It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

DJT JR Was Set Up by the DNC. Russian Lawyer worked for Fusion GPS, Group behind phony Dossier

page: 10
37
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 01:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

Teddy Kennedy actually traveled to Russia and met with the Kremlin to ask them to help unseat Reagan back in the '80s during his re-election campaign and that was not considered criminal.




posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 01:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Middleoftheroad

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: shooterbrody

Lets pretend no law was broken.

Would you really be comfortable with the idea of the POTUS having won because of Russian interference?

Now laws may very well have been broken, but just take the issue of law out of it, its still very disturbing. What bothers me more than anything right now is how Trump supporters such as yourself seem to be ignoring this possibility, you are blinded by politics.


I would because the left quickly forgot, but a lot of us didn't. The DNC colluded with MSM, judges, ex-presidents, etc. to not only circumvent the actual election process, but to also avoid facing justice like the rest of us peons. Not only did they manipulate the elections, but they also pissed off a lot of their own supporters colluding to screw over Bernie Sanders.

Even though there was actual proof of the collusion going on behind the curtains, nobody did anything because the DNC and MSM were the guilty parties. Now all of a sudden because they still lost and their credibility is on its last leg they sensationalize stories with absolutely no proof. Where is the law that was broken? Where is the document/information that's being talked about? How about the left come up with some evidence to prosecute with instead of using headlines to do it for them to just throw dirt on someones name. It just might bring back a little credibility, but it would only be a little at this point.


More importantly the DNC worked with the Ukranian government to dig up opposition research on Manafort to try and discredit the Trump campaign - some selective memories some people have.



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 01:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Blarneystoner

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Sillyolme



This is collusion.

Even IF it was collusion....
could you tell us all what US law was broken?


The law barring foreign nationals from providing assistance in US elections.

Federal Election Campaign Act




The Act and Commission regulations include a broad prohibition on foreign national activity in connection with elections in the United States. 52 U.S.C. § 30121 and generally, 11 CFR 110.20. In general, foreign nationals are prohibited from the following activities:

Making any contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or making any expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement in connection with any federal, state or local election in the United States;
Making any contribution or donation to any committee or organization of any national, state, district, or local political party (including donations to a party nonfederal account or office building account);
Making any disbursement for an electioneering communication;
Making any donation to a presidential inaugural committee.


Foreign Nationals

I take it reading comprehension is a problem for you.

That all talks about donating money to a political campaign, in various guises.
It does not say that providing information about illegal activity is somehow illegal if you're Russian.


I take it you didn't read the entire act....

It's not just monetary contributions that are prohibited by the act. ANY participation by foreign nationals in the election process is prohibited.



Commission regulations prohibit foreign nationals from directing, dictating, controlling, or directly or indirectly participating in the decision-making process of any person (such as a corporation, labor organization, political committee, or political organization) with regard to any election-related activities.


My reading comprehension is just fine... as well as my attention span. How's your's?



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Oh my, how right you are. My analogy isn't bunk when considering the implied effect of his actions.

You're considering my analogy bunk because you can't come to grips with the Donald Jr's actions so you mind is feebly trying to rationalize why everything is ok and its really HILLARY's EMAILS that we need to mobilize the armed forces to combat!

The president is immune to any crime, so in fact Donald could have given Putin our nuclear launch codes and there would be no crime committed (save but for what the Republican controlled congress wished to define as one). The fact that you and other Trump supporters are ok with this speaks volumes to your moral compass and your patriotism (though judging from your account name I assuming you're British).

Lets take a show of hands, even though its perfectly legal, how many people would have no problem with Trump allowing Putin to 'annex' the United States? Would it be cool with everyone if we at least got to keep our name? That way we can all be MAGA 113% of the time while Russia pulls the strings and determines the countries course of action in the future. Is this really what the Conservative Republicans have become?



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

No.

It would be closer to being invited to deposit your funds legally into a bank only to discover the bank is really a carnival and no one wants to play bank. Never did.

So you walk away asking why do people waste our time.

THEN, months later after the ring leader loses an election, someone says that you tried to rob the carnival because you came looking for a bank....a bank to rob. We assume that last part to be true.

"Why would you go to a carnival?" They ask.

Junior: "because they said they were a BANK!" "Here I will publish evidence of me trying to deposit my money...."

Retards: "That money shows you were trying to take more money than you were going to deposit!" The old switcharoo!"


And you have no facts.

Facts. FACTS. FaCtS. Fun Facts.

DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING NOT BASED ON YOUR OPINION?

I will get crack headish about it.

YO MAAAng. You got dem facts yooooo!? I'll soup your click.




edit on 7 11 2017 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wayfarer
a reply to: UKTruth

Oh my, how right you are. My analogy isn't bunk when considering the implied effect of his actions.

You're considering my analogy bunk because you can't come to grips with the Donald Jr's actions so you mind is feebly trying to rationalize why everything is ok and its really HILLARY's EMAILS that we need to mobilize the armed forces to combat!

The president is immune to any crime, so in fact Donald could have given Putin our nuclear launch codes and there would be no crime committed (save but for what the Republican controlled congress wished to define as one). The fact that you and other Trump supporters are ok with this speaks volumes to your moral compass and your patriotism (though judging from your account name I assuming you're British).

Lets take a show of hands, even though its perfectly legal, how many people would have no problem with Trump allowing Putin to 'annex' the United States? Would it be cool with everyone if we at least got to keep our name? That way we can all be MAGA 113% of the time while Russia pulls the strings and determines the countries course of action in the future. Is this really what the Conservative Republicans have become?


Sounds like a lot of bluster because you don't have an argument.
Your analogy was bunk because it refers to an attempted crime.
There was no crime attempted here in having a meeting to get oppo research and would have been no crime if they had managed to get something decent to run with in the campaign.

You realise that Hillary's campaign paid Fusion who worked on lobbying for Russia? Right?
You realise that the DNC worked with the Ukranian govt to get opposition research on the Trump campaign? Right?
Neither of those incidents were crimes either.
Perhaps you can explain the difference?



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blarneystoner

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Blarneystoner

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Sillyolme



This is collusion.

Even IF it was collusion....
could you tell us all what US law was broken?


The law barring foreign nationals from providing assistance in US elections.

Federal Election Campaign Act




The Act and Commission regulations include a broad prohibition on foreign national activity in connection with elections in the United States. 52 U.S.C. § 30121 and generally, 11 CFR 110.20. In general, foreign nationals are prohibited from the following activities:

Making any contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or making any expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement in connection with any federal, state or local election in the United States;
Making any contribution or donation to any committee or organization of any national, state, district, or local political party (including donations to a party nonfederal account or office building account);
Making any disbursement for an electioneering communication;
Making any donation to a presidential inaugural committee.


Foreign Nationals

I take it reading comprehension is a problem for you.

That all talks about donating money to a political campaign, in various guises.
It does not say that providing information about illegal activity is somehow illegal if you're Russian.


I take it you didn't read the entire act....

It's not just monetary contributions that are prohibited by the act. ANY participation by foreign nationals in the election process is prohibited.



Commission regulations prohibit foreign nationals from directing, dictating, controlling, or directly or indirectly participating in the decision-making process of any person (such as a corporation, labor organization, political committee, or political organization) with regard to any election-related activities.


My reading comprehension is just fine... as well as my attention span. How's your's?


You still seem to be having some problems with your reading comprehension.

..directing, dictating, controlling, or directly or indirectly participating in the decision-making process of any person


Care to elaborate on how that applies?


edit on 11/7/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Information brokering isn't a crime, you are correct. Trading information for lifting of sanctions, or easing of restrictions (like the Magnistky Act) is.



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 02:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: butcherguy

It was intended to. With an expectation of reciprocity.
That's the third time I've said that in this thread.
What is so hard to understand?

How can you prove in court that certain information had value when it didn't exist?

That is apparently really hard to understand.
I have been told that this involves a law that requires something of value having been given to someone else.

Please prove the value of something that doesn't exist.



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wayfarer
a reply to: UKTruth

Information brokering isn't a crime, you are correct. Trading information for lifting of sanctions, or easing of restrictions (like the Magnistky Act) is.

comeback when you have any proof of either
we have statements and emails from both parties saying no info was traded

go get your shinebox



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

Laws come with special legal definitions.
None that include info in this case.
Square peg round hole.
Not 1 single case has been prosecuted or even charged without monetary transfer, and they know this.



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 02:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Blarneystoner

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Blarneystoner

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Sillyolme



This is collusion.

Even IF it was collusion....
could you tell us all what US law was broken?


The law barring foreign nationals from providing assistance in US elections.

Federal Election Campaign Act




The Act and Commission regulations include a broad prohibition on foreign national activity in connection with elections in the United States. 52 U.S.C. § 30121 and generally, 11 CFR 110.20. In general, foreign nationals are prohibited from the following activities:

Making any contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or making any expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement in connection with any federal, state or local election in the United States;
Making any contribution or donation to any committee or organization of any national, state, district, or local political party (including donations to a party nonfederal account or office building account);
Making any disbursement for an electioneering communication;
Making any donation to a presidential inaugural committee.


Foreign Nationals

I take it reading comprehension is a problem for you.

That all talks about donating money to a political campaign, in various guises.
It does not say that providing information about illegal activity is somehow illegal if you're Russian.


I take it you didn't read the entire act....

It's not just monetary contributions that are prohibited by the act. ANY participation by foreign nationals in the election process is prohibited.



Commission regulations prohibit foreign nationals from directing, dictating, controlling, or directly or indirectly participating in the decision-making process of any person (such as a corporation, labor organization, political committee, or political organization) with regard to any election-related activities.


My reading comprehension is just fine... as well as my attention span. How's your's?


You still seem to be having some problems with your reading comprehension.

..directing, dictating, controlling, or directly or indirectly participating in the decision-making process of any person


Care to elaborate on how that applies?



What part of "directly or indirectly participating in the decision making process" do you not understand?


Trump Jr's email....


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 governments support for Mr. Trump — helped along by Aras and Emin.



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 02:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Blarneystoner

That email was from a talent agent, an American

try to keep up



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Yes ma'am Mrs. Clinton. I'm sorry. Please don't kill me.



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 02:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Blarneystoner

That email was from a talent agent, an American

try to keep up


Offering information from foreign nationals...



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 02:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wayfarer
a reply to: UKTruth

Information brokering isn't a crime, you are correct. Trading information for lifting of sanctions, or easing of restrictions (like the Magnistky Act) is.


Oh, you mean the Magnitsky Act which was never referenced on the campaign trail nor has it become any kind of issue in Congress since the election?



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Blarneystoner

But the email was NOT from a foreign national
Legally that actually matters



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 02:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Blarneystoner

But the email was NOT from a foreign national
Legally that actually matters


Oh I'm sure it does matter... but so does this:




Seems we have some time and if it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer.


Trump Jr basically saying "yes" I'd love to see the documents provided by foreign nationals. The FEC act states that even indirect influence is a crime.



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 02:39 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

You effin racist. Did you not see the emails? Wait did you?

Yeah. God damned intolerant xenophobic suminabich. Russia is the enemy you traitor!

What are you triggered snowflake? See what I did there, I flipped it on you. Ha!

The world's rich, famous and powerful dont like Trump. What are you crazy? Did you not hear what Madonna said?

How about Soros? Oh I know. You did see we got like a bunch of unfounded investigations going. You wait and see. Just wait. YOU JUST WAIT. Please wait, please. We only need like 4 more years.

You still not onboard?

Racist ignorant bastard!




edit on 7 11 2017 by tadaman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 11 2017 @ 03:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Blarneystoner

Again that email was to an AMERICAN
that actually matters




top topics



 
37
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join