Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Now you’re simply piling on more made up shit. What you’re claiming now is contradicted by the FEC definitions I posted earlier. Need I remind you, you started off by ridiculously claiming a contribution had to be monetary?I already showed you contributions do not need to be monetary. Anything of value is a contribution. Soliciting Russia’s service to hack Hillary’s email might very well constitute a crime. We’ll see what Mueller finds when he releases his report.LOLOL”And anything except money is perfectly legal”
Nope, you’re wrong about that too. Just about everyyou’re posting is unadulterated bullshit.
It’s illegal for a campaign to solicit contributions from a foreign national. Campaign contributions are not limited to monetary donations, but extend to anything of value.
Types of contributions
Contributions are the most common source of campaign support.
A contribution is anything of value given, loaned or advanced to influence a federal election. It is important to understand which receipts are considered contributions because:
These is nothing in the list that is remotely like emails.
Emails cost nothing to copy, so there is nothing like a service at all involved.
Revealing a candidate’s personal hacked email is of value to their opposition. That’s self evident as Trump wouldn’t have solicited Russia to hack her unless it was worth something to him.
You don't get it.
Whether or not something is of value to someone is irrelevant.
The ONLY basis for campaign finance laws is that you can try to assure that no one uses secret money to buy up a monopoly on the media.
And PERSONAL value can't do that.
Lots of things have personal value.
But the campaign finance laws can't touch that unless it can be turned into control over the media.
And in fact, there is no evidence Hillary EVER got hacked at all.
It was the DNC that got hacked, but that was BEFORE Trump suggested the Russians look for Hillary's missing emails.
So you don't seem to know at all what is even being discussed?
Wrong.
Yes it DOES have to be something liquid.
Campaign finance laws have no jurisdiction over things like dirty tricks.
They ONLY have jurisdiction over being able to buy up media access.
And after Citizens United, there really is no longer anyway to regulate any campaign contributions.
Any company with foreign assets can mix those into combined company campaign contributions any time it wants, since they no longer have to list the sources.
And he let Russia out of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.Putin is getting ripped off on HIS paycheckThat putz is just making all this shit up. He clearly doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about.Are you talking about Russian Law? Because that sure as shit ain't the law here Igor”There is nothing wrong with asking for help, and there also would have been nothing wrong with giving help.”
LOLOL
Of course there’s something wrong with soliciting foreign nationals to hack a political opponent — it’s against the law...
Who can and can't contribute
Foreign nationals
Campaigns may not solicit[/red] or accept contributions from foreign nationals. Federal law prohibits contributions, donations, expenditures and disbursements solicited, directed, received or made directly or indirectly by or from foreign nationals in connection with any election — federal, state or local. This prohibition includes contributions or donations made to political committees and building funds and to make electioneering communications. Furthermore, it is a violation of federal law to knowingly provide substantial assistance in the making, acceptance or receipt of contributions or donations in connection with federal and nonfederal elections to a political committee, or for the purchase or construction of an office building. This prohibition includes, but is not limited to, acting as a conduit or intermediary for foreign national contributions and donations.
That legislation is about MONEY.
Is not about information or EMAILS.
And anything except money is perfectly legal.
But Trump was talking about wanting help in finding the missing Clinton server emails after Benghazi.
Since Hillary said they were missing, then anyone looking for or finding them would be doing everyone a favor, and it would not at all be illegal.
And you are also wrong about email in general.
Since emails always are routed through dozens of servers in order to get delivered, the counts have ruled than can never be considered private, and it is not illegal to copy them.
All the servers they are routed through likely has copies of them.
I dunno, he got a guy in office who's pushing to relax sanctions on Russia, who's ignoring the overtaking in the Ukraine. Who's working to weaken US support for NATO. Who's leaving Russia to expand their influence in Syria. Who's siding with Putin over US intelligence agencies.
Seems like he's doing pretty well
And he let Russia out of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.
In this bizarre Trump world these people have chosen, you do...And he let Russia out of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.
Which is a sign of weakness not strength.
When someone commits a crime you don't get rid of the law he broke.
Okay, let's see the proof please.FYI
Clinton's private server was hacked by Russian operatives the night Candidate Trump made his "Russia, if you are listening...." comment, and there is PROOF, it is in the Mueller indictment of the Russian intelligence operatives.
Declaring a premature victory only makes you look stupid and dishonestNo facts, no evidence, no proof. Game, set, and match Trump.
Failing to read beyond the headline in your own article makes you look ridiculous:Declaring a premature victory only makes you look stupid and dishonest
Russians tried to hack Clinton server on day Trump urged email search
Thats a shameless lie you just made up. As such, I ignored the rest. How embarrassing...really desperate and silly of you,my man...Email has always been ruled by all courts to be public property.
Uh...what? Our intelligence agencies released a report. What you mean to say is that nobody has read it for you and then spoonfed it to you.I notice that no one really defines what these "Russian hackers" actually did.
It's the claim of the special counsel office. Are you taking Putin's story over our own agencies? Gee, where would you learn that sort of behavior?Okay, let's see the proof please.
It's understandable that those unversed in the intricacies of hacking (such as yourself) would be impressed by the words used in this indictment, but use of phishing, malware, and key-loggers must be substantiated through corroborating evidence. Thus far we have an indictment which clearly makes claims, but as yet we've seen no evidence. This is basically moot anyway, as extradition is laughable. But, most notably, this indictment makes no connection between these alleged hackers and an actual conspiracy between them and Trump, which is pure speculation.Uh...what? Our intelligence agencies released a report. What you mean to say is that nobody has read it for you and then spoonfed it to you.
The claims would not be made in the indictment without evidence.Thus far we have an indictment which clearly makes claims, but as yet we've seen no evidence
Why would it?But, most notably, this indictment makes no connection between these alleged hackers and an actual conspiracy between them and Trump,
The indictment states "Starting in at least March 2016, the Conspirators used a variety of means to hack the email accounts...".It's not rocket surgery...he said it on national TV, thenit happened. If it offends your delicious trump cultist sensibilities that anyone would do the obvious and speculate they are connected, that's your problem. You look like a fool to berate others for it.
https://www.justice.gov/file/1080281/downloadOkay, let's see the proof please.FYI
Clinton's private server was hacked by Russian operatives the night Candidate Trump made his "Russia, if you are listening...." comment, and there is PROOF, it is in the Mueller indictment of the Russian intelligence operatives.
FYILOLOL”And anything except money is perfectly legal”That legislation is about MONEY.
Is not about information or EMAILS.
And anything except money is perfectly legal.
But Trump was talking about wanting help in finding the missing Clinton server emails after Benghazi.
Since Hillary said they were missing, then anyone looking for or finding them would be doing everyone a favor, and it would not at all be illegal.
And you are also wrong about email in general.
Since emails always are routed through dozens of servers in order to get delivered, the counts have ruled than can never be considered private, and it is not illegal to copy them.
All the servers they are routed through likely has copies of them.
Nope, you’re wrong about that too. Just about everyyou’re posting is unadulterated bullshit.
It’s illegal for a campaign to solicit contributions from a foreign national. Campaign contributions are not limited to monetary donations, but extend to anything of value.
Types of contributions
Contributions are the most common source of campaign support.
A contribution is anything of value given, loaned or advanced to influence a federal election. It is important to understand which receipts are considered contributions because:
These is nothing in the list that is remotely like emails.
Emails cost nothing to copy, so there is nothing like a service at all involved.
Revealing a candidate’s personal hacked email is of value to their opposition. That’s self evident as Trump wouldn’t have solicited Russia to hack her unless it was worth something to him.
You don't get it.
Whether or not something is of value to someone is irrelevant.
The ONLY basis for campaign finance laws is that you can try to assure that no one uses secret money to buy up a monopoly on the media.
And PERSONAL value can't do that.
Lots of things have personal value.
But the campaign finance laws can't touch that unless it can be turned into control over the media.
And in fact, there is no evidence Hillary EVER got hacked at all.
It was the DNC that got hacked, but that was BEFORE Trump suggested the Russians look for Hillary's missing emails.
So you don't seem to know at all what is even being discussed?
Clinton's private server was hacked by Russian operatives the night Candidate Trump made his "Russia, if you are listening...." comment, and there is PROOF, it is in the Mueller indictment of the Russian intelligence operatives.
Putin is getting ripped off on HIS paycheckThat putz is just making all this shit up. He clearly doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about.Are you talking about Russian Law? Because that sure as shit ain't the law here Igor”There is nothing wrong with asking for help, and there also would have been nothing wrong with giving help.”
LOLOL
Of course there’s something wrong with soliciting foreign nationals to hack a political opponent — it’s against the law...
Who can and can't contribute
Foreign nationals
Campaigns may not solicit[/red] or accept contributions from foreign nationals. Federal law prohibits contributions, donations, expenditures and disbursements solicited, directed, received or made directly or indirectly by or from foreign nationals in connection with any election — federal, state or local. This prohibition includes contributions or donations made to political committees and building funds and to make electioneering communications. Furthermore, it is a violation of federal law to knowingly provide substantial assistance in the making, acceptance or receipt of contributions or donations in connection with federal and nonfederal elections to a political committee, or for the purchase or construction of an office building. This prohibition includes, but is not limited to, acting as a conduit or intermediary for foreign national contributions and donations.
That legislation is about MONEY.
Is not about information or EMAILS.
And anything except money is perfectly legal.
But Trump was talking about wanting help in finding the missing Clinton server emails after Benghazi.
Since Hillary said they were missing, then anyone looking for or finding them would be doing everyone a favor, and it would not at all be illegal.
And you are also wrong about email in general.
Since emails always are routed through dozens of servers in order to get delivered, the counts have ruled than can never be considered private, and it is not illegal to copy them.
All the servers they are routed through likely has copies of them.
I dunno, he got a guy in office who's pushing to relax sanctions on Russia, who's ignoring the overtaking in the Ukraine. Who's working to weaken US support for NATO. Who's leaving Russia to expand their influence in Syria. Who's siding with Putin over US intelligence agencies.
Seems like he's doing pretty well
LOLOLYou’re still making shit up.LOLOLOLOLYou are totally and completely wrong.
Damaging or deleting email is illegal, but you do NOT own your email service.
It is a cooperative, shared operation, with dozens of other computers and administrators.
If you look a the Palin case, it was that David Kernell deliberately stole Palin's identity, and then was charged with "felony destruction of records". If he had just copied emails to be a whistleblower on crimes the emailed revealed, then they could not have charged him with anything.
Quick, call David Kernell and tell him he was wrongfully incarnated for ”unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer.” Oh, and you’re wrong again. He was not convicted of stealing Palin’s identity. Had you actually bothered to read or understand the link I posted, you would have seen...
U.S. District Judge Thomas W. Phillips declared a mistrial on another charge, felony identity theft, after the jurors said they were hopelessly deadlocked.
Basically, you’re just making up everything you’re posting at this point. And almost none of it’s true.
And I was kidding about calling up Mr. Kernell. You’d need a Ouija Board as he’s dead.
You are not making sense.
I never said he was convicted of anything, just charged with stealing Palin's identity.
And if you notice, it said ”unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer.”
That implies it was a secured government computer, with additional layers of protections and warnings.
That is not the same as hacking Hillary's private email server or the DNC email server.
To make your case, you would have to prove a whole lot more details as to what he actually did.
People hack email all the time, whether from Nigeria or Russia, and no one gets convicted over copying email.
That simply is not a crime.
Nor could anyone prove they did not get it as it passed through some server on the way through the chain of servers.
”That implies it was a secured government computer, with additional layers of protections and warnings.”
That implies no such thing; and in fact, it was Palin’s Yahoo! account which was hacked, not a “secure government computer.” And the hacker was convicted of hacking into her email account, so yes, it most certainly is a crime, despite your lies. Compared to Hillary, who did use her own personal email server.
Nonsense, you proved nothing of the kind.
Clearly the felony charges were things, like destruction of information.
The fact he reposted things also violated privacy laws.
The guy went to jail for hacking into her email; yet here you are, still denying it’s s crime.
Meanwhile, at the same time, nearly everything you’ve posted has been wrong.
Digital copies of the hard drives were provided to the FBI.FYILOLOL”And anything except money is perfectly legal”
Nope, you’re wrong about that too. Just about everyyou’re posting is unadulterated bullshit.
It’s illegal for a campaign to solicit contributions from a foreign national. Campaign contributions are not limited to monetary donations, but extend to anything of value.
Types of contributions
Contributions are the most common source of campaign support.
A contribution is anything of value given, loaned or advanced to influence a federal election. It is important to understand which receipts are considered contributions because:
These is nothing in the list that is remotely like emails.
Emails cost nothing to copy, so there is nothing like a service at all involved.
Revealing a candidate’s personal hacked email is of value to their opposition. That’s self evident as Trump wouldn’t have solicited Russia to hack her unless it was worth something to him.
You don't get it.
Whether or not something is of value to someone is irrelevant.
The ONLY basis for campaign finance laws is that you can try to assure that no one uses secret money to buy up a monopoly on the media.
And PERSONAL value can't do that.
Lots of things have personal value.
But the campaign finance laws can't touch that unless it can be turned into control over the media.
And in fact, there is no evidence Hillary EVER got hacked at all.
It was the DNC that got hacked, but that was BEFORE Trump suggested the Russians look for Hillary's missing emails.
So you don't seem to know at all what is even being discussed?
Clinton's private server was hacked by Russian operatives the night Candidate Trump made his "Russia, if you are listening...." comment, and there is PROOF, it is in the Mueller indictment of the Russian intelligence operatives.
That is totally and completely wrong.
The Clintons contend their servers were NEVER hacked.
There is no evidence they ever were.
It was the DNC servers that were hacked, which is way easier.
And that was BEFORE Trump said anything about hacking email servers.
There can be no proof in the Mueller investigation because the Mueller investigation never touched on the Clinton servers.
Since they are private, the Mueller investigation could never even look at them.
