This is where I think your argument fails. Broad meaning of thing of value for non tangible things in this context 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/OrinKerr/status/884631379245498368 …
-
-
Replying to @rickhasen
1/ But the statute has a lot more text than "thing of value" that is getting lost in this discussion. I agree, this was a thing of value.
4 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @OrinKerr
I try to lay it out in a number of blog posts, shortened in slate. solicitation thing of value from foreign person/entity w/knowledge
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @rickhasen
1/ Unless I'm mistaken, the statute doesn't prohibit soliciting a thing of value. It prohibits soliciting a contribution or donation,
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @OrinKerr
I think you are mistaken. Prohibits contribution or donation as defined in (a), which includes donation of thing of value
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
-
Replying to @rickhasen @OrinKerr
Does the statute prohibit transferring a broader class of items than may be solicited? "thing of value" doesn't appear in solicit rule.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
(Unless "donation" encapsulates both "money" and "other thing.")
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
-
-
It certainly does in the solicitation section- "as described in (a) and (b)"- if Menendez doesn't get overturned this argument is dead.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.