07-11-2017, 01:34 PM
(07-11-2017, 01:30 PM)michaelsean Wrote: After thinking about it, my opinion, and I'm not speaking to legality, is that if someone has information and you had no part in helping to obtain it or asked for it to be done for you, and there is no quid pro quo, then I'm OK with it.
Interestingly enough, even legally speaking, there may not be an issue: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-meeting-raises-question-collusion-even-crime-n781571
What that news article talks about is the differing opinions on whether or not collusion is even a crime. It looks a lot like some of the differences I see in policy: academics are more theoretical than the real world allows, partisan interest groups want to push their agenda, and the folks doing the actual work have answers that no one wants to hear (which in this case means it is wrong, and the person passing the info could be charged, but not the person accepting it, most likely).
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
