For those pretending there's no value, for legal purposes, in the information Russians stole.....

[kpete]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-alleged-russian-hacker-teamed-up-with-florida-gop-operative-1495724787

Link to tweet

[Hoyt]

1. It will come down to whether Mueller and prosecutors think such info is what Congress intended.

Obviously, Congress intended money, ads, clerical help, etc. Something like emails or other damaging info, certainly has "value," but is that what the law was about?

I don't have the answer, but I can hope. A couple of Trumps -- including in-laws -- behind bars would be very satisfying.

Maybe we could put a video cam on them and watch them 24/7.

[BigmanPigman]

2. Whose "in-laws"? Jared's or Melania's? I wouldn't be surprised if both are involved as well.

[Igel]

3. I doubt it.

Precinct walking has to be worth at least what they think the minimum wage should be. Do we count phone banking and other kinds of volunteerism at $15/hr?

DU provides publicity. So does the press--they sell ad space, what about the invaluable publicity in talking about Russian hacking or email servers?

The lawsuit has to fail. Otherwise suddenly everything is assigned a monetary value, right down to talking with your friends and grass-root campaigns and posting a campaign sign in your front yard. Unless, of course, you're a paid consultant at the local water cooler. That would go to credibility.

Moreover, apart from the "worth millions" quip, made without expertise or any kind of formal valuation, how much was the information worth? Esp. if much of it was in the news within a few days. "Okay, it's worth millions, but only if you can process it and use it to full extent in the next 72 hours." And what if you never use it?

Too much picking and choosing of claims in all of this, with the assumption that the ones that support a given story must be the true facts and everybody else is lying. This time. Next time, those lying now will be seen to have sterling character, provided their new claims support a given story. I'll wait for Mueller.

[Hoyt]

4. I hear you, but I'm not sure that is what Congress meant when they enacted the law and I doubt

Last edited Tue Jul 18, 2017, 12:39 PM - Edit history (1)

a GOPer proscecutor is going to see it that way either. And of course, do you think we can find a jury that will vote unanimously to convict a fellow greedy, ignorant white wing racist like Trump, Jr., or Kush? But, if I am wrong, that's a good thing if it takes the Trump crime family down.

[dsc]

5. actually canvasing is considered to have monetary value

If a corporation, or union for that matter, pays people to canvas for a candidate or orders their employees to do so as part of their duties they are breaking the law which bans them from contributing to campaigns.

[thesquanderer]

6. Hillary gave her email list to the DNC, and it was valued at $3.5 million.

from http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/hillary-clintons-campaign-turns-over-email-list-to-dnc/ar-BBzTWxn?OCID=ansmsnnews11

"The contribution was valued as $3.5 million, according to data from the Federal Election Commission."

(I assume for tax purposes.)