Colluding with foreigners to influence an election is a crime

Originally published at:


Fake laws!


They’re neither. They’re hiding behind the fact that “collusion” isn’t something you can be charged with. Because its not a legal term or specific crime. Its just a catch all. A good lot of the things we’re rolling into “collusion” are actively illegal. But collusion itself has no precise meaning, and isn’t specifically a crime you can directly be charged with.

Its the same reason the DOJ keeps specifying their investigation is not meant to determine collusion or find evidence of it. “Collusion” is not a thing as far as the law’s concerned.

They’re playing semantics.


No it’s not. Yes it is.
No it’s not. Yes it is.
No it’s not. Yes it is.
No it’s not. Yes it is.
No it’s not. Yes it is.
No it’s not. Yes it is.
No it’s not. Yes it is.




Cooperation = collusion.


“It didn’t happen” said the spokesman “and if it did; it wasn’t important, and if it was; he was freelancing, and if he wasn’t; he doesn’t work here any more, and if he does; it was 20 months ago while Obama was still the president. Why aren’t you questioning HIM about this?” The spokesman then grinned silently for 44 seconds before walking out the wrong door.


“Don’t worry your holiness,” said the boy scout. “The ‘Leader of the Free World’ just jumped out of the plane wearing my backpack.”


This seems correct. “Conspiracy” i think is the term we want.



Seems like it comes down to how the court interprets “thing of value” in the context of that statute. I suspect the meaning intended by legislators is something of value in a market, like equities or gold, which could be sold for cash to fund a campaign. I personally doubt that the court would interpret “thing of value” to include oppo or other information.

If Russia had offered the Clinton campaign an acknowledgement of their hacking activities and a public apology, would that have also have been a “thing of value?” Could the Clinton campaign could have solicited that or accepted it? It would certainly have helped their campaign in the final days.

I think any coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia aimed at swaying the election was wrong and ought to be illegal somehow, but I don’t think this statute is the slam dunk we’d like to see.

1 Like


Since oppo research comes with a cost attached (paying for the researchers time, at least), it pretty clearly is a thing of value when you get it for free.


Murder is a crime
Unless it was done
By a policeman
Or an aristocrat
Oh, know your rights

– Strummer/Jones


Looks like someone who just realized his Depends were undependable.


I can see the Trump supporter response:

“You changed the word you used! This is a clear sign you’re just making stuff up! Just like you had to change the term global warming to climate change!”

Silly rabbit, picking a more precise term doesn’t change facts.


Since there’s growing evidence that Russian efforts helped get Trump elected, the assistance seems very valuable to me.


Collusion is the perfect word to cover such crimes’
John W. Dean was Richard Nixon’s White House counsel. He served a four-month sentence for his role in Watergate.

It was the fake legal analysis by Fox News in June—claiming that “collusion” with a foreign government violated no law—that prompted me to look. Surely Fox knows it fooled only fools. Collusion is the descriptive word the news media has settled on to cover many potential illegal actions by the Trump campaign, which could range from aiding and abetting (18 USC 2) to conspiracy per se (18 USC 371) to conspiring to violate several potentially applicable laws like: 18 USC 1030—fraud and related activity in connection with computers; 18 USC 1343—wire fraud; or 52 USC 30121—contributions and donations by foreign nationals. Also, 18 USC 2381—for, contrary to a widespread belief that there must be a declared war, the Justice Department as recently as 2006 indicted for “aid and comfort” to our enemies, the form of collusion better known as treason. Collusion is the perfect word to cover such crimes, pejorative and inclusive.


Oh great, now I have to print this out and leave it in the break room so my tRumpanzie Boss can see it. No rest for the wicked.


There is a similar issue in the Concord Management trial. They are trying to use laws which have previously only been used for illegal campaign contributions according to the defence lawyers (p. 13).

1 Like

That’s almost Rob Ford-level crazy eyes.

1 Like