[you wrote] Snowden/Greenwald is a false equivalences, since that involved an American citizens who shared information publicly. And last I checked, Snowden was still facing charged under the US Espionage Act and hasn't been pardoned, so your example isn't even accurate.[I wrote] Receiving criminally obtained information is not itself a crime, there is a long history of precisely that happening and the recievers never go to jail for it - for a recent example consider Snowden/Greenwald.Greenwald hasn't been charged with anything because as the reciever - he hasn't committed a crime.
[You wrote]  For one, it's a violation of the Campaign Finance Law, which states that foreign people are forbidden to interfere in an election.  The fact that Trump expressed interest in obtaining it and met with her makes him an accessory.  And that's putting aside the fact that this constitutes involvement in a plot by a foreign, hostile power to undermine a US election, for which he could face a charge of treason!
[You wrote]  Worst of all, you're saying we still need evidence. We've just have been given the evidence, FFS! For months, the Trump camp has been saying that there is no evidence Trump knew or took part in the Russian hacking campaign.  Now Trump Jr. surrendered his email chain which proves they did and sought to profit from it!  And yet, people like yourself still maintain this ridiculous fiction that a crime wasn't committed and this is somehow normal.
[You wrote]  And you have the audacity to say that I'm blinded?  You're the one maintaining the pretense that this isn't criminal and its normal, which are arguments as ridiculous as they are baseless.  I'm not sure if it's ignorance of the law, but you're hopelessly misinformed here.
For one, it's a violation of the Campaign Finance Law, which states that foreign people are forbidden to interfere in an election.
We believe that this agency’s enforcement process is the proper mechanism for addressing any allegations about foreign interference in the 2016 presidential election. The enforcement process must be conducted in an impartial and deliberative manner, free of prejudgment, bias, or politicization.
In addition to this agency’s enforcement process, several other federal agencies and congressional committees are currently investigating or engaging in fact-finding regarding allegations of foreign participation in the 2016 election. The Special Counsel at the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network are all reported to be investigating alleged foreign election activity. At the same time, the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee and the U.S. House of Representatives Intelligence Committee are conducting fact-finding investigations while at least six other congressional committees look into various aspects of the 2016 election. Each agency brings its unique authority, statutes, and expertise to bear upon these issues.
Officials emphasized that the information contradicting Sessions comes from U.S. intelligence on Kislyak’s communications with the Kremlin, and acknowledged that the Russian ambassador could have mischaracterized or exaggerated the nature of his interactions....Russian and other foreign diplomats in Washington and elsewhere have been known, at times, to report false or misleading information to bolster their standing with their superiors or to confuse U.S. intelligence agencies.But U.S. officials with regular access to Russian intelligence reports say Kislyak — whose tenure as ambassador to the United States ended recently — has a reputation for accurately relaying details about his interactions with officials in Washington.(https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...)
Welcome back. Just a moment while we sign you in to your Goodreads account.