Trump: Nothing wrong with accepting dirt from foreign governments on opponents

[heybruce]

7 hours ago, usviphotography said:

Steele was a foreign spy. His source was a foreign politician (who btw, never met Trump and would be better classified as a very bad and highly biased source). Veselnitskaya was a top lawyer in Russia. Unlike the Ukrainian MP she would actually be a very good source for the alleged information being provided but would obviously have the same massive bias problem. But their biases and merit as sources are really besides the point.

 

Clinton took info from: Former Foreign Spy, Sitting Foreign Politician 

Trump Jr took it from: Foreign Lawyer

 

How is the latter worse than the former? Only argument I've heard from your side is that what Clinton did is ok because Clinton laundered the information through the third party entity fusion GPS. 

Steele was a former agent from one of the US's most trusted allies.  Steele's work was considered good enough for the FBI to contract with him.

 

Trump Jr. took a meeting with a lawyer representing a hostile foreign power that was offering dirt on Trump's opponent.

 

And, once again, the Democrats paid for their research, which is legal.  Trump Jr. wanted free help from a foreign government, which is illegal.

 

I can see why you are fascinated with Tucker Carlson; you admire his ability to ignore pertinent facts.

[heybruce]

Enough about the Steele dossier.  It has been out there for over two years.  If Trump's administration had found anything remotely illegal about it charges would have been brought.  The way the Democrats contracted for opposition research on Donald Trump was clearly legal.

 

This topic is about Trump announcing he would take free, and therefore illegal, information on an opponent from a foreign country and "maybe" tell the FBI.  That is clearly illegal, and an open invitation to other countries to interfere in the upcoming election.

[riclag]

31 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Enough about the Steele dossier.  It has been out there for over two years.  If Trump's administration had found anything remotely illegal about it charges would have been brought.  The way the Democrats contracted for opposition research on Donald Trump was clearly legal.

 

This topic is about Trump announcing he would take free, and therefore illegal, information on an opponent from a foreign country and "maybe" tell the FBI.  That is clearly illegal, and an open invitation to other countries to interfere in the upcoming election.

The topic arose from a interview ! Do you actually know what the  controversial question from GS was?

Stephanopoulos: Your campaign this time around, if foreigners, if Russia, if China, if someone else offers you information on opponents, should they accept it or should they call the FBI?

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, riclag said:

The topic arose from a interview ! Do you actually know what the  controversial question from GS was?

Stephanopoulos: Your campaign this time around, if foreigners, if Russia, if China, if someone else offers you information on opponents, should they accept it or should they call the FBI?

Of course I knew that.  Trump gave the wrong answer, which is why it is such a hot topic.

[JHolmesJr]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

.... Trump announcing he would take free, and therefore illegal, information on an opponent from a foreign country and "maybe" tell the FBI.  

 

actually he said 'maybe' to both, not just the second part but Im sure it sounds sounds nicer to you when you write it your way.

 

"I would maybe do both" is the real quote.

[heybruce]

5 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

actually he said 'maybe' to both, not just the second part but Im sure it sounds sounds nicer to you when you write it your way.

 

"I would maybe do both" is the real quote.

He rambled on and said it many ways, without ever stating that he would definitely do what the law required.

 

I'm sure it sounds better to you if you ignore that.

[riclag]

Of course I knew that.  Trump gave the wrong answer, which is why it is such a hot topic.

There was no wrong answer !He answered according to what happen in his campaign.He said he would listen to foreigners ,Russians or China and if it was suspect he would report it .The reAson it’s hot is the media and dems are accusing Mr Trump of supporting OR ,similar of what was perpetrated on him.

[Tug]

Donald better hope he gets help rigging the election things aren’t looking so good for him lol 

[Sujo]

8 hours ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

If a novice like me can figure this out, I imagine the real players are far more sophisticated.

Everyone traffics in opposition information during election time. Dems need to get off their sanctimonious high horse.

Even the US provides dirt to other countries....enough with the virtue signalling.

 

Once again Trump cuts through the BS with the truth.

Trump now says he would report it to fbi. He has reversd course.

 

I expect you to now post that trump is wrong to do that.

[heybruce]

4 hours ago, riclag said:

There was no wrong answer !He answered according to what happen in his campaign.He said he would listen to foreigners ,Russians or China and if it was suspect he would report it .The reAson it’s hot is the media and dems are accusing Mr Trump of supporting OR ,similar of what was perpetrated on him.

There are countless wrong answers.  There is only one correct answer; if offered free election assistance from a foreign power he would contact the FBI.  By not giving this answer Trump appeared to be opening the door for future meddling in US elections, and testing the waters with his base on how they would react to him accepting illegal assistance.  Judging from the reaction of Trump supporters here, his base thinks he can do no wrong.

 

Prove me wrong on that last point:  If Trump did accept illegal election assistance from another country and publicly reminded people he said he would, how would you react?

[bristolboy]

17 hours ago, usviphotography said:

So what? He's a foreign national. Clinton Campaign got a report from him. Worse, the report was largely compiled by a sitting member of the Ukrainian Government. By your own logic, Clinton committed a far greater crime than Trump. 

 

Now obviously, Trump is correct and none of this stuff is actually illegal, but if you want to play these games, and you want people to take you seriously, then you better be consistent. Hell, Barack Obama met with Merkel in Germany as a candidate in 2008 for a photo op. Held a huge rally in Berlin. Yet you are bitching about Trump Jr meeting with a foreign lawyer? Get real!

As pointed out earlier, the law only applies to foreign nationals making a donation. Steele was paid for his services. And there is nothing in the law that prohibits any politician from meeting foreign nationals. But if those meeting involve donations of something of value, then there could be a violation of law.

[riclag]

3 hours ago, heybruce said:

There are countless wrong answers.  There is only one correct answer; if offered free election assistance from a foreign power he would contact the FBI.  By not giving this answer Trump appeared to be opening the door for future meddling in US elections, and testing the waters with his base on how they would react to him accepting illegal assistance.  Judging from the reaction of Trump supporters here, his base thinks he can do no wrong.

 

Prove me wrong on that last point:  If Trump did accept illegal election assistance from another country and publicly reminded people he said he would, how would you react?

I stand by my previous post! No need to go into should of could of

[heybruce]

9 hours ago, riclag said:

I stand by my previous post! No need to go into should of could of

And I stand by my post, the correct answer is to clearly state he would follow the law.  He didn't do that.