You're gonna see a lot of talk related to the following laws in relation to Don Jr:
• 11 CFR § 110.20(g) / Title 11 as a Whole / [www law cornell edu/cfr/text/11/110.20] • 52 USC § 30121 / Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) / [www law cornell edu/uscode/text/52/30121] • 36 USC § 510 / Presidential Inaugural Ceremonies / [www law cornell edu/uscode/text/36/510]
Basically, these laws say that you can't accept anything of value from foreign nationals for campaign purposes (contributions, etc.)
Most shills cite these passages and then argue that "anything of value" (the phrase used in those laws) includes information and/or dirt, and therefore Don Jr. broke the law.
They are wrong.
I repeat, THIS STORY HAS NO LEGS.
"Anything of value" has never been and legally cannot be construed as "information".
definitions uslegal com/a/anything-of-value/ www lrc ky gov/Statutes/statute.aspx?id=43302 law justia com/codes/ohio/2006/orc/jd_103-3e3.html
Again, this isn't just loophole shit, this is a basic legal definition that can be found in literally and set of state (federal?) code definitions.
This basically means that Don Jr. could have met with Putin himself in total secrecy for any dirt about anyone and it would be completely legally sound.
And if you're worried about the morality of the situation, I would suggest that you look at the archive of the Russian lawyer's Facebook page:
archive is/mdSre (note that the FB profile that's logged in at the archive is not mine)
She hates Trump.
TL;DR: Even if the meeting was illegal (which it isn't), the lawyer was obviously not going for a collusion angle.
Thank you dedicated law fag. You're doing God's work by plainly stating the truth when your training in kikery would have you do otherwise.
Daniel White
Not saying you're wrong, but if you're explaining, you're losing. Need to go on the offense so that Dems are spending all their time explaining Hillary, Lynch, etc. Campaign-mode Trump understood this. President-mode Trump seems to have forgotten it.
Jordan Martin
Thanks, user. Help me by ber-bumpitying.
Jayden Rivera
You're right, and that's why I'm preaching to the choir. Having a bolstered defense is good when you're on offense.
Caleb Sullivan
>russia wants to help you >ok. I'll set up a meeting.
wrong. hang this fuck.
Christian Diaz
Thanks for the bump, shill.
Jacob Nguyen
Money is free speech in burgertopia. Bake the cake
Adrian Ward
>Innocent
Nobody is innocent
Michael Ortiz
You are flat-out wrong. Read United States v. Girard, 601 F. 2d 69 (2d. Cir. 1979). Information is a thing of value, as is amusement, sex, or a promise.
Jayden Parker
The Judges' opinion in that case, in relation to "a promise", is worded and refers to a commitment to an action, not information by itself. Re-read the part about "a promise to reinstate an employee"
James Hughes
THE LAWYER IS A SOROS OPERATIVE
Dylan Bell
No they are right. But let them bring that up.... so we can arrest every single AIPAC lobbyists in DC. Don Jr. Trusted a Jew.... He shouldn't have... GET IVANKA OUT OF WHITE HOUSE!!!
Jonathan Long
What if the person that offered the bogus info was a Democratic Party Agent that's just impersonating?
Owen Mitchell
The lawyer is a Far Left nobody. Look at Goldstone.
Mason Wilson
Isn't this bitch connected to Soros?
Grayson Turner
Spoken like a True Fake news Click-baiting Dis-info outlet.
Isaiah Gomez
I'm not Russian. I tell you I have Russian info and I really don't. And you say OK. What happens?
Julian Walker
>absolutely no contribution, argument, or rebuttal whatsoever thanks for the bump
Even if "anything of value" were to mean information about an opponent, wouldn't that make Hillary and pretty much every other politician in Washington guilty of the same crime?
This is the stupidest accusation yet.
Asher Harris
I think we've already figured out that the left doesn't actually value information.
Ayden Jenkins
That's what happened but I guess the idea is ppl don't care because Don Jr. took the meeting anyway?
great write up, was just thinking about the possibility of historians or lawyers actually browsing Sup Forums. i'm interested in hearing if there are actual accredited historians that browse here, but try to fight the stupid revisions of WE WUZ and such.
Justin Mitchell
>Basically, these laws say that you can't accept anything of value from foreign nationals for campaign purposes (contributions, etc.) So what do you say to the fact that they've been saying no collusion for months but it's clear by the fact Jr didn't bat an eyelid to "part of Russia's ongoing effort to help you" that Russia and the Trump's were colluding
Robert Moore
All of the trumps (incl. barron), and any one who voted from them, is going to jail. It can't be stopped now, sorry!
Jace Roberts
these delicious bumps
John Wilson
That is somewhat of a separate issue, and this post relates more to the legal ramifications of the event.
Joshua Kelly
>"Anything of value" has never been and legally cannot be construed as "information". >information has no value are you fucking retarded
>This basically means that Don Jr. could have met with Putin himself in total secrecy for any dirt about anyone and it would be completely legally sound. anyone who thinks op has anything to do with being a lawyer is an actual moron
>www lrc ky gov/Statutes/statute.aspx?id=43302 >lrc ky gov >DONT TAKE MY WORD FOR IT. TAKE THE WORD OF THE KENTUCKY LEGISLATURE it's actually comical how delusional people are that are trying to defend this
Camden Price
>russians warn Trump the Democrats are rigging the election >Democrats consider this treason
Brody Clark
Look. I'm a CaliFag that voted Trump because I wanted a free Awoo in the afterlife (and the supreme justice slots being filled with conservatives was a bonus). But I'm totally not buying into this horseshit. Trump Jr fucked up along with daddy by hearing about this meeting, saying it was a good idea when their advisors and campaign staff would have been horrified with him actually going in person. You use MIDDLE MEN for this shit. Always. He might not have broken the law, but he broke Trump's word when the claim was made that 'we never colluded with the Russians, we never sought to collude with them.'
Jr was a part of the campaign staff, and he sure as shit sought to collude. Even if it's a big fat legal nothing (which I agree that it is), it gave the liberal media more shit to shovel on the screen.
Lucas White
He didn't get any information that aided the Trump campaign or damage Hillary's campaign. Not a very strong case, mostly hyped up bullshit from CNN yet again
Ethan Diaz
...
Joshua King
I've been saying that it was his duty as an American first to go to that meeting and take whatever was collected and right to the FBI, making sure to make copies for internet of course, and protecting us from illegal activities by Hillary Clinton.
When nothing was presented, oh well. But the UnAmerican activity is looking the other way when evidence of illegal activity is presented (which basically every liberal has done since Hillary pressed delete).
Aiden Jackson
"I LOVE IT" He knew and took the bait
Joseph Hughes
You basically said "You're wrong" three times without saying why or how.
I'm sure you have an argument, I'd just like for you to begin.
Isaiah Miller
And for the record, no, I am not a lawyer.
Also, citing state legislature isn't bad practice, especially if you use more than one source, which I did.
Thomas Brown
I can smell your busted vaginas from here.
Zachary Hall
the bumps they flow like wine from a glass
Jaxson Edwards
Campaigns meet with people all the time. The damn Hillary campaign had the Orlando Muslim terrorist shooters father at a prime seat holding a campaign sign.
Not an ounce of outrage.
If he said no to that meeting I would have thought there was something wrong with him because in a presidential campaign when the media is the opposition research force you are against, you have to turn over every rock and lead to get the news out there.
This is also what happens when you can only trust a small core amount of people. Don Jr. Did just fine, and found nothing. But if their was evidence of Hillary collusion with Russia and he walked that to FBI in front of cameras, that's exactly what was needed, because EVERYONE was covering for her.
Caleb Smith
anticom bump
Juan Gray
>Also, citing state legislature isn't bad practice, especially if you use more than one source, which I did. i just got off the phone with the sheriff of ohio. he says you're under arrest for legal bad practice (malpractice). thanks
>And for the record, no, I am not a lawyer. Yes, obviously. You're just making shit up to make yourself feel better. Take Califag's word of advice here because this was fucked up regardless of what crimes Don Jr actually did commit or attempt to commit. Trump has been shooting himself in the feet constantly because he only trusts his family and he's relying on idiots like you to go along for the whole ride with him. He should have just taken his lumps and then moved on a long time ago but, unfortunately for us all, they all keep lying and covering it up which means there might actually be something there.
even if there was nothing criminal here it's 1000000000000000% enough to justify looking into and if they're all this retarded then Mueller is going to fuck them all in the ass.
Sebastian Perez
I'm glad he did it...Does any retard actually believe they would conduct collusion over the internet and in Trump fucking Tower..Fuck off..
Nicholas Clark
Yeah but the issue becomes if they literally have been lying about this for so long, who's to say this is literally the worst they did? If they actively encouraged criminal acts they're fucked
William Bennett
...
Jack Gutierrez
>thinks someone who hurts his feelings must be a clinton supporter >thinks foreign intelligence agencies should compete over influence in US elections >thinks calling someone a hypocrite is a justification for criminal behavior you're a fuckin retard too
I agree, however, that something of this nature warrants investigation.
Isaiah Evans
See
Brayden Nguyen
>thinks someone who hurts his feelings must be a clinton supporter >thinks calling someone a hypocrite is a justification for criminal behavior okay
>rcp >I mean, there’s a point at which you have to show some element of maturity and stand back and tell people — look, this is worthy we have an investigation. But you shouldn’t suggest that this is a clear evidence of a criminal act... Thank you for agreeing with me though
>tick tock >thinks the secretary of state meeting a president is evidence of criminal links, but not inviting someone to a collusion party for "ultra sensitive very high level info" "as part of Russia and the Russian government's campaign to help Mr. Trump" you also have been added to the fucking retard list
>The consequences are a separate issue. you tried to make up legal-speak saying there should be no consequences and I called bullshit on it. The best-case scenario here is that Don junior fell for a KGB plot to entrap him and has been doubling down on it ever since. This is actually fucked and anyone who believes in the US and its constitution should be horrified by it. All it's doing is killing Trump's agenda, and that's only if the investigation doesn't show that they're lying because there's a lot more there.
Jayden Walker
can someone explain the tick tock meme for me please?
Adam Gutierrez
How is citing laws and definitions "made-up legal speak"??
Hunter Foster
1. he linked to kentucky and ohio laws for something that happened in new york city 2. he drew the complete opposite conclusion from what his own links say 3. you have to be an actual idiot to think information cannot have value 4. even if any of that were true, she was supposedly (according to Don junior) looking to trade the info for sanctions relief 5. the best case scenario here is that Don junior got himself into a blackmail situation and has been covering it up
if this kind of wishful thinking is what Don junior, Kushner, Manafort, etc have for themselves they are all so fucked and are destroying Trump's presidency
Gavin Thompson
Tick tock, sharia blue. Tick fucking tock.
David Adams
>thinks the secretary of state meeting a president of another country who knows the algarovs is evidence of wrongdoing >doesn't think trump's family meeting and doing business with the algarovs means anything how many times do i have to put you on the retard list
