Trump-Appointed Judge....Rules ‘Collusion’ Is A Crime

a reply to: dawnstar

russian operatives hacked the dnc computers that was a crime.

Yes, that would be a crime, IF that happened. No independent forensic examination of the data was ever conducted, because the DNC refused to turn over the servers for such analysis. For conspiracy to be applicable, there must be some evidence that a crime was attempted, not simply an accusation. Since there was no proper examination of the data, that would have to be proven via other means, and that is difficult to say the least.

In any case, even if it were proven that Donald Trump conspired with the Vladimir Putin in person to hack the DNC computers, I do not believe that would rise to the level of defrauding the government, nor would it be an offense against the US government. The DNC is not the US government (as much as they would seem to like to think they are).

weather a crime or not, one has to question the worthiness of politicians who are willing to harm US citizens just so they can have their try at the power!!!

I agree with this; however, it seems to be used only against one group and not applied equally. Your own post indicates this very clearly. Your examples are of recent Republican Presidents, without a single mention of similar (sometimes worse) actions taken by Democratic Presidents. That disputes your very argument.

TheRedneck

a reply to: dawnstar

so let's see, a grand jury, who by the way reviewed the evidence, felt that there was enough to prosecute.

Speaking as someone who has sat on a Grand Jury... the indictment is far, far from a conviction. An indictment is notoriously easy to get because the typical Grand Jury wants to get the job over with (so they can go home) and usually only hears from the prosecution. It is rare that the accused even get a chance to say a word. The consideration is that, if the prosecutor thinks he can win, it's worth a try; if the accused is innocent, they'll still get a chance to prove it.

Do not put too much faith in an indictment. It is not a conviction. Not even close.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck

Do not put too much faith in an indictment. It is not a conviction. Not even close.

TheRedneck

Ham sandwiches agree

a reply to: JacKatMtn

Ham sandwiches are worth agreeing with.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: yuppa

They have to show up in court to be entitled to discovery.
They wont.

You are over simplifying the premise.

Umm i seem to remember one who represented all 13 showed up. The judge told mueller he had to give them the information. im not oversimplifying anything.

originally posted by: BlackJackal

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: BlackJackal

Mueller case fell apert on those 13. They demanded evidence for their defense and he cant provide it.

Just make # up and see if it sticks, is that your plan? If the case fell apart why did the judge rule just last week that the case can move forward? If you want to debate, fine, but don’t debase yourself and the quality of this site by spewing falsehoods. If the topic is worth defending to you then by all means do the research and defend it properly. But under no circumstances should you use lies as your defense because it only serves to lower the quality of the discussion and brings your character into question.

link

Ahh ABC news,i mean ABC us make the news up. One showed up and Mueller was required to show evidence,but the trial is set to occur even if Muellers cant produce evidence of their guilt which means effectively mueller has no case.

I don't understand how we can even pretend that the indictment could have surgically extracted the Trump Administration through Mueller's prosecution without indicting everybody?

Eventually this would if gone due process would erupt into many more indictments after trump administration's impeachment and or he takes a deal and resigns peacefully for some new deal.

I think honestly do you think it's a clean take the liver out of politics and your OK!

Desperate Under Mueller's Beurocratic Perversion? The Steele Dossier which lead to the indictment is means to begin the WAR ON EVERYONE in POLITICS.

Elections have always been linked with other countries influencing internationally the political players because it's kind of like we all live on the same planet or something!
uh huh huh uhhhh....Beavis...we got problems.

a reply to: BlackJackal

First, the indictment was on the Russians, and the Russian company that didn't exist when Mueller indicted it. That does not equal to "Trump colluded."

Second, in order for an investigation to start you must present REAL EVIDENCE, and yet again what was the "evidence" provided?... Claims put together by a foreign agent whom by his own word stated he would do anything, and everything to stop Trump from becoming President. He was paid by Hillary/the DNC, and wrote claims that have not been corroborated which came mostly from Russian officials, and an Australian who heard from another person, who heard from another, and heard from another something that was said at a bar, while everyone was getting drunk... Which of course no court would admit as evidence.

But somehow this investigation continues even though it has been proven that Hillary friend's have been given immunity in exchange for nothing for the same crimes committed by people like Manafort. Crimes which were committed over a decade BEFORE Manafort was part of Trump's Presidential campaign...

Then there is Gen Flynn, whose only crime was to believe the FBI would be fair with him, and instead even thou Stzork and another FBI agent stated they did not believe Gen. Flynn lied, instead McCabe and Comey hid this exonerating evidence even from Congress, and to this day a good man's name has been tainted thanks to the corrupt democrats and RINOs like Mueller. Then there Mueller's past, which includes convicting innocent people, and hiding exonerating evidence time and time again... Just like Mueller, and his team of demonrats have been doing with their hoax of an investigation.

Then there is Papadapulous (sp?) who did not give in to the attempts of making him a spy in Trump's campaign.

If you had any sense of honesty you would have admitted that this is not an "investigation." It is a "witch hunt" with no evidence except uncorroborated claims paid by the political opponent of Trump...

a reply to: ErEhWoN

Then i guess they'll finally lock up HRC. You know, since there is verifiable evidence she colluded... while there's somehow still none on Trump.

So if the DNC is considered part of the US Government, and Steele put known lies into his dossier, would that not be defrauding the US Government? When is he going to be turned over to the US?

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: ErEhWoN

Of course,
Collusion is just a synonym for conspiracy, and even conspiracy to steal milk is a crime. This just allows the prosecution of Clinton, the one where there's actual evidence of collusion with Russians.

PS I don't babysit threads, probably wont come back til later this evening.

Typical of you people, post and run and hide...

Post and run and hide? Or come back to review later after actually leaving the house?

Most people don't have all day to argue on the internet.