One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
This is the Big Freaking Deal
Page <prev 2 of 11 next> last>>
Jun 14, 2019 18:22:05   #
lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas
 
rumitoid wrote:
Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano said there’s not much room for interpretation when it comes to President Donald Trump’s claim that he’d “listen” if a foreign power offered dirt on a political rival.

“He would be committing a felony,” Napolitano told host Shepard Smith on Thursday.
Trump this week said “there’s nothing wrong with listening” to dirt on an opponent, no matter what the source.

“They have information,” he said in an ABC interview. “I think I’d take it.”

Napolitano said that would be a crime, and there’s “no wiggle room” as the Federal E******n Commission has in previous cases decided that opposition research is considered a “thing of value.”
  
Under the law, a candidate can’t receive anything of value from a foreign national related to a U.S. e******n.

And that means Trump would be committing a crime.

“The president of the United States of America is prepared to commit a felony to get reelected,” he said. “That was my reaction, and it was not a happy one.”

Napolitano also said that whoever gives the president that info would also be committing a felony.
Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano... (show quote)


No, I think they misunderstood, it's only illegal for Democrats and Independents. What Republican would prosecute their lord and savior Donald trump?

Reply
Jun 14, 2019 18:25:24   #
debeda
 
rumitoid wrote:
Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano said there’s not much room for interpretation when it comes to President Donald Trump’s claim that he’d “listen” if a foreign power offered dirt on a political rival.

“He would be committing a felony,” Napolitano told host Shepard Smith on Thursday.
Trump this week said “there’s nothing wrong with listening” to dirt on an opponent, no matter what the source.

“They have information,” he said in an ABC interview. “I think I’d take it.”

Napolitano said that would be a crime, and there’s “no wiggle room” as the Federal E******n Commission has in previous cases decided that opposition research is considered a “thing of value.”
  
Under the law, a candidate can’t receive anything of value from a foreign national related to a U.S. e******n.

And that means Trump would be committing a crime.

“The president of the United States of America is prepared to commit a felony to get reelected,” he said. “That was my reaction, and it was not a happy one.”

Napolitano also said that whoever gives the president that info would also be committing a felony.
Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano... (show quote)


Well, except who says the information would be of value?

Reply
Jun 14, 2019 18:29:53   #
archie bunker Loc: Texas
 
lpnmajor wrote:
No, I think they misunderstood, it's only illegal for Democrats and Independents. What Republican would prosecute their lord and savior Donald trump?


Prosecute him for what? Answering a loaded, hypothetical question? If he's done something that merits prosecution as President, I'm all for it, but this is ridiculous!

Reply
 
 
Jun 14, 2019 18:35:12   #
woodguru
 
proud republican wrote:
So tell me how do you relate info to FBI,if you dont listen first???....Presidents talk to foreign governments all the time, are they supposed to report it to FBI after every single phone call???.This doesn't make sense!!!


You report the foreign contact and the offer, something Trump people didn't do dozens of times as they did everything including giving Russia campaign demographic data to be used to target gullible people.

Reply
Jun 14, 2019 18:37:20   #
archie bunker Loc: Texas
 
woodguru wrote:
You report the foreign contact and the offer, something Trump people didn't do dozens of times as they did everything including giving Russia campaign demographic data to be used to target gullible people.


You know this because?

Reply
Jun 14, 2019 18:42:05   #
dongreen76
 
Fit2BTied wrote:
And just as soon as we're done prosecuting everyone involved in the DNC/Clinton Team/Obama administration/FBI/CIA/etc who played any part in the illegal spying on the Trump campaign/the creation and use of the Russian Dossier/the fraudulent FISA warrant applications/etc. we'll get after President Trump for...wait...what...oh, he just gave an answer to a hypothetical question asked by a Clinton toadie in order to try to gin up another controversy, so he didn't actually do anything prosecutable. Well as long as we got that other stuff done, let's call it a day.
And just as soon as we're done prosecuting everyon... (show quote)


Once again,the president,the secretary of state,the FBI,the CIA,were certainly within their jurisdictional boundaries to investigate and surveil any citizen seen fraternizing with known enemies of the U.S..Had they not did this,they would not have been doing their jobs.

As for Trump,admitting he would except and welcome the espionage congruities and use it against a competing political opponent,(remember Trump Jr.said this particular circumstances arose,and he did not)this is an admission that he would collude.Trump and his supporters are not in accord with that age old saying of. - `A rose by any other name is still a rose", - his supporters contending that there is no such thing as collusion in the Constitution[Which shackles those law enforcement officials that are annointed the duties of pursuing such high crimes and misdemeanors and applying the appropriate punitivness,]from using the word Collusion,they will have to settle for the more mundane,words of Conspiracy,
or Treason; of course Trump,in all is majestic brilliance probaly can't see it that way.The country that supplies info,with the intention of manipulating an e******n so that their preferred candidate wins is violating and breaking Constitutional laws. ( in this case,Trump is the preferred candidate) .Whether they commit this act because they feel as though their preference is the less formidable candidate,or whether their preference has some kind of unknown allegiance to the provider of said information is academic,laws have been broken.

Reply
Jun 14, 2019 18:53:56   #
Mikeyavelli
 
rumitoid wrote:
Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano said there’s not much room for interpretation when it comes to President Donald Trump’s claim that he’d “listen” if a foreign power offered dirt on a political rival.

“He would be committing a felony,” Napolitano told host Shepard Smith on Thursday.
Trump this week said “there’s nothing wrong with listening” to dirt on an opponent, no matter what the source.

“They have information,” he said in an ABC interview. “I think I’d take it.”

Napolitano said that would be a crime, and there’s “no wiggle room” as the Federal E******n Commission has in previous cases decided that opposition research is considered a “thing of value.”
  
Under the law, a candidate can’t receive anything of value from a foreign national related to a U.S. e******n.

And that means Trump would be committing a crime.

“The president of the United States of America is prepared to commit a felony to get reelected,” he said. “That was my reaction, and it was not a happy one.”

Napolitano also said that whoever gives the president that info would also be committing a felony.
Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano... (show quote)


The tuf*g combo of Napolitano and Sheepman Smith will say anything to insult, bash, and vilify Trump.

Reply
 
 
Jun 14, 2019 19:00:40   #
Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON
 
archie bunker wrote:
I'm tracking with ya!
Yo también.

Reply
Jun 14, 2019 19:05:01   #
dongreen76
 
debeda wrote:
Well, except who says the information would be of value?


A concensus,would say if something of value has value.Mr philosopher of semantics.I think that if two people are in a race,( for arguments sake,let's say foot race) and some gives one member of the race,a steroid,or gives him any device, physical or what ever, that will impede the others participants effort towards winning the race and the one who was given the steroid,or was given the impeding device which causes his opponent to lose the race,I'm sure a concensus would say that the device or steroid had some value to the winner of the race.

Reply
Jun 14, 2019 19:06:20   #
rumitoid
 
debeda wrote:
Well, except who says the information would be of value?


Interesting question. For it to be a crime, Trump would have to accept something of value from a foreign government. If turned out to be a nothing-burger, no foul, I guess. Yet that is not really the point. That the leader of the Free World would state that he'd accept "dirt on his political opponents" is a disgrace to our country's image and office of the president. Those are the actions of a petty dictator.

Reply
Jun 14, 2019 19:17:08   #
Liberty Tree
 
rumitoid wrote:
Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano said there’s not much room for interpretation when it comes to President Donald Trump’s claim that he’d “listen” if a foreign power offered dirt on a political rival.

“He would be committing a felony,” Napolitano told host Shepard Smith on Thursday.
Trump this week said “there’s nothing wrong with listening” to dirt on an opponent, no matter what the source.

“They have information,” he said in an ABC interview. “I think I’d take it.”

Napolitano said that would be a crime, and there’s “no wiggle room” as the Federal E******n Commission has in previous cases decided that opposition research is considered a “thing of value.”
  
Under the law, a candidate can’t receive anything of value from a foreign national related to a U.S. e******n.

And that means Trump would be committing a crime.

“The president of the United States of America is prepared to commit a felony to get reelected,” he said. “That was my reaction, and it was not a happy one.”

Napolitano also said that whoever gives the president that info would also be committing a felony.
Fox News senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano... (show quote)


It is not of value unless he benefits in some way. Just listening by itself does not create value. Also, he is still the POTUS and has to look out for national interest so if the information shows actions or potential actions that are harmful to America there is not crime.

Reply
 
 
Jun 14, 2019 19:29:07   #
rumitoid
 
Liberty Tree wrote:
It is not of value unless he benefits in some way. Just listening by itself does not create value. Also, he is still the POTUS and has to look out for national interest so if the information shows actions or potential actions that are harmful to America there is not crime.


Do you hear what you are saying? The simple willingness of Trump to listen to a foreign government looking for favor by offering possible dirt on a political opponent is an atrocious breach of ethics and a disgrace to America.

The point was this: Trump accepting dirt on a political opponent from a foreign government. It was NOT ABOUT LOOKING "out for national interest."

Reply
Jun 14, 2019 19:53:02   #
archie bunker Loc: Texas
 
rumitoid wrote:
Do you hear what you are saying? The simple willingness of Trump to listen to a foreign government looking for favor by offering possible dirt on a political opponent is an atrocious breach of ethics and a disgrace to America.

The point was this: Trump accepting dirt on a political opponent from a foreign government. It was NOT ABOUT LOOKING "out for national interest."


He didn't say he would "accept" anything! He said he would listen!! Get over it drama queen!

Reply
Jun 14, 2019 19:56:21   #
teabag09
 
rumitoid wrote:
The question was about accepting "dirt on political opponents," which Trump answered yes to, and not about something "bad is going to happen." Two distinctly different scenarios. The former a crime and the other civic duty.


Pull your head out, you're going to suffocate. Mike

Reply
Jun 14, 2019 19:58:16   #
teabag09
 
Liberty Tree wrote:
It is not of value unless he benefits in some way. Just listening by itself does not create value. Also, he is still the POTUS and has to look out for national interest so if the information shows actions or potential actions that are harmful to America there is not crime.


Trying to talk to this numb*^$ is a waste of time. I think he gets off on seeing if he/she can get a response. Mike

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 11 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.