The One Question No One So Far Can Answer

[Iceweasel]

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...

And I believe that someone was Seth Rich, who died of lead poisoning on the streets.

 

[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 question is if you have reasonably known that the emails were stolen and went along with a conspiracy, perhaps lying later about it and attempting to obstruct justice by...well how about firing the head of FBI.

And even if intent would not be fully proven, even if the lying was not under oath, even if obstruction would not be established, the damage to this White House would still be crippling politically. They would be in the public conscience firmly as a house of crooks who ARE the swamp.

So you don't have an answer, just opinion. Thanks for playing.

.

 

[Vastator]

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.

.

Beat me to it...

 

[OKTexas]

lol, create a 'hypothetical' question that does not include enough information to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt,
and then ask what crime was committed.

Genius!!! lolol

You first must establish there is something to be guilty of. I see you can't do it. Thanks for playing.

.

 

[jc456]

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.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

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.

...and you can show us the DNC servers were hacked because they were never inspected while Hillary destroyed, bleach bitted and obliterated hers, right?

 

[hadit]

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?

.

A lot of haters get remarkably fuzzy when it comes to this, but they're absolutely certain that "the Russians hacked the election" and Trump is guilty of something. That's usually all it takes for them to demand he be impeached.

Naturally, none of them are considering the ramifications of a Pence presidency. If they think Trump is going to appoint conservative justices...

 

[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.

.

I don't pledge allegiance to any political party. I see corruption, dishonesty, and partisan bullshit from both sides and would like to see more accountability and consequences upheld when anybody is caught breaking the law.

With that said, I also recognize the tactics of witch hunts, smear campaigns, and baseless accusations being used to degrade political opponents. The Trump Russia thing maybe one of those over politicized things, however, you can't say that the Trumpers have been honest through this whole ordeal, it's been lie after lie and diversion after diversion. All that stuff just fuels the fire, so maybe there is something there that they are trying to cover up. I just hope the investigation ends soon because I'm sick of hearing about it.

I agree, I'd like to see every candidate and elected official considered under oath every time they speak publicly, but we both know that will never happen. Every one is making claims about crimes being committed yet no one seems to be able to articulate exactly what crime. We do know the FBI warned the DNC of the attempted hacking, before anyone clinched the nomination, and they didn't take the necessary steps to stop it, because many of the released emails were dated after that warning.

.

 

[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?

.

It's called the 'Logan Act'. Google it yourself.

Please quote the law and explain how it applies.

.

 

[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?

.

quid :releasing info helping one candidate by damaging the other candidate.

quo:????

Like the media, or people like Harry Reid lying about Romney not paying any taxes. Then admitting it was false and laughing about it, saying it worked didn't it. So now show me the law that was violated.

.

 

[easyt65]

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.

1. To my knowledge there has never been evidence presented that Russians actually hacked the servers. The FBI never looked at the servers.

2. Russians approaching the Trump team AFTER they had hacked the servers, if they did, does not constitute a crime on behalf of the Trump team. The Trump team did not 'collude' to hack the servers. In this scenario the team would have been offered 'stolen goods'.

3. The only information that was supposedly hacked was the 'revelation' that DNC members' e-mails contained racist / sexist / homophobic / anti-Semitic jokes/comments AND that the DNC rigged their primaries, engaged in voter fraud during their primaries, and helped Hillary cheat in debates. While embarrassing, it's not like any of this was a huge shock to anyone. This is more of a 'self-inflicted wound' than something the Russians did to Hillary and the DNC.

 

[NYcarbineer]

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?

.

It's called the 'Logan Act'. Google it yourself.

Please quote the law and explain how it applies.

.

Since your question is hypothetical and not fact based, what is the point of it?

 

[hadit]

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.

1. To my knowledge there has never been evidence presented that Russians actually hacked the servers. The FBI never looked at the servers.

2. Russians approaching the Trump team AFTER they had hacked the servers, if they did, does not constitute a crime on behalf of the Trump team. The Trump team did not 'collude' to hack the servers. In this scenario the team would have been offered 'stolen goods'.

3. The only information that was supposedly hacked was the 'revelation' that DNC members' e-mails contained racist / sexist / homophobic / anti-Semitic jokes/comments AND that the DNC rigged their primaries, engaged in voter fraud during their primaries, and helped Hillary cheat in debates. While embarrassing, it's not like any of this was a huge shock to anyone. This is more of a 'self-inflicted wound' than something the Russians did to Hillary and the DNC.

But, since it's the only reason for Hillary to have lost the election that does not involve Hillary being a terrible candidate and their ideas to be unappealing to the electorate, they cling bitterly to it. 20 years from now, some will still be claiming "it was da Roosians, I tells ya", just like some are still bemoaning Algore's loss in 2000.

 

[AntonToo]

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 question is if you have reasonably known that the emails were stolen and went along with a conspiracy, perhaps lying later about it and attempting to obstruct justice by...well how about firing the head of FBI.

And even if intent would not be fully proven, even if the lying was not under oath, even if obstruction would not be established, the damage to this White House would still be crippling politically. They would be in the public conscience firmly as a house of crooks who ARE the swamp.

So you don't have an answer, just opinion. Thanks for playing.

.

Something is terribly wrong in the head with you right wingers.

Here you go

18 U.S. Code § 1343 - Fraud by wire, radio, or television

18 U.S. Code § 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States

18 U.S. Code § 1505 - Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees

18 U.S. Code § 1503 - Influencing or injuring officer or juror generally

 

[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?

.

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.

There"s no such crime as "colusion," dipstick.

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

 

[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

 

[easyt65]

But, since it's the only reason for Hillary to have lost the election....

You think the DNC being exposed as filled with racists, sexists, homophobes, and anti-Semites AND the DNC having to help Hillary defeat Sanders to acquire the nomination is the only reason for Hillary to have lost?



She was the 1st (Female) candidate to ever be allowed to remain in a campaign despite being under multiple FBI investigations - for crimes we now know she WAS guilty of, according to FBI Director Comey's testimony.

She had more baggage than the state of Georgia all going on vacation at one time.

She proved she couldn't beat Sanders, a 105yo Socialist Party member, without help from the DNC.

She ran the worst campaign ever, refusing to campaign in Wisconsin and only minimally in Michigan, which bit her in the ass...

She knowingly, willingly allowed 4 Americans to die needlessly then lied her ass off about it to save her career

She was an ENABLER to a career sexual deviant who sexually assaulted, sexually harassed, and raped women - she spent years demonizing, victimizing, and silencing them to protect her future / career

She was the worst candidate to run for President in US history!

 

[jc456]

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.

1. To my knowledge there has never been evidence presented that Russians actually hacked the servers. The FBI never looked at the servers.

2. Russians approaching the Trump team AFTER they had hacked the servers, if they did, does not constitute a crime on behalf of the Trump team. The Trump team did not 'collude' to hack the servers. In this scenario the team would have been offered 'stolen goods'.

3. The only information that was supposedly hacked was the 'revelation' that DNC members' e-mails contained racist / sexist / homophobic / anti-Semitic jokes/comments AND that the DNC rigged their primaries, engaged in voter fraud during their primaries, and helped Hillary cheat in debates. While embarrassing, it's not like any of this was a huge shock to anyone. This is more of a 'self-inflicted wound' than something the Russians did to Hillary and the DNC.

so now the american public knows what turds the libturds actually are and that they aren't out for their best interests. Wow how fking spectacular for the citizens of our country. oh wait, the libturds prefer illegal aliens rather than citizens.

 

[L.K.Eder]

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?

.

quid :releasing info helping one candidate by damaging the other candidate.

quo:????

Like the media, or people like Harry Reid lying about Romney not paying any taxes. Then admitting it was false and laughing about it, saying it worked didn't it. So now show me the law that was violated.

.

You are blabbering.

 

[jc456]

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?

.

quid :releasing info helping one candidate by damaging the other candidate.

quo:????

Like the media, or people like Harry Reid lying about Romney not paying any taxes. Then admitting it was false and laughing about it, saying it worked didn't it. So now show me the law that was violated.

.

You are blabbering.

he is?