(07-11-2017 05:39 PM)Barrett Wrote:  Respectfully, OO, I think you're way too concerned with where you think my questions are going, or what you think my "agenda" is, such that you're signposting rebuttals to arguments I'm not even making. I don't think you need to be this protective of or invested in your position. If Campaign A willingly gets opposition research from a foreign government so that it can gain political advantage in an election, and such information is knowingly the product of illegal activity, including espionage, then is Campaign A guilty of a crime of some sort--perhaps some form of treason? I don't know the statutes in play, but my guess is that there would likely be a crime under those circumstances.

Again, I don't know if any of that occurred here. Perhaps very few people who are outside of D.C. know. I feel like you believe you're one of them, such that you're sure that no investigation is even necessary. But I happen to think it's worthy of investigation--as do many Republicans, even.

If the investigation turns up emptyhanded, I think that's a good thing.

Seems like there would be some corollary to the WikiLeaks situation.

The person stealing the information is presumed guilty. Publishing it is apparently freedom of the press/free speech.

Am I simplifying this too much? The 'presumed thief' is holed up in an embassy fighting extradition. The publishers or benefactors are free and clear?