will be able to do it again in 2020.
 
joko104 said:
That legislation makes every politician a criminal IF they read any newspaper, look at the Internet or watch the MSM - since it is constantly including foreign nationals declaring dirt on candidates.
Click to expand...

Oh what a load of crap. You need to stop listening to Fox News and rush Limbaugh. The legislation makes it mandatory for a candidate to let the FBI know if they have been contacted by a Foreign country or their agent. Does that sound like you can get in trouble by reading a magazine o newspaper? You people will do anything to win, even give up on our democracy. I know you are hoping that the Russian's will help Trump win again in 2020. You must just love the dictators in this world like your master Trump.
 
Lutherf said:
If you've been paying attention it's starting to look more and more like Papadopolous and Page were being fed information from Simpson associates and then Steele used those contacts to prime pump at the FBI.
Click to expand...


Feel free to provide evidence.
 
apdst said:
But, not Hiitlery the old hag? You know, the only person to actually receive information from foreigners?...lol
Click to expand...


You are incorrect. she hired only Fusion GPS, an American firm.
 
apdst said:
I was referring to the Steele Dossier. She paid for it, ya know.

There's already a law that made her mishandling of classified material, illegal.
Click to expand...


She paid for the services of Fusion GPS. her emails were not marked classified, save for one or two.
 
apdst said:
You still believe that horse****? :lamo

You do know that Mueller cleared everyone of collusion.
.
Click to expand...

No, he did not. THere is plenty of Russian collusion in the Mueller report, in fact, some 150 comms between Russia and campaign staff.

Collusion was not his mandate, coordination/conspiracy, was his mandate. he merely couldn't establish that beyond a reasonable doubt where a jury would prosecute.

Also, to find crimes arising from the investigation, and prosecute, and/or farm out to other agencies. This he has done.

The other crimes he found on Trump have to do with corruption & obstruction.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Why don't you EVER know what you're talking about?

§30121. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals
(a) Prohibition

It shall be unlawful for-

(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make-

(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;

(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or

(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title);

What they're trying to pass now is a bill that would make immediate reporting of such contact/offers a legal requirement.

You're just SO bad at all this.
Click to expand...

Hate to burst your little bubble but conversations about dirt on candidates are not contributions. I know you need it to be but if that were true, every politician in Washington would be in jail.

If your little fairy tale were true, How did the DNC send people to the Ukraine to get dirt on Manafort prior to any investigation. How did Clinton work with Steele to get Russian dirt on Trump? Your reaching for something that was never there.
 
Condor060 said:
No such thing as obstruction for firing anyone who works at the pleasure of the president. It could only be obstruction if the president fired Comey that stopped an investigation.
Click to expand...

You dont get it. Trump trying to fire people and ordering people to fire people and undermining the public's trust in a lawful investigation into Russian meddling -is criminal obstruction.-

Trump tried to obstruct the investigation, not because he had ties with Russia, but because he didnt like the appearance that it damaged his duly elected status!

He invented that problem.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Well, keep in mind, McConnell, the gravedigger of American democracy, is a bought and paid for whore.

And accepting it is already illegal.
Click to expand...

There is one minor loophole in the current law, maybe two. I would close them off. I don't think we need more than that myself.
 
I think you need the law because previous law is based on the premise that the individual and the administration is law abiding. Trump operates by testing the limits of rules ordinary mortals accept and comply with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom