General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFox News: "DT Jr. could have met with Putin himself and it wouldn't be a crime."
https://www.mediamatters.org/video/2017/07/14/foxs-gregg-jarrett-vladimir-putin-former-kgb-could-have-sat-trump-jr-meeting-and-it-wouldnt-be-crime/217272GREGG JARRETT: The meeting with Donald Trump Jr., my goodness, you know, Vladimir Putin, former KGB, could have sat in on that meeting and it wouldn't be a crime. The -- the Constitution gives us the freedom to freely associate with anybody, including Russians, and the freedom to exchange ideas and information from any source, including Russians.
But there's this myth, somehow, that every Russian is the boogeyman, and if you dare talk with one of them, it's a heinous crime. The fact is there are no crimes here.
----------------
The talking-points mirror exactly the three stages of climate-change denial:
1. It didn't happen.
2. It happened, but it wasn't my fault.
3. It was my fault, but it's not a crime.
secondwind
(16,903 posts)The crime is not the talking, so much as the INTENT behind the meeting, also known as COLLUSION. They are either ignorant or just selling their audience a bill of goods.
onlyadream
(2,166 posts)If they didn't think it was wrong, then why didn't Sessions, Kushner, or Flynn cop to meetings on the forms?
Intent and omission.
Ruby the Liberal
(26,219 posts)because of the ultimate boogieman to "they're our best friend and a boon to the business world".
Oh, but we still need billions more in MIC 'defense' spending.
global1
(25,241 posts)(sarcasm)
Bernardo de La Paz
(48,988 posts)Stage 4:
4. It was a crime but I'm not a crook.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029328940
{excerpt}
Ranit Akhmetshin, a Russian American lobbyist and former Soviet counterintelligence officer, told The Associated Press on Friday he took part in the meeting on June 9, 2016, along with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya. Akhmetshin said Veselnitskaya brought a folder full of documents, which he said she left behind after the meeting.
The documents detailed the Democratic National Committees finances and funding sources, some of which Veselnitskaya described as unlawful, Akhmetshin told the AP.
{/excerpt}
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/trump-jr-russian-intelligence_us_5969356ee4b0d6341fe8f28f
kairos12
(12,852 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Only difference is, here you have a hostile foreign power doing the break-in, instead of G. Gordon Liddy.
Cosmocat
(14,563 posts)That they can't get their pods to go along with.
Docreed2003
(16,858 posts)This nonsense about "no crime was committed", is entirely for the rubes to convince them that no crime was committed. Never mind campaign finance laws, nevermind that this shows actual collusion, they are serving red meat to their base and keeping them brainwashed. I fear the result when their "hero" is finally brought down, if he ever is. As someone else said, if Fox had been around for Nixon, he would never have resigned!!
Botany
(70,490 posts)Receiving stolen property is defined by statute in most states. Generally it consists of four elements: (1) the property must be received; (2) it must have been previously stolen; (3) the person receiving the property must know it was stolen; and (4) the receiver must intend to deprive the owner of his or her property.
A person receives stolen property by acquiring or taking manual possession of it. Physical possession, however, is not always required. Under some statutes, it is sufficient if the accused has exercised control over the property. For example, a statute may declare that paying for the property constitutes control, regardless of whether the accused has handled it.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Receiving+Stolen+Property
Vinca
(50,261 posts)I wonder why none of the legal expert pundits haven't mentioned it.
mgardener
(1,816 posts)They are not true, loyal Americans.
True Americans would have notified the FBI when contacted and offered information that indicates they had potentially damning information about wrongdoing by the former Secretary of State.
They did not do that. They lied about the meeting, who was there and what was discussed several times.
Mr. Kushner lied about this meeting on a form he filled out for security clearance. He still continues to receive highly sensitive classified information, despite lying about attending a meeting to potentially receive compromising information about the former SECRETARY OF STATE, because she was running for POTUS against his FIL.
The information offered was identified as coming from the Russia government and was offered to help Donald Trump win the election.
They attended this meeting, lied about it and think they did nothing wrong.
In my view, they are traitors to the American people and the United States.
jaxind
(1,074 posts)Who knew? Every time the Republicans were hell-bent on pinning Hillary down with something, all we needed to say was "hey, there was no crime committed" and they would have left her alone! Who knew that's all it would have taken to shut the republican witch hunts down against Hillary??! Oh, let me guess...for them, that wouldn't have been enough, yet they think that's enough for us to stop talking about Russia!
George II
(67,782 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,710 posts)Ethel and Julius Rosenberg were freely associating with the Russians, exchanging ideas and information with them.
It's the nature of the information and not the meeting, stupid.
* https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/usanow/2014/05/22/fox-news-anchor-arrested/9427551/
pnwmom
(108,976 posts)to learn about it eventually.
spanone
(135,823 posts)fukfox
Ilsa
(61,694 posts)Previously:
Fox's Gregg Jarrett: "Our Constitution" allows Americans to "place the interests of another nation ahead of those of the U.S."
Fox's Gregg Jarrett: "You can collude all you want with a foreign government in an election"
________
But somehow, Hillary's server was a problem, even though it was never hacked, that we are aware of.