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.

 

The Left Make Giuliani & POTUS Trump Guilty with Campaign Finance Violation Before Facts are Known.

page: 3
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 08:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari


Information is not considered a thing of value by the FEC,


Show the law.

edit on 11-10-2019 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 08:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

PFFfft ... "one side follows the law" ...

That's a good one ... I didn't know there was going to be a comedy portion.




posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Lumenari



Information is not considered a thing of value by the FEC

Source?



If you mean the contributions that were not spent and put into another fund because they thought they were shady and needed investigated?
Source?


Ah...Phage...



...
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.
...

www.fec.gov...

BTW, if information was of value and grounds to punishment if that information interfered with an election, what does that make of the Steel dossier which has mostly false claims from RUSSIAN OFFICIALS and was written by a FOREIGN NATIONAL, Steele, whom admitted to wanting to stop Trump from becoming/being POTUS?... What about the FISA warrants which were signed as verified, yet Comey admitted were NEVER verified, yet they were used to spy on political opponents?...



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

It doesn't say information is not a thing of value. But, in this case, it seems like there was indeed money involved.


Don't start gish galloping now. Stay on topic.
edit on 10/11/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Weren't your guys investing, er, investigating the creation of Steele Dossier?

Wasn't everyone in the Obama Admin going to prison over that too?

Was it last year or the year before ... hmmm....



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Lumenari

Was the Obama campaign charged under 52 USC 30121 or FEC violations?

Might want to slow down on hoisting the scarecrows and read the article first.

(Hint: Violations of 52 USC 30121 aren't adjudicated by the FEC but by the Federal Court system.)


I don't have to slow down on this one at all, because if getting information from foreign nationals on a political opponent was illegal then Hillary would most certainly be in jail for the Steele Dossier, would she not?

After all, she actually paid for it.

She isn't, so obviously it isn't a crime.

Nobody has brought the issue of "information being a thing of value" to court because it would be a clear violation of the First Amendment.

Freedom of Speech.

The FEC's stance so far has been that information is not considered a thing of value.

Bring it up with them, I guess.




edit on 11-10-2019 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse




This thread is about the FACT that the left-wing media/deep state once again have made guilty people simply because of their political views and nothing more...


No, it's about the FACT you can't handle the absolute corruption being revealed about your dear leader and his associates and want to pass the blame off to Obama or Clinton.

But keep on calling me, and railing against, the "left" and the "deep state" if it makes you feel better.



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

Because he's not the president, for starters?


Oh, so you didn't know that Presidents can be impeached after their administration has ended? And again, when has that stopped any of you? More so when you ignore facts and present lies as evidence?



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari


The FEC's stance so far has been that information is not considered a thing of value.
Source?

In any case, this case is about money. $325 grand. That's valuable. Right?


edit on 10/11/2019 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:06 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse




Oh, so you didn't know that Presidents can be impeached after their administration has ended?

They can be tried in court, yes.
But that's not impeachment. Impeachment applies to those who are holding office.



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

It doesn't say information is not a thing of value. But, in this case, it seems like there was indeed money involved.


Don't start gish galloping now. Stay on topic.



I wonder whom is gish galloping?...


...
Here’s the bottom line: A federal candidate who is freely given information is not receiving acontribution” or “thing of valueand is thus not violating federal campaign finance law or the regulations issued by the Federal Election Commission. I know. I served as an FEC commissioner.
...

Sorry, Media, Talking to Foreigners Does Not Violate Federal Campaign Laws



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

I'm not sure why Hillary isn't in jail ... Mr. Twump pwomised and all ... and we all know he always delivers, MAGA.

You really should get your facts straight ... the FEC has no jurisdiction in 52 USC §  30121. I realize all this must be confusing.






posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: Lumenari


Information is not considered a thing of value by the FEC,


Show the law.


pphhttt.

FEC.GOV

Point to me on the website where information is considered a thing of value.

You show me the law you are talking about.

Show me where anyone has ever been charged with it.

There is no law about information being a thing of value because it isn't.

Prove me wrong.




posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:09 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

That's an OpEd. He is welcome to his opinion.

But again, this thread is about money. Right?



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:10 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse


Here’s the bottom line: A federal candidate who is freely given information is not receiving a “contribution” or “thing of value” and is thus not violating federal campaign finance law or the regulations issued by the Federal Election Commission. I know. I served as an FEC commissioner.


It's not "freely given" if it's coerced. Or if it's implicit or explicit that there are conditions or consequences to receiving it.

Or if it's conditioned on money.

edit on 11-10-2019 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:10 PM
link   
The FEC has no jurisdiction regarding 52 USC §  30121.



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

Providing information is not a service?

Goods or services offered free or at less than the usual charge result in an in-kind contribution. Similarly, when a person pays for services on the committee’s behalf, the payment is an in-kind contribution.



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

They can be tried in court, yes.
But that's not impeachment. Impeachment applies to those who are holding office.


Wrong again Phage.


William Murphy, Professor of American History
...
The Constitution allows only two penalties as a result of impeachment: removal from office, and being banned from holding future federal office.

Technically, it is probably the case that Congress could impeach a President who had left office in order to prevent them from holding future office in the Federal government. This would not only prevent a one-term president from returning to seek another term at a later time, but would prevent a former president from running for Congress or serving in the cabinet of a future president or as a federal judge or Supreme Court justice. However, it’s hard not to see this as a huge waste of Congress’s time.
...


USA: Can a President be impeached after leaving office?

In the case of Lincoln of course that wouldn't be possible. But when has the law, or what is right ever stopped the left from making false claims, and using lies to get the left's agendas pushed?

Just look at the responses on this thread, which includes your own, no evidence whatsoever except some pictures and video and that is enough to claim Giuliani and POTUS Trump must be guilty...



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:13 PM
link   
The FEC has exclusive jurisdiction over the civil enforcement of the federal campaign finance law.

fec.gov

Emphasis mine.



posted on Oct, 11 2019 @ 09:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Hmmm ... does the fact that Mitch and Lindsey have stated that Trump won't be found guilty in the Senate before Articles are even drafted mean that they're ... lefties?

Wow, this cognative dissonance world is cornfusing.


funny, did they say that before or after the democrats start squawking about impeachment??

thats called a "fallacy"; What YOU did was a Fallacy.

so that also makes it fasle equivalents

carry on.




top topics



 
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join