# Has it been established what laws were allegedly broken during the 2016 campaign? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [July 9, 2017, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-it-been-established-what-laws-were-allegedly-broken-during-the-2016-campaign/790805 "2017-07-09T02:45:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2017, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-it-been-established-what-laws-were-allegedly-broken-during-the-2016-campaign/790805/21 "2017-07-09T23:38:05Z")
Part of what is confusing for many is, asking the question about “what laws were broken” is immaterial to the discussion. Even if laws on the books are involved, they don’t apply to a sitting president. What matters is whether or not Trump’s actions rise to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors” in the judgment of Congress. It’s why people keep comparing what Trump has done to Nixon’s Watergate. Watergate is the most topical instance of a president’s abuse of his power. Nixon was not actually impeached, but that is only because he resigned. Congress essentially said, “Quit, or we’ll fire you through impeachment.” He quit. The fact that what is known about what Trump has done _already rises to/perhaps exceeds what Nixon did_ is why Watergate is relevant to the discussion. And what is actually known about Trump’s actions pertains solely to his obstruction of justice – not to the issue of collusion, which is in the hands of Mueller. IOW, Trump has already done enough to be impeached if Republicans decide doing so would be in their best interests. So far, they haven’t. I think it’s why Mueller will make sure his final report is bulletproof and impossible for Republicans to try and stuff under the carpet. They will have to act, or risk losing their seats. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2017, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-it-been-established-what-laws-were-allegedly-broken-during-the-2016-campaign/790805/22 "2017-07-10T00:01:10Z")
We do have those fellows who lied under oath, including one guy who lied at his Senate confirmation hearings. We also may have “interfering with an investigation,” the old Watergate crime. Worse has happened after the election than is known to have happened during it. ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2017, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-it-been-established-what-laws-were-allegedly-broken-during-the-2016-campaign/790805/23 "2017-07-10T01:26:31Z")
Well there are very strong indications that Comey broke the law about leaking government documents containing classified information: > **[Comey’s private memos on Trump conversations contained classified material](https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/341225-comeys-private-memos-on-trump-conversations-contained-classified/?rnd=1499645596)** > > More than half of the memos former FBI Director James Comey wrote as personal recollections of his conversations with President Trump about the Russia investigation have been determined to con… “But when the seven memos Comey wrote regarding his nine conversations with Trump about Russia earlier this year were shown to Congress in recent days, the FBI claimed all were, in fact, deemed to be government documents.” ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2017, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-it-been-established-what-laws-were-allegedly-broken-during-the-2016-campaign/790805/24 "2017-07-10T01:44:10Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > Well there are very strong indications that Comey broke the law about leaking government documents containing classified information: > > [http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/341225-comeys-private-memos-on-trump-conversations-contained-classified?rnd=1499645596](http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/341225-comeys-private-memos-on-trump-conversations-contained-classified?rnd=1499645596) > > “But when the seven memos Comey wrote regarding his nine conversations with Trump about Russia earlier this year were shown to Congress in recent days, the FBI claimed all were, in fact, deemed to be government documents.” > [@](#): > > More than half of the memos former FBI chief James Comey wrote as personal recollections of his conversations with President Trump about the Russia investigation have been determined to contain classified information,\*\* according to interviews with officials familiar with the documents\*\* > > But when the seven memos Comey wrote regarding his nine conversations with Trump about Russia earlier this year were shown to Congress in recent days, the FBI claimed all were, in fact, deemed to be government documents. > > While the Comey memos have been previously reported, this is the first time there has been a number connected to the amount of the memos the ex-FBI chief wrote. > > Four of the memos had markings making clear they contained information classified at the “secret” or “confidential” level, according to officials directly familiar with the matter. > > A spokesman for the FBI on Sunday declined to comment. . Anonymous sources. invalid according to your rules. So the FBI both claimed the memos were classified and yet declined to comment. ETA: Who in Congress did they show the documents to? Or did they just show them to Congress? (Both houses?) Sloppy, claiming that Congress was shown as if it’s just a single body. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2017, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-it-been-established-what-laws-were-allegedly-broken-during-the-2016-campaign/790805/25 "2017-07-10T02:18:16Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > This is also why the Rosenbergs weren’t charged with treason, but espionage, because, while the Soviet Union was undoubtedly an “enemy” in terms of the common term, they weren’t an "enemy in that war wasn’t declared against them. Correct indeed! ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2017, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-it-been-established-what-laws-were-allegedly-broken-during-the-2016-campaign/790805/26 "2017-07-10T02:19:32Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#): > > Well there are very strong indications that Comey broke the law about leaking government documents containing classified information: > > [http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/341225-comeys-private-memos-on-trump-conversations-contained-classified?rnd=1499645596](http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/341225-comeys-private-memos-on-trump-conversations-contained-classified?rnd=1499645596) > > “But when the seven memos Comey wrote regarding his nine conversations with Trump about Russia earlier this year were shown to Congress in recent days, the FBI claimed all were, in fact, deemed to be government documents.” I’m not going to bother correcting this, as we’re now in IMHO and undoubtedly this is simply your opinion. If this post had appeared in GQ, I would have pointed out its lack of factual basis. ---
**Author:** ![igor\_frankensteen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/839c29/32.png) [@igor\_frankensteen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/igor_frankensteen)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2017, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-it-been-established-what-laws-were-allegedly-broken-during-the-2016-campaign/790805/27 "2017-07-10T02:39:09Z")
Question: are there conflict of interest crimes? It certainly appears that some of Trumps people conducted business dealings with Russians who were not entirely disconnected from the Russian government, using their simultaneous connections to the soon-to-be President of the United States to gain extra leverage. And as we already know in this thread and elsewhere, some of them took significant income from their work with Russia, and failed to report it accurately not just once, but continuously until they were threatened with legal action if they did not. I am not a lawyer, but I would suspect that it is technically a crime to deny that you are acting as a paid agent of a foreign power until after you are threatened with prosecution for it, and only THEN fill out the forms and report. I know that if I drive my car while it isn’t properly registered with the state, get caught, and only THEN pay and file to register it, that I have officially broken the law. I might get let off without penalty, but that doesn’t mean I didn’t break the law. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2017, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-it-been-established-what-laws-were-allegedly-broken-during-the-2016-campaign/790805/28 "2017-07-10T02:54:05Z")
> [@igor\_frankensteen](#): > > Question: are there conflict of interest crimes? It certainly appears that some of Trumps people conducted business dealings with Russians who were not entirely disconnected from the Russian government, using their simultaneous connections to the soon-to-be President of the United States to gain extra leverage. And as we already know in this thread and elsewhere, some of them took significant income from their work with Russia, and failed to report it accurately not just once, but continuously until they were threatened with legal action if they did not. > > I am not a lawyer, but I would suspect that it is technically a crime to deny that you are acting as a paid agent of a foreign power until after you are threatened with prosecution for it, and only THEN fill out the forms and report. I know that if I drive my car while it isn’t properly registered with the state, get caught, and only THEN pay and file to register it, that I have officially broken the law. I might get let off without penalty, but that doesn’t mean I didn’t break the law. I have no idea. If you could give a specific example, instead of “some of Trump’s people,” I could opine from a position of at least some knowledge. Who? To whom were the denials directed? There is a law, 22 USC § 612, the Foreign Agents Registration Act, that mandates that any person within the United States who engages in political activities in the interests of a foreign power must register. There are many nuances associated with this general requirement, however. But is that what you mean? ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2017, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-it-been-established-what-laws-were-allegedly-broken-during-the-2016-campaign/790805/29 "2017-07-10T21:06:37Z")
> [@Lord\_Feldon](#): > > It probably wouldn’t ever be treason (“high treason” isn’t a thing in the US), but it could be some kind of criminal conspiracy. Even then it would depend on what exactly was discussed. “Treason” is also historically a relatively rare charge in the USA. So unless Trump was selling nuclear secrets or West Point to the British, most likely the charge would be conspiracy or obstruction or something (IANAJD). ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2017, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-it-been-established-what-laws-were-allegedly-broken-during-the-2016-campaign/790805/30 "2017-07-10T23:01:22Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I have no idea. > > If you could give a specific example, instead of “some of Trump’s people,” I could opine from a position of at least some knowledge. Who? To whom were the denials directed? > > There is a law, 22 USC § 612, the Foreign Agents Registration Act, that mandates that any person within the United States who engages in political activities in the interests of a foreign power must register. There are many nuances associated with this general requirement, however. But is that what you mean? I think it’s not impossible that some of General Flynn’s alleged actions, if substantiated, might have violated laws. General Flynn seems to have taken money and other considerations (primarily travel) from the Russia news network RT. RT is formally independent, however, it was founded by the state run news agency RIA Novosti, and currently shares office space and some officers with the government owned and operated Rossiya Segodnya. Additionally, it receives funding from the Russian government.The Emoluments Clause of the Constitution forbids a military officer, even a retired military officer, from accepting funds from a foreign government without prior congressional approval. From the Defense Department’s Office of the General Counsel: > [@](#): > > As interpreted in Comptroller General opinions and by the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel, the Emoluments Clause prohibits receipt of consulting fees, gifts, travel expenses, honoraria, or salary by all retired military personnel, officer and enlisted, Regular and Reserve, from a foreign government unless Congressional consent is first obtained. Consentis provided by Congress in 37 U.S.C. § 908, which requires advance approval from the relevant Service Secretary and the Secretary of State before accepting employment, consulting fees, gifts, travel expenses, honoraria or salary from a foreign government. > > Employment compensation from foreign educational or commercial institutions that are owned, operated, or controlled by a foreign government generally qualifies as an emolument because such entities are viewed as an extension of the foreign government. If RT’s links to the Russian government are such that it is “owned, operated, or controlled” by the Russian government, and I think, given its funding and commonality of assets and executives with an agency that is openly operated by the Russian government, Flynn may have been in violation of that. Additionally, Flynn does not appear to have disclosed meetings he had with foreign officials on his application to renew his security clearance, and claimed on the application that a trip that appears to have been paid for by RT was paid for by American businessmen. Knowingly making false statements of material fact to the federal government is a crime. There are also questions about work that Flynn’s consulting group may or may not have done for the Turkish government, either directly or indirectly, and whether he was required to register as a foreign lobbyist, and his later, retroactive registration as such, but I admit I’m having trouble getting and understanding the facts behind that, so I’m refraining from commenting. It appears to be a muddle, to use a technical term. ---
**Author:** ![Barrett\_Bonden](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/5e9695/32.png) [@Barrett\_Bonden](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barrett_Bonden)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2017, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-it-been-established-what-laws-were-allegedly-broken-during-the-2016-campaign/790805/31 "2017-07-10T23:13:44Z")
> [@aceplace57](#): > > The press is full of innuendo that somehow a crime was committed during the 2017 Presidential campaign. That campaign insiders allegedly met with various people in Russia. There’s never any hard facts. > > Special counsel Mueller is investigating and I haven’t seen what charges are being considered. Or even why the 2016 R. Campaign is being accused of any improprieties. > > Can we get to the heart of the matter? What crimes may have been committed? > > Please, set aside politics and focus on existing Federal campaign law. Seth Abramson has some decent legal summaries on twitter (alas for the mega-thread format). For instance, [Here’s everything we learned today about the June 9, 2016 meeting at Trump Tower between Trump’s campaign and a Russian agent.](https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/884260128928800768) Short version leaving lots of stuff out: On June 9, 2016, Donald Trump Jr., Kushner, and Manafort met with attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya, an agent of the Kremlin, in Trump Tower. She gave him anti-Clinton intelligence and then she spoke to him about US-Russian sanctions. Jr. says that he didn’t know beforehand with whom he was meeting or about what, and that none of the meeting attendees discussed it with Trump even though they met with Trump later that same day also in Trump Tower. Abramson has another thread wherein he explains why the June 9 activities are collusion. [Yes, yesterday’s bombshell about a June 9, 2016 Trump campaign-Russia meeting DID prove Trump and associates colluded with Russia.](https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/884429578449629184) Abramson says that Russia’s cyberattack on the US election was an ongoing crime “multiple felonies.” Per Abramson, any member of the campaign, including Trump himself, who after learning of the crime, participates in its concealment is an “Accessory After the Fact.” So, for instance, Trump personally trying to prevent the FBI from investigating Flynn’s sanction discussions with Russia would make Trump an accessory after the fact. ---
**Author:** ![DinoR](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dinor/32/2821_2.png) [@DinoR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DinoR)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2017, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-it-been-established-what-laws-were-allegedly-broken-during-the-2016-campaign/790805/32 "2017-07-11T01:41:51Z")
> [@China\_Guy](#): > > or being on the payroll of foreign companies/governments (ahem Michael Flynn ahem).Simplistically, you can lobby for the Russian government, but you have to disclose this is what you’re doing and what you get paid to do. Flynn’s case is special because he’s not just Michael Flynn. He’s LTG(Retired) Michael Flynn. His retirement didn’t sever his connection to the Army like a retirement from a civilian corporation. It was a transfer to the Retired Reserves where he still holds a commission as a Lieutenant General in the US Army. He’s even eligible for involuntary recall to service because of that status. Because of his status he was still subject to ethics laws and regulations as a senior military officer. He had to report his Russian business dealings at the time. In late April the DoD IG began an investigation related to thee allegations that he didn’t. If the allegations hold up there’s then the question of whether Mueller seeks an indictment under the ethics laws or DoD recalls and court martial Flynn for violating regulations that implement and flesh out those laws. That’s different than someone who is a civilian and does business with a foreign government. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2017, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-it-been-established-what-laws-were-allegedly-broken-during-the-2016-campaign/790805/33 "2017-07-11T01:59:07Z")
Breaking on Maddow, the New York Times has just reported that according to 3 sources, Don Jr. received an email in advance of the meeting with the Russian lawyer indicating that the help on the campaign in the form of dirt on Hillary Clinton was coming from the Russian government, and its purpose was to help his father get elected. If true, well… I’d say there’s a fire. [Reuters’ report on the Times Story](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-meeting-nyt-idUSKBN19W044). ---
**Author:** ![Okrahoma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90db22/32.png) [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2017, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-it-been-established-what-laws-were-allegedly-broken-during-the-2016-campaign/790805/34 "2017-07-11T02:08:10Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > Breaking on Maddow, the New York Times has just reported that according to 3 sources, Don Jr. received an email in advance of the meeting with the Russian lawyer indicating that the help on the campaign in the form of dirt on Hillary Clinton was coming from the Russian government, and its purpose was to help his father get elected. If true, well… I’d say there’s a fire. > > [Reuters’ report on the Times Story](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-meeting-nyt-idUSKBN19W044). Then [take my bet](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=20335979&postcount=663). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/has-it-been-established-what-laws-were-allegedly-broken-during-the-2016-campaign/790805.md?page=1)