11 USC 110.20(b) and 11 USC 110.20(g)

LV426 said:
Yes, they did. In fact, Trump was on TV literally soliciting Russia's help.
Click to expand...

You can only think this if you are a willful idiot; thank you for clarifying that for everyone. :rofl2:

LV426 said:
“Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,”
-Donald Trump
Click to expand...

That was a DAMNED funny statement. However, if you are a leftist moron on steroids, it was a criminal act. :rofl2:

LV426 said:
That's a solicitation.
Click to expand...

No it wasn't; it was a funny joke on Hitlery. Only idiots and morons claim it was a solicitation. Apparently you're BOTH. :rofl2:
 
anatta said:
if you looked at that as a lawyer, you would see the definition given to you there of items of value..all tangible assets
Click to expand...

Guess what Summer's Eve, you're not a lawyer.

You just play one on the internet.
 
Nomad said:
Guess what Summer's Eve, you're not a lawyer.

You just play one on the internet.
Click to expand...

He is not playing one very well... he is using some idiotic persons evaluation, not the plain wording of the statute.
 
The alt right cry babying along. They can't argue it because they look more and more stupid.

The Alt Right Trump cels and cucks simply can't take what they try to limp wristedly dish. :cool:
 
110-20-(b)Contributions and donations by foreign nationals in connection with elections. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution or a donation of money or other thing of value, or expressly or impliedly promise to make a contribution or a donation, in connection with any Federal, State, or local election.
Click to expand...

this has been covered and recovered.......no money or thing of value was given or promised to be given......

110-20-(g)Solicitation, acceptance, or receipt of contributions and donations from foreign nationals. No person shall knowingly solicit, accept, or receive from a foreign national any contribution or donation prohibited by paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section.
Click to expand...

since no money or thing of value was given it obviously was not accepted or received........since no one asked for money or a thing of value, it was not solicited.......

so simple any attorney could understand it......probably leaves Jarot out.......
 
the statute further defines what it means to solicit....attending a meeting thinking someone is going to disclose evidence that Hilliary has violated a crime is not included......
(m)To solicit. For the purposes of part 300, to solicit means to ask, request, or recommend, explicitly or implicitly, that another person make a contribution, donation, transfer of funds, or otherwise provide anything of value. A solicitation is an oral or written communication that, construed as reasonably understood in the context in which it is made, contains a clear message asking, requesting, or recommending that another person make a contribution, donation, transfer of funds, or otherwise provide anything of value. A solicitation may be made directly or indirectly. The context includes the conduct of persons involved in the communication. A solicitation does not include mere statements of political support or mere guidance as to the applicability of a particular law or regulation.

(1) The following types of communications constitute solicitations:

(i) A communication that provides a method of making a contribution or donation, regardless of the communication. This includes, but is not limited to, providing a separate card, envelope, or reply device that contains an address to which funds may be sent and allows contributors or donors to indicate the dollar amount of their contribution or donation to the candidate, political committee, or other organization.

(ii) A communication that provides instructions on how or where to send contributions or donations, including providing a phone number specifically dedicated to facilitating the making of contributions or donations. However, a communication does not, in and of itself, satisfy the definition of “to solicit” merely because it includes a mailing address or phone number that is not specifically dedicated to facilitating the making of contributions or donations.

(iii) A communication that identifies a Web address where the Web page displayed is specifically dedicated to facilitating the making of a contribution or donation, or automatically redirects the Internet user to such a page, or exclusively displays a link to such a page. However, a communication does not, in and of itself, satisfy the definition of “to solicit” merely because it includes the address of a Web page that is not specifically dedicated to facilitating the making of a contribution or donation.

(2) The following statements constitute solicitations:

(i) “Please give $100,000 to Group X.”

(ii) “It is important for our State party to receive at least $100,000 from each of you in this election.”

(iii) “Group X has always helped me financially in my elections. Keep them in mind this fall.”

(iv) “X is an effective State party organization; it needs to obtain as many $100,000 donations as possible.”

(v) “Giving $100,000 to Group X would be a very smart idea.”

(vi) “Send all contributions to the following address * * *.”

(vii) “I am not permitted to ask for contributions, but unsolicited contributions will be accepted at the following address * * *.”

(viii) “Group X is having a fundraiser this week; you should go.”

(ix) “You have reached the limit of what you may contribute directly to my campaign, but you can further help my campaign by assisting the State party.”

(x) A candidate hands a potential donor a list of people who have contributed to a group and the amounts of their contributions. The candidate says, “I see you are not on the list.”

(xi) “I will not forget those who contribute at this crucial stage.”

(xii) “The candidate will be very pleased if we can count on you for $10,000.”

(xiii) “Your contribution to this campaign would mean a great deal to the entire party and to me personally.”

(xiv) Candidate says to potential donor: “The money you will help us raise will allow us to communicate our message to the voters through Labor Day.”

(xv) “I appreciate all you've done in the past for our party in this State. Looking ahead, we face some tough elections. I'd be very happy if you could maintain the same level of financial support for our State party this year.”

(xvi) The head of Group X solicits a contribution from a potential donor in the presence of a candidate. The donor asks the candidate if the contribution to Group X would be a good idea and would help the candidate's campaign. The candidate nods affirmatively.

(3) The following statements do not constitute solicitations:

(i) During a policy speech, the candidate says: “Thank you for your support of the Democratic Party.”

(ii) At a ticket-wide rally, the candidate says: “Thank you for your support of my campaign.”

(iii) At a Labor Day rally, the candidate says: “Thank you for your past financial support of the Republican Party.”

(iv) At a GOTV rally, the candidate says: “Thank you for your continuing support.”

(v) At a ticket-wide rally, the candidate says: “It is critical that we support the entire Democratic ticket in November.”

(vi) A Federal officeholder says: “Our Senator has done a great job for us this year. The policies she has vigorously promoted in the Senate have really helped the economy of the State.”

(vii) A candidate says: “Thanks to your contributions we have been able to support our President, Senator and Representative during the past election cycle.”
Click to expand...
 
PostmodernProphet said:
the statute further defines what it means to solicit....attending a meeting thinking someone is going to disclose evidence that Hilliary has violated a crime is not included......
Click to expand...

I dont see any (m) in 11 USC 110.20, can you give a proper citation?
 
Jarod said:
He is not playing one very well... he is using some idiotic persons evaluation, not the plain wording of the statute.
Click to expand...
2x you've said that/ I used both the plain wording and the legal analysis. You prefer to broaden it out to intangible.
Nowhere in the statue does it include intangibles -but it does plainly list the tangibles
 
anatta said:
2x you've said that/ I used both the plain wording and the legal analysis. You prefer to broaden it out to intangible.
Nowhere in the statue does it include intangibles -but it does plainly list the tangibles
Click to expand...

It is clear what "anything of value" is, especially when Rump says, "I am sure you will be rewarded handsomely."

Stop trying to pretend the statute defines it differently than the clear meaning.
 
Jarod said:
Now that Rump is admitting collusion, tell me what you think of this statute!

Also consider that Collusion does not require success, only that the crime was attempted.


What are your thoughts.
Click to expand...

The douche bag will be out of the White House by Thanksgiving.
 
Jarod said:
Also consider that Collusion does not require success, only that the crime was attempted.

What are your thoughts.
Click to expand...

So, if someone from any part of this planet contacts (calls, emails, sends a letter, walks in the door, etc.) a campaign (candidate, campaign aide, politician, etc.) and OFFERS UNSOLICITED info on candidate, we are not to talk to them to see what info they have?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top