Collusion is not a crime.

[hanger4]

The "collusion narrative was started by and pushed by left media.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/where-heck-did-term-collusion-come

And BTW, if "conspiracy" had been used need a crime would have had to been produced.

 

[apdst]

Conspiracy is indeed a crime.

/thread

Only if your conspiring to commit a crime.

 

[apdst]

​

Trump’s Preposterous 'Collusion Is Not a Crime' Defense: What Real Lawyers—If Asked—Would Have Advised His Campaign About the Trump Tower Meeting

The Trump Tower meeting wasn't illegal.

 

[apdst]

You clearly do not understand what an investigation is:
"Pre-arrest Investigation: Pre-arrest investigation is the stage of criminal procedure that takes place after a report of suspected criminal activity or law enforcement otherwise becomes aware of such activity, but before an arrest is made. Law enforcement investigates whether a crime has occurred and whether an arrest should be made. If law enforcement determines that the evidence uncovered during pre-arrest investigation reveals that a crime was committed and a suspect is identified, law enforcement may arrest the suspect or, depending upon the jurisdiction, present the investigation results to the prosecuting attorney. If the jurisdiction is one in which the prosecuting attorney becomes involved pre-arrest, the prosecuting attorney generally decides whether and what charges to file; only after such determination does an arrest take place. Alternatively, after an investigation, law enforcement may determine that there is insufficient evidence to pursue the matter, and no arrest is made. "
https://law.lclark.edu/live/news/5498-what-are-some-common-steps-of-a-criminal

Ok...what's the "suspected criminal activity"?

 

[apdst]

Remember when Republicans used to pretend to be the law and order party? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

That's why we keep pointing out that collusion isn't a crime.

 

[tecoyah]

Ok...what's the "suspected criminal activity"?

Likely it would have something to do with firing the FBI director, but that is apparently a minor issue now as the investigation uncovers so many new threads. At this point no one except Mueller would know.

 

[apdst]

In the SDNY memo for the Michael Cohen sentencing, Individual-1 (Donald Trump) is considered an unindicted co-conspirator.

That can change in 2020 or thereafter.

Where does the memo say "Donald Trump"?

 

[apdst]

Likely it would have something to do with firing the FBI director, but that is apparently a minor issue now as the investigation uncovers so many new threads. At this point no one except Mueller would know.

The president has the authority to fire the FBI director. There's no debate, there.

 

[markjs]

Where does the memo say "Donald Trump"?

You're even worse at that old schtick than the other guy that always uses it.:roll:

Not surprising, I mean, it's YOU posting this crap, you don't want nor will accept answers for.:2rofll:

BTW, how does it feel to be unable to deduce who "individual 1" is? There is audio tape of the presidnt , and yet for you that's confusing?:roll:

I know, I shouldn't make fun of your condition, but when you take someone else's failed schtick and fail so much worse in your own unique way it has enough entertainment value to be worthy of comment anyway! Good boy!:2rofll:

 

[markjs]

The president has the authority to fire the FBI director. There's no debate, there.

Ah but there is a LOT of debate here, when you fail to notice that he fired a guy cuz of an investigation into himself and then said so on TV! (It is you though, so I suppose we can give a mulligan there, given the source)

That's beside the point, my qustion is why the ","? Debate on whether you graduated grammar school or...?:roll::lamo

 

[Skeptic Bob]

Wow, that’s an old tag-line!

No kidding!

 

[Skeptic Bob]

STOP IT with "collusion". The investigation is not into "collusion".





(b) The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James B. Comey in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including:

(i) any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and

(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and

(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. s. 600.4(a).

(c) If the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate, the Special Counsel is authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters.

(d) Sections 600.4 through 600.10 of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations are applicable to the special counsel.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...nt-Robert-Mueller-Special-Counsel-Russia.html



Stop playing their stupid ****ing game.

Boring. Too many sub paragraphs.

 

[apdst]

Ah but there is a LOT of debate here, when you fail to notice that he fired a guy cuz of an investigation into himself and then said so on TV! (It is you though, so I suppose we can give a mulligan there, given the source)

That's beside the point, my qustion is why the ","? Debate on whether you graduated grammar school or...?:roll::lamo

It's an illegal investigation.

 

[markjs]

It's an illegal investigation.

Oh yeah that old debunked BS. Is it supposed to make being a criminal scumbag in the white house OK? Obviously that's enough for you. Thank god you people are a minority, living in "the ****hole states".:2rofll:

 

[apdst]

Oh yeah that old debunked BS. Is it supposed to make being a criminal scumbag in the white house OK? Obviously that's enough for you. Thank god you people are a minority, living in "the ****hole states".:2rofll:

So far, there has been no information presented that justified the investigation.

 

[MrShangles]

This investigation might have started as an investigation into Collusion and/or obstruction of Justice but the reality is that it is (and should be) and investigation into crimes committed by Trump and those is power. Aren't we all on the same page regarding wanting our President and/or our Representatives to be lawful citizens that represent us and our needs and not their own?

For the longest time, this kind of thread has been pushed around and further supported by Trump saying a million times that there was no Collusion. To me, I want a President and a governing body that has our interests at heart and not their own. Already 3 people have been fired by Trump for clear cut abuses of power for their own benefit and there are more (including Trump) that are doing it. Those 3 that were fired, were fired because they were doing it out in the open and Trump had no other choice but to fire them. That doesn't mean that Trump and many others in his administration are not doing it as we speak but doing it covertly.

The FBI is supposed to seek and find wrong doers in every possible way. Whether it is Collusion, Obstruction of Justice, or simply stealing or abusing their power, they need to be prosecuted.

As far as Trump and his Collusion with Russia, I am now in the camp that he did not Collude with Russia as he never "colludes" with anyone. He was simply following Putin's orders as Putin has him by the balls.

Did Trump give Russians 20% of our Uranium? how many millions did Russia contribute him? I guess I was mistaken, I thought that was a democrat? Oh and did Trump pay for a fake Russian dossier with dirt on a political opponent?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[hanger4]

Likely it would have something to do with firing the FBI director, but that is apparently a minor issue now as the investigation uncovers so many new threads. At this point no one except Mueller would know.

Likely not, Comey started this investigation in July of 2016, Comey was fired early May 2017 nearly a year later.

 

[tecoyah]

Likely not, Comey started this investigation in July of 2016, Comey was fired early May 2017 nearly a year later.

This investigation began when Rosenstien gave the mandate to Mueller.

 

[markjs]

"[h=1]What is COLLUSION?[/h]A deceitful agreement or compact between two or more persons, for the one party to bring an action against the other for some evil purpose, as to defraud a third party of his right Cowell. A secret arrangement between two or more persons, whose interests are apparently conflicting, to make use of the forms and proceedings of law in order to defraud a third person, or to obtain that which justice would not give them, by deceiving a court or it officers. Baldwin v. New York, 45 Barb. (N. Y.) 359; Belt v. Blackburn, 28 Md. 235; Railroad Co. v. Gay. 8G Tex. 571, 26 S. W. 599, 25 L. R. A. 52; Balch v. Beach, 119 Wis. 77, 95 N. W. 132. In divorce proceedings, collusion is an agreement between husband and wife that one of them shall commit, or appear to have committed, or be represented in court as having committed, acts constituting a cause of divorce, for the purpose of enabling the other to obtain a divorce. Civil Code Cal"

However CONSPIRACY IS.

"
[h=1]What is CONSPIRACY?[/h]In criminal law. A combination or confederacy between two or more persons formed for the purpose of committing, by their joint efforts, some unlawful or criminal act, or some act which is innocent in itself, but becomes unlawful when done by the concerted action of the conspirators, or for the purpose of using criminal or unlawful means to the commission of an act not in itself unlawful. Pettibone v. U. S., 148 U. S. 197, 13 Sup. Ct. 542, 37 L. Ed. 419; State v. Slutz, 106 La. 182, 30 South. 298; Wright v. U. S., 108 Fed. 805, 48 C. C. A. 37; U. S. v. Benson, 70 Fed. 591, 17 C. C. A. 293; Girdner v. Walker, 1 Heisk. (Tenn.) 186; Boutwell v. Marr, 71 Vt. 1, 42 Atl. 607, 43 L. It. A. 803, 76 Am. St. Rep. 746; U. S. v. Weber (C. C.) 114 Fed. 950; Comm. v. Hunt, 4 Mete. (Mass.) Ill, 3S Am. Dec. 340; Erdman v. Mitchell, 207 Pa. 79, 56 Atl. 327, 63 L. R. A. 534, 99 Am. St. Rep. 7S3; Standard Oil Co. v. Doyle, US Ky. 602, 82 S. W. 271, 111 Am. St. Rep. 331. Conspiracy is a consultation or agreement between two or more persons, either falsely to accuse another of a crime punishable by law; or wrongfully to injure or prejudice a third person, or any body of men, in any manner; or to commit any offense punishable by law; or to do any act with intent to prevent the course of justice; or to effect a legal purpose with a corrupt intent, or by improper means. Hawk. P. "
https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/a56338/trump-collusion-conspiracy/

​Perhaps TrupHumpers should begin considering this.

Yeah I know and also, I have a very wise friend, said "The truth needs little explanation", what does it say about this guy?

 

[hanger4]

In the SDNY memo for the Michael Cohen sentencing, Individual-1 (Donald Trump) is considered an unindicted co-conspirator.

That can change in 2020 or thereafter.

Concerning there was no trial proving campaign malfeasance, the accusation of "co-conspirator" is no more than partisan snipping.

 

[markjs]

Concerning there was no trial proving campaign malfeasance, the accusation of "co-conspirator" is no more than partisan snipping.

You know why there was no trial? Cohen's lawyers knew it was a loser, much like your post!:lamo

 

[hanger4]

In the SDNY memo for the Michael Cohen sentencing, Individual-1 (Donald Trump) is considered an unindicted co-conspirator.

That can change in 2020 or thereafter.

Concerning there was no trial proving campaign malfeasance, the accusation of "co-conspirator" is no more than partisan snipping.

 

[hanger4]

This investigation began when Rosenstien gave the mandate to Mueller.

July 2016: The FBI opens a counterintelligence investigation into links between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...-investigation-donald-trump-timeline-updated/

Comey said the FBI launched investigations in July 2016 into whether four Americans helped Russia’s interference in the presidential election. He did not identify the four but said they “had some connection to Mr Trump”. Trump was not one of them, he said.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...stimony-transcript-released-house-committtees

Probably be best for you to catch up, change sources or both.

 

[hanger4]

You know why there was no trial? Cohen's lawyers knew it was a loser, much like your post!:lamo

The tax fraud / evasion sho-nuff was a loser, the possible campaign malfeasance was untried.

 

[tecoyah]

July 2016: The FBI opens a counterintelligence investigation into links between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...-investigation-donald-trump-timeline-updated/

Comey said the FBI launched investigations in July 2016 into whether four Americans helped Russia’s interference in the presidential election. He did not identify the four but said they “had some connection to Mr Trump”. Trump was not one of them, he said.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.th...stimony-transcript-released-house-committtees

Probably be best for you to catch up, change sources or both.

I suppose if we are not discussing the current investigation then you would be correct....my mistake it seems.