Can still throw his family in jail, strip his assets, and be waiting for him outside the white house gates with cuffs and a prison uniform.
That may be true, but it’s a distinction with a difference. A foreign national can pay for an ad saying that a wall is a great idea, but they can’t pay for an ad saying to vote for the guy who thinks that a wall is a great idea. Maybe it’s a very fine distinction, but it does exist.
Yeah, depends on the add. If it says “Vote for Trump [I am Vladimir Putin and I approve this message]”, then that is no bueno. But if it says “drill, baby, drill”, or “Russians are our friends”, that’s OK.
That’s similar to the distinction on what churches are allowed to say (theoretically, at least: Some get away with a lot more). A church can say, for instance, that abortion is a really important issue, and that you should vote to oppose abortion. Or that helping the poor is important, so you should vote to help the poor. Or any other issue, even if it’s obvious which side of the issue each candidate is on. But they can’t say “Vote for Joe Smith, because he’s opposed to abortion”.
They can, but they risk losing their tax exempt status. And it has nothing to do with being a Church. That’s true for all charitable institutions-- 501( c)(3) organizations
If Democrats take the House, they get investigative authority. They can find evidence, presuming it exists, of linkage between the Russians and trump. It will all be out in the open then and you and I can decide if it’s the real deal or mere Benghazi redux. Then impeachment takes a simple majority vote. Once it goes to the Senate, as has been indicated, the Chief Justice is in charge. Republican Senators will face a choice of standing by trump or abandoning him in the face of perhaps mounting proof of his guilt and eroding popular support for the party. Oh, yes, it’s a long shot but then so was trump’s election in the first place.
I don’t have a ton of time to get into it right now, but keep an eye on Joel Zamel.
He’s a side note in the other Trump Tower meeting story, but he was in that meeting.
One of his companies specializes in “social media manipulation.”
One of his former clients is Manfort’s pal Oleg Deripaska.
And his lawyer is a law partner and deputy of Rudy G.
This guy has connections.
Finally, Mueller’s team worked with the Israel Police to seize computers of one of Zamel’s firms. How does that even work? Did Bob just ask really nicely?
I suppose he contacted the someone from the Israeli State Attorney office, presented them with their case, and asked them to get a judge to issue a warrant. Prosecutors from different countries cooperate all the time.
That is exactly what I suppose as well. My question was more about the case that was presented. I imagine the bar is quite high for the FBI to be able to seize computers that belong to a non-American in Israel.
Best as I can tell, Israel Police haven’t released any further information.
Part of me wishes that it was illegal for foreigners to actively campaign for specific candidates, in that it would greatly increase the likelihood of Nigel Farage ending up in prison.