Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS
And then you repeatedly say it was a crime when you specifically know it was not a crime because there was no law at the time. And part of the law is that he has to benefit monetarily which he did not do.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
I said it "is" a crime. Today, it's a crime.
The proof is there in my first post on the topic, Paul, if that wasn't clear enough for you, then you need this stuff expressed in pop-up books.
I can argue Blumenthal did benefit from it. If you can assume Santos' lies helped his election, why can't I assume the same
exact thing about Blumenthal? Just because Blumenthal is a democrat?