- Joined
- Sep 13, 2012
- Messages
- 18,233
- Reaction score
- 15,861
- Location
- veni, vidi, volo - now back in NC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
What we also know is that foreign nationals were paid to do "opposition research" to be used in affecting the 2016 POTUS election outcome. The fact that both sides (political parties?) did this further complicates matters - just how much of that was legally too much is a very important issue.
What some folks seem to be getting upset about is pointing out that "collusion" is a very broad spectrum which may (or may not) include the "smoke" of two entities pursuing a common goal. It seems clear to me that the DNC (via its legal team) did, in fact, use foreign agents (some in Russia) to supply "opposition research" yet many want that ignored while, at the same time, point to Trump (et al) meeting to accept similar help (some from Russians) as being "clearly criminal".
The primary problem I see right now is that there's not a clear and coherent definition of what would or would not be legal in soliciting assistance or accepting unsolicited assistance from foreign nationals regarding political campaign activities for a federal office.
It's clearly illegal to accept money, and that may be the tipping point here - what assistance, if any, was received by a federal level campaign from a foreign source that can be defined as a "donation-in-kind" due to it having a monetary value? Kind of like how the feds use IRS Tax Law to convict gangsters of felonies for not paying taxes on illicit income. If the act of getting assistance isn't illegal, maybe they can demonstrate how that assistance may have had a monetary value that makes it an illegal foreign campaign contribution.
Who knows how this will all turn out. One thing is for sure, IMHO, no political party nor politician nor staffer is immune at this point. The Democratic Party, the GOP, et al, are potential targets of federal prosecution.