[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Sorry, CNN, We're Not Going to Stop Talking About the Russian Collusion Hoax

"No Autopsy Can Restore the Democratic Party’s Viability"

RIP Ozzy

"Trump floats 'restriction' for Commanders if they fail to ditch nickname in favor of Redskins return"

"Virginia Governor’s Race Heats Up As Republican Winsome Sears Does a Hard Reboot of Her Campaign"

"We Hate Communism!!"

"Mamdani and the Democratic Schism"

"The 2nd Impeachment: Trump’s Popularity Still Scares Them to Death"

"President Badass"

"Jasmine Crockett's Train Wreck Interview Was a Disaster"

"How Israel Used Spies, Smuggled Drones and AI to Stun and Hobble Iran"

There hasn’T been ... a single updaTe To This siTe --- since I joined.

"This Is Not What Authoritarianism Looks Like"

America Erupts… ICE Raids Takeover The Streets

AC/DC- Riff Raff + Go Down [VH1 Uncut, July 5, 1996]

Why is Peter Schiff calling Bitcoin a ‘giant cult’ and how does this impact market sentiment?

Esso Your Butt Buddy Horseshit jacks off to that shit

"The Addled Activist Mind"

"Don’t Stop with Harvard"

"Does the Biden Cover-Up Have Two Layers?"

"Pete Rose, 'Shoeless' Joe Reinstated by MLB, Eligible for HOF"

"'Major Breakthrough': Here Are the Details on the China Trade Deal"

Freepers Still Love war

Parody ... Jump / Trump --- van Halen jump

"The Democrat Meltdown Continues"

"Yes, We Need Deportations Without Due Process"

"Trump's Tariff Play Smart, Strategic, Working"

"Leftists Make Desperate Attempt to Discredit Photo of Abrego Garcia's MS-13 Tattoos. Here Are Receipts"

"Trump Administration Freezes $2 Billion After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands"on After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands

"Doctors Committing Insurance Fraud to Conceal Trans Procedures, Texas Children’s Whistleblower Testifies"

"Left Using '8647' Symbol for Violence Against Trump, Musk"

KawasakiÂ’s new rideable robohorse is straight out of a sci-fi novel

"Trade should work for America, not rule it"

"The Stakes Couldn’t Be Higher in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court Race – What’s at Risk for the GOP"

"How Trump caught big-government fans in their own trap"

‘Are You Prepared for Violence?’

Greek Orthodox Archbishop gives President Trump a Cross, tells him "Make America Invincible"

"Trump signs executive order eliminating the Department of Education!!!"

"If AOC Is the Democratic Future, the Party Is Even Worse Off Than We Think"

"Ending EPA Overreach"

Closest Look Ever at How Pyramids Were Built

Moment the SpaceX crew Meets Stranded ISS Crew

The Exodus Pharaoh EXPLAINED!

Did the Israelites Really Cross the Red Sea? Stunning Evidence of the Location of Red Sea Crossing!

Are we experiencing a Triumph of Orthodoxy?

Judge Napolitano with Konstantin Malofeev (Moscow, Russia)

"Trump Administration Cancels Most USAID Programs, Folds Others into State Department"

Introducing Manus: The General AI Agent

"Chinese Spies in Our Military? Straight to Jail"

Any suggestion that the USA and NATO are "Helping" or have ever helped Ukraine needs to be shot down instantly


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Why Donald Trump Jr. is Innocent. Period.
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://lawnewz.com/opinion/why-donald-trump-jr-is-innocent-period/
Published: Jul 12, 2017
Author: The Law
Post Date: 2017-07-12 08:46:32 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 7267
Comments: 48

Excerpt:

The Code of Federal Regulations makes the law immunizing Trump Jr.’s actions precisely clear: any foreign national individual may volunteer personal services to a federal candidate or federal political committee without making a contribution. The law provides this volunteer “exemption” as long as the individual performing the service is not compensated by anyone on the campaign. See 11 CFR 100.74. For example, as the Federal Election Commission advises all, “an individual can provide volunteer services to a candidate or party without considering the value of those service a contribution to the candidate or party.” Section 30121 of Title 52 does not apply to voluntary activity or services. The thing “of value” must be actual money, or its transferable equivalent, not a volunteer of services or information. Otherwise, if volunteering information in coordination with a campaign constituted donations, everyone from John Harwood to Chuck Todd (and maybe all of CNN) made millions in donations to the Hillary campaign, as WikiLeaks emails disclosed.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 31.

#1. To: A K A Stone (#0)

So says Facebook.

But the argument is that the information purportedly came from the Russian government and was to be passed on to Don Jr. by a Russian government attorney.

Yes, yes, yes. As we now know, that was all bullshit. Nothing came from the Russian government, the lawyer didn't work for the Russian government, and there was no incriminating information to pass on. It was all a ruse.

BUT, according to the emails, Don Jr. didn't know that at the time of the meeting. He was told the information WAS coming from the Russian government and was to be passed on to him by a Russian government attorney, and he went to the meeting believing that.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-07-12   9:10:56 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: misterwhite, A K A Stone, redleghunter (#1)

BUT, according to the emails, Don Jr. didn't know that at the time of the meeting. He was told the information WAS coming from the Russian government

No, Trump Jr. was told the information was being leaked by a Russian government official.

Donald Trump Jr. received an email from Rob Goldstone, not a Russian government agent.

Trump Jr. did not go to the meeting, the meeting came to him, 725 5th AVe., 25th floor, brought to the meeting by Rob Goldstone.

The Russian lawyer did not have an entry visa and was granted parole entry into the United States by the Obama Justice Department.

As with a U.S. government lawyer, a Russian government lawyer would not be representing her government on unofficial business.

What is the alleged crime of meeting with a third-party Russian lawyer for the purpose of receiving unspecified alleged official documents allegedly leaked by a Russian government official with whom Trump Jr. had no direct contact whatever?

Nobody claims any documents were passed.

Nobody claims that the Russian lawyer attempted to pass on any documents or information about Hillary Clinton.

Nobody claimed any personal knowledge or possession of documents. The only claimed knowledge of documents is Rob Goldstone alleging that an acquaintance of Trump Jr. had allegedly alleged that his Russian government relative was allegedly desirous of leaking some unspecified official documents to the Trump campaign.

It sounds about as criminal as downloading a document from Wikileaks.

And the documents sound as real as Teo Manti's girlfriend.

It reads more like a sting operation. The lawyer did not have to be in on it. Goldstone could have told her he could get a meeting where she could pitch opposition to the Magnitsky Act. But who had the power to grant the Russian lawyer parole entry into the United States without a visa? Loretta Lynch's Department of Justice.

nolu chan  posted on  2017-07-13   1:29:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: nolu chan (#10)

"What is the alleged crime of meeting with a third-party Russian lawyer for the purpose of receiving unspecified alleged official documents allegedly leaked by a Russian government official with whom Trump Jr. had no direct contact whatever?"

I don't see a crime there. But that's not the issue.

From the information in the emails, Don Jr. thought he was meeting with a Russian government attorney who was acting as a go-between to pass on incriminating information about Hillary. This information was coming from a named high-level Russian government official demonstrating the Russian government's support for Trump.

Now, that was all a lie. A scam. A sting. A setup. Call it whatever you want. But Don Jr. didn't know that when he set up the meeting.

The fact that he took the meeting seems to demonstrate an attempt at collusion with the Russian government to influence the campaign. No?

misterwhite  posted on  2017-07-13   9:57:11 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: misterwhite, A K A Stone, redleghunter (#13)

This information was coming from a named high-level Russian government official

No, it was allegedly being provided by the "Crown prosecutor of Russia." There is no "Crown" anything in a republic, such as Russia. It was allegedly coming from a fictional character.

The fact that he took the meeting seems to demonstrate an attempt at collusion with the Russian government to influence the campaign. No?

No. There is no suggestion of a leak by the Russian government. There is only the suggestion of a leak by one non-existent Russian government official who was allegedly proposing to act outside his official duties to leak information.

Now, that was all a lie. A scam. A sting. A setup. Call it whatever you want.

Ok. I'd call it quite possibly a staged event to create the appearance of a Russia connection at Trump Tower to enable the Obama administration to creatively support an application to a FISA court to grant an application for foreign surveillance, the results of such surveillance then being subjected to the unveiling of the names of the U.S. persons therein.

nolu chan  posted on  2017-07-13   15:43:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: nolu chan (#23)

There is no "Crown" anything in a republic, such as Russia.

"Goldstone seems to have garbled things a bit; in the United Kingdom a Crown prosecutor is one that works for the Crown, i.e., a federal prosecutor. There’s no such position in Russia technically, but the analogue would be the top federal prosecutor of Russia, and that is Yury Chaika, the prosecutor-general of the Russian Federation."
-- theatlantic.com

misterwhite  posted on  2017-07-13   16:04:51 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: misterwhite (#24) (Edited)

Goldstone seems to have garbled things a bit

He referred to a nonexistent position. What Russian source could have referred to a crown prosecutor?

As a Dem scam event, any Russian government connection would have been unnecessary and unwanted. Ms. Veselnitskaya could have arrived only to pitch opposition to the Magnitsky Act. The Dem scammer seeking to manufacture cause to obtain a FISA warrant to surveil Trump Tower would not have cared what was confusedly said at the meeting. They only cared that a meeting with a Russian lawyer was taken at Trump Tower.

There is no actual evidence of any involvement of Yuri Chaika, nor is there any actual evidence of any anti-Hillary information or document involved or pitched at the meeting.

Moreover, Goldstone told the WSJ that by Crown prosecutor, he meant Veselnitskaya.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/12/who-is-natalia-veselnitskaya-low-level-lawyer-or-kremlin-power-broker

Goldstone told the Wall Street Journal his reference to the “crown prosecutor” meant Veselnitskaya, which seems unlikely as she is a defence lawyer and has never been a prosecutor. In the same exchange Goldstone referred to her as an “attorney”.

The Agalarovs were Trump’s partners in Russia during the 2013 Miss Universe contest hosted in Moscow, and Trump had even appeared in one of Emin’s music videos. Goldstone had worked as Emin’s agent.

Agalarov told a Russian radio station on Wednesday that he was not involved in setting up the meeting. “What’s Hillary Clinton got to do with this? I don’t know. I don’t know Rob Goldstone at all,” he said. He did admit that Goldstone had worked for his son.

nolu chan  posted on  2017-07-13   17:25:52 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: nolu chan (#25)

What Russian source could have referred to a crown prosecutor?

None. But he was Australian, so it would be natural for him to refer to the top guy as the "Crown prosecutor".

"There is no actual evidence of any involvement of Yuri Chaika, nor is there any actual evidence ..."

I don't care. That's beside the point. My point is that Don Jr. believed these things and set up the meeting anyways.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-07-13   17:57:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: misterwhite, A K A Stone (#26)

he was Australian, so it would be natural for him to refer to the top guy as the "Crown prosecutor".

Why was it natural for Goldstone, because he was Australian, to refer Yuri Chaikin as the Crown prosecutor??? The top guy is the Attorney-General of Australia. A crown prosecutor in Australia is not a government servant or a potentate. They are private counsel retained by the Office of Public Prosecutions to prosecute cases. It would make sense for Goldstone to refer to Natalia Veselnitskaya as a crown prosecutor if he wrongly believed she were still working for the prosecutors' office, and wrongly assumed she was prosecuting cases, which she never did. She was not litigating in court for the prosecutors office.

I repeat:

Goldstone told the WSJ that by Crown prosecutor, he meant Veselnitskaya.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/12/who-is-natalia-veselnitskaya-low-level-lawyer-or-kremlin-power-broker

Goldstone told the Wall Street Journal his reference to the “crown prosecutor” meant Veselnitskaya, which seems unlikely as she is a defence lawyer and has never been a prosecutor. In the same exchange Goldstone referred to her as an “attorney”.

Veselnitskaya has not been shown to have any government position.

I don't care.... My point is that Don Jr. believed these things and set up the meeting anyways.

Please explain your mindreading skills. How have you determined that Donald Jr. believed that there was a crown prosecutor of Russia, or that he mistook Goldstone's reference to Veselnitskaya to refer to Yuri Chaika?

Donald Jr. did not set up the meeting. Goldstone set up the meeting. Donald Jr. agreed to take the meeting proposed by Goldstone.

What was Velnitskaya doing in the country without a visa, and perhaps with only an expired parole?

nolu chan  posted on  2017-07-13   20:25:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: nolu chan (#28) (Edited)

Please explain your mindreading skills. How have you determined that Donald Jr. believed that there was a crown prosecutor of Russia, or that he mistook Goldstone's reference to Veselnitskaya to refer to Yuri Chaika?

Because Don Jr. is a smart guy and you're obviously confused. Two reasons.

First, Goldstone is a foreigner and uses foreign words and phrases. For example, if he refers to the "bonnet" of a car, Don Jr. knows he's not talking about a cute hat. He makes the translation automatically. Likewise, if he refers to the Crown prosecutor, that's translated into "Yuri Chaika".

Second, Goldstone referred to two different people in the email -- the "Crown prosecutor" who had access to "some official documents and information" and "the Russian government attorney" who would be bringing the documents to the meeting. Right?

Now you're trying to tell me this was the same person? Give me a break.

misterwhite  posted on  2017-07-14   9:39:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 31.

#38. To: misterwhite (#31)

He makes the translation automatically. Likewise, if he refers to the Crown prosecutor, that's translated into "Yuri Chaika".

You said Goldstone was Australian and that's why he would naturally assume Crown prosecutor referred to head man. As I pointed out, a crown prosecutor in Australia is not the head man, and is not a government servant. A natural translation would be low level prosecutor, a non-government employee.

The most natural interpretation is that Goldstone did not know shit, he was just making up a story to get a meeting taken with a Russian lawyer. The only thing wanted was the fact of the meeting taking place. The meeting was not publicly revealed for a year. The fact that said meeting took place was wanted for some other purpose.

He is a civilian attorney retained/appointed by the government to prosecute cases. The Attorney General of Australia is the head man.

Goldstone told the WSJ that by Crown prosecutor, he meant Veselnitskaya. That is who Goldstone said he meant, and Veselnitskaya much more closely fits the description of an Australian crown prosecutor than Chaika. She worked in the prosecutor's office, but not as an in-court litigator.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/12/who-is-natalia-veselnitskaya-low-level-lawyer-or-kremlin-power-broker

Goldstone told the Wall Street Journal his reference to the “crown prosecutor” meant Veselnitskaya

[misterwhite #26] But he was Australian, so it would be natural for him to refer to the top guy as the "Crown prosecutor".

Ok, I went along with your joke last time. Rob Goldstone is really English, and claimed to have run PR for Michael Jackson's Australian tour did not change him into an Australian. However, a crown prosecutor is not the head man in England either. There is the Attorney General for England and Wales at the top, then the Director of Public Prosecutions who oversees crown prosecutors and advocates.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Prosecution_Service

Crown prosecutors are prosecutors like Marcia Clark, Christopher Darden, HJank Goldberg and Cheri Lewis. Crown prosecutors are not high level officials in England or Australia, and they do not exist in Russia. In England they do not even present cases in court; that is reserved for the Crown advocates.

"Crown Prosecutors (also known as reviewing lawyers) provide advice to investigators and take charging decisions; Crown Advocates present prosecution cases in court; Associate Prosecutors represent the CPS in cases with guilty pleas in the magistrates’ courts; and paralegals/casework assistants provide clerical support and help with progressing cases."

As an Englishman, Goldstone would naturally translate a crown prosecutor to a lawyer working on the bottom rung of the prosecution system, so low she does not even get to do trial work.

Do try to learn more than boot and bonnet old chap. I lived in the UK for five years and got married there. Here's one. After a big meal, you leave a restaurant with your significant other and she remarks that she is starving. Whatever did she mean?

nolu chan  posted on  2017-07-14 13:02:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 31.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com