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.

 

What law was violated?

page: 3
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 04:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
In answer to your question about what crimes may have been committed is this:

52 USC 30121, 36 USC 510:
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.

What that means is that if Trump Jr, was offered, actively sought out and then actually followed through with the intent to gain information, through a foreign government is actually breaking the law. While it is not cash, it is information that is a thing of value in any campaign.


So long as we are discussing "contributions or donations either direct or implied" ; why is the Hillary and the Clinton Foundation not also being subjected to the same questions in the media ??




posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 04:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
In answer to your question about what crimes may have been committed is this:

52 USC 30121, 36 USC 510:
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.

What that means is that if Trump Jr, was offered, actively sought out and then actually followed through with the intent to gain information, through a foreign government is actually breaking the law. While it is not cash, it is information that is a thing of value in any campaign.
Tell that to Hillary. But hey you are trying to apply a campaign contributions law to a situation where it does not apply. I didn't look it up to see if the Act creating that law defines what contribution means. It usually does. But I am certain it has never been defined as broadly as you attempt. Fail again but as usual it always points out the obvious in that it applies to Hillary and SCREAMS, WHY ISN'T SHE IN JAIL.



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 07:03 PM
link   
a reply to: jwh125
The kind of information that they were trying to get, is tangible, as it was not just mere heresay or unverified, but something that was stolen . That is a crime in itself, and most legal experts that are stating, and that comes from some of the best legal minds in the country.

Now if HIllary did do anything wrong, then present your evidence, show it. But if it is on the emails or Bengazhi, then that was already found, and deemed that the woman was innocent, and they closed the investigation.

So what is Hillary accused of that she should be in jail for that only seems to apply to her and no one else, that everyone else seems to be doing and worse?



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: tinymind

Several reasons: 1) She did not win the election.

But more importantly the question is can it be proven in a court of law? What proof is there that there was any wrong doing?

According to all reporting, all of the paperwork is in order, there is nothing out of the ordinary, and seems to be following the laws as per the State of New York. And while it would be nice if they itemized where the donations came from, they are not under any obligations to do such.

There is a third reason that no one is looking at Hillary. The final reason is that too many people have used lies and tampered with evidence to the point where one can not be sure if it is or is not valid. Even when they first got to DC, there was a person who was investigating, and then it turned out that the man had lied and fabricated information, that damaged some people politically, and yet failed to bring down the Clintons. Even in this last time, was it not strange that with everything, Trey had to doctor the evidence, yet he was not punished for it. And thus ruined the entire investigation for that. Even when they found nothing to substantiate, congress still spent millions on an investigation that went no where.

If after 30 years of investigations, nothing can be proven, then there 2 only choices: 1) They are not looking in the correct places. 2) Maybe there is nothing there to find.

And from the looks, I would say the ladder is more probable.



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: sdcigarpig

First, the alleged information wasn't stolen. No one even knew about anything stolen by alleged russians at this point.

And no great legal minds are saying receiving stolen information is illegal. The first amendment covers this pretty clearly.



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 09:05 PM
link   
a reply to: sdcigarpig

An object has no value unless it is valued. Information has not intrinsic value. If information can be exchanged for an agreed amount of $, then it is said to have been valued and therefore assigned a value.



new topics

top topics
 
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join