The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > Elections

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1901  
Old 08-12-2017, 04:12 PM
Aspenglow Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,429
My initial post in this discussion was simply to clarify that while it is true that "collusion" is not a crime, conspiracy is. I wasn't trying to change any conversation. Past that, I responded directly to what you were posting and nothing else. I did read through the posts but didn't feel that I was hijacking your discussion.

To your point, I disagree Trump is innocent if he became aware others were doing illegal things and simply failed to report it. If he benefited as the candidate of the fraudulent election, then I think he becomes a co-conspirator, even if he did not actively engage in the conspiracy (which I frankly doubt). It's similar to the getaway driver in a robbery being fully culpable for all crimes committed during the robbery, even though he didn't actively have his hands on the money or the guns.

It defies all reason to believe he was unaware. His comments made from the podium re "Russia, if you're listening... Hillary's 30,000 emails..." Also, his frantic, Herculean efforts to obstruct/stop the investigations are evidence of his consciousness of guilt. And these are just the things we know about.

True re the necessity of the "hostile" part, but it really is so much worse. Russia actively works against our interests in the world in ways that Great Britain does not. You're kinda nit-picking now.
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #1902  
Old 08-12-2017, 05:39 PM
John Mace John Mace is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aspenglow View Post
Sorry; misunderstood your point. No, I don't think that. But I do think that if you believe Trump wasn't fully aware of and participated materially in what was being done by his campaign on his behalf, I've got a bridge you might be interested in purchasing.
Missed this post. No, I'm not sure the "emphasis added" part happened, and no I'm not interested in any bridges. I'm not even sure he was fully aware of everything that went on by his staff-- is any candidate every fully aware of that? Oftentimes a candidate will deliberately distance himself from questionable activity precisely to preserve some deniable playability. Now, Trump's ego may have gotten in the way of him doing that, but it's far from clear that it did.
Reply With Quote
  #1903  
Old 08-12-2017, 05:56 PM
Aspenglow Aspenglow is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Mace View Post
Missed this post. No, I'm not sure the "emphasis added" part happened, and no I'm not interested in any bridges. I'm not even sure he was fully aware of everything that went on by his staff-- is any candidate every fully aware of that? Oftentimes a candidate will deliberately distance himself from questionable activity precisely to preserve some deniable playability. Now, Trump's ego may have gotten in the way of him doing that, but it's far from clear that it did.
No worries re missing the post. People have lives and goodness knows I miss them all the time.

Back to the discussion: His behavior isn't that of an innocent person. It doesn't support why he's worked so hard to thwart the investigations. He has regularly demonstrated zero compunction to throw anyone under the bus for any reason he perceives to be in his own self interest, no matter how loyal. That's his character.

You may find it "far from clear" that he knew. I see lots of evidence that he was fully aware.

I've never heard of deniable playability. If it's a way of saying plausible deniability, it's kind of cute.
Reply With Quote
  #1904  
Old 08-12-2017, 05:56 PM
Johnny Ace Johnny Ace is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Aiding and abetting what? Despite all of the media blather about "collusion," the fact is that "collusion's" not necessarily a crime - I'm not sure anyone's even really accurately defined precisely what in the hell it means. Having mutual interest in seeing a political figure lose is not a crime, and it's not even necessarily collusion. Participating in schemes in order to make that become reality might be criminal, but good look proving that Trump aided or abetted anything.
This was your original statement:

Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Trump knowing about illegal things that other people do isn't necessarily a crime, but trying to impede a lawful investigation into said illegality, is.
Emphasis mine.

You weren't making an argument against collusion being illegal. Knowing about illegal activity and doing nothing about it is, indeed, a crime.
Reply With Quote
  #1905  
Old 08-14-2017, 05:21 PM
JohnT JohnT is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 18,362
Trump campaign emails show aide’s repeated efforts to set up Russia meetings.

The Derp State strikes again!
Reply With Quote
  #1906  
Old 08-14-2017, 06:34 PM
Fiveyearlurker Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Hey, Pence has Trump's back, and vows that there was no collusion with Russia, with no caveats. Well, he's "not aware" of any collusion at at all with the Trump campaign at any time. Well at least "during the time that I was on the campaign" anyway. And he would know because he has all the information. Well, the information "what Michael Flynn had told" him. So, no caveats at all.
Reply With Quote
  #1907  
Old 08-14-2017, 06:51 PM
Sherrerd Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 3,951
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
Hey, Pence has Trump's back, and vows that there was no collusion with Russia, with no caveats. Well, he's "not aware" of any collusion at at all with the Trump campaign at any time. Well at least "during the time that I was on the campaign" anyway. And he would know because he has all the information. Well, the information "what Michael Flynn had told" him. So, no caveats at all.
It's probably the case that most politicians want to be President, so it wouldn't be fair to criticize Pence for that. But, heavenly days, his maneuverings are certainly unlovely to behold.
Reply With Quote
  #1908  
Old 08-14-2017, 06:53 PM
Fiveyearlurker Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Wasn't so much a criticism as interesting to note how many caveats he threw into what could have been a very simple sentence: "There was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia". Period. For some reason he was unable to make such a statement.
Reply With Quote
  #1909  
Old 08-14-2017, 09:44 PM
asahi asahi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Ace View Post
This was your original statement:



Emphasis mine.

You weren't making an argument against collusion being illegal. Knowing about illegal activity and doing nothing about it is, indeed, a crime.
I'll hedge a little and put emphasis on the word 'necessarily'. In any case, this might be a Bricker question, but AFAIK, unless it is laid out in a statute, there's not necessarily a law that says knowing about a crime is illegal in and of itself. To be sure there are laws that get to the heart of the intent to commit and/or conceal crimes, but those are statutes with which we are familiar. There are laws against conspiracy to commit a crime and there are laws that prohibit attempts to obstruct justice and provide false information to an investigator and providing false testimony in a courtroom -- those are crimes.
Reply With Quote
  #1910  
Old 08-15-2017, 08:49 AM
Fotheringay-Phipps Fotheringay-Phipps is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
That article is actually pretty exculpatory, headline notwithstanding.

The article makes pretty clear that this "aide" was a junior volunteer with no real influence in the campaign, and that his repeated efforts to set up meetings with Russians were consistently rebuffed by senior campaign people (including Manafort). That seems inconsistent with the notion that these same people were also colluding with the Russians.
Reply With Quote
  #1911  
Old 08-15-2017, 09:39 AM
GrandWino GrandWino is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fotheringay-Phipps View Post
That article is actually pretty exculpatory, headline notwithstanding.

The article makes pretty clear that this "aide" was a junior volunteer with no real influence in the campaign, and that his repeated efforts to set up meetings with Russians were consistently rebuffed by senior campaign people (including Manafort). That seems inconsistent with the notion that these same people were also colluding with the Russians.
This "aide" had no real foreign policy experience and was a fairly recent college graduate. He had no business being on that team from a FP perspective. Of the 5 foreign policy advisers Trump named to the WaPo, 2 of them were Russian intermediaries (this guy and Carter Page). These emails show that discussion that happened BEFORE that infamous Trump Tower meeting where the legality of meeting with Russians, and the Logan Act, were discussed. Makes it a lot harder for campaign folks at that meeting to try and plead ignorance.

This may not be a smoking gun of any kind but it's certainly some new threads for Mueller to pull on and see what else he finds. Wanna bet there are other emails in this guy's history that we don't know about?

This is a very long Twitter thread by former prosecuting attorney Seth Abramson that does a good job of laying out all of what is known and the timeline of what went on. It all ties into Rosnoft and that Mayflower Hotel meeting. I encourage you to read it without blinders.


ETA: A good case made in the thread linked about that its very possible Carter Page met personally with Putin while he was in Russia (when he traveled there with the Trump campaign's permission/go-ahead.)

Last edited by GrandWino; 08-15-2017 at 09:41 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #1912  
Old 08-15-2017, 09:42 AM
GrandWino GrandWino is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Good info here also:

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump...anafort-2017-8

Key paragraphs:
Quote:
Mariotti wrote that perhaps the most important implication of the news was that "everyone on those emails was aware of the concerns expressed in the emails about meeting with Russians, including Admiral Kubic's concern about the legality of meeting with [Russians]."

"If anyone on those emails later met with Russians or accepted aid from them," Mariotti continued, "the prior emails about concerns could be used to indicate that they knew that the meeting was problematic and potentially illegal but nonetheless persisted."
Quote:
"If you're Paul Manafort and your defense is to say, 'I didn't think taking this meeting was a problem,' and then you have the prosecutor showing the jury emails that were sent a month earlier where people are raising precisely those same legal concerns — that's such devastating evidence in a trial," Wright said.
Reply With Quote
  #1913  
Old 08-15-2017, 09:50 AM
Fotheringay-Phipps Fotheringay-Phipps is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
IANAL, but that seems silly to me.

There is no legal category called "meeting with Russians". A meeting with Russians could be legally problematic or not, depending on which Russians and what the purpose of the meeting was, and other matters of that sort.
Reply With Quote
  #1914  
Old 08-15-2017, 09:56 AM
JohnT JohnT is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 18,362
Lol. When you have a jr aide who is sending out "GOT AN INVITE FROM PUTIN, WHO WANTS IN?" emails which are responded with "THIS ISN'T LEGAL, GUYS!" from campaign heads, yeah, there is a problem and it's not so silly.

Last edited by JohnT; 08-15-2017 at 09:57 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #1915  
Old 08-15-2017, 10:14 AM
Johnny Ace Johnny Ace is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fotheringay-Phipps View Post
IANAL, but that seems silly to me.

There is no legal category called "meeting with Russians". A meeting with Russians could be legally problematic or not, depending on which Russians and what the purpose of the meeting was, and other matters of that sort.
It's a big problem when you failed to register as a foreign agent until well after the fact. Goes to intent. They've got Manafort by the short-and-curlies at the very least.
Reply With Quote
  #1916  
Old 08-15-2017, 11:44 AM
ElvisL1ves ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 42,563
The next step is to see what Manafort has on Trump, and who else he has something on. I'll guess it won't take much for Mueller to turn him.
Reply With Quote
  #1917  
Old 08-15-2017, 11:51 AM
GrandWino GrandWino is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
The next step is to see what Manafort has on Trump, and who else he has something on. I'll guess it won't take much for Mueller to turn him.
Mueller could let Ukraine take him and try him for his accused crimes there. And I highly suspect Paulie would rather that not end up happening.
Reply With Quote
  #1918  
Old 08-15-2017, 11:53 AM
Okrahoma Okrahoma is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandWino View Post
Mueller could let Ukraine take him and try him for his accused crimes there. And I highly suspect Paulie would rather that not end up happening.
Ukraine has no extradition treaty with the United States.
Reply With Quote
  #1919  
Old 08-15-2017, 12:19 PM
GrandWino GrandWino is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Okrahoma View Post
Ukraine has no extradition treaty with the United States.
Doesn't mean he won't end up there.
Reply With Quote
  #1920  
Old 08-15-2017, 12:20 PM
Okrahoma Okrahoma is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandWino View Post
Doesn't mean he won't end up there.
How would that work, exactly?
Reply With Quote
  #1921  
Old 08-15-2017, 12:54 PM
ElvisL1ves ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 42,563
Some of the same fleet of private jets Cheney used to send Afghan prisoners to "black sites" for interrogation are still available.

Mueller isn't going to do it; he just has to threaten to do it or something equally frightful.
Reply With Quote
  #1922  
Old 08-15-2017, 12:59 PM
Okrahoma Okrahoma is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Some of the same fleet of private jets Cheney used to send Afghan prisoners to "black sites" for interrogation are still available.

Mueller isn't going to do it; he just has to threaten to do it or something equally frightful.
Or maybe he could just pull some nails with pliers. Or threaten it or "something equally frightful".
Reply With Quote
  #1923  
Old 08-15-2017, 01:07 PM
ElvisL1ves ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 42,563
Point is, he's got Manafort.

Please note that to get the warrant for their pre-dawn raid on his home, the FBI had to present a judge with probable cause they'd find evidence of a crime.
Reply With Quote
  #1924  
Old 08-15-2017, 01:42 PM
GrandWino GrandWino is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Point is, he's got Manafort.

Please note that to get the warrant for their pre-dawn raid on his home, the FBI had to present a judge with probable cause they'd find evidence of a crime.
And not only probable cause, but had to show reason to believe evidence was at risk of being destroyed. Judges don't like to sign off on dramatic raids like this unless there's a very good reason.
Reply With Quote
  #1925  
Old 08-16-2017, 05:08 PM
JohnT JohnT is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 18,362
Trump Nazi has been so dominant in the news lately that this interesting tidbit about Trump Russia has been obscured:

Ukrainian hacker responsible for writing program used by Russia in DNC hacking attempts has been cooperating with the FBI.

Last edited by JohnT; 08-16-2017 at 05:08 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #1926  
Old 08-16-2017, 06:33 PM
Johnny Ace Johnny Ace is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
Trump Nazi has been so dominant in the news lately that this interesting tidbit about Trump Russia has been obscured:

Ukrainian hacker responsible for writing program used by Russia in DNC hacking attempts has been cooperating with the FBI.
Interesting, but not particularly useful. I don't see how having this witness is going to prove anything WRT Russian involvement in hacking, especially considering that Fancy Bear appears to have replaced all their hacking tools. It's possible they could use his technical expertise to work against future attacks, though.
Reply With Quote
  #1927  
Old Yesterday, 07:55 PM
Skypist Skypist is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Anybody heard anything more about this?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gop-con...ulian-assange/

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (apparently known to be a fan of Putin and 45) has "met with" Julian Assange and is going to go wee, wee, wee back to Tmurp with what he has learned, before telling anyone else any deets.

Quote:
Assange "emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails," according to a statement from Rohrabacher's office.
Reply With Quote
  #1928  
Old Yesterday, 08:33 PM
Sage Rat Sage Rat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Howdy
Posts: 18,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skypist View Post
Anybody heard anything more about this?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gop-con...ulian-assange/

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (apparently known to be a fan of Putin and 45) has "met with" Julian Assange and is going to go wee, wee, wee back to Tmurp with what he has learned, before telling anyone else any deets.
Hadn't heard about it, but if anything comes of it, I'd guess that it has nothing to do with what is being said here.

While the US intelligence community said that they have to use something more like heuristics to determine Russian activities, they didn't seem open to the idea that those heuristics were to be questioned at all. (Basically, they either have something better than heuristics going on and don't want to tell anyone, or there's just too many clues for anyone to have any realistic doubt.) So if Dana is to show up with "proof" that Russia wasn't behind the Clinton emails, ain't no one going to bother spending any time looking into it except a few conspiracy theory level Right-wing news rags, and presumably the quality of the evidence won't allow it to make it out of that territory.

But, that doesn't mean that Assange can't use the opportunity to pass Dana something of use to Trump and Putin, unrelated to the Clinton email hacks.

If such a thing exists, I'm not sure what it would be, or that we'd be able to track it back to this particular meeting. Blackmail materials on congressmen, perhaps? Trump might be figuring that he needs some leverage against the Legislature, for when Mueller makes his findings public and impeachment proceedings start.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2017 Sun-Times Media, LLC.