The One Question No One So Far Can Answer

[candycorn]

So yet again, the defense of Trump boils down to “others did it too”; i.e. Trump is no different than Clinton, Obama, Bush … Are you ready to sacrifice the BS that he is “different” because as soon as anyone questions your messiah, the rationalization is crying about Obama (which is in bounds I guess) but Clinton hasn’t been in office in nearly 2 decades. Time to turn the page.

If you’re trying to keep the thread focused on legality; why does one of the President’s top advisors keep tabs on Guccifer 2.0 (a Russian Hacker)? How does one of the President’s Men (to introduce the Nixonian parlance because that seems to be where we’re going) know six months ahead of the fact that John Podesta is going to be hacked?

Hacking a computer is illegal.

Child, you're the one that brought up the ends justifies the means mantra, that was the whole premise behind Alinsky's teaching, a premise revered by your dear leader and the hildabitch.

Now can you get back to the topic of legality?

.

If you’re trying to keep the thread focused on legality; why does one of the President’s top advisors keep tabs on Guccifer 2.0 (a Russian Hacker)? How does one of the President’s Men (to introduce the Nixonian parlance because that seems to be where we’re going) know six months ahead of the fact that John Podesta is going to be hacked?

Hacking a computer is illegal

Podesta wasn't hacked, he fell for a phishing scam and provided his password.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 20 (UPI) -- John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, had his email hacked by Russian operatives, security researchers confirmed Thursday.

Podesta's Gmail account was hacked using a fake login page with a URL associated with the hacker persona Fancy Bear, which has been tied to Russian interests. The connection was first reported by Motherboard. Politico reported it had also confirmed with a cybersecurity firm the connection between Podesta's hacked account and Fancy Bear.

U.S. intelligence officials have said Fancy Bear was behind the months-long effort to hack the Democratic National Committee and other Democratic groups. Clinton charged in Wednesday's debate that Russia was hacking Democrats exclusively in a bid to help sway the election.

Fancy Bear was also behind the hack of former Secretary of State Colin Powell's email.

Podesta's email was hacked using what's known as a spear-phishing technique. Podesta was sent a fake bit.ly link that redirected him to a site built to look exactly like his usual Gmail login, but that instead enabled the hackers to get his password and recode his email to allow them access.

The same bit.ly URL was used in all the hacking attempts of the the DNC, Powell and other Democrats.

John Podesta Wasn't 'Hacked,' He Fell For An Email Phishing Scam

So if you’re swindled, it’s different than if you’re robbed?

View attachment 126165

Again, one of the President’s top advisor knew about Podesta being hacked well before his e-mails were released….

Illegal? Maybe not.
Unethical? Yes
Is this what you want from your President? Someone who uses hackers/phishers (LOL) to win? If you’re a Republican…sure. The ends always justify the means for them.

You made the claim that a Trump associate knew beforehand that Podesta would fall for a phishing scam. How could he possibly know what Podesta would do? So to answer your question, being swindled requires some form of willing participation of the victim.

.

Or someone controlling his computer….

 

[LoneLaugher]

I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.

Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Any takers?

.

You are awesome. You are trying to find ways to justify what you fear may have happened. Why would you do that?

I asked a simple question, answer it or move on.

.

Nope. You asked a loaded question which is more of a statement of opinion. It's a lame tactic that weak people use when they don't have firm ground to stand on.

Ask a real question or move on.

 

[candycorn]

So yet again, the defense of Trump boils down to “others did it too”; i.e. Trump is no different than Clinton, Obama, Bush … Are you ready to sacrifice the BS that he is “different” because as soon as anyone questions your messiah, the rationalization is crying about Obama (which is in bounds I guess) but Clinton hasn’t been in office in nearly 2 decades. Time to turn the page.

If you’re trying to keep the thread focused on legality; why does one of the President’s top advisors keep tabs on Guccifer 2.0 (a Russian Hacker)? How does one of the President’s Men (to introduce the Nixonian parlance because that seems to be where we’re going) know six months ahead of the fact that John Podesta is going to be hacked?

Hacking a computer is illegal.

Child, you're the one that brought up the ends justifies the means mantra, that was the whole premise behind Alinsky's teaching, a premise revered by your dear leader and the hildabitch.

Now can you get back to the topic of legality?

.

If you’re trying to keep the thread focused on legality; why does one of the President’s top advisors keep tabs on Guccifer 2.0 (a Russian Hacker)? How does one of the President’s Men (to introduce the Nixonian parlance because that seems to be where we’re going) know six months ahead of the fact that John Podesta is going to be hacked?

Hacking a computer is illegal

Podesta wasn't hacked, he fell for a phishing scam and provided his password.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 20 (UPI) -- John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, had his email hacked by Russian operatives, security researchers confirmed Thursday.

Podesta's Gmail account was hacked using a fake login page with a URL associated with the hacker persona Fancy Bear, which has been tied to Russian interests. The connection was first reported by Motherboard. Politico reported it had also confirmed with a cybersecurity firm the connection between Podesta's hacked account and Fancy Bear.

U.S. intelligence officials have said Fancy Bear was behind the months-long effort to hack the Democratic National Committee and other Democratic groups. Clinton charged in Wednesday's debate that Russia was hacking Democrats exclusively in a bid to help sway the election.

Fancy Bear was also behind the hack of former Secretary of State Colin Powell's email.

Podesta's email was hacked using what's known as a spear-phishing technique. Podesta was sent a fake bit.ly link that redirected him to a site built to look exactly like his usual Gmail login, but that instead enabled the hackers to get his password and recode his email to allow them access.

The same bit.ly URL was used in all the hacking attempts of the the DNC, Powell and other Democrats.

John Podesta Wasn't 'Hacked,' He Fell For An Email Phishing Scam

So if you’re swindled, it’s different than if you’re robbed?

View attachment 126165

Again, one of the President’s top advisor knew about Podesta being hacked well before his e-mails were released….

Illegal? Maybe not.
Unethical? Yes
Is this what you want from your President? Someone who uses hackers/phishers (LOL) to win? If you’re a Republican…sure. The ends always justify the means for them.

You made the claim that a Trump associate knew beforehand that Podesta would fall for a phishing scam. How could he possibly know what Podesta would do? So to answer your question, being swindled requires some form of willing participation of the victim.

.

Phishing is a crime as well.

I’m not sure it breaks any laws in the way you described in the OP.

However, what you're leaving out is whether or not the Russian representative broke the law to acquire the "really bad shit". If you're aware of US Laws being broken and do nothing about it and, in fact, seek to benefit from it...the electorate should be made aware that you have no respect for the law.

In this case, Roger Stone, a Trump Associate admits to interaction with Guccifer (the Russian hacker US intel concludes hacked Ms .Clinton's e-mails) and even tweeted that her campaign manager will "have his turn in the barrel" six weeks prior to the release of his hacked files. Why a man with the President's ear is chatting with a hacker is mind boggling in and of itself.... That the hacker/phisher is probably responsible for breaking the law and Mr. Stone and Mr. Trump did nothing about it…tells you all you need to know about how seriously they take our electoral process.

 

[RealDave]

I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.

Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Any takers?

.

So, you have no problem if a campaign welcomes foreign interference in an election instead of standing up for our democracy.

You must be a Trumpette.

I asked a specific legal question, if you don't want to address it move on.

.

I answered it. They knew our country was under cyber attack, & yet said nothing.

I am sure that you think that is a good thing.

Criminal: "I broke into your neighbor's house & stole all this money. I'll buy you a new car."

OKdumbass texas: "Cool"

 

[percysunshine]

I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.

Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Any takers?

.

Would the answer be different if it was Bernie Sanders who phished Podesta?

 

[OKTexas]

Child, you're the one that brought up the ends justifies the means mantra, that was the whole premise behind Alinsky's teaching, a premise revered by your dear leader and the hildabitch.

Now can you get back to the topic of legality?

.

If you’re trying to keep the thread focused on legality; why does one of the President’s top advisors keep tabs on Guccifer 2.0 (a Russian Hacker)? How does one of the President’s Men (to introduce the Nixonian parlance because that seems to be where we’re going) know six months ahead of the fact that John Podesta is going to be hacked?

Hacking a computer is illegal

Podesta wasn't hacked, he fell for a phishing scam and provided his password.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 20 (UPI) -- John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, had his email hacked by Russian operatives, security researchers confirmed Thursday.

Podesta's Gmail account was hacked using a fake login page with a URL associated with the hacker persona Fancy Bear, which has been tied to Russian interests. The connection was first reported by Motherboard. Politico reported it had also confirmed with a cybersecurity firm the connection between Podesta's hacked account and Fancy Bear.

U.S. intelligence officials have said Fancy Bear was behind the months-long effort to hack the Democratic National Committee and other Democratic groups. Clinton charged in Wednesday's debate that Russia was hacking Democrats exclusively in a bid to help sway the election.

Fancy Bear was also behind the hack of former Secretary of State Colin Powell's email.

Podesta's email was hacked using what's known as a spear-phishing technique. Podesta was sent a fake bit.ly link that redirected him to a site built to look exactly like his usual Gmail login, but that instead enabled the hackers to get his password and recode his email to allow them access.

The same bit.ly URL was used in all the hacking attempts of the the DNC, Powell and other Democrats.

John Podesta Wasn't 'Hacked,' He Fell For An Email Phishing Scam

So if you’re swindled, it’s different than if you’re robbed?

View attachment 126165

Again, one of the President’s top advisor knew about Podesta being hacked well before his e-mails were released….

Illegal? Maybe not.
Unethical? Yes
Is this what you want from your President? Someone who uses hackers/phishers (LOL) to win? If you’re a Republican…sure. The ends always justify the means for them.

You made the claim that a Trump associate knew beforehand that Podesta would fall for a phishing scam. How could he possibly know what Podesta would do? So to answer your question, being swindled requires some form of willing participation of the victim.

.

Or someone controlling his computer….

By all reports he was controlling his own computer and screwed up.

.

 

[OKTexas]

I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.

Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Any takers?

.

You are awesome. You are trying to find ways to justify what you fear may have happened. Why would you do that?

I asked a simple question, answer it or move on.

.

Nope. You asked a loaded question which is more of a statement of opinion. It's a lame tactic that weak people use when they don't have firm ground to stand on.

Ask a real question or move on.

Loaded? How so?

 

[Little-Acorn]

The Information was obtained by breaking the law by hacking the DNC servers...

No, it wasn't. It was obtained when Hillary went on a trip as Secretary of State to a foreign country, the Russians bugged her room, and overheard her and Bill discussing whether they had adequately paid the people who had taken care of Jerry Parks.

 

[OKTexas]

Child, you're the one that brought up the ends justifies the means mantra, that was the whole premise behind Alinsky's teaching, a premise revered by your dear leader and the hildabitch.

Now can you get back to the topic of legality?

.

If you’re trying to keep the thread focused on legality; why does one of the President’s top advisors keep tabs on Guccifer 2.0 (a Russian Hacker)? How does one of the President’s Men (to introduce the Nixonian parlance because that seems to be where we’re going) know six months ahead of the fact that John Podesta is going to be hacked?

Hacking a computer is illegal

Podesta wasn't hacked, he fell for a phishing scam and provided his password.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 20 (UPI) -- John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, had his email hacked by Russian operatives, security researchers confirmed Thursday.

Podesta's Gmail account was hacked using a fake login page with a URL associated with the hacker persona Fancy Bear, which has been tied to Russian interests. The connection was first reported by Motherboard. Politico reported it had also confirmed with a cybersecurity firm the connection between Podesta's hacked account and Fancy Bear.

U.S. intelligence officials have said Fancy Bear was behind the months-long effort to hack the Democratic National Committee and other Democratic groups. Clinton charged in Wednesday's debate that Russia was hacking Democrats exclusively in a bid to help sway the election.

Fancy Bear was also behind the hack of former Secretary of State Colin Powell's email.

Podesta's email was hacked using what's known as a spear-phishing technique. Podesta was sent a fake bit.ly link that redirected him to a site built to look exactly like his usual Gmail login, but that instead enabled the hackers to get his password and recode his email to allow them access.

The same bit.ly URL was used in all the hacking attempts of the the DNC, Powell and other Democrats.

John Podesta Wasn't 'Hacked,' He Fell For An Email Phishing Scam

So if you’re swindled, it’s different than if you’re robbed?

View attachment 126165

Again, one of the President’s top advisor knew about Podesta being hacked well before his e-mails were released….

Illegal? Maybe not.
Unethical? Yes
Is this what you want from your President? Someone who uses hackers/phishers (LOL) to win? If you’re a Republican…sure. The ends always justify the means for them.

You made the claim that a Trump associate knew beforehand that Podesta would fall for a phishing scam. How could he possibly know what Podesta would do? So to answer your question, being swindled requires some form of willing participation of the victim.

.

Phishing is a crime as well.

I’m not sure it breaks any laws in the way you described in the OP.

However, what you're leaving out is whether or not the Russian representative broke the law to acquire the "really bad shit". If you're aware of US Laws being broken and do nothing about it and, in fact, seek to benefit from it...the electorate should be made aware that you have no respect for the law.

In this case, Roger Stone, a Trump Associate admits to interaction with Guccifer (the Russian hacker US intel concludes hacked Ms .Clinton's e-mails) and even tweeted that her campaign manager will "have his turn in the barrel" six weeks prior to the release of his hacked files. Why a man with the President's ear is chatting with a hacker is mind boggling in and of itself.... That the hacker/phisher is probably responsible for breaking the law and Mr. Stone and Mr. Trump did nothing about it…tells you all you need to know about how seriously they take our electoral process.

You seem to be going in circles here. You admit that no law were broken by the Trump representative.

I've already addressed you other issues, the news media uses stolen information all the time, are they also demonstrating a lack of respect for the law. In fact they printed the very same emails.

Also I provided a link to an AP story that stated some hacker that goes by the name Fancy Bear was responsible for the Podesta phishing, not Gufficer. But you're also ignoring the fact that both Wikileaks and Gufficer telegraphed upcoming releases. If you were involved in a campaign wouldn't you try to get an idea of what was coming? I guarantee there were people on the dem side and in the press doing exactly that.

.

 

[bripat9643]

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Interesting question, and outside of saying "there has to be SOME kind of law being broken", I definitely don't know. So let's try this from the opposite angle:

What if Hillary had won, and all the same accusations were made about her campaign and China?

Certainly the GOP would be all over it, but what would be their reason?
.

The GOP would be all over it. The MSM would take Hillary's side and call it a witch hunt. There would be hearing until it is called old news. It would simply be part of the right wing conspiracy against the Clintons.

If Hillary won there would be hearing after hearing going after her for the email server and Clinton foundation accusations

And the MSM would take her side....not investigate. Clinton and the MSN would pronounce it an old story and move on.

Probably, just as the conservative media would cover it 24/7, just like Benghazi. We live in a grossly partisan and divided country and it is polluting our political system.

You mean one cable network would cover it? Yeah, that is exactly equivalent!

 

[bripat9643]

I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.

Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Any takers?

.

In your scenario, probably no law is being broken. If they were complicit in spreading false Informstion to influence an election then they are probably flirting with treason. If they told the Russians not to react to sanctions because the new administration will be more forgiving then I'm guessing that's a violation... not sure which exact law it's breaking though. Perhaps treason as well. Undermining our government

If spreading false in formation to win an election was a crimes, then every Democrat in the country would be in prison.

Sent from my SM-G935P using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

Dems and Reps that spread false information while campaigning should be held accountable. This situation involved more extreme measures that do break laws like hacking and the theft of private information. Also goes into trolling and the spreading of false news Stories

"Spreading false information" is what we call "freedom of speech." If it was a crime, then all Dims would be in prison.

 

[Timmy]

I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.

Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Any takers?

.

Espionage?

 

[bripat9643]

I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.

Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Any takers?

.

Seeing as nothing crazy was released in said emails Hillary's evilness is obviously not the motive. The more likely motive is that Putin wanted someone in office who would get rid of Obama placed sanctions because it hurt their economy immensely. Putin wanted an easily manipulated puppet in our WH, which he clearly found in Trump.

US defines treason as levying war against our nation or providing aid and comfort to any enemy.

The answer is treason. Donnie should rot in jail like the traitor he is.

Since we are not at war with Russia, nor is it a declared enemy of the United States, how does any of this constitute treason??

 

[bripat9643]

I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.

Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Any takers?

.

Conspiracy

"Conspiracy" to do what?

 

[bripat9643]

I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.

Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Any takers?

.

So, you have no problem if a campaign welcomes foreign interference in an election instead of standing up for our democracy.

You must be a Trumpette.

What laws were broken, douche bag?

 

[bripat9643]

I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.

Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Any takers?

.

I'm not sure it breaks any laws in the way you described.

However, what you're leaving out is whether or not the Russian representative broke the law to acquire the "really bad shit". If you're aware of US Laws being broken and do nothing about it and, in fact, seek to benefit from it...the electorate should be made aware that you have no respect for the law.

In this case, Roger Stone, a Trump Associate admits to interaction with Guccifer (the Russian hacker US intel concludes hacked Ms .Clinton's e-mails) and even tweeted that her campaign manager will "have his turn in the barrel" six weeks prior to the release of his hacked files. Why a man with the President's ear is chatting with a hacker is mind boggling in and of itself.... That the hacker is probably responsible for breaking the law and Mr. Stone and Mr. Trump did nothing about it...tells you all you need to know about how seriously they take our electoral process.

so? what would you do to the Russian guy? tell us please.

Not much you can do to the Russian guy/guys.

You can impanel grand jurie(s) to compel the under oath testimonies of Stone, Flynn, Bannon, the President, the VP, etc and as we saw with Whitewater, it can go ANYWHERE from there. Those who don’t testify can be held in contempt with any punitive action taken as a result. As I recall, jail time is usually a remedy for that.

You can also subpoena the hacker(s). I doubt they’d show up. But it would be fun to monitor their bank accounts (they’d be fools to get paid in rubles) and watch them swell and trace that money back to Washington, New York or Mura Lago….

“What did the President know and when did he know it…..”

Short answer: You've got nothing.

 

[bripat9643]

I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.

Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Any takers?

.

In your scenario, probably no law is being broken. If they were complicit in spreading false Informstion to influence an election then they are probably flirting with treason. If they told the Russians not to react to sanctions because the new administration will be more forgiving then I'm guessing that's a violation... not sure which exact law it's breaking though. Perhaps treason as well. Undermining our government

Spreading false information in an election is treason?
Tell us again about Romney never pays taxes.

Every time Dims open their mouths they are spreading false information. Throw them in prison and throw away the key?

 

[bripat9643]

I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.

Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Any takers?

.

There probably is none Just the stink will remain on Republican politics forever And jfmi How loud will you howl if the shoe is on the other foot some day??

There is not "stink" because you snowflakes are making absolute fools of yourselves. The longer this goes on, the more apparent it will become that it's all a big hoax. The public is already losing interest in the whole thing. Soon you will all be a laughing stock, if you aren't already.

 

[bripat9643]

What law was broken?
Good question!
And guess what, we're going to find out because the FBI is independent and career prosecutors will not be deterred, slowed maybe by Trumps obvious attempt to obstruct justice, but the truth will eventually come out.
Then Trumps Chumps will have to decide whether it country before party.
For the sake of democracy let's hope they choose the former.

In other words, you don't know. As always, the snowflake has nothing.

 

[RealDave]

I've posed this hypothetical question to a couple of members and so far no one seems up to the task of providing an answer. So now I'm posing it the whole board.

Ok, here's a hypothetical scenario. Let's say a Trump associate spoke to a Russian representative. The Russian told him we have some really bad shit on the hildabitch and the representative said wow, it would sure help us if you released it on Tuesday and they did exactly that.

Tell me, what specific law would have been broken? Don't give me an opinion, quote the law.

Any takers?

.

In your scenario, probably no law is being broken. If they were complicit in spreading false Informstion to influence an election then they are probably flirting with treason. If they told the Russians not to react to sanctions because the new administration will be more forgiving then I'm guessing that's a violation... not sure which exact law it's breaking though. Perhaps treason as well. Undermining our government

Spreading false information in an election is treason?
Tell us again about Romney never pays taxes.

Every time Dims open their mouths they are spreading false information. Throw them in prison and throw away the key?

Funny chit coming from an asshole that voted for Trump.

What was his truth rating during the campaign?