Also from the link: 

 

"M. What are the elements of a conspiracy?

 

J. Well, there are basically 5 elements for the crime of Conspiracy. Those elements are: 1. You must have 2 or more persons who 2. Intentionally 3. make an agreement 4. to violate federal law or defraud the United states, and then 5. Commit some overt act in furtherance of the agreement. Based on these elements, we know that the crime of Conspiracy is a specific- intent crime. In other words Michelle, the government must prove that these 2 or more persons intentionally entered into an agreement to commit some criminal offense. This means that in proving that there are two (2) or more person involved, undercover officers and confidential informants would not count because they would not have the requisite criminal intent. Also, the overt act done in furtherance of the agreement must occur AFTER the agreement has been reached."

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

And what was the crime Trump was conspiring to commit, who was he conspiring with, and what was the act that demonstrated that the agreement was being acted upon? 

 

If it was entering into the NDA with Stormy, wouldn't Stormy be a coconspirator? 

Don’t be impatient, the trial starts with jury selection commencing Monday.

 

Meanwhile we have the judge’s summary of the case against Defendant Trump:

 

“The allegations are in substance that Donald Trump falsified business records to conceal an agreement with others to unlawfully influence the 2016 election. ”

 

7 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Also from the link: 

 

"M. What are the elements of a conspiracy?

 

J. Well, there are basically 5 elements for the crime of Conspiracy. Those elements are: 1. You must have 2 or more persons who 2. Intentionally 3. make an agreement 4. to violate federal law or defraud the United states, and then 5. Commit some overt act in furtherance of the agreement. Based on these elements, we know that the crime of Conspiracy is a specific- intent crime. In other words Michelle, the government must prove that these 2 or more persons intentionally entered into an agreement to commit some criminal offense. This means that in proving that there are two (2) or more person involved, undercover officers and confidential informants would not count because they would not have the requisite criminal intent. Also, the overt act done in furtherance of the agreement must occur AFTER the agreement has been reached."

AND

 

 

” In addition, the overt act that follows the agreement doesn’t necessarily have to be an illegal act. It just has to be some act that demonstrates that the agreement is now being acted upon.”

 

 

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Don’t be impatient, the trial starts with jury selection commencing Monday.

 

Meanwhile we have the judge’s summary of the case against Defendant Trump:

 

 

“The allegations are in substance that Donald Trump falsified business records to conceal an agreement with others to unlawfully influence the 2016 election. ”

 

So, so the state is saying that he failed to classify the payment as campaign related.

 

Do you think they'll go after Biden for lying about Hunter's laptop? 

 

Didn't Hillary illegally conspire with Christopher Steele to generate the Trump–Russia dossier for the purpose of influencing the 2016 election? 

35 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So, so the state is saying that he failed to classify the payment as campaign related.

 

Do you think they'll go after Biden for lying about Hunter's laptop? 

 

No.

 

Trump is indicted for his part in the same crimes that Michael Cohen was convicted of and sent to prison for.

 

Michael Cohen, you will recall, was indicted, tried, found guilty and imprisoned while Trump was President.

 

Trump’s administration went after Cohen and secured a conviction.

 

Now it’s Trump’s turn in the barrel.

 

Get the popcorn!

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

No.

 

Trump is indicted for his part in the same crimes that Michael Cohen was convicted of and sent to prison for.

 

Michael Cohen, you will recall, was indicted, tried, found guilty and imprisoned while Trump was President.

 

Trump’s administration went after Cohen and secured a conviction.

 

Now it’s Trump’s turn in the barrel.

 

Get the popcorn!

Any don't forget the tissue....

Just now, Yellowtail said:

Any don't forget the tissue....

Pinned

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Didn't Hillary illegally conspire with Christopher Steele to generate the Trump–Russia dossier for the purpose of influencing the 2016 election? 

You have lost the plot on that one.

Just now, Danderman123 said:

You have lost the plot on that one.

Well, she was fine for just that wasn't she? 

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Well, she was fine for just that wasn't she? 

The Steele Dossier was not released prior to the 2016 election.

 

It was a compendium of reports about Trump, ie standard political intelligence. Most campaigns have that on hand. It contained raw, unvetted data.

 

The Steele Dossier was initially compiled by a Republican group.

 

 

8 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

The Steele Dossier was not released prior to the 2016 election.

 

It was a compendium of reports about Trump, ie standard political intelligence. Most campaigns have that on hand. It contained raw, unvetted data.

 

The Steele Dossier was initially compiled by a Republican group.

 

 

Then why was she fined for it? 

 

 

17 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Well, she was fine for just that wasn't she? 

No. She wasn't

4 minutes ago, candide said:

No. She wasn't

Yes. She was

Just now, Yellowtail said:

Yes. She was

B.S. Her campaign was fined, not Hillary, as you already know.

2 minutes ago, candide said:

B.S. Her campaign was fined, not Hillary, as you already know.

So, Hillary through her campaign, illegally conspired with Christopher Steele to generate the Trump–Russia dossier for the purpose of influencing the 2016 election? 

 

 

7 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So, Hillary through her campaign, illegally conspired with Christopher Steele to generate the Trump–Russia dossier for the purpose of influencing the 2016 election? 

 

 

B.S. again. The campaign was not fined for conspiracy.

Not tired of trolling?

 

2 minutes ago, candide said:

B.S. again. The campaign was not fined for conspiracy.

Not tired of trolling?

 

So, Hillary through her campaign, conspired with Christopher Steele to generate the Trump–Russia dossier for the purpose of influencing the 2016 election, but was not fined for conspiracy, but for misreporting the money that funded the dossier. 

 

Okay? 

28 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So, Hillary through her campaign, conspired with Christopher Steele to generate the Trump–Russia dossier for the purpose of influencing the 2016 election, but was not fined for conspiracy, but for misreporting the money that funded the dossier. 

 

Okay? 

 No. Hillary did not conspire with Christopher Steele to influence the election. When you make such an accusation, you need first to back it with relevant quotes from reliable sources,  instead of trolling.

 

BTW, when was the Steele dossier published?

 

 

20 minutes ago, candide said:

 No. Hillary did not conspire with Christopher Steele to influence the election. When you make such an accusation, you need first to back it with relevant quotes from reliable sources,  instead of trolling.

 

BTW, when was the Steele dossier published?

 

 

It is you position that the Trump–Russia dossier was not attempting to influence the election? 

4 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

It is you position that the Trump–Russia dossier was not attempting to influence the election? 

When was it published?

4 minutes ago, candide said:

When was it published?

I give up, when? 

 

I never said anything about it being published. 

 

Again, is it your position that the Trump–Russia dossier was not attempting to influence the election?

Trump’s criminal trial starts Monday,

 

Screaming Hillary is already underway.

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

I give up, when? 

 

I never said anything about it being published. 

 

Again, is it your position that the Trump–Russia dossier was not attempting to influence the election?

After the election, so it couldn't have influenced the election.

It's my position that you are trolling.

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Then why was she fined for it? 

 

 

because they paid the law firm that hired Steele, and reported it as legal services, instead of for opposition research.

 

In either case, it was a legitimate campaign expenditure.

 

 

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

It is you position that the Trump–Russia dossier was not attempting to influence the election? 

If they had used it, it would have been legal. So, what's your point?

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

I give up, when? 

 

I never said anything about it being published. 

 

Again, is it your position that the Trump–Russia dossier was not attempting to influence the election?

You are all worked up about opposition research, which is standard for most campaigns.

 

Next you will get all hot and bothered over funding for voter registration.

 

Meanwhile, Trump is going on trial for hush money payments to a porn star and then misreporting these as Trump Organization business expenses.

3 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Well, she was fine for just that wasn't she? 

Nope.

 

I don't recall Hillary Clinton claiming hush money payments to a porn star as a business expense.

 

Sometimes your internet friends send you just enough information to let you make yourself foolish.

9 hours ago, candide said:

After the election, so it couldn't have influenced the election.

It's my position that you are trolling.

"Published" after the election but it distributed, leaked and used long before that.

 

And of course it was all made up. 

9 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Nope.

 

I don't recall Hillary Clinton claiming hush money payments to a porn star as a business expense.

 

Sometimes your internet friends send you just enough information to let you make yourself foolish.

I'm used to looking foolish around all you really smart guys.