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: 2
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:30 AM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

If they look far enough, everyone has ties to Putin. Someone's uncle's sister's cousin's cousin's sister in law's aunt's grandpa could be a cousin of Putin. Doesn't mean #.




posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
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?


No. I don't agree with imaginary crimes that you are making up.
If you think that receiving information about a political opponent is illegal then you're on the wrong track. I suggest you dig in and stop getting carried away with propaganda.

edit on 12/7/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:37 AM
link   
So every other politician is okay with finding dirt and releasing it.

Ooooo

but Trump did it.


Yeah. That's bad. He bad. He's a bad boy.

#ing children.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

I am not getting carried away with propaganda.

All I am saying, is that whether a crime has been committed or not in this instance, has nothing to do with the facts, and everything to do with the fact that its one rule for one group of people, and another for the political class, and the super wealthy. Slightest immorality on the part of someone in the streets? Chaos, evidence of social decay, the collapse of society. Someone from a wealthy background colluding with foreign nationals in order to affect the outcome of an election by one means or another though, thats totally fine?



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: ConscienceZombie
So every other politician is okay with finding dirt and releasing it.

Ooooo

but Trump did it.


Yeah. That's bad. He bad. He's a bad boy.

#ing children.


When you do it with a foreign government that want's to influence the election process in the United States, it's Treason.

www.mcclatchydc.com...
edit on 12-7-2017 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

Any excuse in a storm I guess. Lol.
Except the email said from the Russian government and that it involved Clinton and that it was confidential
But aside from all that sure asking any random Russian citizen for dirt on Clinton would be pretty dumb. I agree.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Stevenjames15

Oops how did he miss that?



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: TrueBrit
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?


No. I don't agree with imaginary crimes that you are making up.
If you think that receiving information about a political opponent is illegal then you're on the wrong track. I suggest you dig in and stop getting carried away with propaganda.


It may or may not be illegal, that's what lawyers are hired for.

DTJ was under the assumption that he was meeting with, and receiving, official Russian personnel and official Russian government correspondence.

"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."

Still, it may not have been an illegal act. But it sure looks shady. Especially after months and months of denial from all involved in the Trump WH about Russian meddling, Russian involvement, Russian support, etc....

It appears the Trump WH isn't driving the narrative of this story, because they don't have the truth on their side.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 10:58 AM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

He thought which goes to intent. And we only have his lying ass to go by that they didn't get anything.
Tell me again why we should believe him or Russia both of whom have something to gain by claiming nothing was exchanged?
We believe them because????__________________________
Fill in the blank.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Stevenjames15
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!


They exchanged no information. No money. No services. No promises or favors. Committed no illegal acts.

Another big nothing burger.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Sublimecraft

Well you have Google look it up but yes thing of value because sometimes a contribution can be a service or an idea. Labor is a value. Information has value. Once we find out what Russia gave them and what Russia got in return then we can assign a dollar amount to it I guess. How much has trump gained as president of the United States. Considering he never divested himself from a business that he would profit from as president. How much has his company taken in from foreign dignitaries staying at his hotels to curry favor?



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Too bad there is no intent clause in 11 CFR 110.20 huh...



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Can you show me where the definition of value in 11 CFR 110.20 is? Because you're cute Webster's definition of value isn't the same as the legal one...

Also the hotel thing doesn't even come close to counting legally as far as the emoluments clause goes...Try again?
edit on 12-7-2017 by RickyD because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: jjkenobi

Conveniently set up that way by the Kremlin as plausible deniability.
Putin didn't fall off a turnip truck yesterday. He's an ex KGB agent with decades of experience. You describe a rookie mistake he would never make.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: RickyD

I will give it a shot. It sounds like something of value is meant to mean monetary value, I never did extra credit and am not going to start now. I do believe information can have monetary value, but I believe it is a perceived value that differs depending on who has/wants the information. I dunno my mind is melted from lack of sleep and too much work.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:10 AM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

So if he took a trip to Moscow and grabbed a random stranger on the streets and asked for Hillary's dirt, it's treason? I don't think so.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: ConscienceZombie
So every other politician is okay with finding dirt and releasing it.

Ooooo

but Trump did it.


Yeah. That's bad. He bad. He's a bad boy.

#ing children.


When you do it with a foreign government that want's to influence the election process in the United States, it's Treason.

www.mcclatchydc.com...


The only influence I saw was you lefts acting like you own the place. Saying whatever you wanted. Doing what ever you wanted. And stealing from the American people. That's why you lose. And that's why you will continue to lose.

I know you can't start a sentence with and but I want to act like a left today. So what I do is right. Everyone else is wrong.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it. If you don't smoke. Then shove a spoon up your ass. Same result.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:11 AM
link   
The "Steele Dossier" is exactly what they are accusing Trump Jr. of doing.



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:13 AM
link   
a reply to: XxitsTtimexX

That's not how it works...If you look up 11 CFR 110.20 in Google and read the actual statute it has a definition section. Legal definitions are attached to the statute they pertain to. In this case I have already looked a little and there is no out right definition of value however there is quite about donations and contributions of which it doesn't seem like this would be covered by. In that case you'd need to cite precedence from other cases to make an argument for the definition of value in a legal sense. However there isn't many cases I've found that would help there...See why this will amount to nothing?



posted on Jul, 12 2017 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: GeechQuestInfo

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: TrueBrit
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?


No. I don't agree with imaginary crimes that you are making up.
If you think that receiving information about a political opponent is illegal then you're on the wrong track. I suggest you dig in and stop getting carried away with propaganda.


It may or may not be illegal, that's what lawyers are hired for.

DTJ was under the assumption that he was meeting with, and receiving, official Russian personnel and official Russian government correspondence.

"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."

Still, it may not have been an illegal act. But it sure looks shady. Especially after months and months of denial from all involved in the Trump WH about Russian meddling, Russian involvement, Russian support, etc....

It appears the Trump WH isn't driving the narrative of this story, because they don't have the truth on their side.



They do have the truth on their side when it comes to whether a crime was committed - there wasn't.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join