Cont: Breaking: Mueller Grand Jury charges filed, arrests as soon as Monday pt 2

[LSSBB]

Let's say the tabloids would pay a lot, but the times obviously wouldn't pay but would publish the story (she has the goods).

When you value a car, do you check people who are looking to pay or people who aren't willing to pay?

 

[BobTheCoward]

When you value a car, do you check people who are looking to pay or people who aren't willing to pay?

I don't think the analogy works with the news. Plenty of people take their story to the press even if it is valuable as tabloids fodder or insider tradeing.

 

[BobTheCoward]

If I thought you were actually thinking about what was presented and how it fits this case, I would be happy to address your questions.

But you're just entertaining yourself to see how crazy a question you can ask. You don't really care about the answer, because as soon as someone answers that I am sure we can expect an even crazier followup. The next question will probably be something like if they weren't from Russia, but from the planet Zebulon would that still be illegal?

If you tell me it is not illegal, the next few questions are obviously start turning them into sensitive foreign documents and find out what variable does it. Then explore is it possible to assert as a legal defense that they thought it would be those documents.

 

[LSSBB]

I don't think the analogy works with the news. Plenty of people take their story to the press even if it is valuable as tabloids fodder or insider tradeing.

It's not an analogy. It's a method of determining a baseline value. Would the story be more valuable to the campaign, or less?

 

[acbytesla]

If you tell me it is not illegal, the next few questions are obviously start turning them into sensitive foreign documents and find out what variable does it. Then explore is it possible to assert as a legal defense that they thought it would be those documents.

No I'm done with you. Find someone else's chain to yank.

 

[LSSBB]

It's not an analogy. It's a method of determining a baseline value. Would the story be more valuable to the campaign, or less?

Here's a real life story for illustrating the concept:

https://www.vox.com/2018/4/18/17254786/karen-mcdougal-trump-affair-national-enquirer-michael-cohen

 

[BobTheCoward]

It's not an analogy. It's a method of determining a baseline value. Would the story be more valuable to the campaign, or less?

It would obviously be valuable.i constructed the scenario so that it was.

 

[WilliamSeger]

I honestly cant figure out if the woman's story counts as a thing of value as defined by the law. If it is such an easy question, what is the answer?

Well, I don't know how a judge would rule, but a thing only has value if both sides of an exchange agree on a value. If she sold the story, then there wouldn't be any question it had value. If she gave it to them with no expectation of compensation, then she wasn't putting any exchange value on it. But if she gave it to the campaign rather than the press, expecting some compensation or consideration other than money, then that compensation would make it a thing of value to her, also, wouldn't it?

 

[Slings and Arrows]

Breaking News: "Hillary's tawdry affair with a young female foreign national. Huma Abedin heartbroken but vows to stand by her gal."

 

[LSSBB]

Well, I don't know how a judge would rule, but a thing only has value if both sides of an exchange agree on a value.

I can think of instances where a thing can have a value independent of what two parties agree to as the value. Real estate is the first that comes to mind - one may sell it to another for a dollar, yet it's value is well beyond that to other parties or assessors.

 

[WilliamSeger]

I can think of instances where a thing can have a value independent of what two parties agree to as the value. Real estate is the first that comes to mind - one may sell it to another for a dollar, yet it's value is well beyond that to other parties or assessors.

Yes, but that's a question of what the value is, which is different. It's a "thing" of value if it can be exchanged for something else that you value.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Well, I don't know how a judge would rule, but a thing only has value if both sides of an exchange agree on a value. If she sold the story, then there wouldn't be any question it had value. If she gave it to them with no expectation of compensation, then she wasn't putting any exchange value on it. But if she gave it to the campaign rather than the press, expecting some compensation or consideration other than money, then that compensation would make it a thing of value to her, also, wouldn't it?

Suppose there is no evidence one way or the other that it was being exchanged for something.

 

[LSSBB]

Suppose there is no evidence one way or the other that it was being exchanged for something.

Such as when Tony Soprano buys a house and just gives it to you?

 

[BobTheCoward]

Such as when Tony Soprano buys a house and just gives it to you?

Yes. Someone is just giving away their story.

 

[acbytesla]

I can think of instances where a thing can have a value independent of what two parties agree to as the value. Real estate is the first that comes to mind - one may sell it to another for a dollar, yet it's value is well beyond that to other parties or assessors.

Value is different than price. Some things are priceless yet have little value in an open market. It might be valuable to one person and worthless to everyone else. The old maxim that everything and everyone has its price. But this simply is not always true. Sometimes, you can't find a buyer and sometimes a seller won't sell.

 

[BobTheCoward]

I thought of another exchange of a thing of value for something.

BBC gets a story on a scandal. They ask the campaign for a comment before publishing. They are giving the campaign something valuable, a headstart to prepare their messaging. They are receiving something of value, additional creditability that they chased the story appropriately.

Can the BBC do that?

Bonus, they are an extension of the government. So we have foreign nationals providing limited information to the campaign. Plus we took the side of their enemies 30 years ago.

 

[LSSBB]

Yes, but that's a question of what the value is, which is different. It's a "thing" of value if it can be exchanged for something else that you value.

Yet real estate value is assessed, and taxed, independent of the purchase transaction.

 

[acbytesla]

Yes. Someone is just giving away their story.

Just because the owner of the story isn't selling and is giving away their story, that doesn't mean their story is valueless. It might be extremely valuable to the person it is told to. If the story is good enough to sway a Presidential, it is valuable.

Also, I contend that there was a price. It just wasn't in the form of an immediate payment in dollars and Trump wasnt picking up the check, the US is paying that tab.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Just because the owner of the story isn't selling and is giving away their story, that doesn't mean their story is valueless. It might be extremely valuable to the person it is told to. If the story is good enough to sway a Presidential, it is valuable.

Also, I contend that there was a price. It just wasn't in the form of an immediate payment in dollars and Trump wasnt picking up the check, the US is paying that tab.

I agree on all counts. But I don't think the Helsinki press conference could be submitted as evidence in a Don Jr trial. In that framework, I don't know what a prosecutor would do.

 

[WilliamSeger]

I thought of another exchange of a thing of value for something.

BBC gets a story on a scandal. They ask the campaign for a comment before publishing. They are giving the campaign something valuable, a headstart to prepare their messaging. They are receiving something of value, additional creditability that they chased the story appropriately.

Can the BBC do that?

Bonus, they are an extension of the government. So we have foreign nationals providing limited information to the campaign. Plus we took the side of their enemies 30 years ago.

Please, you can conduct your thought experiments offline. Do you have any point relevant to the topic at hand?