|
|
Post by Vegas on Jul 15, 2017 17:46:14 GMT
These guys are still great......
|
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jul 15, 2017 18:32:25 GMT
Being thorough and being on point can be two different things. The video tends to focus on Trump ties to Russia before he even ran for president. Those are not illegal. Ties during his run for president are in a gray zone, will there be "gifts" after the inauguration? The video does absolutely nothing to clear that up. Deciding whether there is after the inauguration "normal business" with Russia or "emoluments" in exchange for advancing Russian interests in the United States by our government* can be difficult and therefore even normal business would appear to be inadvisable.
Virginia recently had a similar problem with gifts to public officials, for example former governor Bob McDonnell, and whether they were "quid pro quo" government favor of any kind. The result was to adopt stricter gift standards. One thing that should be clear, McDonnell was never accused of colluding with the left.
Eliminating foreign influence on government is a good idea on paper but it can be difficult to apply in this new world of extensive commerce.
Now you have a "great summarization" of the Russia connection and it didn't cost you $5 of air data to get it.
* Edit > Actually if congress consents, favors might be granted Russia. For example repealing the Magnitsky Act would be seen by some Russian officials as a relief. Congress is not likely going to do that though, the Magnitsky Act has solid bipartisan support. There is no way Trump on his own could repeal it however much he is rewarded anyway.
I should also clarify that any gift is forbidden (from foreign officials) regardless of any favors. It is election law that allows donations so long as there are no "quid pro quo" government favors. Foreign interests are not normally involved in individual state issues or laws anyway.
Discussing adoption of a Russian child is raising objections insofar as it might suggest repealing the Magnitsky Act. It is believed that Russia forbid adoptions in "retaliation" for the Magnitsky Act. However there is no suggestion Trump or anyone representating offered such nonsense in exchange for an adoption.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jul 16, 2017 15:21:05 GMT
Being thorough and being on point can be two different things. The video tends to focus on Trump ties to Russia before he even ran for president. Those are not illegal. Ties during his run for president are in a gray zone, will there be "gifts" after the inauguration? The video does absolutely nothing to clear that up. Deciding whether there is after the inauguration "normal business" with Russia or "emoluments" in exchange for advancing Russian interests in the United States by our government* can be difficult and therefore even normal business would appear to be inadvisable. Virginia recently had a similar problem with gifts to public officials, for example former governor Bob McDonnell, and whether they were "quid pro quo" government favor of any kind. The result was to adopt stricter gift standards. One thing that should be clear, McDonnell was never accused of colluding with the left. Eliminating foreign influence on government is a good idea on paper but it can be difficult to apply in this new world of extensive commerce. Now you have a "great summarization" of the Russia connection and it didn't cost you $5 of air data to get it. * Edit > Actually if congress consents, favors might be granted Russia. For example repealing the Magnitsky Act would be seen by some Russian officials as a relief. Congress is not likely going to do that though, the Magnitsky Act has solid bipartisan support. There is no way Trump on his own could repeal it however much he is rewarded anyway.
I should also clarify that any gift is forbidden (from foreign officials) regardless of any favors. It is election law that allows donations so long as there are no "quid pro quo" government favors. Foreign interests are not normally involved in individual state issues or laws anyway.
Discussing adoption of a Russian child is raising objections insofar as it might suggest repealing the Magnitsky Act. It is believed that Russia forbid adoptions in "retaliation" for the Magnitsky Act. However there is no suggestion Trump or anyone representating offered such nonsense in exchange for an adoption.
Please note the edits. The problem is still what I said at first. It is important to avoid influence of our government by foreign interests, but that is going to be difficult to enforce in this age of extensive commerce, a "global" economy, and instantaneous global social networking. |
|
