U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-17-2018, 08:16 PM
 
Location: On the water.
12,682 posts, read 7,427,101 times
Reputation: 10183

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by 5trillion View Post
Suspiciously your history lessons omit the aggressions of the sanctioned countries which actually led to the sanctions in the first place. The United States enacted sanctions on Japan because Japan declared war on China, invaded Manchuria, Northern China, French Indochina, etc..., committed the Nanking massacre, and became a signatory to the Berlin pact. The United States was not obligated to continue to provide Japan with oil and metals exports while it attacked allies in East Asia and threatened to conquer all of China while maintaining a military alliance with the axis powers. Furthermore the embargo only affected Japan's ambitions of expansionism which had they relinquished would've ended the embargo.

If I commit a crime against a grocery store, it has every right to deny me service. If Russia doesn't like it, shop elsewhere... and stop committing crimes.
Uh oh ... somebody knows their history ... that's likely to ruin an entertaining thread ...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-17-2018, 08:18 PM
 
Location: On the water.
12,682 posts, read 7,427,101 times
Reputation: 10183
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
You probably should pull out a history book and find out why Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. What you are calling sanctions was actually an embargo and the embargo was to prevent Japan from getting the aviation fuel they needed to invade Burma, Malaya, the East Indies, and the Philippines. The Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor because they feared that the US would use the Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor to interfere with the invasions.
Oh dang! More history! Thread down the loo ...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2018, 08:24 PM
 
2,145 posts, read 633,386 times
Reputation: 1825
Quote:
Originally Posted by don1945 View Post

You guys can pretend all you want that this is not a problem for Trump, but we see it for what it really is. Mueller is not going away, and neither is this investigation.

What is it that you guys always say ? Oh yeah..........BOOM !!!!! Mueller just indicted 13 Russians of trying to influence our election ! 13, what an unlucky number for Trump.
Actually, it's more like "NOT BOOM!!!" You see...Mueller didn't indict any of these Russian players under 52 U.S.C. §30121 (contributions and donations by foreign nationals). Instead, he indicted them for violations of 18 U.S.C. §371 (conspiracy to defraud the United States), §§ 1343 and 1344 (wire fraud and bank fraud), and §1082(A) (identity theft).

Now, as you and I will both agree, the proper charges to be brought for election interference by foreign nationals fall under 52 U.S.C. §30121. But no indictment was issued against these Russians under that section; rather, they were indicted for activities amounting to a conspiracy to defraud the United States, as if they were suspected of bilking the Social Security Administration out of $50,000 in benefits or something similar.

The question you're asking yourself, obviously, is "Why didn't Mueller charge these Russians under 52 U.S.C. §30121? The case against them is self-evident, and the statute was there, available for use in just this type of scenario. Why didn't Mueller charge these guys under the applicable statute, instead reaching for charges under these other statutes that are really intended to cover other crimes?"

I got the answer for ya, pal. And it's simpler than you may think.

If Mueller charged these Russians under 52 U.S.C. §30121 (the proper section for such violations), then he'd have to charge Christopher Steele as well, since it's well established that Steele, a foreign national, contributed a "thing of value" (it doesn't necessarily have to be a monetary contribution, as you know) to the Hillary Clinton campaign, to wit, the fake Trump dossier.

There's simply no doubt as to Steele's guilt here under 52 U.S.C. §30121, yet he remains unindicted. But if Mueller charged the Russians under the proper section, he would have no choice but to give Christopher Steele the ham sandwich treatment as well, since Steele is obviously guilty of a glaring, egregious violation of 52 U.S.C. §30121.

As an academic courtesy, please find below the relevant statute Mueller should have indicted under:

52 U.S.C. §30121 - Contributions and Donations by Foreign Nationals

(a) Prohibition: It shall be unlawful for—
(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make—
(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;
(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or
(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title); or
(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2018, 09:09 PM
 
Location: annandale, va & slidell, la
7,243 posts, read 3,005,765 times
Reputation: 6060
Quote:
Originally Posted by MetroWord View Post
If it's just BS, why not just let the investigation run it's course? Why make thread after thread making all kinds of excuses under the sun?
The investigation did run it's course. Nothing there after a year and $$$$.

What you want is a perpetual kangaroo court to antagonize the President until he's out of office in 7-years.

America sees your game!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2018, 09:40 PM
 
Location: Columbia, SC
18,060 posts, read 10,087,139 times
Reputation: 6978
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milton Miteybad View Post
Actually, it's more like "NOT BOOM!!!" You see...Mueller didn't indict any of these Russian players under 52 U.S.C. §30121 (contributions and donations by foreign nationals). Instead, he indicted them for violations of 18 U.S.C. §371 (conspiracy to defraud the United States), §§ 1343 and 1344 (wire fraud and bank fraud), and §1082(A) (identity theft).

Now, as you and I will both agree, the proper charges to be brought for election interference by foreign nationals fall under 52 U.S.C. §30121. But no indictment was issued against these Russians under that section; rather, they were indicted for activities amounting to a conspiracy to defraud the United States, as if they were suspected of bilking the Social Security Administration out of $50,000 in benefits or something similar.

The question you're asking yourself, obviously, is "Why didn't Mueller charge these Russians under 52 U.S.C. §30121? The case against them is self-evident, and the statute was there, available for use in just this type of scenario. Why didn't Mueller charge these guys under the applicable statute, instead reaching for charges under these other statutes that are really intended to cover other crimes?"

I got the answer for ya, pal. And it's simpler than you may think.

If Mueller charged these Russians under 52 U.S.C. §30121 (the proper section for such violations), then he'd have to charge Christopher Steele as well, since it's well established that Steele, a foreign national, contributed a "thing of value" (it doesn't necessarily have to be a monetary contribution, as you know) to the Hillary Clinton campaign, to wit, the fake Trump dossier.

There's simply no doubt as to Steele's guilt here under 52 U.S.C. §30121, yet he remains unindicted. But if Mueller charged the Russians under the proper section, he would have no choice but to give Christopher Steele the ham sandwich treatment as well, since Steele is obviously guilty of a glaring, egregious violation of 52 U.S.C. §30121.

As an academic courtesy, please find below the relevant statute Mueller should have indicted under:

52 U.S.C. §30121 - Contributions and Donations by Foreign Nationals

(a) Prohibition: It shall be unlawful for—
(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make—
(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;
(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or
(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title); or
(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.
Maybe you should apply for a position on his staff. He seems incompetent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2018, 09:43 PM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
8,848 posts, read 2,665,620 times
Reputation: 6792
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post
Now, what libs missed with their breathless excitment over this new "bombshell" were the following words by Rod Rosenstien:

"Now, there is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity. There is no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election."
Notice it says "THIS" indictment. I hope you don't think this is going to be the last indictment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2018, 09:55 PM
 
Location: San Francisco, CA
13,921 posts, read 10,875,771 times
Reputation: 12667
I understand that the investigation should be allowed to run its course, and anyone running victory laps either way right now is an idiot talking out of their ass.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2018, 10:29 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
66,195 posts, read 33,593,322 times
Reputation: 14148
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
I just did a word search for Charlottesville nothing. There were two matches for Virginia, neither of which referred to the Charlottesville incident. How bout a page and paragraph number since you seem to see something there that no one else can find?

Ya, well.... look at page 23 a little harder there, PAL!

Then come talk to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2018, 10:32 PM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
30,893 posts, read 13,440,942 times
Reputation: 21997
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Ya, well.... look at page 23 a little harder there, PAL!

Then come talk to me.
Ok, I did and I'm back there is a reference to a rally in Nov 2016 in Charlotte North Carolina. What does that have to do with the incident in Charlottesville Virginia, pal
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2018, 10:47 PM
 
4,356 posts, read 811,012 times
Reputation: 1796
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
INFOwars!!!

There is a war on for your mind!!
Information warfare is an act of war!!! A call to arms is needed! Their lies cannot beat our truths!!!


The 1st amendment is war I tell ya!
The first casualty of war is the truth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:40 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top