The June 3, 2016, email sent to Donald Trump Jr. could hardly have been more explicit: One of his father’s former Russian business partners had been contacted by a senior Russian government official who was offering to provide the Trump campaign with dirt on Hillary Clinton.

The documents “would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father,” read the email, written by a trusted intermediary, who added, “This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.”

He replied within minutes: “If it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer.”

Four days later, after a flurry of emails, the intermediary wrote back, proposing a meeting in New York on Thursday with a “Russian government attorney.”

Donald Trump Jr. agreed, adding that he would most likely bring along “Paul Manafort (campaign boss)” and “my brother-in-law,” Jared Kushner, now one of the president’s closest White House advisers.

On June 9, the Russian lawyer was sitting in the younger Mr. Trump’s office on the 25th floor of Trump Tower, just one level below the office of the future president.

Over the last several days, The New York Times has disclosed the existence of the meeting, whom it involved and what it was about. The story has unfolded as The Times has been able to confirm details of the meetings.

Paraphrased from:

http://oursalon.ning.com/profiles/blogs/probable-cause?xg_source=ac...

So, here's the question:

If you were a member of a Grand Jury and this material was presented to you by a prosecuting attorney, would you vote to indict on charges of conspiracy and collusion?

Please note:

Grand Juries do not determine guilt or innocence. The function of the grand jury is to determine whether there is sufficient evidence that a crime has been committed and that those accused of said crime should be put on trial for the offense based on the evidence presented against them.

Views: 245

Comment by Ron Powell on July 12, 2017 at 1:09pm

@Amy; Each of the individuals identified by Trump Jr including himself was asked by the appropriate governmental authorities,having proper jurisdiction, whether any member of the Trump campaign had any contact with any  Russians during the campaign re Russian involvement/interference
 in or with the American Presidental Electoral process.

Each of these individuals denied having any such contact,  conversation,  conspuracy , or collusion re the Presidential camaign.

Trump Sr. now denies knowledge of any contact that his son has now acknowledged and admitted having taken place.... When he first denied that any such contact had taken place at all.

"Making false statements (18 U.S.C. § 1001) is the common name for the United States federal crime laid out in Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code, which generally prohibits knowingly and willfully making false or fraudulent statements, or concealing information, in "any matter within the jurisdiction" of the federal government of the United States, even by mere denial.

A number of notable people have been rosecuted and convicted under the section, including Martha Stewart, Rod Blagojevich, Scooter Libby, Bernard Madoff, andJeffrey Skilling.

This statute is used in many contexts. Most commonly, prosecutors use this statute to reach cover-up crimes such as perjury, false declarations, and obstruction of justice and government fraud cases."

------Wikipedia

At the very least some , if not all, of these people  and others,may be guilty of making false statements and as FM aptly  puts it 'cover up'.

As I said in my previous post, "this may not be the 'smoking gun', but it does leave a kot of smoldering shell casings in the floor at the feet of TrumpJr and those he identifies as having been at 'the meeting'"

Under ordinary circumstances ,  somebody would be well on his way to prison....

But these are not ordinary circumstances.

Comment by Ron Powell on July 12, 2017 at 1:33pm

@FM;

"Please note:

Grand Juries do not determine guilt or innocence. The function of the grand jury is to determine whether there is sufficient evidence that a crime has been committed and that those accused of said crime should be put on trial for the offense based on the evidence presented against them."

"... we don't know the entire story or what law was broken and how the law would be applied..."

This is the essential purpose of a trial.

Comment by Ron Powell on July 12, 2017 at 1:36pm

@AKA; No argument from me ..Thanks

Comment by Ron Powell on July 12, 2017 at 1:39pm

@gh; They may have already calculated that Trump could abuse his executive power and pardon or commute the sentence of abyone tried and found guilty....

Comment by Foolish Monkey on July 12, 2017 at 2:06pm

king donald has the power to fire the special investigator.  he can pardon his son.  he can pardon everyone.  congress has gradually bestowed upon the president royal status.  

you can convene a grand jury, but a prosecutor has to have a basis for investigation. btw, grand juries can do their own investigating but that's the stuff of fictions...great reading but ordinary citizens normally don't buck prosecutors.  king donald might just keep firing prosecutors.  congress would at some point, start impeachment hearings, assuming they'd like to be reelected.  however, that core 35% that still supports king donald will not look kindly upon congress if it razzes their hero.  

Comment by Safe Bet's Amy on July 12, 2017 at 2:21pm

Ron, that makes some sense, but only for Flynn and partially for Kushner (because he admitted having meetings later) because of their security clearance swearings.

Don Jr. holds no official position and was not "sworn in", to my knowledge, when questioned (much like Hillary was never sworn in or her ass would be dead guilty).

None the less, this is getting WAAAAY past my knowledge level comfort zone so I'm going to wait to see what people much more knowledgeable about legal machinations have to decide (and those "people" do not include AKA, regardless of how much he thinks he is the arbitrator or all things right, good and Hillary).

BTW, even though I find the source and writer to be VERY distasteful, I though you might want to read what the other side is claiming, which is the exact opposite.

http://lawnewz.com/opinion/why-donald-trump-jr-is-innocent-period/

Comment by alsoknownas on July 12, 2017 at 2:30pm

Hey SBA..the word is averse not adverse.

I'll feel bad as soon as I think it's worth it.

Comment by Safe Bet's Amy on July 12, 2017 at 2:35pm

You should feel "more bad" about your narcissistic personality disorder slip showing, AKA.  (well, that and looking like a idiot for even mentioning that).

Comment by Ron Powell on July 12, 2017 at 2:49pm

@Amy;


"Making false statements (18 U.S.C. § 1001) is the common name for the United States federal crime laid out in Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code, which generally prohibits knowingly and willfully making false or fraudulent statements, or concealing information, in "any matter within the jurisdiction" of the federal government of the United States, even by mere denial. ..."

There is no requirement that the "false statement" be made under oath...

Comment by koshersalaami on July 12, 2017 at 3:20pm

In looking at what legal authorities seem to be saying here, they tend to doubt Trump Jr. will be indicted. For whatever reason, I'm not reading a whole lot about the false statement issue when it comes to Don Jr. What they talk more about is whether Trump solicited something of value from a foreign government, which is legally kind of dicey. If "conspiracy and collusion," as stated in your post, is off the table, there may be nothing to indict him over. I don't know anything about the legal status of conspiracy and collusion. Amy may be right - he may not have done anything illegal, particularly given that he didn't have an official position in the campaign. But Kushner did. And, if nothing else, his security clearance is now in jeopardy.

Amy,

When an attorney writes a post asking if we as members of a grand jury would indict under the circumstances for "conspiracy and collusion," it is natural to assume he has a legal basis for suggesting conspiracy and collusion as prosecutable. If those are criteria for indictment, then yes, I would indict, because those phenomena are absolutely indicated by Trump's released information. Other attorneys in the news don't seem to be focusing there, but that's a question for Ron. He's the lawyer. 

Comment

You need to be a member of Our Salon to add comments!

Join Our Salon

NEW BLOG POSTS

Dick Gregory

Posted by Jonathan Wolfman on August 19, 2017 at 7:41pm 1 Comment

The Haunted Beach

Posted by Boanerges on August 19, 2017 at 6:03am 4 Comments

THE DAILY ROMAN

Posted by cheshyre on August 19, 2017 at 6:00am 3 Comments

© 2017   Created by lorianne.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service