Hannity Confirms Dossier was used to obtain the FISA warrant

a reply to: soberbacchus

Kimdotcom touched on this today. He thinks it deals directly with the fact the DNC was a leak and not a hack.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus

So by you interpretation, if Don Jr offered to pay the Russian lawyer for dirt, it's ok.

It just getting it for free that is a problem.

Legally he would be in better shape if it was an on-the-books services transaction for payment rather than trading US policy.

One is employing a questionable contractor that he could claim he did not know was a Russian agent, the other is "treason" as Bannon put it.

One is paid for campaign services the other is accepting contributions from foreign nationals.

It just getting it for free that is a problem.

Right. That is what donations and contributions mean.

It is why politicians travelling abroad don't get arrested for paying a Moscow hotel bill, but will get arrested if they accept gifts, services for free and other stuff.

Honestly, that is pretty basic. Maybe research earned revenue vs. contribution.

This is a flat earth discussion where you seem to have invented a new definition for contribution or donation.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: soberbacchus

Kimdotcom touched on this today. He thinks it deals directly with the fact the DNC was a leak and not a hack.

LOL

Keep holding on to that denial conspiracy.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Same old talking points.

It comes out the dossier may have been used for fisa documents.

People go back to the well saying Don Jr's meeting was treason.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: soberbacchus

Actually giving a foreign national anything of value in exchange for something of value is a violation of US law.

FEC - Foreign Nationals

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.

Persons who knowingly and willfully engage in these activities may be subject to an FEC enforcement action, criminal prosecution, or both.

* - 52 USC § 30121 - Contributions and donations by foreign nationals
* - 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).
* - 36 USC § 510 - Disclosure of and prohibition on certain donations

To those wishing to apply these laws towards Trump please bear in mind they also apply to Clinton, who sought info on Trump from Steele, a British national who was paid in addition to the Ukraine government.

The law you quoted says nothing like what you claim it says.

You guys still don't understand the difference what donations and contributions are.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus

Same old talking points.

The literal legal definitions of contributions or donations are not "talking points".

Odd that you seem to dismiss factual reality as talking points when those facts don't support you rhetorical inventions.

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: soberbacchus

Actually giving a foreign national anything of value in exchange for something of value is a violation of US law.

FEC - Foreign Nationals

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.

Persons who knowingly and willfully engage in these activities may be subject to an FEC enforcement action, criminal prosecution, or both.

* - 52 USC § 30121 - Contributions and donations by foreign nationals
* - 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).
* - 36 USC § 510 - Disclosure of and prohibition on certain donations

To those wishing to apply these laws towards Trump please bear in mind they also apply to Clinton, who sought info on Trump from Steele, a British national who was paid in addition to the Ukraine government.

The law you quoted says nothing like what you claim it says.

You guys still don't understand the difference what donations and contributions are.

Yeah maybe read the law instead of repeating ignorance.

Participation by foreign nationals in decisions involving election-related activities

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. Such activities include, the making of contributions, donations, expenditures, or disbursements in connection with any federal or nonfederal elections in the United States, or decisions concerning the administration of any political committee. Foreign nationals are also prohibited from involvement in the management of a political committee, including any separate segregated fund (SSF), nonconnected committee, or the nonfederal accounts of any of these committees. See Explanation and Justification for 11 CFR 110.20 at 67 FR 69946 (November 19, 2002) [PDF].

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus

Same old talking points.

The literal legal definitions of contributions or donations are not "talking points".

Odd that you seem to dismiss factual reality as talking points when those facts don't support you rhetorical inventions.

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.

Persons who knowingly and willfully engage in these activities may be subject to an FEC enforcement action, criminal prosecution, or both.

The same people that claim that the Russians hacked the DNC can be found saying that there is no way that Hillary's private server was hacked.

Whatever.

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus

Same old talking points.

The literal legal definitions of contributions or donations are not "talking points".

Odd that you seem to dismiss factual reality as talking points when those facts don't support you rhetorical inventions.

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).

(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. See 11 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]

a reply to: soberbacchus

Okay, but wait. If Trump Jr. meeting with a FN for potential dirt and leaving when there is none is possible treason, but the DNC actually paying (through a Law firm and oppo research firm yes yes they hid their tracks well) a FN for dirt is merely business as usual? THEN said dirt ends up in the hands of the IC which it then presents to the FISA court for a wiretap warrant. We have no idea what Trump Jr. might have paid had there been dirt, but I think it's unfair to assume it would have been anything other than regular old money. That should be fair game, right?

a reply to: Xcathdra

Weird..

You do know what you posted is a law prohibiting foreign nationals from leading PACs?

You keep posting weird stuff and claiming it says things it doesn't?

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus

Same old talking points.

The literal legal definitions of contributions or donations are not "talking points".

Odd that you seem to dismiss factual reality as talking points when those facts don't support you rhetorical inventions.

11 CFR 300.2 - Definitions.

(d)Disbursement. Disbursement means any purchase or payment made by:

(1) A political committee; or

(2) Any other person, including an organization that is not a political committee, that is subject to the Act.

(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.

I hate spamming all the law stuff but if you arent going to read it you leave me no choice.

originally posted by: soberbacchus
a reply to: Xcathdra

Weird..

You do know what you posted is a law prohibiting foreign nationals from leading PACs?

You keep posting weird stuff and claiming it says things it doesn't?

Again you aren't reading the info provided. If you did you would see it deals with foreign nationals involving themselves in US federal elections. Part of those laws deal with foreign national involvement in PACS. I can see why you would try and deflect by pointing out something mundane while ignoring the parts that dont support your argument.

Now, you wanna read it and try again.

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus

Same old talking points.

The literal legal definitions of contributions or donations are not "talking points".

Odd that you seem to dismiss factual reality as talking points when those facts don't support you rhetorical inventions.

Y0u have provided no legal definition of the term contribute.

You have given your opinion.

Some lawyers agree, others disagree.

Your talking point is your assertion that don jr.s meeting was absolutely treason.

And its funny half of the people against trump on here are saying hillarys team didnt pay a foreign national, the paid a US firm.

So if thats the case, she accepted a contribution.

You all just canty seem to make up your minds on why what don jr did was a crime, but what hillary did wasnt.

originally posted by: Zelun
a reply to: soberbacchus

Okay, but wait. If Trump Jr. meeting with a FN for potential dirt and leaving when there is none is possible treason, but the DNC actually paying (through a Law firm and oppo research firm yes yes they hid their tracks well) a FN for dirt is merely business as usual? THEN said dirt ends up in the hands of the IC which it then presents to the FISA court for a wiretap warrant. We have no idea what Trump Jr. might have paid had there been dirt, but I think it's unfair to assume it would have anything been other than regular old money. That should be fair game, right?

Again if Trump had paid for something via the campaign and declared it opposition research, he might have explaining to do, but the legal jeopardy would be significantly lower.

Instead...THIS:

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

a reply to: soberbacchus

There is no such thing as a crown prosecutor of russia.

cite your source.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Further more, using your own logic, it would be a crime for a candidates team to listen to an expert from the UK give any advice, say on what type of computers the campaign should us that would be cheaper, or how to save gas money by skyping, or any other mundane thing.

Instead, they would have to pay the person from the UK for this advice.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Russia doesn't have a Crown prosecutor.

The British publicist who set up a meeting between senior Trump campaign figures and a Kremlin-linked Russian lawyer says he exaggerated an email promising damaging information about Hillary Clinton.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

a reply to: Grambler

11CFR 300 places "contribution" in the same legal category as "donations". the definitions defined in 11 cfr 300 are directly referenced as the same meanings for the FEC foreign national sections of FEC laws.

referenced here - www.abovetopsecret.com...