|
JVoV -> RE: First charges filed in Mueller investigation (10/29/2017 4:30:25 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: BoscoX
quote:
ORIGINAL: JVoV
I'm curious as to how information can be considered a contribution. That seems unconstitutional by way of violating freedom of speech & association.
And both campaigns may very well come under fire for that same thing, so this isn't a leftist question.
From the article:
quote:
Specifically, the complaint contends that, last year, Ukrainian-American operative and DNC consultant, Alexandra Chalupa met with Ukrainian government officials to get information in an effort to expose ties between Trump, his former campaign manager Paul Manafort and Russia. As reported, a political officer in the Ukrainian Embassy was instructed to help Chalupa conduct research on connections between Trump, Manafort and Russia. The DNC subsequently acknowledged that it had knowledge of the research.
First, according to federal law, an in-kind contribution consists of “anything of value, including information and leads, the fruits of paid research, or similar investigatory activity, to a political committee.” Second, federal law also prohibits accepting or receiving anything of value from foreign nationals and the Ukrainian government officials are foreign nationals.
Since Chalupa allegedly engaged in both activities as a DNC staffer, this collusion would constitute an illegal, in-kind contribution. And, even though the DNC claimed it “did not incorporate [Chalupa’s] findings in its dossiers on the subjects,” that would be irrelevant as the DNC solicited and received valuable opposition research.
Hillary and the DNC paid nine million + to their Russian collaborator friends for opposition research, dirt on political campaigns doesn't come cheap even if it is fiction (like what they paid for vs. Trump)
Can payment for services rendered count as a donation though? As you said, the information wasn't given freely.
|
|
|
|
