drlee wrote:Wrong again Blackjack:
Unnamed officials is just another euphemism for fake news. The Department of Justice has already reviewed the whistleblower complaint and found it wanting.
Making a distinction between a "prosecutable campaign finance violation" and a "non-prosecutable campaign finance violation" is superfluous and irrelevant.
late wrote:You mean like insider trading?
Insider information is directly related to finance. Political information is not. It's protected by the first amendment.
late wrote:There are a number of laws pertaining to information.
Of course. I noted patents, trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets among them. Classified material is another one, and that's related to state secrets, not commerce. However, campaign finance is about finance. It's authority comes under the commerce clause, because it is regulating money.
late wrote:Either way, it would make for an interesting Supreme Court decision. If we get a real AG before the statute of limitations runs out.
The AG is not on the Supreme Court.
QatzelOk wrote:Most of the Democratic Party are now rich, isolated oligarch ass-kissers who secretly admire how much distraction Trump is providing their class.
I saw a Michael Bloomberg ad and found it hilarious that he's running on the effects of stop-and-frisk while apologizing for it simultaneously. Elizabeth Warren is selling "billionaire tears" mugs, and the Democrats are running no less than two billionaires now.