LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

We'll leave this one to the King

O

OldJourno

Literotica Guru
Joined
Nov 26, 2015
Posts
6,300
King Orfeo has been at the Lit forefront in detailing crimes against the state, humanity and the local Rotary club by Donald Trump. We will leave it to him to answer this brain teaser from a man who claims to know something of the law.
KO, take it away!


"No one has yet to explain to me what the core crime [is] that would be investigated with regard to Russian influence." — law professor Jonathan Turley
 
https://up3.xhcdn.com/000/131/283/025_1000.gif

State Trooper says to OldJourno, "I stopped you for posting two identical threads
in less than a minute."

OldJourno replies, "I'm sorry officer. It was an accident."

State Trooper says, "I also saw you throw this out the window. Is it yours?"

OldJourno replies, "I want to speak with my attorney."
 
OldJourno said:
King Orfeo has been at the Lit forefront in detailing crimes against the state, humanity and the local Rotary club by Donald Trump. We will leave it to him to answer this brain teaser from a man who claims to know something of the law.
KO, take it away!


"No one has yet to explain to me what the core crime [is] that would be investigated with regard to Russian influence." — law professor Jonathan Turley
Click to expand...

Well, I don't do criminal law, but I'm pretty sure the Russians broke some laws when they did all this:

The United States government's intelligence agencies concluded the Russian government interfered in the 2016 United States elections.[1][2][3] In January 2017, a U.S. intelligence community assessment expressed "high confidence" that Russia favored Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton, and that Russian President Vladimir Putin personally ordered an "influence campaign" to denigrate and harm Clinton's electoral chances and potential presidency.[4] The report concluded that Russia used disinformation, data thefts, and leaks to attempt to advantage Trump over Clinton. These conclusions were reaffirmed by the lead intelligence officials in the Trump administration in May 2017.[5] Intelligence allies of the U.S. in Europe found communications between suspected Russian agents and the Trump campaign as early as 2015.[6]

On October 7, 2016,[7] the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) jointly stated that Russia hacked the Democratic National Committee (DNC) servers and Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta's personal email account and leaked their documents to WikiLeaks.[8][9] Several cybersecurity firms stated that the cyberattacks were committed by Russian intelligence groups Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear.[10] In October 2016, U.S. President Barack Obama used the red phone line to directly contact Putin and issue a warning to him regarding the cyber attacks.[11] Russian officials have repeatedly denied involvement in any DNC hacks or leaks.[12][13][14] In early January 2017, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper testified before a Senate committee that Russia’s alleged meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign went beyond hacking, and included disinformation such as the dissemination of fake news often promoted on social media.[15]

Six federal agencies have also been investigating possible links and financial ties between the Kremlin and Trump's associates, including his son in law Jared Kushner and advisers Carter Page, Paul Manafort and Roger Stone.[16][17]

In early December 2016, Obama ordered a report on foreign interventions in the 2016 elections,[18] while U.S. Senators called for a bipartisan investigation.[19] President-elect Donald Trump initially rejected the report, saying that Democrats were reacting to their election loss,[20] and attacked the intelligence agencies in a transition team statement.[21] Senate Majority Leader Republican Mitch McConnell expressed confidence in U.S. intelligence and supported a bipartisan investigation,[22] which was started by the Senate Intelligence Committee on January 24, 2017.[23] On December 29, 2016, the U.S. expelled 35 Russian diplomats, denied access to two Russia-owned compounds, and broadened existing sanctions on Russian entities and individuals.[24]

On March 20, 2017, FBI director James Comey testified to the House Intelligence Committee that the FBI has been conducting a counter-intelligence investigation about Russian interference since July 2016, including possible coordination between associates of Trump and Russia.[25][26] Trump dismissed Comey on May 9, 2017. The initial reason given for the dismissal had to do with Comey's handling of the investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails, but later a White House spokesperson expressed the hope that firing Comey would help bring the Russia investigation to an end and Trump stated “When I decided [fire Comey], I said to myself, I said, ‘You know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made up story, it’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won.’”[27]
Click to expand...

And if the Trump team knowingly colluded with them, they are accessories, and also guilty of the additional crime of criminal conspiracy, and arguably treason as well, depending on whether Russia can for that purpose be legally defined as an "enemy" of the United States.
 
Last edited:
so you're just going to ignore the part where he said that the timing of comey's firing created a credibility problem for trump? huh. interesting.
 
phrodeau said:
It ain't the crime; it's the cover-up.
Click to expand...

Both, actually; but it is probably only the coverup that might personally implicate Trump. He's not a hands-on sort of manager except when his subordinates are hot chicks; he might not have known or cared what his people were doing.
 
This is like a Far Side cartoon caption:

"Once again the mindless lemmings' narrative turns into a pile of dinosaur shit."
 
KingOrfeo said:
Well, I don't do criminal law, but I'm pretty sure the Russians broke some laws when they did all this:


And if the Trump team knowingly colluded with them, they are accessories, and also guilty of the additional crime of criminal conspiracy, and arguably treason as well, depending on whether Russia can for that purpose be legally defined as an "enemy" of the United States.
Click to expand...

KingOrfeo said:
See post #4.
Click to expand...

Criminal liability associated with Russian hacking in the 2016 election would depend on which laws are presumed to have been violated. Espionage laws are certainly criminal statutes, and IF anyone in the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to violate those statutes they would not be "accessories," they would be full-blown criminal conspirators.

I'm less certain about statutes governing the DNC's privacy and/or property rights associated with the specific emails that were hacked and publicly exposed. Those violations might be mere tort offenses. Torts are not full-fledged crimes, and third-party cooperation or assistance in their violation would not rise to the level of conspiracy. Accessory might be a better description in those cases.

Practically speaking, however, you're talking about two very different investigations. The Russian investigation is an intelligence investigation. The United States is not going to invade Russia for the purpose of locking Vladimir Putin up for the crime of espionage.

If, however, in the course of that investigation the FBI discovers criminal activity by persons far more accessible to arrest and prosecution, then a separate criminal investigation is far more likely.
 
Colonel Hogan said:
Criminal liability associated with Russian hacking in the 2016 election would depend on which laws are presumed to have been violated. Espionage laws are certainly criminal statutes, and IF anyone in the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to violate those statutes they would not be "accessories," they would be full-blown criminal conspirators.

I'm less certain about statutes governing the DNC's privacy and/or property rights associated with the specific emails that were hacked and publicly exposed. Those violations might be mere tort offenses. Torts are not full-fledged crimes, and third-party cooperation or assistance in their violation would not rise to the level of conspiracy. Accessory might be a better description in those cases.

Practically speaking, however, you're talking about two very different investigations. The Russian investigation is an intelligence investigation. The United States is not going to invade Russia for the purpose of locking Vladimir Putin up for the crime of espionage.

If, however, in the course of that investigation the FBI discovers criminal activity by persons far more accessible to arrest and prosecution, then a separate criminal investigation is far more likely.
Click to expand...

The likelyhood that evidence of wrongdoing by anyone will be found does not increase over time. The FBI, under Comey (really, Comey's sole decision) had no problem in quelling controversy by announcing "nothing to see here" (while detailing actual crimes for which they had ample, actual, physical evidence) for Clinton, but did noth8ng to quell a whispering campaign for which no one has claimed to have seen any evidence of any of the unspecified wrongdoing.

When and if any and all investigations are finally officially no longer under way it'll just be said "Well there are probably things that they did wrong but we just can't hear about it for national security reasons.."

If there was anything to find, Comey would have leaked it by now.

The more vested KO and co. remain in the retarded Russiagate false narrative, the less likely they will be to address their own shortcomings, so it probably shpuld be encouraged.
 
BotanyBoy said:
Oh look KO is still pushing the (D) propaganda, pretending that exposing Clinton's skid marks is interfering in an election.
Click to expand...

It's not D propaganda that the Russians did all the things mentioned in that Wiki article; that is all a matter of public record. The open question is whether and how deeply the Trump team was involved.
 
KingOrfeo said:
It's not D propaganda that the Russians did all the things mentioned in that Wiki article; that is all a matter of public record. The open question is whether and how deeply the Trump team was involved.
Click to expand...

Conager said:
The likelyhood that evidence of wrongdoing by anyone will be found does not increase over time.
Click to expand...

It's a matter of stages. First they had to determine what the Russians did, now they can focus on the Trump team's involvement.
 
water505 said:
You're absolutely right, but without a crime there is no cover up. There is no evidence of either.
Click to expand...

Again, there is ample evidence of crime on the Russians' part; whether and how deeply the Trump team was involved is the open question, and of course merits and demands further investigation.
 
KingOrfeo said:
It's not D propaganda that the Russians did all the things mentioned in that Wiki article; that is all a matter of public record. The open question is whether and how deeply the Trump team was involved.
Click to expand...

The propaganda is the lie that catching Clinton being a dirtbag = interfering in an election.

If the Russians didn't hack the voting machines, manipulate the counts in some way or engage in voter intimidation the election wasn't interfered with.

Do you have evidence that the Spetsnaz or anyone else was taking out Clinton voters or manipulated the vote count?

No?

Then the election was solid.
 
KingOrfeo said:
Again, there is ample evidence of crime on the Russians' part; whether and how deeply the Trump team was involved is the open question, and of course merits and demands further investigation.
Click to expand...

No, there isn't. The DNC reluctance to turn over their server, and the FBI's negligence in demanding it ensures no one will ever know. The only suggestion we have of evidence is NSA types saying attempts have the halmarks of Russian intrusion attempts, that the NSA just happens to have the ability to plant in their toolkit.

The only actual evidence available is testementary evidence from Assange who says his source was not Russian, which would mean either NSA contractor, or DNC insider. Any Bernie supporter is a better guess with motive and opportinity than Rooskies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
David McCallum, star of hit TV series 'The Man From U.N.C.L.E.' and 'NCIS,' dies at 90
Replies
10
Views
1K
butters
butters
RobDownSouth
Vice President JD Vance: UK-USA Tariff Trade Agreement will require King Charles to "bend the knee" to King Donald
Replies
24
Views
558
Justplainjeff
J
Rightguide
E.O. Targets Hidden Regulatory Crimes
Replies
6
Views
147
Politruk
P
P
Musk wants to leave politics because he’s tired of ‘attacks’ from the left
Replies
8
Views
231
Saint_Ann
Saint_Ann
butters
Trump loses latest bid to get Central Park Five defamation lawsuit tossed—another SLAPP in the face
Replies
0
Views
82
butters
butters
Back
Top