Does DNC paying British ex-MI6 to solicit Russians for dirt on Trump count as "soliciting" "anything of value" "from foreign citizen"?
As promised, here are my thoughts on Trump Jr., campaign finance violations, and the 1st Amendment http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/07/donald_trump_jr_s_free_speech_defense_is_as_bogus_as_it_sounds.html …https://twitter.com/jedshug/status/885156491984068608 …
-
-
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I still don't see the criminal liability under these campaign statutes for these particular facts.http://shugerblog.com/2017/07/13/more-problems-with-the-campaign-finance-charge-against-don-jr/ …
-
I would think a jury could find that "high level" and "official documents" that "would incriminate Hillary" are worth more than $2,000, no?
-
The standard for in-kind contributions in federal elections is market value, no? So the documents are worth what someone would pay for them
-
Campaigns typically spend well in excess of $25K on opposition research so that doesn't seem like a tough threshold to pass
-
Also, it beggars belief that a campaign manager & 2 senior staffers would take a meeting for something worth less than $2K.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
And I'm not sure how your suggested interpretation for "compiled" information is workable. How was this information "compiled"?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Seems Volokh arguing the wrong side of a smart case: Jr shdn't claim that oppo-as-an-in-kind-contribution is per se unconstitutional. /1
-
Jr shd instead argue he had no reason to believe he was being offered compiled or stolen info vs., say, being intro'd to a whistleblower. /2
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.