FrozenVent posted:

I hope he does, and then Junior either refuses or we find out he's already deleted all the emails or something like that.

The irony would be just too great.

KildarX posted:

Current right wing talking point on AM radio today was, "Putin would have absolutely loved Hilary in charge, why would he possibly help trump?! Makes no sense, trumps an unknown quantity while Hillary would have just been more of Obama which would be SCRAPING to Putin."

Poppyseed Poundcake posted:

The gently caress are sanctions anyway?

TBeats posted:

Fox News anchor just said this exact thing, and maybe someone can check the accuracy of the claim: "Collusion is not a crime so be that it is not being held in exchange for favors, especially during a political election."

quote:

It shall be unlawful for—
a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make—
(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election; or
(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or
(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title);

quote:

It shall be unlawful for—
a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) [of the above quote] from a foreign national.

quote:

To solicit. For the purposes of part 300, to solicit means to ask, request, or recommend, explicitly or implicitly, that another person make a contribution, donation, transfer of funds, or otherwise provide anything of value. A solicitation is an oral or written communication that, construed as reasonably understood in the context in which it is made, contains a clear message asking, requesting, or recommending that another person make a contribution, donation, transfer of funds, or otherwise provide anything of value. A solicitation may be made directly or indirectly. The context includes the conduct of persons involved in the communication. A solicitation does not include mere statements of political support or mere guidance as to the applicability of a particular law or regulation.

quote:

(1) The following types of communications constitute solicitations:
(i) A communication that provides a method of making a contribution or donation, regardless of the communication. This includes, but is not limited to, providing a separate card, envelope, or reply device that contains an address to which funds may be sent and allows contributors or donors to indicate the dollar amount of their contribution or donation to the candidate, political committee, or other organization.
(ii) A communication that provides instructions on how or where to send contributions or donations, including providing a phone number specifically dedicated to facilitating the making of contributions or donations. However, a communication does not, in and of itself, satisfy the definition of “to solicit” merely because it includes a mailing address or phone number that is not specifically dedicated to facilitating the making of contributions or donations.
(iii) A communication that identifies a Web address where the Web page displayed is specifically dedicated to facilitating the making of a contribution or donation, or automatically redirects the Internet user to such a page, or exclusively displays a link to such a page. However, a communication does not, in and of itself, satisfy the definition of “to solicit” merely because it includes the address of a Web page that is not specifically dedicated to facilitating the making of a contribution or donation.

(2) The following statements constitute solicitations:
(i) “Please give $100,000 to Group X.”
(ii) “It is important for our State party to receive at least $100,000 from each of you in this election.”
(iii) “Group X has always helped me financially in my elections. Keep them in mind this fall.”
(iv) “X is an effective State party organization; it needs to obtain as many $100,000 donations as possible.”
(v) “Giving $100,000 to Group X would be a very smart idea.”
(vi) “Send all contributions to the following address * * *.”
(vii) “I am not permitted to ask for contributions, but unsolicited contributions will be accepted at the following address * * *.”
(viii) “Group X is having a fundraiser this week; you should go.”
(ix) “You have reached the limit of what you may contribute directly to my campaign, but you can further help my campaign by assisting the State party.”
(x) A candidate hands a potential donor a list of people who have contributed to a group and the amounts of their contributions. The candidate says, “I see you are not on the list.”
(xi) “I will not forget those who contribute at this crucial stage.”
(xii) “The candidate will be very pleased if we can count on you for $10,000.”
(xiii) “Your contribution to this campaign would mean a great deal to the entire party and to me personally.”
(xiv) Candidate says to potential donor: “The money you will help us raise will allow us to communicate our message to the voters through Labor Day.”
(xv) “I appreciate all you've done in the past for our party in this State. Looking ahead, we face some tough elections. I'd be very happy if you could maintain the same level of financial support for our State party this year.”
(xvi) The head of Group X solicits a contribution from a potential donor in the presence of a candidate. The donor asks the candidate if the contribution to Group X would be a good idea and would help the candidate's campaign. The candidate nods affirmatively.

(3) The following statements do not constitute solicitations:
(i) During a policy speech, the candidate says: “Thank you for your support of the Democratic Party.”
(ii) At a ticket-wide rally, the candidate says: “Thank you for your support of my campaign.”
(iii) At a Labor Day rally, the candidate says: “Thank you for your past financial support of the Republican Party.”
(iv) At a GOTV rally, the candidate says: “Thank you for your continuing support.”
(v) At a ticket-wide rally, the candidate says: “It is critical that we support the entire Democratic ticket in November.”
(vi) A Federal officeholder says: “Our Senator has done a great job for us this year. The policies she has vigorously promoted in the Senate have really helped the economy of the State.”
(vii) A candidate says: “Thanks to your contributions we have been able to support our President, Senator and Representative during the past election cycle.”

Ceiling fan posted:

Legally enforced boycott and persona non grata. These people and organizations cannot visit, do business, or associate with any US citizen or organization. What's the good of being a corrupt strongman when the empire that controls all the luxury goods and services freezes you and your cronies out?

Pesticide20 posted:

Internet Wizard posted:

I'm just boggled by Junior thinking he had anything to gain by just tossing the emails out like that

joat mon posted:

Collusion is not a crime in this context, though it can be in an antitrust context. Regarding 2016's presidential campaign issues, 'collusion' is being used colloquially, not legally.

Collusion is a less culturally and less legally loaded term than conspiracy, which I guess is why its being used.

The solicitation angle comes from Title 52, section 30121 of the U.S. Code which has to do with Contributions and donations by foreign nationals. For trump purposes, there are two different crimes here:

and


Title 11, section 110.20 of the Combined Federal Register (Federal regulations) lays out what definitions are to be used in this context - in this case, at 11 CFR 300.2.

It goes on to give some guidance and examples:


So, back to 52 USC 30121.
1) No foreign national gave or promised to give Clinton opposition research to Trump or anyone connected to the campaign. Opposition research could be a thing of value that could constitute a donation.

2) No Trump person solicited the opposition research - Goldstone solicited Trump Jr. I don't think Jr. agreeing to a meeting set up by Goldstone can transfer Goldstone's solicitation of Jr. to a solicitation by Jr, but I haven't researched it.

LongDarkNight posted:

Lal

CHICKEN SHOES posted:

i'm the autistic weirdo in that gif

facialimpediment posted:

aaaaaahahahahahahahaha

https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/884853347815235584

HE THINKS HE'S HELPING

https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/884856520055418880

https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/884857260995903488

Handsome Ralph posted:

Podesta tweeted back at Assange,
https://twitter.com/john_podesta/status/884854018824175620

aphid_licker posted:

You ever wonder how much of their day various people running our political system spend reading and writing tweets nowadays?

quote:

“Let’s cut through the baloney here. We know what the Russians have been doing,” Painter said during a later appearance on the network. “When the Russians call or someone calls on behalf of the Russians and offers derogatory information about a former secretary of state who is a presidential candidate, the first person you call is the FBI.”

“I don’t care if you’re Republican, as I am, or a Democrat. You call the FBI. The last thing you do is go meet with the Russians to try and get the derogatory information," he went on. "They’re only trying do that in order to use you to accomplish some purpose. And we know what that is — it is undermining our system of representative democracy.”

TBeats posted:

https://twitter.com/woodruffbets/status/884867119434747904

hell ya finally some justice MAGA

facialimpediment posted:

I remember the times when political people all used the same standard talking points and all that actually changed was the name barking the words. Occasionally, people would even wince when they'd have to say bullshit. Now, it's a free-for-all chucking poo poo against a wall for my amusement.

But this one's the best.

https://twitter.com/mmfa/status/884858126339645441

TBeats posted:

https://twitter.com/woodruffbets/status/884867119434747904

hell ya finally some justice MAGA

psydude posted:

I think Richard Painter actually does a good job of boiling all of this down:

quote:

“I don’t care if you’re Republican, as I am, or a Democrat. You call the FBI. The last thing you do is go meet with the Russians to try and get the derogatory information," he went on. "They’re only trying do that in order to use you to accomplish some purpose. And we know what that is — it is undermining our system of representative democracy.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/11/donald-trump-jr-treason-buzzword-240406

quote:

In the Bush administration we could have had him in custody for questioning by now.

bird food bathtub posted:

That....may not be the brilliant maneuver he thinks it is.

Like, I get that hyperpartisanship is the name of the game. Even so, if this poo poo show turns into a judicial free for all of just arresting political opponents based on what the guy in charge today says I have to think there's enough people with survival instincts that can look to tomorrow and think, 'better not, that could be me'.

Not nearly as many as a functioning, stable society should have, but enough. Because if not and we start down THAT rabbit hole then the last six months are going to be the calm period in history.

facialimpediment posted:

Chances of a government shutdown on October 1st just went up dramatically as House Republicans are tossing some wall funding into the next appropriations bill.

https://twitter.com/jdawsey1/status/884878855466614785

Zeris posted:

The script writer?

quote:

n the Bush administration we could have had him in custody for questioning by now.

Genocide Tendency posted:

The Chinese have figured out teleportation?? Maybe??

This seems kinda like a big deal. But maybe not.