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.

 

Why Trump Jr didn't commit a crime

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 09:55 AM
link   
It's illegal for a campaign personnel to solicit things of value from a foreign national, which is American law.

First, not sure if he was part of the Trump campaign. Let's assume he was.

Let's say he goes to some Russian national living in America or even takes a trip to Russia somewhere and grab hold of some random Russian national on the streets and ask him or her of damaging information on Hillary. So what? That's not illegal.

The person he asked at the meeting does not have dirt on Hillary. Rod Goldstone saying so doesn't make it true. Natalia never went into the meeting knowing who she would meet. Rod Goldstone told her she was going into the meeting to talk about adoption. Rod Goldstone told Trump Jr he was going into the meeting to talk about dirt info on Hillary. Clearly Rod Goldstone is the one who played both of them and set up a hoax meeting.
edit on 12-7-2017 by allsee4eye because: (no reason given)



+5 more 
posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

Did you actually read the emails? If so? Why are you asking whats the fuss? It's blatant. Dumbald Jr thought he was getting dirt on the Clinton campaign by a government employee as the email stated!



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Stevenjames15

He thought. So what? Natalia didn't have dirt. Rod Goldstone lied to him. He went to the meeting to verify Rod Goldstone. He wasn't soliciting. Do you even know what soliciting means?
edit on 12-7-2017 by allsee4eye because: (no reason given)


+2 more 
posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:02 AM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye


It's illegal for a campaign personnel to solicit things of value from a foreign national, which is American law.


OK - then I'm going to ask you the same thing I literally just asked in another thread......

Can you please link the code of conduct and compliance requirements to back up this statement because I am suspect that something not tangible constitutes 'of value'. I am subject to compliance and CoC policies and I am not allowed to accept gifts or anything else which can be seen as a bribe where both parties stand to make financial gain.

Seriously - lets see the compliance requirements from the GOP and US government pertaining to your assertion there.


+7 more 
posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Liberals massively overplaying a simple meeting to explore potential opposition research.
They're in the process of damaging themselves - AGAIN.
The entire homepage main stories on fake news site, CNN, is about this - laughable.
Of course there is no law broken.
edit on 12/7/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:04 AM
link   
This lawyer was not representing Russia in any capacity whatsoever.

Meeting with her does not equal meeting with Russia.

She's not a criminal or dodgy. She worked with the US Russian Ambassador appointed by Obama.


+1 more 
posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:06 AM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

Waaaaait a second.

First of all, lets say someone tells me that a particular building contains an object that I want, or a person I want dead. If I rock up at that building ready to burglarise it, or armed and ready to commit murder, but the object or person in question is not there, I still left the house intent on theft/murder, and a crime therefore, has been committed. I went prepared in both cases, right?

So, no matter what the meeting was ACTUALLY about, if Trump Jnr. went to it, with the intention of getting hold of dirty data from a foreign source, then regardless of whether he actually got that information or not, surely he conspired to accumulate something of worth from a foreign national, which must also be a criminal offence?



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

He did not go to the meeting with the intention of getting dirt on Hillary from Natalia. Rod Goldstone told him someone has dirt on Hillary, go get it. First, Rod Goldstone was a spy who lied to Trump Jr. Second, Trump Jr went to the meeting simply to check it out, since he never got in touch with Natalia prior to the meeting. Trump Jr was never told of anything by Natalia prior to the meeting. So it's not soliciting.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: allsee4eye

Waaaaait a second.

First of all, lets say someone tells me that a particular building contains an object that I want, or a person I want dead. If I rock up at that building ready to burglarise it, or armed and ready to commit murder, but the object or person in question is not there, I still left the house intent on theft/murder, and a crime therefore, has been committed. I went prepared in both cases, right?

So, no matter what the meeting was ACTUALLY about, if Trump Jnr. went to it, with the intention of getting hold of dirty data from a foreign source, then regardless of whether he actually got that information or not, surely he conspired to accumulate something of worth from a foreign national, which must also be a criminal offence?


No it isn't a criminal offence.
The more apt analogy would be going to McDonalds to get a burger, but when you get there all the burgers are sold out, so you end up with a bun and no meat.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Sublimecraft

I didnt see anything promising Jr anything in return for something, just that theres a person at this event with dirt on hillary, go talk.

The info, which there was none isnt of any value, or else they would have asked for something in return.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:11 AM
link   
Just watch this video and then judge for yourselves:




posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

That's not even the correct analogy. It's more like a friend told me there's a new kind of burger, go check it out. I go to McDonald's to check out the burger, only to find out my friend lied to me.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:14 AM
link   

ornell Law SchoolSearch Cornell

Toggle navigation

CFR › Title 11 › Chapter I › Subchapter A › Part 110 › Section 110.20

11 CFR 110.20 - Prohibition on contributions, donations, expenditures, independent expenditures, and disbursements by foreign nationals (52 U.S.C. 30121, 36 U.S.C. 510).

eCFRAuthorities (U.S. Code)RulemakingWhat Cites Me

prev | next

§ 110.20 Prohibition on contributions, donations, expenditures, independent expenditures, and disbursements by foreign nationals (52 U.S.C. 30121, 36 U.S.C. 510).

(a)Definitions. For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:

(1)Disbursement has the same meaning as in 11 CFR 300.2(d).

(2)Donation has the same meaning as in 11 CFR 300.2(e).

(3)Foreign national means -

(i) A foreign principal, as defined in 22 U.S.C. 611(b); or

(ii) An individual who is not a citizen of the United States and who is not lawfully admitted for permanent residence, as defined in 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(20); however,

(iii)Foreign national shall not include any individual who is a citizen of the United States, or who is a national of the United States as defined in 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(22).

(4)Knowingly means that a person must:

(i) Have actual knowledge that the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national;

(ii) Be aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to conclude that there is a substantial probability that the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national; or

(iii) Be aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to inquire whether the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national, but the person failed to conduct a reasonable inquiry.

(5) For purposes of paragraph (a)(4) of this section, pertinent facts include, but are not limited to:

(i) The contributor or donor uses a foreign passport or passport number for identification purposes;

(ii) The contributor or donor provides a foreign address;

(iii) The contributor or donor makes a contribution or donation by means of a check or other written instrument drawn on a foreign bank or by a wire transfer from a foreign bank; or

(iv) The contributor or donor resides abroad.

(6)Solicit has the same meaning as in 11 CFR 300.2(m).

(7)Safe Harbor. For purposes of paragraph (a)(4)(iii) of this section, a person shall be deemed to have conducted a reasonable inquiry if he or she seeks and obtains copies of current and valid U.S. passport papers for U.S. citizens who are contributors or donors described in paragraphs (a)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section. No person may rely on this safe harbor if he or she has actual knowledge that the source of the funds solicited, accepted, or received is a foreign national.

(b)Contributions and donations by foreign nationals in connection with elections. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution or a donation of money or other thing of value, or expressly or impliedly promise to make a contribution or a donation, in connection with any Federal, State, or local election.

(c)Contributions and donations by foreign nationals to political committees and organizations of political parties. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution or donation to:

(1) A political committee of a political party, including a national party committee, a national congressional campaign committee, or a State, district, or local party committee, including a non-Federal account of a State, district, or local party committee, or

(2) An organization of a political party whether or not the organization is a political committee under 11 CFR 100.5.

(d)Contributions and donations by foreign nationals for office buildings. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party for the purchase or construction of an office building. See11 CFR 300.10 and 300.35.

(e)Disbursements by foreign nationals for electioneering communications. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make any disbursement for an electioneering communication as defined in 11 CFR 100.29.

(f)Expenditures, independent expenditures, or disbursements by foreign nationals in connection with elections. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make any expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement in connection with any Federal, State, or local election.

(g)Solicitation, acceptance, or receipt of contributions and donations from foreign nationals. No person shall knowingly solicit, accept, or receive from a foreign national any contribution or donation prohibited by paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section.

(h)Providing substantial assistance.

(1) No person shall knowingly provide substantial assistance in the solicitation, making, acceptance, or receipt of a contribution or donation prohibited by paragraphs (b) through (d), and (g) of this section.

(2) No person shall knowingly provide substantial assistance in the making of an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement prohibited by paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section.

(i)Participation by foreign nationals in decisions involving election-related activities. A foreign national shall not direct, dictate, control, or directly or indirectly participate in the decision-making process of any person, such as a corporation, labor organization, political committee, or political organization with regard to such person's Federal or non-Federal election-related activities, such as decisions concerning the making of contributions, donations, expenditures, or disbursements in connection with elections for any Federal, State, or local office or decisions concerning the administration of a political committee.

(j)Donations by foreign nationals to inaugural committees. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a donation to an inaugural committee, as defined in 11 CFR 104.21(a)(1). No person shall knowingly accept from a foreign national any donation to an inaugural committee.

[67 FR 69950, Nov. 19, 2002, as amended at 69 FR 59780, Oct. 6, 2004]



Because I doubt most people have even looked...Now tell me how the law defines value...For extra credit tell me how you would go about establishing a definition


Just for good measure...This is from 11 CFR 300.2.



(e)Donation. For purposes of part 300, donation means a payment, gift, subscription, loan, advance, deposit, or anything of value given to a person, but does not include contributions.

edit on 12-7-2017 by RickyD because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Butterfinger

How do you know she provided no info? When about ten minutes after said meeting, Trump was tweeting about Hillary's emails again? It's obvious to people with commonsense and aren't just licking the Trump family boots.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:20 AM
link   
I recently said this on a similar post:

I think that Putin is a skunk. I also believe that he and his Russian comrades are interfering in US politics for their own advancement. (Many other countries too,)

But what has recently occurred to me is that he is colluding with both sides in a very deliberate and artful manner. It is historically classic. He has divided us and set us upon each other. Each political party is at the others throat. A vast amount of people are so disgusted by the political fighting that they are just sitting it out on the sidelines. But for all of us it means that we are not paying attention anymore. Neither is the media.

All the while Putin continues unwatched and unabated with his agenda. A recent example is his moving the Russian border further into Georgia.

Anyone else see it this way?



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

Conspiracy to commit a crime, is a criminal act in and of itself. In this case, the closest match would be espionage, would it not? Colluding with a foreign national in the hopes of receiving information from them which ought not be public? Pretty damned near the knuckle, would you not agree?



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Stevenjames15

If they got dirt on Hillary, why didn't they use it? Unless they are planning to use it in the 2020 election when Trump runs against Hillary again.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:25 AM
link   


Why Trump Jr didn't commit a crime



Treason isn't a crime?

www.thedailybeast.com...



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

Tim is that you?

LOL.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12



Why Trump Jr didn't commit a crime



Treason isn't a crime?

I'll let you know after snowden gets a trial.

www.thedailybeast.com...




top topics



 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join