Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports

The Statutes

wesfau2

  • ***
  • 13855
  • I love it when you call me Big Poppa
The Statutes
« on: July 12, 2017, 10:27:54 AM »
I keep hearing that the now-verified/admitted meeting with the Russian lawyer (understood by the Trump campaign to be an agent of the Kremlin) between TrumpJr, Kushner and Manafort is of no legal consequence.  That’s all.  No support for the naked conclusion, but that’s the talking point.

To recap, the story appears to be thus: Goldstone reaches out to TrumpJr and tells him that he can arrange a meeting with a “crown prosecutor” of Russia who has damaging information regarding Hillary Clinton.

I’ll offer the disclaimer that I’m no federal prosecutor, but I can read statutes and the narrative appears to violate various provisions of the US Code.  Specifically, the following:

I.   In corresponding with the “crown prosecutor” through Goldstone, the Trump campaign (through its agents) engaged in illegal private correspondence with a foreign government.

18 USC §953. Private correspondence with foreign governments
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.
   
II.   In falsifying (or “forgetting” multiple times) their paperwork and/or in their sworn statements before Congress regarding their contact with the foreign government.  Trump campaign agents apparently violated TWO statutes:

18 USC §954. False statements influencing foreign government
Whoever, in relation to any dispute or controversy between a foreign government and the United States, willfully and knowingly makes any untrue statement, either orally or in writing, under oath before any person authorized and empowered to administer oaths, which the affiant has knowledge or reason to believe will, or may be used to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government, or of any officer or agent of any foreign government, to the injury of the United States, or with a view or intent to influence any measure of or action by the United States or any department or agency thereof, to the injury of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

18 USC §1621. Perjury generally
Whoever-
(1) having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or
(2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true;
is guilty of perjury and shall, except as otherwise expressly provided by law, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. This section is applicable whether the statement or subscription is made within or without the United States.

III.   Anyone in the campaign who “coached” their testimony violating the two statutes
above or who advised on the information contained in their disclosures may have violated this one:

18 USC §1622. Subornation of perjury
Whoever procures another to commit any perjury is guilty of subornation of perjury, and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

IV.   If the discussion was about trading on emails illegally obtained from Hillary Clinton in her official capacity as Sec State then this statute was probably violated (and the downstream purchasers would be involved in a criminal conspiracy…regardless of efficacy of the transaction):

18 USC §1361. Government property or contracts
Whoever willfully injures or commits any depredation against any property of the United States, or of any department or agency thereof, or any property which has been or is being manufactured or constructed for the United States, or any department or agency thereof, or attempts to commit any of the foregoing offenses, shall be punished as follows:
If the damage or attempted damage to such property exceeds the sum of $1,000, by a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than ten years, or both; if the damage or attempted damage to such property does not exceed the sum of $1,000, by a fine under this title or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or both.
   
V.   Finally, even if the emails were not exchanged, the express promise to make a contribution of a thing of value (the promise to deliver the Hillary emails) violates this one (with bonus definitions!):


52 USC §30121. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals
(a) Prohibition
It shall be unlawful for-
(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make-
(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;
(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or
(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title); or

(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.
(b) "Foreign national" defined
As used in this section, the term "foreign national" means-
(1) a foreign principal, as such term is defined by section 611(b) of title 22, except that the term "foreign national" shall not include any individual who is a citizen of the United States; or
(2) an individual who is not a citizen of the United States or a national of the United States (as defined in section 1101(a)(22) of title 8) and who is not lawfully admitted for permanent residence, as defined by section 1101(a)(20) of title 8.

22 USC §611. Definitions
As used in and for the purposes of this subchapter-
(a) The term "person" includes an individual, partnership, association, corporation, organization, or any other combination of individuals;
(b) The term "foreign principal" includes-
(1) a government of a foreign country and a foreign political party;
(2) a person outside of the United States, unless it is established that such person is an individual and a citizen of and domiciled within the United States, or that such person is not an individual and is organized under or created by the laws of the United States or of any State or other place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and has its principal place of business within the United States; and
(3) a partnership, association, corporation, organization, or other combination of persons organized under the laws of or having its principal place of business in a foreign country.

friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You can keep a wooden stake in your trunk
On the off-chance that the fairy tales ain't bunk
And Imma keep a bottle of that funk
To get motel parking lot, balcony crunk.

Buzz Killington

  • *
  • 22899
  • Bofa
Re: The Statutes
« Reply #1 on: July 12, 2017, 10:30:41 AM »
Serious question...
Can one be accused of attempted collusion?  Because it sounds like that's what happened here, unless either my reading skills are bad (which I will disclose is a definite possibility) or we don't have the whole story.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Now I may be an idiot, but there is one thing I am not, sir, and that, sir, is an idiot.

wesfau2

  • ***
  • 13855
  • I love it when you call me Big Poppa
Re: The Statutes
« Reply #2 on: July 12, 2017, 10:41:46 AM »
Serious question...
Can one be accused of attempted collusion?  Because it sounds like that's what happened here, unless either my reading skills are bad (which I will disclose is a definite possibility) or we don't have the whole story.

Collusion isn't really a criminal offense.  It's a child of regulatory subversion.

We're talking actual crimes.  The proper charge would be conspiracy to violate what appears to be a laundry list of federal statutes.

Read Paragraph V above closely.  Even the promise to contribute the emails was a violation...and the conspiracy to receive them is a crime.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You can keep a wooden stake in your trunk
On the off-chance that the fairy tales ain't bunk
And Imma keep a bottle of that funk
To get motel parking lot, balcony crunk.

WiregrassTiger

  • *
  • 12237
  • Don't touch Tappy, he's a service tiger.
Re: The Statutes
« Reply #3 on: July 12, 2017, 01:09:00 PM »
I. What the hell do you know about law?
27 USC §911.007
You need to stick to posting with which you are well versed, like...wait. Never mind.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Like my posts on www.tigersx.com

Kaos

  • *
  • 29548
  • It's GO time
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: The Statutes
« Reply #4 on: July 12, 2017, 01:48:31 PM »
You should work for the Washington post.  They and their psychophants would appreciate all the time you wasted on this.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

wesfau2

  • ***
  • 13855
  • I love it when you call me Big Poppa
Re: The Statutes
« Reply #5 on: July 12, 2017, 02:30:33 PM »
You should work for the Washington post.  They and their psychophants would appreciate all the time you wasted on this.

Non-responsive/ad hominem.

Predictable.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You can keep a wooden stake in your trunk
On the off-chance that the fairy tales ain't bunk
And Imma keep a bottle of that funk
To get motel parking lot, balcony crunk.

Re: The Statutes
« Reply #6 on: July 12, 2017, 02:50:33 PM »
Wes, when did DT Jr go under oath, for it to be perjury?  Or have I watched too many lawyer movies, and have a misconception of what is really means?
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

wesfau2

  • ***
  • 13855
  • I love it when you call me Big Poppa
Re: The Statutes
« Reply #7 on: July 12, 2017, 02:55:19 PM »
Wes, when did DT Jr go under oath, for it to be perjury?  Or have I watched too many lawyer movies, and have a misconception of what is really means?

All their disclosure documents are subject to an oath/affirmation of veracity.  In addition, there is a continuing obligation of disclosure if any of their answers/responses should need amendment.

To the extent that Sessions (in his confirmation hearings) or any other campaign/administration official/agent testified in open court/before Congress about the campaign/admin's contacts with Russia or Russian agents, they are all on the block.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You can keep a wooden stake in your trunk
On the off-chance that the fairy tales ain't bunk
And Imma keep a bottle of that funk
To get motel parking lot, balcony crunk.

Re: The Statutes
« Reply #8 on: July 12, 2017, 02:59:06 PM »
Thanks, Wes.  Didn't know that.

My lawyering knowledge comes from Ted 2.

Objection!
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Buzz Killington

  • *
  • 22899
  • Bofa
Re: The Statutes
« Reply #9 on: July 12, 2017, 03:00:54 PM »
All this reminds me of the Perry Mason episode "The Case of the Perjured Parrot" where the only witness to a rich man's murder is his parrot, who keeps repeating the suspect's name. But in court, everyone is surprised at what the bird says next. Perry does his magic at an informal coroner's Inquest in a rural area.

friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Now I may be an idiot, but there is one thing I am not, sir, and that, sir, is an idiot.

Kaos

  • *
  • 29548
  • It's GO time
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: The Statutes
« Reply #10 on: July 12, 2017, 04:10:30 PM »
Non-responsive/ad hominem.

Predictable.

You are no better than Rachel Madcow.  Digging through every parsed word and possible interpretation, lacing that with your own speculation and looking for some possible way to crucify this administration.  In that you offer little more than Prowler. You just have a better vocabulary and bigger words.

I can (and will) engage with you on just about any other topic. Here? There's no point. You want Trump gone. You see everything only in the light that best reflects your unfulfilled desire. This lengthy spew of half baked legal research bears that out. 

I'm sorry your gal didn't win.  Get off the man's ass.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

Snaggletiger

  • *
  • 44556
  • My Fighting Pearls
Re: The Statutes
« Reply #11 on: July 12, 2017, 04:35:58 PM »
Collusion isn't really a criminal offense.  It's a child of regulatory subversion.

We're talking actual crimes.  The proper charge would be conspiracy to violate what appears to be a laundry list of federal statutes.

Read Paragraph V above closely.  Even the promise to contribute the emails was a violation...and the conspiracy to receive them is a crime.

I don't know if the emails would fall into the category of "Thing of value" in the spirit of what the statute is trying to prohibit. I get where you're coming from and I think this was a shit move by DTJr all the way around.  He's probably going to pay, and should. He's most likely the most susceptible on the perjury issue.   
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
My doctor told me I needed to stop masturbating.  I asked him why, and he said, "because I'm trying to examine you."

AUChizad

  • Female Pledge Trainer
  • ***
  • 19523
  • Auburn Basketball Hits Everything
Re: The Statutes
« Reply #12 on: July 12, 2017, 04:47:29 PM »
I don't know if the emails would fall into the category of "Thing of value" in the spirit of what the statute is trying to prohibit. I get where you're coming from and I think this was a shit move by DTJr all the way around.  He's probably going to pay, and should. He's most likely the most susceptible on the perjury issue.
I agree with this. Using "thing of value" to mean dirt on your opponent is stretching...a lot. A "thing of value" is "We can't pay you money, but we can give you this original Van Gough." Not information you can't put a monetary value on...
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

GH2001

  • *
  • 23848
  • I'm a Miller guy. Always been. Since I was like, 8
Re: The Statutes
« Reply #13 on: July 12, 2017, 05:06:31 PM »
So you are telling me jay sekulow is a legal hack?
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
WDE

The Prowler

  • *
  • 16095
  • Catch Him!
Re: The Statutes
« Reply #14 on: July 12, 2017, 05:33:55 PM »
Imo, it becomes a "thing of value" even more when the discussion turned to the Magnitsky Act. "Blackmail file" on Hillary for looking into and overturning the Magnitsky Act.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
"Patriotism and popularity are the beaten paths for power and tyranny." Good, no worries about tyranny w/ Trump

"Alabama's Special Teams unit is made up of Special Ed students." - Daniel Tosh

"The HUNH does cause significant Health and Safety issues, Health issues for the opposing fans and Safety issues for the opposing coaches." - AU AD Jay Jacobs

Kaos

  • *
  • 29548
  • It's GO time
    • No, YOU Move!
Re: The Statutes
« Reply #15 on: July 12, 2017, 06:37:32 PM »
Imo, it becomes a "thing of value" even more when the discussion turned to the Magnitsky Act. "Blackmail file" on Hillary for looking into and overturning the Magnitsky Act.

This is why you don't get it. 

If the presented reason for the meeting was to provide info on Hillary -- which at that time had no reasonable indication that it had been gathered by any other than legitimate means -- and it was as all agree then that's simply modus operandi.  Clinton would have taken the meeting. So would Bernie. So would Obama. And Kennedy. And Lincoln. And carter. Well. Maybe not him.  Nothing to see.

Should Trump's son have done the political thing and put layers between himself and the info? In the Washington world, probably so.  But that's why we like and trust them. They aren't asking for the definition of the word "is" or wondering why Benghazi matters anyway. They aren't lying about servers and smashing phones with hammers.  Maybe they aren't politically savvy. Maybe they make mistakes. 

But by all accounts, when the topic turned? The meeting was over.

All of wes' Catfish Barger and Scott Moore charts aside, this is a giant zero.  A fart in a dervish.

friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
If you want free cheese, look in a mousetrap.

GH2001

  • *
  • 23848
  • I'm a Miller guy. Always been. Since I was like, 8
Re: The Statutes
« Reply #16 on: July 12, 2017, 10:01:44 PM »
This is why you don't get it. 

If the presented reason for the meeting was to provide info on Hillary -- which at that time had no reasonable indication that it had been gathered by any other than legitimate means -- and it was as all agree then that's simply modus operandi.  Clinton would have taken the meeting. So would Bernie. So would Obama. And Kennedy. And Lincoln. And carter. Well. Maybe not him.  Nothing to see.

Should Trump's son have done the political thing and put layers between himself and the info? In the Washington world, probably so.  But that's why we like and trust them. They aren't asking for the definition of the word "is" or wondering why Benghazi matters anyway. They aren't lying about servers and smashing phones with hammers.  Maybe they aren't politically savvy. Maybe they make mistakes. 

But by all accounts, when the topic turned? The meeting was over.

All of wes' Catfish Barger and Scott Moore charts aside, this is a giant zero.  A fart in a dervish.

Well put.

F this noise.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
WDE

Re: The Statutes
« Reply #17 on: July 12, 2017, 11:26:17 PM »
I agree with this. Using "thing of value" to mean dirt on your opponent is stretching...a lot. A "thing of value" is "We can't pay you money, but we can give you this original Van Gough." Not information you can't put a monetary value on...
I have thing of value I bet you would like to collude.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

CCTAU

  • *
  • 13054
  • War Eagle!
Re: The Statutes
« Reply #18 on: July 12, 2017, 11:27:36 PM »
This place is becoming Facebook for our left wing tards!
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Five statements of WISDOM
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity, by legislating the wealth out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friends, is the beginning of the end of any nation.

wesfau2

  • ***
  • 13855
  • I love it when you call me Big Poppa
Re: The Statutes
« Reply #19 on: July 13, 2017, 07:52:45 AM »
If the presented reason for the meeting was to provide info on Hillary -- which at that time had no reasonable indication that it had been gathered by any other than legitimate means --

What legitimate means would that be?  Unless Hillary voluntarily turned them over or their production was compelled via subpoena, then they were obtained illegitimately.  That is to say: illegally.
friendly
0
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
You can keep a wooden stake in your trunk
On the off-chance that the fairy tales ain't bunk
And Imma keep a bottle of that funk
To get motel parking lot, balcony crunk.