|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
United States44286 Posts
On July 12 2017 06:37 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2017 06:33 xDaunt wrote:On July 12 2017 06:26 KwarK wrote:On July 12 2017 06:20 xDaunt wrote:
A criminal conspiracy to do what, exactly? Obtain illegally obtained information from a foreign government for the purpose of influencing the election. Good morning
Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting.
The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.
This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin.
What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be able to speak to Emin about it directly?
I can also send this info to your father via Rhona, but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first.
Best
Rob Goldstone Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I just speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and if it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer. Could we do a call first thing next week when I am back?
Best,
Don https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20 I'm not sure that those regulations prohibit the receipt of opposition research from a foreign national. It also doesn't look like those regulations relate to criminal statutes (the enabling statutes aren't in Title 18). Setting aside the legality of the entire situation. Do you now accept that the Russian investigation is not a hoax and that (thanks to Donald Jr) there is now proof of Russia directly interacting with the highest levels of the Trump campaign (leaving aside the question if they accepted the help or not, that would be the next step to prove).
How is whether or not they accepted the help the next step to prove? Manafort, Kushner and Don Jr. went to the meeting. That's accepting the help. Whether or not the meeting was particularly helpful is irrelevant. That's like complaining that the 13 year old girl whose house you went to turned out to be a 40 year old FBI agent. They accepted the invitation and set up a meeting.
|
didn't someone predict that conservatives would argue "ah yes but it's not illegal/ criminal?"
|
On July 12 2017 06:37 KwarK wrote:
Are we calling this opposition research now? Also you're using the words foreign national rather than foreign government. The emails explain that it is part of "Russian and its government's support for Mr. Trump".
It really should go without saying that absent political bias, no one would support getting damaging info from Russia.
|
On July 12 2017 06:40 ticklishmusic wrote:
didn't someone predict that conservatives would argue "ah yes but it's not illegal/ criminal?"
that part was really obvious. if you cant pretend it didn't happen then the next step is to pretend its not wrong.
|
On July 12 2017 06:39 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2017 06:37 Gorsameth wrote:On July 12 2017 06:33 xDaunt wrote:On July 12 2017 06:26 KwarK wrote:On July 12 2017 06:20 xDaunt wrote:
A criminal conspiracy to do what, exactly? Obtain illegally obtained information from a foreign government for the purpose of influencing the election. Good morning
Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting.
The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.
This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin.
What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be able to speak to Emin about it directly?
I can also send this info to your father via Rhona, but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first.
Best
Rob Goldstone Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I just speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and if it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer. Could we do a call first thing next week when I am back?
Best,
Don https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20 I'm not sure that those regulations prohibit the receipt of opposition research from a foreign national. It also doesn't look like those regulations relate to criminal statutes (the enabling statutes aren't in Title 18). Setting aside the legality of the entire situation. Do you now accept that the Russian investigation is not a hoax and that (thanks to Donald Jr) there is now proof of Russia directly interacting with the highest levels of the Trump campaign (leaving aside the question if they accepted the help or not, that would be the next step to prove). How is whether or not they accepted the help the next step to prove? Manafort, Kushner and Don Jr. went to the meeting. That's accepting the help. Whether or not the meeting was particularly helpful is irrelevant. That's like complaining that the 13 year old girl whose house you went to turned out to be a 40 year old FBI agent. They accepted the invitation and set up a meeting.
For the law intent might be enough, for Trumps followers they will simply say they went but declined.
Baby steps Kwark. Baby steps.
|
On July 12 2017 06:40 ticklishmusic wrote:
didn't someone predict that conservatives would argue "ah yes but it's not illegal/ criminal?"
And it is hilarious to see after how long there was so much talk about how the Russia thing itself was blatantly false and just mccarthyism and whatnot. Now we are at the point where Trump's team knowingly walked into a room looking for damaging information on Clinton, provided by the Russian government.
Think about how many times that was denied and with how much enthusiasm/disgust. This is very likely not the end of this tale. Trump's team have actively denied every single thing that turned out to be true so far.
|
On July 12 2017 06:37 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2017 06:33 xDaunt wrote:On July 12 2017 06:26 KwarK wrote:On July 12 2017 06:20 xDaunt wrote:
A criminal conspiracy to do what, exactly? Obtain illegally obtained information from a foreign government for the purpose of influencing the election. Good morning
Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting.
The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.
This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin.
What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be able to speak to Emin about it directly?
I can also send this info to your father via Rhona, but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first.
Best
Rob Goldstone Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I just speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and if it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer. Could we do a call first thing next week when I am back?
Best,
Don https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20 I'm not sure that those regulations prohibit the receipt of opposition research from a foreign national. It also doesn't look like those regulations relate to criminal statutes (the enabling statutes aren't in Title 18). Setting aside the legality of the entire situation. Do you now accept that the Russian investigation is not a hoax and that (thanks to Donald Jr) there is now proof of Russia directly interacting with the highest levels of the Trump campaign (leaving aside the question if they accepted the help or not, that would be the next step to prove).
I still haven't seen anything that shows criminal conduct warranting an investigation into Trump. I have always thought it likely that there were some back channel communications between the Trump campaign and Russia during the election. This, in and of itself, isn't problematic. What would be problematic would be the Trump campaign participating in an actual illegal activity that the Russians were conducting. For example, Trump's campaign facilitating the Russian hacking of the DNC server would be criminal. Merely receiving information, regardless of how it is obtained, after the fact? Probably not.
|
On July 12 2017 06:45 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2017 06:37 Gorsameth wrote:On July 12 2017 06:33 xDaunt wrote:On July 12 2017 06:26 KwarK wrote:On July 12 2017 06:20 xDaunt wrote:
A criminal conspiracy to do what, exactly? Obtain illegally obtained information from a foreign government for the purpose of influencing the election. Good morning
Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting.
The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.
This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin.
What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be able to speak to Emin about it directly?
I can also send this info to your father via Rhona, but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first.
Best
Rob Goldstone Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I just speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and if it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer. Could we do a call first thing next week when I am back?
Best,
Don https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20 I'm not sure that those regulations prohibit the receipt of opposition research from a foreign national. It also doesn't look like those regulations relate to criminal statutes (the enabling statutes aren't in Title 18). Setting aside the legality of the entire situation. Do you now accept that the Russian investigation is not a hoax and that (thanks to Donald Jr) there is now proof of Russia directly interacting with the highest levels of the Trump campaign (leaving aside the question if they accepted the help or not, that would be the next step to prove). I still haven't seen anything that shows criminal conduct warranting an investigation into Trump. I have always thought it likely that there were some back channel communications between the Trump campaign and Russia during the election. This, in and of itself, isn't problematic. What would be problematic would be the Trump campaign participating in an actual illegal activity that the Russians were conducting. For example, Trump's campaign facilitating the Russian hacking of the DNC server would be criminal. Merely receiving information, regardless of how it is obtained, after the fact? Probably not.
Our definition of wrong is different but thats no surprise.
Thank you for stating your opinion on the matter 
|
From the interviews I have heard today, there are more than a couple attorneys what are not as confident as XDaunt that none of this was illegal. Receiving what amounts to material support from the Russian goverment and not telling anyone is not something a candidate can do. Accepting a meeting to receive it is even worse.
|
looking at the statute, i guess the argument is that damaging info on the clinton campaign of dubious providence is not of value.
|
I think they will focus on the "of value" part more than anything.
And on the last page, I wasn't implying that the meeting fell through, just by what was being stated. I doubt they walked away empty handed.
|
On July 12 2017 06:45 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2017 06:37 Gorsameth wrote:On July 12 2017 06:33 xDaunt wrote:On July 12 2017 06:26 KwarK wrote:On July 12 2017 06:20 xDaunt wrote:
A criminal conspiracy to do what, exactly? Obtain illegally obtained information from a foreign government for the purpose of influencing the election. Good morning
Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting.
The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.
This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin.
What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be able to speak to Emin about it directly?
I can also send this info to your father via Rhona, but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first.
Best
Rob Goldstone Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I just speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and if it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer. Could we do a call first thing next week when I am back?
Best,
Don https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20 I'm not sure that those regulations prohibit the receipt of opposition research from a foreign national. It also doesn't look like those regulations relate to criminal statutes (the enabling statutes aren't in Title 18). Setting aside the legality of the entire situation. Do you now accept that the Russian investigation is not a hoax and that (thanks to Donald Jr) there is now proof of Russia directly interacting with the highest levels of the Trump campaign (leaving aside the question if they accepted the help or not, that would be the next step to prove). I still haven't seen anything that shows criminal conduct warranting an investigation into Trump. I have always thought it likely that there were some back channel communications between the Trump campaign and Russia during the election. This, in and of itself, isn't problematic. What would be problematic would be the Trump campaign participating in an actual illegal activity that the Russians were conducting. For example, Trump's campaign facilitating the Russian hacking of the DNC server would be criminal. Merely receiving information, regardless of how it is obtained, after the fact? Probably not.
Would that info ever be received from Russia for free? The investigation is also a counter intel one, because Russia is a foreign adversary. To simply gloss over it as not criminal is only 10% of the story. As a hypothetical, if it were to be proven that it happened, and it really wasn't criminal, Congress would probably pass a law to make it criminal in the future.
|
Not going to lie, Donald Jr. fucked up.
Donald Sr. does his thing within the legal limit.
Sr. will most likely going to give Jr. a spanking tonight.
|
Interesting precedent here.
On September 14, 2000, former congressman Tom Downey, a close advisor to Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore, received an anonymous package in the mail containing a videotape of George W. Bush practicing for the upcoming presidential debates and more than 120 pages of planned debate strategies. Downey and his lawyer contacted the FBI and handed the cache over that very day, and Gore campaign officials then immediately reached out to the Associated Press to provide a timeline of the events. The Gore campaign had no hint of who had sent the materials—nothing indicated the involvement of a foreign power; indeed, the package was eventually traced to a low-level employee at a media firm. But the materials were on their face likely provided to the Gore campaign as part of an attempt to damage Gore’s opponent, and that was enough to prompt a call to authorities.
The rightness of the Gore officials’ course of action is in no way diminished by the fact that, as suggested at the time, they were probably in part motivated by the desire to avoid the accusations of ill-gotten advantage that had rocked the Reagan administration. A couple years after the fact, it had been revealed that the Reagan campaign had obtained secret briefing materials on then-President Jimmy Carter’s debate strategy in the run-up to the 1980 election; those revelations in turn triggered long-running congressional and Justice Department investigations. Those investigations—which eventually ended in a whimper—raised questions about whether and what kind of crime had been committed, but note that the Justice Department concluded at the time that there was ''no criminal intent of any kind” and “no criminal wrongdoing” committed in connection with the transfer of the materials. This scandal too did not involve any indication of involvement by a hostile foreign power or its intelligence services.
www.lawfareblog.com
|
On July 12 2017 06:45 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2017 06:37 Gorsameth wrote:On July 12 2017 06:33 xDaunt wrote:On July 12 2017 06:26 KwarK wrote:On July 12 2017 06:20 xDaunt wrote:
A criminal conspiracy to do what, exactly? Obtain illegally obtained information from a foreign government for the purpose of influencing the election. Good morning
Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting.
The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.
This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin.
What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be able to speak to Emin about it directly?
I can also send this info to your father via Rhona, but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first.
Best
Rob Goldstone Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I just speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and if it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer. Could we do a call first thing next week when I am back?
Best,
Don https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20 I'm not sure that those regulations prohibit the receipt of opposition research from a foreign national. It also doesn't look like those regulations relate to criminal statutes (the enabling statutes aren't in Title 18). Setting aside the legality of the entire situation. Do you now accept that the Russian investigation is not a hoax and that (thanks to Donald Jr) there is now proof of Russia directly interacting with the highest levels of the Trump campaign (leaving aside the question if they accepted the help or not, that would be the next step to prove). I still haven't seen anything that shows criminal conduct warranting an investigation into Trump. I have always thought it likely that there were some back channel communications between the Trump campaign and Russia during the election. This, in and of itself, isn't problematic. What would be problematic would be the Trump campaign participating in an actual illegal activity that the Russians were conducting. For example, Trump's campaign facilitating the Russian hacking of the DNC server would be criminal. Merely receiving information, regardless of how it is obtained, after the fact? Probably not. Really? The Senate investigative Committee disagree that it isn't a problem. That's why they are investigating it.
|
It's telling how quiet Danglars is. And xDaunt, it's okay to be proven wrong. Just accept it, renounce trump and his team, and move on. This is an uphill battle you've found yourself in with evidence mounting ever higher.
|
On July 12 2017 07:30 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
It's telling how quiet Danglars is. And xDaunt, it's okay to be proven wrong. Just accept it, renounce trump and his team, and move on. This is an uphill battle you've found yourself in with evidence mounting ever higher.
Danglars responded earlier today.
On July 11 2017 13:54 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2017 11:55 Mohdoo wrote:
"failing new york times" dropping a nuke
Edit: Can we take a moment to appreciate the pages and pages of arguments saying Russia wasn't even involved? I can recall some juicy conversations. It's a blockbuster alright. And some actual substance behind collusion accusations. We'll have to see the email because something is fishy. Show nested quote +It is unclear whether Mr. Goldstone had direct knowledge of the origin of the damaging material. One person who was briefed on the emails said it appeared that he was passing along information that had been passed through several others. So Goldston didn't know if it was true and didn't himself know where this damaging info came from? One person who didn't see the emails is guessing at what Goldstone might not have known? Still damaging as it stands and likely as further reporting comes out.
|
I mean, even if it isn't "wrong" Donald Trump and his campaign systematically denied and lied to the American people about this issue over, and over, and over again. And then Trump fired Comey to make it go away.
I don't see how anyone can't see that as wrong.
|
On July 12 2017 07:36 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2017 07:30 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
It's telling how quiet Danglars is. And xDaunt, it's okay to be proven wrong. Just accept it, renounce trump and his team, and move on. This is an uphill battle you've found yourself in with evidence mounting ever higher. Danglars responded earlier today. Show nested quote +On July 11 2017 13:54 Danglars wrote:On July 11 2017 11:55 Mohdoo wrote:
"failing new york times" dropping a nuke
Edit: Can we take a moment to appreciate the pages and pages of arguments saying Russia wasn't even involved? I can recall some juicy conversations. It's a blockbuster alright. And some actual substance behind collusion accusations. We'll have to see the email because something is fishy. It is unclear whether Mr. Goldstone had direct knowledge of the origin of the damaging material. One person who was briefed on the emails said it appeared that he was passing along information that had been passed through several others. So Goldston didn't know if it was true and didn't himself know where this damaging info came from? One person who didn't see the emails is guessing at what Goldstone might not have known? Still damaging as it stands and likely as further reporting comes out.
Did not see that. Apologies to Danglars.
|
On July 12 2017 07:09 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 12 2017 06:45 xDaunt wrote:On July 12 2017 06:37 Gorsameth wrote:On July 12 2017 06:33 xDaunt wrote:On July 12 2017 06:26 KwarK wrote:On July 12 2017 06:20 xDaunt wrote:
A criminal conspiracy to do what, exactly? Obtain illegally obtained information from a foreign government for the purpose of influencing the election. Good morning
Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting.
The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.
This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin.
What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be able to speak to Emin about it directly?
I can also send this info to your father via Rhona, but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first.
Best
Rob Goldstone Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I just speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and if it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer. Could we do a call first thing next week when I am back?
Best,
Don https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20 I'm not sure that those regulations prohibit the receipt of opposition research from a foreign national. It also doesn't look like those regulations relate to criminal statutes (the enabling statutes aren't in Title 18). Setting aside the legality of the entire situation. Do you now accept that the Russian investigation is not a hoax and that (thanks to Donald Jr) there is now proof of Russia directly interacting with the highest levels of the Trump campaign (leaving aside the question if they accepted the help or not, that would be the next step to prove). I still haven't seen anything that shows criminal conduct warranting an investigation into Trump. I have always thought it likely that there were some back channel communications between the Trump campaign and Russia during the election. This, in and of itself, isn't problematic. What would be problematic would be the Trump campaign participating in an actual illegal activity that the Russians were conducting. For example, Trump's campaign facilitating the Russian hacking of the DNC server would be criminal. Merely receiving information, regardless of how it is obtained, after the fact? Probably not. Would that info ever be received from Russia for free? The investigation is also a counter intel one, because Russia is a foreign adversary. To simply gloss over it as not criminal is only 10% of the story. As a hypothetical, if it were to be proven that it happened, and it really wasn't criminal, Congress would probably pass a law to make it criminal in the future.
I have no idea. You can't convict people on speculation and the hypothetical. As always, I'm waiting to see how this plays out. How many times have numerous posters in this thread pronounced Trump's demise due to an instance of alleged [criminal] wrongdoing? And how many time have they been right? Last I checked, they're all still batting zero. You'd think that people would have learned to not be so presumptuous by now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
