What is the difference between Trump saying he'd accept foreign information

[domer76]

There's an epidemic in here tonight.

post # 97

One more time, illiterate moron.

“While it is illegal to accept contributions from foreign nationals for political campaigns (as Trump suggested he would do), “paying a foreign national fair market value for opposition research is generally not illegal,” as former chief counsel for the Federal Election Commission Lawrence Noble told The Washington Post. “It is considered a commercial transaction, which is not a contribution.”

https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/20...he-2020/223924

[domer76]

Oh my gosh. And I thought that I was computer illiterate.

Who's talking about hits???????
This is a simple google seardch for words like 'Hillary Trevor Noah November 2, 2017'
or maybe 'Hillary Trevor Noah it's part of what happens in a campaign where you get information'

Turns out that Clinton was correct, dumbfuck.

“While it is illegal to accept contributions from foreign nationals for political campaigns (as Trump suggested he would do), “paying a foreign national fair market value for opposition research is generally not illegal,” as former chief counsel for the Federal Election Commission Lawrence Noble told The Washington Post. “It is considered a commercial transaction, which is not a contribution.”

https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/20...he-2020/223924

[Darth Omar]

As usual, simple English escapes you. Tell me which of the following words befuddle you. I’ll try to dumb it down for you.

“Let me make something 100% clear to the American public and anyone running for public office: It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election,“ wrote Ellen Weintraub, chairwoman of the FEC. “This is not a novel concept.“

Yet, not a single indictment came out of Meeting Gate lol.

I told you nitwits it was a Nothing Burger.

[domer76]

Yet, not a single indictment came out of Meeting Gate lol.

I told you nitwits it was a Nothing Burger.

We all know why, don’t we?

Mueller said Donnie was to fucking stupid to be able to prove that he knew the law.

[Damocles]

As usual, simple English escapes you. Tell me which of the following words befuddle you. I’ll try to dumb it down for you.

“Let me make something 100% clear to the American public and anyone running for public office: It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election,“ wrote Ellen Weintraub, chairwoman of the FEC. “This is not a novel concept.“

The problem you have is in understanding that "of value" is defined, linked to, and it does not include what you want it to include.

[Darth Omar]

We all know why, don’t we?

Mueller said Donnie was to fucking stupid to be able to prove that he knew the law.

But I thought there was collusion lol.

You mean Donnie was unaware that there was collusion? How you could you and the despicable media hacks have gotten it so wrong and so badly, for so long?

[Grokmaster]

on political rivals last Wednesday and Trump directly asking Russia to find Clinton's Emails back in 2016?

Actually not much of a difference, except this time Trump is putting the request right out there, sending a public invitation to all his autocratic buddies, openly inviting foreign powers to interfere in our election for his behalf

And why not, Trump cares little for respecting historical institutions, he knows his GOP lackeys don't have the backbone to say anything, he's assured billy Barr ain't going to care, and he has a whole media network that will not only defend him but will quickly portray any effort to expose say North Korea's involvement as a witch hunt

The Democrats ought to immediately pass legislation making it illegal to accept any kind of assistence from any foreign nation in our elections and quickly forward it to Mitch, put the Senate invertebrates on the spot

Let me see some more ILLOGICAL GYRATIONS about how the TRUMP CAMPAIGN NOT SEEKING, and even REJECTING RUSSIAN CRAP = "COLLSION", (as reported by Mueller), and the Hillary Campaign ACTIVRLY SEEKING, then PAYING FOR, and HIRIING KREMLIN-LINKED FOREIGN AGENTS TO OBTAIN POLITICAL DIRT FROM RUSSIA , "IS NOT COLLUSION". ( Do I even need to mention its being ILLEGALLY USED FOR A FISA WARRANT?)

It's hilarious reading the FUCKING IDIOTIC PRETZELTHINK LOOPS the BRAINDEAD LEFT HAS INVENTED TO PROPAGATE THIS FLAMING DUNCEHOOD.

[domer76]

The problem you have is in understanding that "of value" is defined, linked to, and it does not include what you want it to include.

Dirt on your opponent has immense value. That's why campaigns aew willing to pay big bucks for it.

Want me to quote the FEC Chair again? She was responding directly to Trump's admission that he would listen to someone offering harmful information.

"Let me make something 100% clear to the American public and anyone running for public office: It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a US election," she said in a statement."

Which words are you stumbling on? I'll try to get it to third grade level for you.

[domer76]

But I thought there was collusion lol.

You mean Donnie was unaware that there was collusion? How you could you and the despicable media hacks have gotten it so wrong and so badly, for so long?

hat part of this simple sentence do you fail to understand, dimwit?

Mueller said Donnie was to fucking stupid to be able to prove that he knew the law. ot this one?

Let me make something 100% clear to the American public and anyone running for public office: It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a US election," she said in a statement

The words you are stumbling over, I can try to dumb it down for your third grade mentality.

[Damocles]

Dirt on your opponent has immense value. That's why campaigns aew willing to pay big bucks for it.

Want me to quote the FEC Chair again? She was responding directly to Trump's admission that he would listen to someone offering harmful information.

"Let me make something 100% clear to the American public and anyone running for public office: It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a US election," she said in a statement."

Which words are you stumbling on? I'll try to get it to third grade level for you.

Desperately trying to defend the indefensible, I bet you didn't realize you had so much in common with how you perceive your "enemy".

I have given you the definition, you simply apply a crowbar, try to make the square block fit in the round hole and hope everybody is too stupid to realize that your definition is different than the actual law. I've given you links to the definition and your only response is to repeat without even refining. The reality is, your wish doesn't make reality, and your assumption that it is somehow a contribution to hear words is beyond stupid.

[reagansghost]

Desperately trying to defend the indefensible, I bet you didn't realize you had so much in common with how you perceive your "enemy".

I have given you the definition, you simply apply a crowbar and hope we're too stupid to realize that your definition is different than the actual law. I've given you links to the definition and your only response is to repeat without even refining. The reality is, your wish doesn't make reality.

here ya go dumb fuck

[archives]

Yet, not a single indictment came out of Meeting Gate lol.

I told you nitwits it was a Nothing Burger.

The only way one could have is if one of the stooges turned on the others, which given the character of the individuals present that wasn't going to happen, lying is more innate to them than honesty or morality

[domer76]

Desperately trying to defend the indefensible, I bet you didn't realize you had so much in common with how you perceive your "enemy".

I have given you the definition, you simply apply a crowbar, try to make the square block fit in the round hole and hope everybody is too stupid to realize that your definition is different than the actual law. I've given you links to the definition and your only response is to repeat without even refining. The reality is, your wish doesn't make reality, and your assumption that it is somehow a contribution to hear words is beyond stupid.

Not my reality, dumbfuck. I’m merely quoting the experts.

“While it is illegal to accept contributions from foreign nationals for political campaigns (as Trump suggested he would do), “paying a foreign national fair market value for opposition research is generally not illegal,” as former chief counsel for the Federal Election Commission Lawrence Noble told The Washington Post. “It is considered a commercial transaction, which is not a contribution.”

https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/20...he-2020/223924

“Let me make something 100% clear to the American public and anyone running for public office: It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election,“ wrote Ellen Weintraub, chairwoman of the FEC. “This is not a novel concept.“

[Damocles]

Not my reality, dumbfuck. I’m merely quoting the experts.

“While it is illegal to accept contributions from foreign nationals for political campaigns (as Trump suggested he would do), “paying a foreign national fair market value for opposition research is generally not illegal,” as former chief counsel for the Federal Election Commission Lawrence Noble told The Washington Post. “It is considered a commercial transaction, which is not a contribution.”

https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/20...he-2020/223924

“Let me make something 100% clear to the American public and anyone running for public office: It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election,“ wrote Ellen Weintraub, chairwoman of the FEC. “This is not a novel concept.“

Repeating what was proven to be wrong when presented with the actual definition in the law doesn't change that it was wrong. You can keep repeating it, but all you have left, even according to your own people in Congress is a hopeful belief that others will think there was "Obstruction", not "collusion". The experts, even those on your own side, disagree with you and this person.

[anatta]

The only way one could have is if one of the stooges turned on the others, which given the character of the individuals present that wasn't going to happen, lying is more innate to them than honesty or morality

how would lying change anything?
the meeting took place. it was under false pretenses ( the Russian lawyer really wanted to change the Maginsky act)
It was walked out on. there were no agreements on anything except "taking the meeting"

Unless you think there was some super secret agreement reached otherwise, the facts stand alone.

Honestly you have been reading too much Mueller!! there WAS NO COLLUSION ( conspiring )