Trump associates may have coordinated with Russians, according to US officials

[RickJay]

@kaylasdad99

BTW, I get that, broadly speaking, it’s illegal for a campaign to solicit or accept material assistance from foreign sources. Is it likewise illegal for a foreign national to offer or provide it?

As has been pointed out in other threads, a blanket ban on merely accepting information from persons who are not American would be

1. Impossible to fairly enforce,
2. Probably a violation of the First Amendment, and
3. Not really in the spirit of the purpose of such laws.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

@k9bfriender

Extreme cases, like living a completely different lifestyle than your parents did? Trump’s parents did not have access to taco bowls. People tended to live a similar lifespan to their parents because they also tended to live a similar lifestyle.

Some is lifestyle but much is genetic. Trump doesn’t live all that unhealthy of a lifestyle. He doesn’t drink or smoke. He’s somewhat overweight but not morbidly obese. Per WebMD, “a new study shows that weighing a third more than your ideal weight could reduce your life by three years on average”. I don’t think Trump weighs a third more than his ideal weight, but even if he does, 3 years is not a big deal for our purposes for a 71 year old guy whose parents lived to an average age of ~90.

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

You’re forgetting all the amphetamines and coke.

[Lance_Turbo]

Here’s a theory I’m growing quite fond of for it’s sheer ridiculousness…

The meeting Don Jr. had with the Russian lawyer was a set up to gain access to Trump Tower so Obama could wire tap it.

Seriously, Mike Cernovich tweeted it.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@septimus

Is this to be Junior’s defense? Out of curiosity, Okrahoma, do you believe that assisting law enforcement was his motive?

I will file this one along with the traditional excuse that Republican politicians use when caught red-handed with a hooker:

“I was just doing research into how these poor girls become trapped into this lifestyle”

[kaylasdad99]

@kaylasdad99

BTW, I get that, broadly speaking, it’s illegal for a campaign to solicit or accept material assistance from foreign sources. Is it likewise illegal for a foreign national to offer or provide it?

@RickJay

As has been pointed out in other threads, a blanket ban on merely accepting information from persons who are not American would be

1. Impossible to fairly enforce,
2. Probably a violation of the First Amendment, and
3. Not really in the spirit of the purpose of such laws.

1. Must have missed those threads.
2. Does “merely accepting information” mean the same as “accepting what amounts to the fruits of opposition research?”
3. I was under the impression that the purpose of such laws was to prevent foreign participation in our elections. Is that not the purpose, or if it is, how would such a prohibition violate the spirit of them?

[Euphonious_Polemic]

I’m pretty sure that in a few months time, if (when?) we have solid evidence (emails, witnesses) that high level members of the Trump campaign worked directly with Russian government operatives, giving them detailed voter data so that the Russians could target certain voters with social media bots and anti-clinton “news sites”…

That the usual suspects here will have no problem with that, because:

• It never happened.
• OK, it happened, but It’s not illegal
• OK, it’s not strictly legal, but it’s only a minor campaign finance violation. Small fine and move on. No biggie
• Anyway, Hillary would have done the same thing.
• It’s a witch-hunt.

[doorhinge]

@Bayard

Yes, if a reputable news source published an obviously sarcastic description of Trump killing prostitutes and claimed it was a real story, that would be fake news. Your logic is impeccable.

Thanks.

[Okrahoma]

@septimus

Is this to be Junior’s defense? Out of curiosity, Okrahoma, do you believe that assisting law enforcement was his motive?

When I said “publish it”, did you think that was to assist law enforcement?

[skdo23]

@yanceylebeef

I think it’s time we took the word “may” out of this thread’s headline.

I was giving Twitler the benefit of the doubt, a mistake I’ll never make again.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

I wish I was a better writer. I frequently come across stuff, and I think “I really wish I could have put it that way”. The National Post is a right-of-center national newspaper in Canada, and this columnist put things nicely, I think. His “defense” of Don Jr. is that he is a moron;

The proposal Goldstone passed on—to share some unspecified ugliness about Clinton that originated with “the Crown prosecutor of Russia”—was a scandal waiting to happen. Only the dimmest of people would fail to appreciate the implications involved in agreeing to co-operate with a hostile foreign government to smear an opponent. That the country in question happened to be Russia only adds to the battiness of the plan. But that’s just it: Donald Jr. didn’t have a clue that what he was doing might be a bad idea.

[Fiveyearlurker]

@Euphonious_Polemic

I wish I was a better writer. I frequently come across stuff, and I think “I really wish I could have put it that way”. The National Post is a right-of-center national newspaper in Canada, and this columnist put things nicely, I think. His “defense” of Don Jr. is that he is a moron;

From a legal standpoint, that can’t be used as a defense, can it? I had no idea that this was wrong?

(Asking a question, not making a statement.)

[Aspenglow]

@Euphonious_Polemic

I wish I was a better writer. I frequently come across stuff, and I think “I really wish I could have put it that way”. The National Post is a right-of-center national newspaper in Canada, and this columnist put things nicely, I think. His “defense” of Don Jr. is that he is a moron;

I agree he’s far from the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I think the failure is more fundamental than that. He has no moral compass. Why should he? Who in that family does? Trump Sr. lies as easily as speaking. The old saw about, “How do you know he’s lying? His lips are moving!” could have been crafted with Trump Sr. in mind. And it’s clear that Jr. is a chip off the ol’ block.

Even as Jr. was attempting to defend his actions, he said things like that it was a minor meeting, they didn’t get what they were looking for – and it never seemed to occur to him that they shouldn’t have been looking for it in the first place.

None of them gets that even entertaining such a scheme is wrong.

[Aspenglow]

@Fiveyearlurker

From a legal standpoint, that can’t be used as a defense, can it? I had no idea that this was wrong?

(Asking a question, not making a statement.)

Ignorance of the law has never been a defense.

[Happy_Lendervedder]

@Fiveyearlurker

From a legal standpoint, that can’t be used as a defense, can it? I had no idea that this was wrong?

(Asking a question, not making a statement.)

Didn’t work for Costanza when he had sex with the cleaning lady on his desk. But hey, Costanza wasn’t the president’s son.

[Blue_Blistering_Barnacle]

@septimus

Is this to be Junior’s defense? Out of curiosity, Okrahoma, do you believe that assisting law enforcement was his motive?

I think it would be sufficient to Okrahoma that it ***could ***be his motive, as he is always willing to extend the benefit of any doubt to Trump, his family, his current friends & associates,…

Further, it seems that he will not rest until everyone else does, too. Okra is nearly as tireless as KellyAnne Conway.

[PatriotX]

@Aspenglow

Ignorance of the law has never been a defense.

It is a thing for laws that require actions be taken “knowingly” or some similar such.

[Fiveyearlurker]

Besides, I’m sure that THIS time we have all the information out in the open and there are no longer any secrets.

[Aspenglow]

@PatriotX

It is a thing for laws that require actions be taken “knowingly” or some similar such.

That’s true, and it is an element of conspiracy – one that can be hard to prove. Fortunately, my understanding is that proof is to the “reasonable person” standard, so if it can be shown that a reasonable person would or should have known it was illegal, then that’ll do.

[CarnalK]

@PatriotX

It is a thing for laws that require actions be taken “knowingly” or some similar such.

That’s not what “ignorance of the law” is referring to though. If a statute says “knowingly crossing the street anywhere but a crosswalk is jaywalking” then saying you never heard of that law is not an excuse but being blind and accidentally crossing at the wrong spot is.