Richdude wrote on Oct 30
th, 2019 at 12:37pm:
You obviously like reading politically motivated fiction!
You can ignore the Mueller report if you want, but just because you don't believe it doesn't make it untrue.
Trumps son spoke to a Russian agent imported by the Dems but no action was taken, Try again!So you admit it then? And your implication that there was no wrongdoing because no action was taken, where are you getting that from?
Ok, let's recap. In June of 2016, Trump Jr. agreed to sit down with Natalia Veselnitskaya, a Russian attorney who promised, in the words of the intermediary who set up the meeting, "official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia" as "part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump."
Trump Jr. needed only minutes to respond. "If it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer," he said "it", in this context, referring to the unambiguously-described efforts of a hostile foreign power to interfere directly in a U.S. presidential election and at the least, provide the Trump Campaign team with a "thing of value" originating from a foreign national.
Federal law prohibits anyone from soliciting, accepting, or receiving "a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value" from foreign nationals in connection with any election.
The circumstances of the Trump Tower meeting, Mueller says, could "support an inference that the Campaign anticipated receiving derogatory documents and information from official Russian sources that could assist candidate Trump's electoral prospects."
The report compares the Clinton dirt offered by Veselnitskaya to opposition research, reasoning that it might qualify as a "thing of value" under the statute because political campaigns frequently pay for opposition research.
The same statutory scheme, however, also sets out different punishments for violations of this provision, which depend on the value of the unlawful "contribution" in question. Case law further requires the government to prove that conduct was "knowing" and "willful" that is, that the defendant knew they were breaking the law in order to establish a prosecutable violation.
This, says Mueller's team, is what undercuts potential prosecution of Trump Jr.
Mueller then goes on to state in the report,
Quote:The investigation has not developed evidence that the participants in the meeting were familiar with the foreign-contribution ban or the application of federal law to the relevant factual context.
So there was no action taken against Trump Jr. not because he didn't conduct the act he was accused of, but because it was deemed because he was ignorant of the law and the difficulties in setting a dollar value on the information he was soliciting that it would be a difficult case to prosecute.
So don't for a second pretend he didn't do it because, like his father and President Zelensky, we KNOW it happened.
Untrue! The transcript was published - no where did Trump coerce or mention same. The Ukrainian President said the no coersion exerted. Get your facts straight sunshine! The
call summary that was released shows Trump solicited dirt on Joe Biden from Zelensky to use politically against him which was then followed up by Trump's personal Attorney and at no point was there any US officials involved. It was not done for the benefit of the country.
There doesn't need to be coercion or a quid pro quo, that is a separate crime, one that evidence given so far points to Trump also doing. We will see as more comes to light as the public proceeding begin. I suggested you get
your facts right princess!
What the hell are you talking? You've mentioned before in defence of Trump that he sought this information from Zelensky in order to fight corruption. A claim that given he only involved his own personal staff and not anyone official, nor did he target anyone but the Bidens has been debunked many times over.
But if you want to stand by that claim, surely you are unhappy about Trump's own corruption, from him being "Individual 1" and an unnamed coconspirator to a crime where his former personal lawyer is currently serving jail time, or the many Emoluments breaches, the bribery we're learning about thanks to the Impeachment Enquiry, surely if stamping out corruption is so important to you, you should be holding Trump to account?
Or is it that you only care about corruption when it's in defence of Trump?
Sad you are a well known trolls troll!I've been accused of that by people smarter than you who still could not defend their position without resorting to personal attack.
Do better.
Allegations by the fake media does not constitute breaking the law!No, but Trump's action, his and his team's admissions show instances where the law has been broken, hence the Impeachment enquiry.
Oh please!Do you need me to post the footage?
See for yourself,
https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-friends/fox-friends-edits-boos-out-video-trump-...That's the good thing about always telling the truth or forming my opinions on the facts. If a troubled little tard like yourself wants to call me a liar etc I can very easily put you in your place.
So back in the corner, bitch.