The One Question No One So Far Can Answer

[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?

.

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.

Right, like news organizations accepting classified information from a confidential informants and publishing the information knowing it was passed illegally? Also you might want to look up the jurisprudence on a private citizens duty to report, simply stated, there is no such duty.

.

 

[Wyatt earp]

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?
.

And what as a private citizen did Trump do?

Would they leak he said " he grabbed pussy"?


.

Not sure what that means. Any guesses?
.

They leaked Hilary's e mails and such, what are the Chinese going to leak about Trump

 

[OKTexas]

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?
.

Feel free to start a thread on that, but please stay on topic in this one.

.

 

[Mac1958]

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?
.

And what as a private citizen did Trump do?

Would they leak he said " he grabbed pussy"?


.

Not sure what that means. Any guesses?
.

They leaked Hilary's e mails and such, what are the Chinese going to leak about Trump

You're missing my point. It's a theoretical question, based on the thread. Again:

If Hillary won, and her campaign had been accused of collusion with the Chinese, what law is being broken if found to be true?

Just trying to open minds on both ends here, to come up with answers for the original question.
.

 

[Mac1958]

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?
.

Feel free to start a thread on that, but please stay on topic in this one.

.

Good grief, it's not a partisan attack. And I answered your question.

A little intellectual elasticity to get your original question answered is not a bad thing.
.

 

[OKTexas]

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?
.

And what as a private citizen did Trump do?

Would they leak he said " he grabbed pussy"?


.

Not sure what that means. Any guesses?
.

They leaked Hilary's e mails and such, what are the Chinese going to leak about Trump

You're missing my point. It's a theoretical question, based on the thread. Again:

If Hillary won, and her campaign had been accused of collusion with the Chinese, what law is being broken if found to be true?

Just trying to open minds on both ends here, to come up with answers for the original question.
.

Would need more details.

.

 

[Slade3200]

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

At this point, nothing I've seen that was released has been proven false. But using your reasoning Harry Reid committed treason when he claimed Romney paid no taxes. He actually admitted it was false and laughed about it.

.

Reid is a turd

 

[Slade3200]

The question is will The Donald administration commence prosecution of the Obama/Crooked Hillary corruption scandals. Who is appointed as new FBI director might actually fulfill The Donald's campaign promise to LOCK HER UP! Of course the democrat senator scumbags will do everything to block the new FBI director from being appointed.

The FBI wouldn't locker her up, it would be up to the DOJ to do that. Sessions could decide to prosecute at anytime. The FBI hasn't done anything to prevent that

 

[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?

.

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

At this point, nothing I've seen that was released has been proven false. But using your reasoning Harry Reid committed treason when he claimed Romney paid no taxes. He actually admitted it was false and laughed about it.

.

Reid is a turd

Just applying your standards to one of your own. Similar examples can be provided for every election cycle on both sides, I don't see anyone going to jail or any other form of punishment for that matter. I'm just looking for a bit of intellectual honesty and consistency. So far no one is up to the challenge, even a couple of lawyers I know. It might be immoral, but no one, so far, can make a case that it's illegal.

.

 

[Care4all]

Hacking to expose wrongdoing. Most people would not find that a crine.

Any hacking is a crime, cyber theft.

 

[EverCurious]

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.

Your facts are wrong, but I don't have time to correct you in detail. It was APT28 and APT29, the US gov mostly dismissed Guccifer 2.0's claims that he'd done it because it didn't fit the narrative of "Russian /government/ hacked DNC." See my extensive research into this subject (as it happened) if you'd like to be informed about what went down:

Serious Question: What Do Trump-Haters Want Him To Do About 'Russian Hacking?'
Do you feel confidence in the democratic process?
No evidence has been submitted that the Russians hacked the DNC


I'll note that back then I expressed that the rumors of an FBI civil war was occurring between politicized factions related to a bunch of stuff (not just the Trump vs Clinton angle) I suspect that is finally coming to a head and shit is going to fly (the unmasking thing, the people refusing to talk, etc. etc. etc. - that "war" is way bigger/more important to America's "safety" than the incompetent dumbass Clinton's inability to handle classified information and instruct her idiot minions not fall for children's phishing scams.)

 

[candycorn]

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.

Right, like news organizations accepting classified information from a confidential informants and publishing the information knowing it was passed illegally?

Well the PRTK is long accepted by nearly everyone.

Also you might want to look up the jurisprudence on a private citizens duty to report, simply stated, there is no such duty.

.

You may be right about that.

But is that what you really want from the President??? Someone who is willing to use criminals to win? Seriously...why does one of the President's top advisor even remotely know a Russian Hacker? But getting back to expectations... I'm sure your standards are incredibly low for what you expect; the ends justify the means.

What Makes America Great is that the means matter a great deal to most real Americans. It's not something that Trump or his enablers will ever understand.

 

[CowboyTed]

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?

.

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

To then use that to gain advantage is collusion with that crime.

A crime where?

(a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal. ... In all cases of aiding and abetting, it must be shown a crime has been committed, but not necessarily who committed it.

Aiding and abetting - Wikipedia

 

[EverCurious]

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?

.

Wistleblower would apply. Same as with the "hot mic" pussy grabbing tape and Trumps 95 taxes. Generally speaking, when information about a political figure is obtained it is "permitted" to release it regardless of legality (though yes some folks could be busted for criminal actions.) The only reason this is a factor is because Hillary had to gain sympathy and find /anything/ to put on Trump - thus the collusion thing was invented (and yes I say invented - see the second link in #31)

That said, I don't think that's what went down. I think a Bernie found the shit in the DNC and sent it to Wikileaks, which is exactly what Assange said had happened long before the Russian angle was applied - it makes zero sense for Assange to have "added" that little tidbit and it is consistent with the normal operations of Wikileaks (aka most of their info is provided by insiders - that's why most governments don't go after him, because he's got moles everywhere, he's a fucking legend among hackers of all creeds. It's why Anonymous protects him - (Anonymous being hacktivist's and very likely many both contribute to Wikileaks and work for nearly every industry, business, and government on the planet.)

 

[Wyatt earp]

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?

.

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

To then use that to gain advantage is collusion with that crime.

A crime where?

(a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal. ... In all cases of aiding and abetting, it must be shown a crime has been committed, but not necessarily who committed it.

Aiding and abetting - Wikipedia

They don't even throw government leakers in jail which is a felony...that reminds me what's the difference?


.

 

[candycorn]

Wouldn't it be nice if the same ferocity that Stone and Guccifer put into hacking Hillary was done to hack and ISIS computer once in a while???? Perhaps we could find out where their next target is or something.... I guess it's not high on their to-do list; protecting innocent people, hurting terrorists causes, etc...

 

[EverCurious]

Wouldn't it be nice if the same ferocity that Stone and Guccifer put into hacking Hillary was done to hack and ISIS computer once in a while???? Perhaps we could find out where their next target is or something.... I guess it's not high on their to-do list; protecting innocent people, hurting terrorists causes, etc...

They do what they can, but frankly ISIS is really hard to infiltrate because people tend to fear death and there's /no/ question that's whats happening. It's the same reason hacks in Russia and China, even N.K. are limited. Death to you and your family is a real threat in those places. That said Anonymous has declared war on ISIS and they have shut down ISIS shit a number of times - mostly they are hitting the supporters and fund suppliers.

 

[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?

 

[Theowl32]

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?

.

The answer to your question is not a direct answer to your question. The answer however is the only answer that truly answers ALL of your confusion. The answer is this.

The democrats and their followers are completely and utterly demented.

That is the only thing you need to know. Now, there are variations of that answer that really mean the same thing.

These will do.

They are ALL liars
They are ALL losers.
They are ALL hypocrites.
They ALL stand for nothing other being against white male American Christians.

You can add to that list and they will all do. You may think that may have not answered your question. Take a look at it a little closer and you will see how it does. Meaning, they don't a give a flying fuck if it breaks the law. They just know they want Trump impeached. Why? Cause he is a self admitted white American male Christian. You think it is more complicated than that? It isn't.

 

[yiostheoy]

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?

.

Treason !!

This would surely result in impeachment and likely conviction.