FEC chair responds to Trump saying he'd accept foreign intel on opponent: 'It is illegal'

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Tony Stark, Jun 13, 2019.

  1. Tony Stark

    Tony Stark

    https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...s-to-trump-saying-hed-accept-foreign-intel-on

    FEC chair responds to Trump saying he'd accept foreign intel on opponent: 'It is illegal'

    By Rebecca Klar - 06/13/19 07:36 PM EDT

    Federal Election Commission (FEC) Chairwoman Ellen Weintraub said Thursday it is illegal to accept foreign assistance during elections after President Trump publicly suggested he would accept foreign intelligence on opponents.

    "I would not have thought that I needed to say this," Weintraub tweeted Thursday with her statement.

    "Let me make something 100 percent clear to the American public and anyone running for public office: It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election," Weintraub said.


    In an interview with ABC News Wednesday, Trump suggested he would accept dirt on an opponent offered by a foreign country.

    Doubling down on why that's unconstitutional, Weintraub said "this is not a novel concept," adding that "our Founding Fathers sounded the alarm about 'foreign Interference, Intrigue, and Influence.' "

    "They knew that when foreign governments seek to influence American politics, it is always to advance their own interests, not America's," she said.

    Any political campaign that does receive such an offer should report it to the FBI, she added.

    Trump said in the ABC interview he would "maybe go to the FBI" if he received information about an opponent from a foreign government.

    Trump’s comments faced strong push back from Democrats and some Republicans.

    The FEC is an independent regulatory agency whose purpose is to enforce campaign finance law. Weintraub was appointed by former President George W. Bush and has served as commissioner since 2002.

     
  2. Tony Stark

    Tony Stark

     
    Frederick Foresight likes this.
  3. LacesOut

    LacesOut

    LOL.
    Keep on moving them goalposts!
     
  4. WeToddDid2

    WeToddDid2

    Apparently, it is totally fine if Dems do it. Is it only illegal if repubs do it?

     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2019
  5. WeToddDid2

    WeToddDid2

    It is also interesting that Trump specifically mentioned Norway.

    https://dailycaller.com/2016/11/20/...linton-foundation-to-fall-nearly-90-off-peak/

    NORWAY DONATIONS TO CLINTON FOUNDATION TO FALL NEARLY 90% OFF PEAK
     
  6. Tony Stark

    Tony Stark


    Has the head of a federal agency ever had to warn a US President that his planned future actions were fucking illegal?

    Trump is a disgrace to the office he holds.
     
    RedDuke and Frederick Foresight like this.
  7. Cuddles

    Cuddles

    Doesn't matter, his General Attorney will write a summary of how it's not a crime since he didn't commit the crime himself.
     
  8. WeToddDid2

    WeToddDid2

    Barr is awesome!
     
  9. LacesOut

    LacesOut

    LOLLOLOLOLLOLOL.
    Trump living rent free in your little minds.
    More thought crimes for the Leftard morons to prosecute.
     
    GRULSTMRNN and WeToddDid2 like this.
  10. Tony Stark

    Tony Stark

    The left already has multiple charges to prosecute him on and thankfully candidates are starting to promise to do so.Warren better make a stern promise to prosecute Trump as well or she loses my primary vote and donations to Kamala.



    Harris: Justice Dept. 'Would Have No Choice' But To Prosecute Trump After Presidency

    June 12, 20195:00 AM ET

    California Sen. Kamala Harris says that if she's elected president, her administration's Department of Justice would likely pursue criminal obstruction of justice charges against a former President Donald Trump.

    "I believe that they would have no choice and that they should, yes," Harris told the NPR Politics Podcast, pointing to the 10 instances of possible obstruction that former special counsel Robert Mueller's report detailed without making a determination as to whether the episodes amounted to criminal conduct.

    "There has to be accountability," Harris added. "I mean look, people might, you know, question why I became a prosecutor. Well, I'll tell you one of the reasons — I believe there should be accountability. Everyone should be held accountable, and the president is not above the law."

    The former San Francisco district attorney and California attorney general said she wasn't dissuaded by the prospect of a former American president facing trial and a potential prison sentence. "The facts and the evidence will take the process where it leads," she said.

    "I do believe that we should believe Bob Mueller when he tells us essentially that the only reason an indictment was not returned is because of a memo in the Department of Justice that suggests you cannot indict a sitting president. But I've seen prosecution of cases on much less evidence."
     
    #10     Jun 14, 2019