CNN legal analyst Ross Garber said on Monday that Donald Trump Jr.’s Trump Tower meeting with Russians was probably not illegal.
Some analysts have argued the Trump Tower meeting is a violation of election law, which prevents campaigns from accepting any “thing of value” from a foreign national.
“I think there’s actually a fairly good argument that it’s not illegal, that information would not be considered by the courts to be a ‘thing of value,’ largely because of the First Amendment,” Garber explained.
Garber also compared the meeting to the Clinton campaign paying for the infamous Steele dossier, which was at least in part compiled with the help of Russian nationals.
“Then the other thing the president points out, fairly, is if information is a thing of value, well then what about the information that came from Russian nationals and to the Clinton campaign and the DNC through Steele?That’s a fair point,” Garber asserted.
CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer tried to pivot away from Garber’s point about Clinton, but the legal analyst brought it up again later in the panel discussion.
“In the Clinton situation there is information coming from Russian nationals to the Clinton campaign through somebody else,” Garber reiterated.
Of course it wasn’t illegal, but I like he article about antifa freaking out that the police had their pictures online just like every other criminal.
I can imagine the pain it caused them.
Moms friend calls and informs her that they were not out putting in applications for a job……
Complete nonsense. Information can have enormous value. This is why we have laws that protect the ownership of information, and that define who does or does not have a legal right to possess it, to use it, or to distribute it. It’s why the newspaper, magazine, and television industries will sometimes pay enormous sums of money for exclusive rights to a story. The value that certain information might have to a nation’s enemies is the reason why it may be classified.
@Greg: Good for you you agree CNN is complete nonsense and their legal analysts suck.
Some people pay enormous sums of money for unverifiable trash.
Other sign their name to documents lying by saying it was the same unverifiable trash is good evidence for a warrant to spy on an opposing campaign.
I believe what Garber said is complete nonsense. It will prove to be as irrelevant as efforts to convince people that “collusion is not a crime,” when “collusion” has never been more than shorthand for a more complex matter that’s under investigation.
@Greg: Can you cite any statute? Give us the longhand.
Every Sunday every football team colludes to beat the other team.
The Trump campaign team colluded to beat Hillary.
When Maxine Waters said that was grounds to impeach I nearly fell off the chair laughing.
You are all low IQ as she is.
@kitt, #5:
A number of the following statutes might be relevant:
18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States
52 U.S. Code § 30121 – Contributions and donations by foreign nationals
18 U.S. Code Chapter 73 – OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE (Run down the list. Several could apply.)
18 U.S. Code § 1001 – Statements or entries generally (At this point, Trump Jr’s testimony before a congressional investigative committee comes to mind.)
That pretty much covers the possibilities, unless we want to get into another area entirely; has Donald Trump promoted any legislation that has directly benefited himself or his family businesses?
5 CFR Part 2635, Subpart G – Misuse of Position
If Obama had done any of the above, the right would have been howling for his immediate impeachment.
Bad CNN contributor, Garber! Bad CNN contributor!
@kitt:
When they know their names, they should all be on a terrorist watch list and banned from purchasing or owning a weapon. I am sure all Democrats would agree with this, being so truly concerned with public safety and all. People showing this level of dementia should not have access to weapons.
@Greg:
“If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States,” What is the crime? Denying Hillary her rightful position as Queen of the United States?
What is the monetary value of words? If Trump had received some factual intelligence to be used against Hillary, would not any media outlet that promoted the same story be making a contribution to the other campaign? God knows, the media outlets contributed countless hours of labor and air time supporting Hillary; have they violated campaign finance rules? How about when Dan Rather concocted a totally false story to try and derail Bush’s campaign; what was the bill for that, and was it a campaign contribution to Kerry?
No, why don’t YOU pick out what you think applies. I’m afraid my mind doesn’t work in the bizarre ways yours does.
In what way? No one has found anything false in any of his statements.
What position did Trump hold before he was elected President? Obama, on the other hand, used his position to use the IRS, DOJ, FBI and IC to attack political opponents and try to help Hillary (even the entire power of the government of the United States of America could not make Hillary an acceptable candidate.
By the way, it sounds like Mueller’s “star witness” got slapped around quite a bit by Manafort’s defense. It appears Gates was stealing from Manafort, having affairs, maintaining an apartment in London without his wife’s knowledge and overcharging expense accounts. A real credible, reliable witness you got there, bubba! Good luck with THAT.
Yep, that’s incredible.
@Greg: I don’t know if you’ve heard, but Trump hasn’t killed anyone. Unlike Obama and Hillary, he hasn’t caused or ordered the deaths of anyone. Now, when Obama and Hillary did that, did you still support them?
@Deplorable me: Dont tell Greg but Obama broke every statute he listed, not Trump. Today the mean old Judge in Manaforts trail made the prosecution attorney cry http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/400677-manafort-trial-judge-suggests-prosecutor-so-frustrated-hes-tearing
That fact that Judge Ellis is behaving like a jackass in his courtroom doesn’t necessarily mean he’s a Trump supporter. Not all jackasses are Trump supporters.
@Greg: Apparently, there are some judges left n existence that think the courtrooms are for justice, not politics. If Mueller wants to try Manafort for tax evasion, Judge Elliot is going to assure that is exactly what he does.
But, for the sake of argument, let’s sat Judge Elliot is acting like a total dick and showing bias and pursuing a political agenda… how’s it feel? Kind of infuriating, isn’t it?
Now you know how WE’VE felt for the past 8 years. Stings a bit.