Just agreeing to meet and/or endorsing such a meeting with a corrupt intent to conspire to commit a crime, not to mention actually meeting to conspire, even though you may allege that nothing came of the meeting, is still a crime of conspiracy.Or......
He has nothing to trade. Because nothing illegal happened at the meeting.
Take a step back and look.
Digging up dirt on your opposition is not a crime, even from a foreign national. Just ask Hillary. Especially if the quo is only monetary.Just agreeing to meet and/or endorsing such a meeting with a corrupt intent to conspire to commit a crime, not to mention actually meeting to conspire, even though you may allege that nothing came of the meeting, is still a crime of conspiracy.
Give us a break.
Umm what do you mean "quo is only monetary"? It seems that Trump, by sucking Putin's dick at the summit, did, among many other things, give Putin's regime a huge boost in terms of its legitimacy in the eyes of every half-ass dictator in every semi-shitty country in the world. Wasn't it a part of Trump's payment for the dirt delivered by Russians?Digging up dirt on your opposition is not a crime, even from a foreign national. Just ask Hillary. Especially if the quo is only monetary.
Then why no charges?Just agreeing to meet and/or endorsing such a meeting with a corrupt intent to conspire to commit a crime, not to mention actually meeting to conspire, even though you may allege that nothing came of the meeting, is still a crime of conspiracy.
Give us a break.
Foreign nationals are prohibited from contributing to campaigns and endorsing and agreeing to meet for the exchange of such contributions and actually meeting for such contributions is considered to be conspiring with foreign agents of an adversarial government to defraud the USA not to mention violating campaign finance laws.Digging up dirt on your opposition is not a crime, even from a foreign national. Just ask Hillary. Especially if the quo is only monetary.
So what is the Dossier then?Foreign nationals are prohibited from contributing to campaigns and endorsing and agreeing to meet for the exchange of such contributions and actually meeting for such contributions is considered to be conspiring with foreign agents of an adversarial government to defraud the USA not to mention violating campaign finance laws.
Imploring upon Russia to 'find the 30,000 missing emails', which most likely would have included criminal acts, may also be considered to be conspiring to defraud and illegal campaign contributions.
I guess your going to say:
There was no collusion, and even if there was, collusion is not a crime. And even if collusion is crime, a sitting President cannot be indicted. And even if a sitting President is indicted ..... what about Hillary!
Ask Nunes, Jordan, Meadows and Gowdy about that.So what is the Dossier then?
In other words you have no defense for it. And you agree they are correct.Ask Nunes, Jordan, Meadows and Gowdy about that.
The dossier was an investigative report prepared by a person know to and trusted by American intelligence which has been largely, although not entirely, corroborated, regardless of who originally commissioned it or paid for it.So what is the Dossier then?
So you mean the referral of Podesta et al to the Southern District is also a witch hunt? It was also the fruit of whatever investigation was begun by Mueller.As well Tony Podesta and the former WH council just got refered for investigation due to their work with Manafort.
So one of the heads of the group that works for the DNC is under Russia investigation according to your standard. And the Lawyer appointed by Obama to know all the WH secrets as well.
Care to comment?
No. And I don't think nailing Manafort is a bad thing. But please remember this. Washington is a small town. And this can of worms is opening further.So you mean the referral of Podesta et al to the Southern District is also a witch hunt? It was also the fruit of whatever investigation was begun by Mueller.
Private foreign national contacts Russian sources for dirt on a political opponent. And paid for it.The dossier was an investigative report prepared by a person know to and trusted by American intelligence which has been largely, although not entirely, corroborated, regardless of who originally commissioned it or paid for it.
A former MI5 agent, trusted source who was well known and trusted by American intelligence brought to their attention what he considered alarming information. Isn't that what you would hope a friendly former agent of an ally would do. I would. What if the information was true. I would hope that a friendly agent would let the intelligence community know. But then of course I do not suffer from HUTA syndrome.Private foreign national contacts Russian sources for dirt on a political opponent. And paid for it.
That's either illegal it not. Buts it's no different then the Trump tower meeting. Take your pick.
LOL. But the investigation of Trump by the same commission is a witch hunt?No. And I don't think nailing Manafort is a bad thing. But please remember this. Washington is a small town. And this can of worms is opening further.
He was paid to do it by the DNC.A former MI5 agent, trusted source who was well known and trusted by American intelligence brought to their attention what he considered alarming information. Isn't that what you would hope a friendly former agent of an ally would do. I would. What if the information was true. I would hope that a friendly agent would let the intelligence community know. But then of course I do not suffer from HUTA syndrome.
Have I ever used that term. Not that I remember. But either way I think it's a a waste of time.LOL. But the investigation of Trump by the same commission is a witch hunt?
Steele a trusted source? Why then the FBI cut him loose? LOL!!!!A former MI5 agent, trusted source who was well known and trusted by American intelligence brought to their attention what he considered alarming information. Isn't that what you would hope a friendly former agent of an ally would do. I would. What if the information was true. I would hope that a friendly agent would let the intelligence community know. But then of course I do not suffer from HUTA syndrome.
Yes he was a trusted source who had previously supplied reliable and useful information to American intelligence. No idea what you mean by cut him lose. In any event you keep repeating the phony narrative that the Mueller investigation was triggered by the dossier. It was not.Steele a trusted source? Why then the FBI cut him loose? LOL!!!!
Flynn was a trusted source at one time as well.Yes he was a trusted source who had previously supplied reliable and useful information to American intelligence. No idea what you mean by cut him lose. In any event you keep repeating the phony narrative that the Mueller investigation was triggered by the dossier. It was not.
