@Victor + @JR:

I think such laws are WRONG, insofar as only deeds, not plans should be punishable.
The slippery part begins for instance for me if real terrorists plan an action endangering lives of others: most dry runs (for example trying out weapons from points mimicking certain public places) are in itself not punishable AFAIK. Unless there is clear and repeated evidence of plans to harm others or other laws (building explosives / chemical mixtures poisonous and forbidden?) are broken, intent should not grow into something punishable as the doors to thought police are thrown open.

Solicitation as in hookers offering their goodies: as long as there is no evident payment for sex, there should be no prosecution (IMO there should be only for some parts of it like forcing others into the biz) and if the recorded vebal transactions can be explained in another way presumption of not guilty should protect. In other words: only the very dumb would be prosecuted.

Unless a specific offer can be proven, in my eyes the reported Jr. email is in the stage of sniffing each other out and "intent" should not be open to clairvoyant interpretation of a jury without provable action based on the meeting - but there is about nil chance for me to argue that as a juror ;-))

And yes, my guess is that - had the lawyer brought usable stuff to the meeting - there would be a clear trail of actions forbidden by quoted laws to be persecuted. If voiced intent/wishes is ***really*** punishable, why is recorded wish of Trump that the deleted mails of HRC email server be "returned" by foreign / Russian sources not persecuted ? For me (as non-English bred) that is much closer to the "disturbance" evoked/expected from the Latin "solicitare".

IANAL IAC ;-)

>>>>>Ambigous language everywhere -
>>>
>>>Yes. Especially the word "solicit" that means to ask for or try to obtain. Intent is enough to satisfy this definition. Did Trump JR try to obtain dirt on HRC? Difficult to claim otherwise in view of his reaction to the offer of dirt on HRC from a Russian lawyer: "I love it."
>>
>>Truthful hyperbole or sales talk... No law requires the "I love it." to follow the same rules of truth a witness has to keep in mind in court or elsewhere.
>
>Trump Jr.‘s decision to take the meeting in and of itself violated campaign finance law, which does not require you to actually get anything useful from foreigners. In other words, the mere fact that Trump Jr. asked for information from a Russian national about Clinton constituted a federal crime.
>
>Statute: 52 USC 30121, 36 USC 510
>
>'A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution or a donation of money or other thing of value, or expressly or impliedly promise to make a contribution or a donation, in connection with any Federal, State, or local election.'
> “No person shall knowingly solicit, accept, or receive from a foreign national any contribution or donation prohibited by (this law)”
>"A solicitation is an oral or written communication that, construed as reasonably understood in the context in which it is made, contains a clear message asking, requesting, or recommending that another person make a contribution, donation, transfer of funds, or otherwise provide anything of value."
>
>...so Trump Jr. was clearly soliciting information that he knew was coming from a foreign source, The solicitation itself is why it doesn’t matter if Trump Jr. actually got useful information. The part that’s illegal is trying to acquire dirt on Clinton from a foreign source, not successfully acquiring it. And his statements admits that he did, in fact, solicit this information.
>
>In other words - he's screwed.
>
>>>My preference is to look at the intent of the law. The intent of that law is to prevent foreign interests or cash corrupting the electoral process to obtain a result of benefit to the foreigner. IMHO Trump JR was naive and silly, because he did not need to meet the lawyer personally to get her dirt. A mistake HRC didn't make when she paid for Russians to tell pee pee stories about Trump.
>>
>>HRC showed more respect for established ways to circumvent abovementioned intent.
>>But Trump style seems to encompass a more direct way of Teflonitis ;-)
>
>Trump Jr, like is father, is an idiot with no understanding of the government or laws. (and/or think he's above the law).