Politics Donald Trump Jr just confessed to Trump campaign election fraud

OK, I've read through the thread, and I'm still confused. What law has allegedly been broken here? Don Jr. talking to a Russian foreign official was illegal somehow?

I guess I just think that if it is illegal, it's a stupid law. But if a law was broken, then it should certainly be prosecuted.

 

Conspiracy is the most likely direct law to have been violated, so far as I can tell - but I do not specialize in this area of the law.*

Perjury is the most likely actual outcome down the road, I'd guess.

*or any other area of the law - I am not a lawyer and do not play one on TV. Kingspeed is available if you need someone to play one on TV, however.

barfo

 

My argument is you don't care that she did. Or that she'd have done worse, without repercussions, if elected.

Also precedent is that it's how campaigns operate, Trump Jr's meeting wasn't out of the ordinary accepted practices.

 

Doesn't conspiracy still have to involve a plan to break a law, though? Like, toward what illegal act were they conspiring? I've seen reference to election fraud, but I don't understand what is fraudulent about attempting to obtain information.

The perjury part is the only thing that does make sense to me, specifically in regard to Kushner's non-disclosure of the meeting.

 

Foreign contributions to campaigns are illegal, it would seem that Jr. was interested in receiving such contributions.

Personally, if this is literally the end of the story and there is nothing else, I don't see any charges being brought. It's certainly unethical, but probably hard to get a criminal conviction.

But more likely there's more to come, and this specific meeting will eventually result in no charges because it will be a small part of a larger whole.

barfo

 

I just haven't seen the email where Russia offers Hillary dirt on Trump, and she writes back to say "I love it". Do you have that email?

barfo

 

We've all seen the dossier, which is more concrete proof of ethical (at least) violations.

 

I was referring to barfo's kind. I've dealt with his kind before.

 

Email server and the dossier are different "crimes."

 

Unsuccessfully.

barfo

 

Au contraire.

 

By whom? Be specific.

barfo

 

Clinton campaign. Those who paid for it. Those who passed it on to the FBI, knowing none of it had merit. Those who shared it with Harry Reid. Those who shared it with the media wing of the Democrat Party.

You act like it's OK to pay a US company to do exactly what you accuse Trump's campaign of doing.

One is somehow a crime or even treason, the other is not.

We should all rejoice. Clinton lost.

The new precedent seems to be "my guy lost, so we'll destroy the democratic process."

 

Who are these people? Name them.

Wait, they paid for something they knew didn't have merit? Why would they do that? The point of outsourced opposition research is to get actual dirt, not made-up dirt. Campaigns are fully capable of making stuff up in-house.

So, giving information to the FBI is a bad thing in your book? Did you believe that before Trump Jr. failed to do so, or is this a recent epiphany?

Yes, you can do things with a US company that you cannot do with the Russian government. Is that really a shock to you?

barfo