We are likely to see the first arrest today from the special investigator and it should tell us a bit more about at least the appearance of illegal activity by accused.
Trump and some of his supporters are trying to deflect and accuse the democrats and Hillary of certain offenses but they have problems distinguishing between normal legal behavior and crimes.
I don't know for sure if anyone in the dotard's campaign did something illegal, the courts get to decide that, but getting indicted is an indication they might have.
Being in charge of a department that was one of several that approved the sale of a Canadian company to a Russian firm is not a crime, unless of course someone could prove a bribe was involved, which unrelated donations to the Clinton Foundation aren't.
It doesn't even seem like the Secretary was directly involved in the approval process.
Also hiring a firm to do research on your opponent is perfectly legal.
The desperation is such that some are trying to accuse the campaign of mischaracterizing the payments since they were characterized as legal expenses because the actual money went to their lawyer.
The lawyer was the one who funded the research and maybe should have disclosed this to the campaign for reporting purposes, but since the difference between spending the money on legal costs or opposition research is meaningless legally, they are both acceptable, the booking error is hardly a significant offense. It certainly isn't indictable.
I'm pretty sure that if you examine the books of any large campaign there will be some mistakes, and let's be clear, funding this research was pretty routine at the time.
Our dotard has no idea of the difference between criminal and meaningless accusations, maybe someone will explain it to him soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment