Quote Originally Posted by wiggin View Post
This is an honest IANAL question: does this mean that individuals in a campaign are not criminally liable for violations of the law carried out by the campaign? As in, let us imagine that we do have proof that Trump Jr knowingly received opp research on HRC from a foreign power; it certainly appears that this would violate the law. Are you suggesting that:

a) We don't have proof he received said information yet so he can't be prosecuted.

or

b) Even if we did have proof he couldn't be prosecuted because of legal argy-bargy.

I'm ignoring the question of involvement in hacking and collusion etc. because right now we have no evidence that it happened. But we certainly have evidence that Trump Jr wanted to break the law (based on his 'I love it!' email), and some evidence that he may in fact have done so. Can't he theoretically be prosecuted on that, irrespective of other issues?
It depends on which laws were violated. The typical target for violations of regulatory election law (which is not criminal law) is the campaign/candidate, precisely to prevent sloughing wrongdoing off on scapegoats. And as far as I can tell, receiving material aid from foreign sources in an election is not a criminal violation but merely a regulatory restriction on campaigns. If he managed to violate criminal statutes as well he'd be charged personally for those. . . not that there'd be much point. Can anyone doubt a presidential pardon would be immediately forthcoming?