09-02-2018, 06:55 PM
(09-02-2018, 10:00 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote:(09-02-2018, 08:12 AM)Duchess Wrote:(09-02-2018, 08:04 AM)Fry Guy Wrote: I thought it was supposed to be collusion and in fact I thought it was coined as such for 2 years.
I could be wrong on this and I should be corrected if I am but I think it has been the media who have used the term collusion. I see the legal community use the term conspiracy in regards to what we are discussing.
The media and the politicians are using the word 'collusion', especially President Trump. "No collusion!".
The President's spokespeople have adjusted their claims regarding possible collusion by the Trump campaign as the investigation has progressed.
They went from insisting that there was no possible collusion to insisting that there there was no clear evidence of collusion. After that, they said that whatever collusion may have taken place was either unintentional or unsuccessful.
Last month, Kellyanne Conway said that the only actionable collusion must be "sustained, systemic, and furtive." This week I heard one his spokespeople say that you have to be a planner to pull off conspiracy and since Trump can't plan, there's no possibility of a crime (paraphrase).
Legally, there is no crime labelled "collusion", but it's an element of the crime of "conspiracy".
Black's Law Dictionary defines conspiracy as "a combination or confederacy between two or more persons formed for the purposes of committing, by their joint efforts, some unlawful or criminal act, or some act which is innocent in itself, but becomes unlawful when done by the concerted action of the conspirators."
Collusion is defined as as "a deceitful agreement or compact between two or more persons, for the one party to bring an action against the other for some evil purpose, as to defraud a third party..." (not necessarily unlawful or criminal)
So, while you can have collusion without having a criminal conspiracy, you can't have a criminal conspiracy without some sort of collusion.
Anyway, I think the challenge in bringing a case of conspiracy is proving that the collusion involved intent to commit a criminal act.
Stop! You are mansplaining.
No, wait, you are female and explaining your position. I think that is okay.
I believe the adage, "Find me a man and i will find a crime". That was Stalin's handbook and now we have it with Mueller. None of this is about the narrative of Trump and his campaign being puppets of and working with Russia. This is and was always retaliation for Trump winning the election. The charges are lying to the FBI and money laundering from year before. That is Mueller being given men to find crimes to pin to them NOT a thing to do with Trump and his campaign collaborating/colluding/conspiring with Russia to steal the election.
However if anyone cared to look the other direction...Awan gave classified information to Pakistan, Hillary gave classified info from her servers to the Chinese, Feinstein had a Chinese Spy working for her, Huma and Jarrett have strong ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Barrack Obama was going to be more flexible after his Presidency to help out Russia.
Collaboration. Conspiracy. Collusion. The projection from the Democrats is astounding.
IF the Democrats do not win the house and senate AND Trump can put them under te same scrunity as they have put him under....they are all completely fucked.
Alternatively, they win the house and senate and impeach 45. They then get Pence who is at least establishment and will play ball somewhat.