View Full Version : Donald Jr and the Russians
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-11-17, 11:27
Thought this would be a good breakpoint for the discussion since we haven't had an active thread in awhile and this seems to be an inflection point.
On the face of it the left is going nuts because it 'proves' the 'collusion' between the campaign and true Russian operatives.
The problem is that it isn't about the stolen DNC emails. The Trump's didn't follow-up on it. I struggle to see how this is different than the dossier file of oppo-research done on Trump that was sourced through Russians? Both are are about alleged illegal activities by the candidates, sourced through Russian assets, that ultimately lead to nothing. Now the my narky side sees the Trumps seeing through the ruse in 10 minutes, while the dossier still is being touted out there, 9 months later.
It seems like it is this weeks 'smoke bomb' as people scream fire, but the left will point out that the Trump people have said that there was no contact about the election- and now there is some. The fact that they had put these down in their contact forms that the FBI has had (although that was delayed?) hardly makes this a cover up and I have to think that everyone knew that this was going to be coming out eventually.
Supposedly, the leak that started this whole chain was from inside the WH?
Of course, the silly thing that the Trumps don't seem to realize is that there is a mountain of evidence against the Clinton's, but no one is willing to go after them specifically (email) or generally after the Progressive political machine (IRS).
It still seems like the biggest threat to the Trumps is the Trumps. The Progressives/MSM have learned that all you have to do to counter them is keep throwing things, anything, at the wall and Trump will get distracted and damage himself.
The things the left is sure to latch onto is the 'Russian govt lawyer' and from the original email the:
This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump...
Emphasis mine. Now come the questions about what else and what and when did the Trumps know.
Yawnnn....
The left is so unhinged at this point over the whole Russian narrative that it is becoming their identity, on a professional and personal level. It's convenient they sat on this until immediately after what is perceived as big political win for Trump following Poland and the G20.
skywalkrNCSU
07-11-17, 12:32
I'm not sure how you can say what Jr did here wasn't wrong. The emails are pretty clear that he met with people who have ties to the Russian government with the intention of getting information to harm the Clinton campaign.
I don't think this is the smoking gun the left thinks it is as I doubt it will touch Trump but the emails speak for themselves.
Singlestack Wonder
07-11-17, 13:01
Lets see...private citizen visits other country and asks for "dirt" on known criminal candidate. Not sure why the libtards are calling this illegal.
Oh well....more fake news in an attempt to remain relevant...
I'm not sure how you can say what Jr did here wasn't wrong. The emails are pretty clear that he met with people who have ties to the Russian government with the intention of getting information to harm the Clinton campaign.
I don't think this is the smoking gun the left thinks it is as I doubt it will touch Trump but the emails speak for themselves.
I'd be taking usable dirt on my opposition from wherever I could get it too. Welcome to politics.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-11-17, 13:07
I'm not sure how you can say what Jr did here wasn't wrong. The emails are pretty clear that he met with people who have ties to the Russian government with the intention of getting information to harm the Clinton campaign.
I don't think this is the smoking gun the left thinks it is as I doubt it will touch Trump but the emails speak for themselves.
How is this different than the dossier collected on Trump using Russian sources? Does adding a Brit ex-spy as a go between really make a difference?
RetroRevolver77
07-11-17, 13:09
I'm not sure how you can say what Jr did here wasn't wrong. The emails are pretty clear that he met with people who have ties to the Russian government with the intention of getting information to harm the Clinton campaign.
I don't think this is the smoking gun the left thinks it is as I doubt it will touch Trump but the emails speak for themselves.
Do you have actual links to these supposed e-mails because from everything I've read they don't actually exist.
Averageman
07-11-17, 13:09
They were desperate to cover for losing an election.
They are desperate to stop Trump.
They are trying to hide the corrupt way they handled Bernie in their primaries.
They want to push the idea of "Collusion", but we're caught handing the debate questions to the favored candidate.
They've covered their bases and slowed the cabinet confirmation and stalled all Legislation with the help of CNN.
Why hasn't anyone called them on it and why didn't the GOP learn how to counter punch this crap?
skywalkrNCSU
07-11-17, 13:15
I'd be taking usable dirt on my opposition from wherever I could get it too. Welcome to politics.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Except soliciting or accepting information from a foreign national is illegal.
How is this different than the dossier collected on Trump using Russian sources? Does adding a Brit ex-spy as a go between really make a difference?
That's a good question, I'm not sure but I'd like to learn more from someone that is qualified to answer that.
Do you have actual links to these supposed e-mails because from everything I've read they don't actually exist.
Donald Jr tweeted them out himself
Doc Safari
07-11-17, 13:18
As long as the left keeps puking blood over this kind of nonsense Trump will be able to quietly implement his agenda without much opposition. As long as the press talks about this they're not talking about the crackdown on illegal immigration and other things. Imagine if we had videos of those "poor persecuted migrants" being deported every night.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-11-17, 13:33
Except soliciting or accepting information from a foreign national is illegal
You know that sounds completely silly? You must be speaking of a specific or limited instance?
Except soliciting or accepting information from a foreign national is illegal.
Isn't this what the CIA does on a regular basis?
Doc Safari
07-11-17, 13:38
Except soliciting or accepting information from a foreign national is illegal.
But soliciting money like the Clintons do is perfectly acceptable.
But soliciting money like the Clintons do is perfectly acceptable.
Through charitable front organization no less.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Lets see...private citizen visits other country and asks for "dirt" on known criminal candidate. Not sure why the libtards are calling this illegal.
Violation of the FARA laws, US Code 52 USC 30121, 36 USC 510.
To be sure there is some ambiguity in the way the laws are written, may be enough for him to get out, but on the face of it, he broke the law.
You know that sounds completely silly? You must be speaking of a specific or limited instance?
If it is connection with a campaign, it is illegal. Regarding HRC/BC soliciting money, it should be illegal, but if it isn't tied directly to campaigning, then it can be OK. Of course no one is under any illusion that they don't launder the money for campaigns.
Isn't this what the CIA does on a regular basis?
But not for a campaign or our own election. You could go to North Korea and get a full dossier of HRC with naked midget wrestlers wallowing in coke and it's good to go. If you that information in the course of a campaign, it may be illegal.
skywalkrNCSU
07-11-17, 13:48
You know that sounds completely silly? You must be speaking of a specific or limited instance?
https://www.google.com/amp/abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/trump-jr-meeting-russian-lawyer-violated-campaign-laws/story%3Fid%3D48557183
This article does a decent job outlining the law. I don't think that there is enough evidence from what we have seen to get a conviction but it's obvious what the intent was
But soliciting money like the Clintons do is perfectly acceptable.
No, that is completely illegal too. If there was actual proof of Clinton acception campaign contributions from a foreign entity then she could be prosecuted. The Clintons aren't dumb and they just funnel that money elsewhere.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-11-17, 14:03
The dossier was paid for, how does it not run afoul of these laws?
If there was something to the charges that the Russians had, all the Trump people would have had to do is say, that's interesting take it to the FBI.
Still fuzzy on how the Trump people are guilty in many eyes, but the dossier isn't held to the same critical and tortured legal standard.
Still fuzzy on how the Trump people are guilty in many eyes, but the dossier isn't held to the same critical and tortured legal standard.
This is one of my biggest beefs: the great and awesome double standard.
RetroRevolver77
07-11-17, 14:19
Donald Jr tweeted them out himself
This is another nothing burger. Basically some woman who is an advocate in Russia to have the US Magnitsky Act repealed contacted DTJR saying she had info that Russians were secretly contributing to Hillary's campaign and wanted a meeting. The Magnitsky Act bars Russian citizens convicted of human rights violations from entering the USA. Instead when she got to the meeting, she just used it to promote having that ban lifted in exchange for the information on Russian's donating money to the DNC. The meeting took place sometime in June 2016 that included Kushner, Trump Jr, Mannafort, Trump team lawyers and this lady with her interpreter but it became quickly apparent that the woman didn't have anything. Basically she made it up to get a meeting with the Trump team.
"Mr. Goldstone recalled the meeting in much the same way.
Ms. Veselnitskaya offered “just a vague, generic statement about the campaign’s funding and how people, including Russian people, living all over the world donate when they shouldn’t donate” before turning to her anti-Magnitsky Act arguments, he said. “It was the most inane nonsense I’ve ever heard.”
Ms. Veselnitskaya, for her part, said in an statement to The Times sent this past weekend that “nothing at all about the presidential campaign” had been discussed at the Trump Tower meeting, adding that she had “never acted on behalf of the Russian government” and that she had “never discussed any of these matters with any representative of the Russian government.” She has not responded to requests for comment since."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/11/us/politics/trump-russia-email-clinton.html?mcubz=2
7n6
This is another nothing burger. Basically some woman who is an advocate in Russia to have the US Magnitsky Act repealed contacted DTJR saying she had info that Russians were secretly contributing to Hillary's campaign and wanted a meeting. The Magnitsky Act bars Russian citizens convicted of human rights violations from entering the USA. Instead when she got to the meeting, she just used it to promote having that ban lifted in exchange for the information on Russian's donating money to the DNC. The meeting took place sometime in June 2016 that included Kushner, Trump Jr, Mannafort, Trump team lawyers and this lady with her interpreter but it became quickly apparent that the woman didn't have anything. Basically she made it up to get a meeting with the Trump team.
"Mr. Goldstone recalled the meeting in much the same way.
Ms. Veselnitskaya offered “just a vague, generic statement about the campaign’s funding and how people, including Russian people, living all over the world donate when they shouldn’t donate” before turning to her anti-Magnitsky Act arguments, he said. “It was the most inane nonsense I’ve ever heard.”
Ms. Veselnitskaya, for her part, said in an statement to The Times sent this past weekend that “nothing at all about the presidential campaign” had been discussed at the Trump Tower meeting, adding that she had “never acted on behalf of the Russian government” and that she had “never discussed any of these matters with any representative of the Russian government.” She has not responded to requests for comment since."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/11/us/politics/trump-russia-email-clinton.html?mcubz=2
7n6
It's going to boil down to whether she will be considered "an agent of a foreign principal" and whether the material she was going to provide will be considered "a service or goods" in the same manner as a financial contribution.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-11-17, 14:55
I think you actually have to provide the information, which wasn't done here. I would find it interesting to find out the legality issues around not purely political information, but that the information offered was of a criminal nature.
The bigger problem is the line about this as part of how the Russians were helping Trump. That will embolden people to keep looking.
I'd still like to hear more about how this meeting information made it from the Trumps to the govt and from the govt to the press. I don't like the 'no contact about the election' and then this pops up.
From 5000 feet elevation in sunny Wyoming, this is how it looks to me: https://goo.gl/images/NjxkUt
skywalkrNCSU
07-11-17, 16:00
From what I've been able to find, the difference between this and the Trump dossier is that the dossier wasn't commissioned by the Clinton campaign whereas this meeting included Donnie Jr, Manafort, and Kushner so it's pretty hard to say Trump's campaign wasn't involved.
RetroRevolver77
07-11-17, 16:01
deleted
Doc Safari
07-11-17, 16:03
I wonder when the MSM is going to start talking about the 25K Hillary e-mails leaked this past week.
Or when anybody in the mother-effing government will actually investigate Seth Rich's death instead of saying "it was a botched robbery."
skywalkrNCSU
07-11-17, 16:15
I wonder when the MSM is going to start talking about the 25K Hillary e-mails leaked this past week.
I'm surprised you find time participating between DU and here but the only thing that dossier released by Fusion GPS proves is the agenda behind it.
"Fusion GPS was on the payroll of an unidentified Democratic ally of Clinton when it hired a long-retired British spy to dig up dirt on Trump. In 2012, Democrats hired Fusion GPS to uncover dirt on GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney. And in 2015, Democratic ally Planned Parenthood retained Fusion GPS to investigate pro-life activists protesting the abortion group."
http://nypost.com/2017/06/24/inside-the-shadowy-intelligence-firm-behind-the-trump-dossier/
Yawn, your personal attacks got old a long time ago.
Fusion GPS can be on the payroll of a Clinton ally and not be a part of the campaign. Ally does not equal campaign, it's pretty simple.
RetroRevolver77
07-11-17, 16:21
Yawn, your personal attacks got old a long time ago.
Fusion GPS can be on the payroll of a Clinton ally and not be a part of the campaign. Ally does not equal campaign, it's pretty simple.
Admit it, my comebacks are snarky. The issue with Fusion is that they haven't substantiated anything and they have past ties with the DNC. If you read the full article you find out that the co-founder of Fusion GPS was a Clinton campaign donor with an obvious agenda.
skywalkrNCSU
07-11-17, 16:28
Admit it, my comebacks are snarky. The issue with Fusion is that they haven't substantiated anything and they have past ties with the DNC. If you read the full article you find out that the co-founder of Fusion GPS was a Clinton campaign donor with an obvious agenda.
This has nothing to do with Fusion substantiating anything or the co-founder being a Clinton campaign donor with an obvious agenda, you are attacking a straw man.
Legally the issue is when a campaign engages with a foreign national. Fusion is not part of a campaign nor were they commissioned by the Clinton campaign. Their political donations and what the dossier said have absolutely nothing to do with this.
I fail to see how anything illegal was done.
RetroRevolver77
07-11-17, 17:31
This has nothing to do with Fusion substantiating anything or the co-founder being a Clinton campaign donor with an obvious agenda, you are attacking a straw man.
Legally the issue is when a campaign engages with a foreign national. Fusion is not part of a campaign nor were they commissioned by the Clinton campaign. Their political donations and what the dossier said have absolutely nothing to do with this.
Have the Clinton friends law firm found anything credible yet? No? OK. So let's begin prosecuting Hillary and get this show going. She got the Kuru, so who knows how long she has. At the least we can slap some cuffs on her while she's still able to walk on her own. Or in her case, wobble. Kind of looks bad when they are being handcuffed in a wheel chair.
7n6
thopkins22
07-11-17, 17:48
So am I reading the general sentiment as "well Hillary got away with a lot, so behavior that would have had us demanding Obama's impeachment is perfectly acceptable."
This is killing the Republican party's future. As in unless people start distancing themselves from this nightmare, you won't see a republican majority for a long long time.
Republicans used to believe in integrity. They also used to understand that Russia doesn't have our interests at heart.
You can say that nothing directly implicates the President, but when there is in fact a Russian under every rock...well it doesn't look good folks.
Doc Safari
07-11-17, 17:56
So am I reading the general sentiment as "well Hillary got away with a lot, so behavior that would have had us demanding Obama's impeachment is perfectly acceptable."
This is killing the Republican party's future. As in unless people start distancing themselves from this nightmare, you won't see a republican majority for a long long time.
Republicans used to believe in integrity. They also used to understand that Russia doesn't have our interests at heart.
You can say that nothing directly implicates the President, but when there is in fact a Russian under every rock...well it doesn't look good folks.
1. The Republican Party is killing the Republican Party's future by being nothing more than Democrat Lite.
2. Trump won the presidency because a huge number of Americans love him and want to see him succeed.
(Please, everyone, let that sink in before you read further).
3. The Russia narrative is nothing but the Democrat sore losers trying to invent something they can impeach Trump for, since their policies are bankrupt and the public is finally on to their bullshit.
(Need time for that one to sink in? Okay)
4. The public voted for Trump because they like his policies and do not like the policies of the Republicrat Party. I would venture a guess that most people think he's too moderate, but that's just MHO.
5. The longer the Dems continue the Russia narrative, the longer they and the media look sillier and sillier. They will die on this hill and Trump will arise triumphant. I predict it.
skywalkrNCSU
07-11-17, 17:58
Have the Clinton friends law firm found anything credible yet? No? OK. So let's begin prosecuting Hillary and get this show going. She got the Kuru, so who knows how long she has. At the least we can slap some cuffs on her while she's still able to walk on her own. Or in her case, wobble. Kind of looks bad when they are being handcuffed in a wheel chair.
7n6
This thread isn't about Hillary, there are plenty of those if you would like to discuss her illegal acts.
2. Trump won the presidency because a huge number of Americans love him and want to see him succeed.
4. The public voted for Trump because they like his policies and do not like the policies of the Republicrat Party. I would venture a guess that most people think he's too moderate, but that's just MHO.
Trump won because the democrat party produced and ran with a candidate that was so polarizing for so many moderate voters that they either held their nose and voted for Trump or voted for a third party. He lost the popular vote for a reason - he is not a popular candidate, he is purely the lesser of two evils the electoral system produced.
If you truly think he's someone that "a huge number of Americans love" then you're living in a dream land. The only reason anyone would support him to succeed is the knowledge he directly impacts everyone in this country with his rhetoric and action. By that standard, everyone who supports Trump should have spent the past eight years supporting Obama (his actions directly affected everyone in the country), but we all know that is nowhere close to the truth.
I want to ask the "Russkies stole the election" crowd a serious question. Given the recent tightening of sanctions against Russia and the speech in Poland, has President Trump done anything to indicate that he is beholden to Russia for anything? Also, please explain exactly how Russia influenced the election, given that everyone expected Hillary to win?
I mean, most of us have known that Hillary's a criminal POS for 20+ years fer cryin' out loud, why does anyone think it requires Putin to tell us so?
RetroRevolver77
07-11-17, 18:13
Trump won because the democrat party produced and ran with a candidate that was so polarizing for so many moderate voters that they either held their nose and voted for Trump or voted for a third party. He lost the popular vote for a reason - he is not a popular candidate, he is purely the lesser of two evils the electoral system produced.
If you truly think he's someone that "a huge number of Americans love" then you're living in a dream land. The only reason anyone would support him to succeed is the knowledge he directly impacts everyone in this country with his rhetoric and action. By that standard, everyone who supports Trump should have spent the past eight years supporting Obama (his actions directly affected everyone in the country), but we all know that is nowhere close to the truth.
Trump won because he was the best candidate. He didn't lose the popular vote either- at least not amongst actual living American citizens. Which is why we need to double down on deporting FSA illegals to keep them from swaying our election system and review state voter registrations for discrepancies.
7n6
SeriousStudent
07-11-17, 18:16
Stop with the snark and personal remarks.
People need to knock this crap off, or there will be snow on the ground in Florida before they post on M4C again.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-11-17, 19:06
From what I've been able to find, the difference between this and the Trump dossier is that the dossier wasn't commissioned by the Clinton campaign whereas this meeting included Donnie Jr, Manafort, and Kushner so it's pretty hard to say Trump's campaign wasn't involved.
The dossier was initially financed/commissioned by a GOP opponent to Trump and after that was picked up then by a Democratic entity that paid for further work. As far as I know the people that paid on the GOP or Dem side have never been identified. To think that a Dem supporter was paying for it and it didn't make its way to the HRC campaign is pretty naive.
So, how Trump could end up being in trouble for not getting info that he didn't pay for, while the Dems get off for paying for Russian information that just happens to be wrong is an interesting legal outcome.
skywalkrNCSU
07-11-17, 19:45
The dossier was initially financed/commissioned by a GOP opponent to Trump and after that was picked up then by a Democratic entity that paid for further work. As far as I know the people that paid on the GOP or Dem side have never been identified. To think that a Dem supporter was paying for it and it didn't make its way to the HRC campaign is pretty naive.
So, how Trump could end up being in trouble for not getting info that he didn't pay for, while the Dems get off for paying for Russian information that just happens to be wrong is an interesting legal outcome.
Supposedly it was a Republican donor that sponsored it originally, not a campaign member of an opposing candidate. Then a Dem supporter took it over.
There is a major difference between a supporter/donor and a member of the campaign. If evidence came out that it was campaign staff then it would be in the same boat from what I can tell.
Also, to me this looks like more of an issue for Jr than the Donald.
thopkins22
07-11-17, 20:00
1. The Republican Party is killing the Republican Party's future by being nothing more than Democrat Lite.
2. Trump won the presidency because a huge number of Americans love him and want to see him succeed.
(Please, everyone, let that sink in before you read further).
3. The Russia narrative is nothing but the Democrat sore losers trying to invent something they can impeach Trump for, since their policies are bankrupt and the public is finally on to their bullshit.
(Need time for that one to sink in? Okay)
4. The public voted for Trump because they like his policies and do not like the policies of the Republicrat Party. I would venture a guess that most people think he's too moderate, but that's just MHO.
5. The longer the Dems continue the Russia narrative, the longer they and the media look sillier and sillier. They will die on this hill and Trump will arise triumphant. I predict it.
1) Since when is voting for populism, protectionism, and so forth abandoning a party that's too similar to the Democrats?
2)There's nothing to sink in. I know people who voted for him because of Hillary, and I know lifelong Republicans/old school conservatives who voted for Hillary because where business is concerned she's more conservative than him. Did people like him? Sure some people love him...in many instances people who are not ideologically consistent or if you pegged them issue for issue would be better suited as Democrats.
3) There is no question at all that it's being attacked as voraciously as it is because of them being sore losers. That does not mean there isn't some truth beneath it all. Nor does it mean that many supporters aren't defending him because "we won so **** those guys." It also does not speak well for his ability to effectively govern if he can't deal with it. There's a genuine credibility problem in his administration now, because he's not only the president of those who voted for him...but also of every adult who doesn't believe him. I mean ignore it, disprove it, or something...don't skirt the truth and shoot yourself in the foot every five minutes.
I want to ask the "Russkies stole the election" crowd a serious question. Given the recent tightening of sanctions against Russia and the speech in Poland, has President Trump done anything to indicate that he is beholden to Russia for anything? Also, please explain exactly how Russia influenced the election, given that everyone expected Hillary to win?
I mean, most of us have known that Hillary's a criminal POS for 20+ years fer cryin' out loud, why does anyone think it requires Putin to tell us so?
I don't think he has to be beholden to the Russians for one minute for them to have accomplished something. Sowing discord and a lack of faith in a political system is an achievement in and of itself.
Creating a situation in which the entire world questions the integrity of our elections and our process is an achievement.
The fact that nobody in his camp had the experience/wherewithal to distance themselves from anything that could at a glance be deemed collusive made him a much easier target.
For what it's worth, I don't believe that anything they did(possible exception of some hacking,) had any influence on the election at all. But it creates the illusion that there is.
It's no different than the claims of voter fraud. In no instances is there substantive proof of any widespread fraudulent activity...but there sure are a lot of people buying into that narrative.
I suppose that yes, the media is circling him like sharks. Tell him to stop chumming the water.
Please don't interpret any of this as "I wish Hillary won." I'm comforted and happy that she lost. I'm also saddened that this is what won, and after a primary election with a handful of genuinely palatable options no less....
So the law says contributions are illegal.
How is exposing an opponents illegal activities contribution?
Back to square one, I'm not convinced there was anything illegal to begin with.
Trump Jr. or the campaign solicited nothing from this Russian woman. Trump was approached first by the 3rd Party. No information of any value was provided to Trump Jr. or the people with him, and the meeting ended shortly thereafter.
So all of this is just hot air, but the democrats are now yelling treason. So much noise for so little that happened. I'm going out for a sunset horse ride.
Lol, a "Republican" finally grew balls big enough to roll around in the gutter and punch Democrats in the vagina and look at the knitted brows and righteous indignation. It's ******* glorious.
What's legal??!! What's not??!! Hilarious.
Here's the thing, Donald J Trump, against all possible odds, with everything stacked against him, prevented Madam President Hillary Rodham Clinton.
If you have a problem with that in any way, shape or form, there is something ****ing wrong with you.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-11-17, 21:26
For what it's worth, I don't believe that anything they did(possible exception of some hacking,) had any influence on the election at all. But it creates the illusion that there is.
The impact of all these accusations, originating with the dossier is far more damaging than the hacks on the DNC. I still remember thinking- that's it? This is stuff we've known for decades.
The fact that the right can't get anyone to put this whole thing in perspective is a shame, and Trump's continuous circular firing squad doesn't help.
thopkins22
07-11-17, 23:23
No information of any value was provided to Trump Jr. or the people with him, and the meeting ended shortly thereafter.
So we're told by the guy who until his hand was forced into getting out in front of the NYT's publishing was saying that the meeting was purely something else. And before that he was saying that there had been no such meetings. He has no credibility. None. It's likely that indeed nothing of consequence came from the meeting. But...why the inability to be honest about it?
I remember just yesterday all of us(myself included,) going after HRC like wildfire because lying on a government form is felonious. She deserves to be gone after. But more and more it looks like DJT's crew does too. Being opposite my enemy does NOT inherently put you on my team.
Meeting with a Russian person is not the same as meeting with "The Russians," you derp. There's no lie there.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-11-17, 23:57
From my understanding, we only know about this because the Trump people told us about it on the disclosure forms.
To be analogous with what Hillary did, the Trump people would've had to have filled out the form and then shredded it.
The press is being very coy with this because even they know there is no illegal activity here, and to try to say that using information gained from the Russians in the election points right back at the use of the dossier. It's kind of a catch – 22. The real damage is that this is just one more leak that contradicts their previous statements on the face if not perhaps on the content.
thopkins22
07-12-17, 00:36
Meeting with a Russian person is not the same as meeting with "The Russians," you derp. There's no lie there.
Good morning
Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting.
The Crown Prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.
This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin.
Yeah...no way anyone could ever interpret that as being anything other than just a dude who happens to be Russian and completely disassociated from all things Kremlin, and in no way do any of those sentences contain anything at all that might be concerning.
Give me a break. Fine, you get to call me a derp, I'll say it wasn't a "lie," and you admit that it's dishonest. It wasn't a lie if a blowjob isn't sexual relations.
All I would like to see is objectivity. I don't think Russia was banking on Trump to lead any sort of coups or promote Russian interests...if that were the case he's been a bad investment. But Trump's camp certainly wanted and sought Russian involvement and help. And then told us...no no, nothing to see here.
They are liars and are bad for America. As bad as Hill-dog? Who the hell knows, he's "likely" better on 2A stuff, and the climate accords were a joke...on those two counts alone I'd rather have him than her, and SCOTUS justices are critical. Does that make bad behavior okay or something to be ignored?
I'm thinking about putting a grand down in Vegas that we see Pence as POTUS following a resignation in the next three years.... Odds aren't that great anymore though.
Moose-Knuckle
07-12-17, 05:06
Lol, a "Republican" finally grew balls big enough to roll around in the gutter and punch Democrats in the vagina and look at the knitted brows and righteous indignation. It's ******* glorious.
What's legal??!! What's not??!! Hilarious.
Here's the thing, Donald J Trump, against all possible odds, with everything stacked against him, prevented Madam President Hillary Rodham Clinton.
If you have a problem with that in any way, shape or form, there is something ****ing wrong with you.
Outstanding posts! Bravo.
I have talked to my good friend Hugh Hewitt about this. Hugh is a big time lawyer, that has worked for the Federal governme and in his past, he has a national radio show, his partner in his law firm is a former Federal prosecutor and Federal judge. Hugh has talked to his partner about Trump Jr. meeting and they have concluded no laws were broken.
For what it is worth, Hugh is not a big Trump fan and I am sure a part of him would love to see Pence replace Trump. But he has never told me this but Hugh is a hard core republican and most of these types are still in shock that Trump was the last one standing.
I have talked to my good friend Hugh Hewitt about this. Hugh is a big time lawyer, that has worked for the Federal governme and in his past, he has a national radio show, his partner in his law firm is a former Federal prosecutor and Federal judge. Hugh has talked to his partner about Trump Jr. meeting and they have concluded no laws were broken.
For what it is worth, Hugh is not a big Trump fan and I am sure a part of him would love to see Pence replace Trump. But he has never told me this but Hugh is a hard core republican and most of these types are still in shock that Trump was the last one standing.
He's a very famous guy, and I always liked his radio show. Didn't he just get a show on MSNBC?
Outlander Systems
07-12-17, 07:08
This is it fellas. For the 10,000th time, it's finally over for Drumpf. We can't let him get access to the nuclear codes.
http://cdn.inquisitr.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/How-To-Spot-A-Shill-In-Six-Easy-Steps.jpg
Averageman
07-12-17, 08:28
Take the issues in context.
Hillary was found with incriminating classified information in her e-mails She gets a pass.
The DNC rigged the primaries for Hillary, they get a pass.
The Attorney General meets with Bill Clinton on the tarmac of an Az airport, they get a pass.
Comey goes out on the MSM and gives Hillary a pass that he is totally not authorised to issue, they all get a pass.
The DNC hands over debate questions, they get a pass.
So you are Donald Jr, someone offers up irrefutable evidence of Clinton corruption and you'll walk away without interviewing them?
Ironical isn't it?
skywalkrNCSU
07-12-17, 09:52
Take the issues in context.
Hillary was found with incriminating classified information in her e-mails She gets a pass.
The DNC rigged the primaries for Hillary, they get a pass.
The Attorney General meets with Bill Clinton on the tarmac of an Az airport, they get a pass.
Comey goes out on the MSM and gives Hillary a pass that he is totally not authorised to issue, they all get a pass.
The DNC hands over debate questions, they get a pass.
So you are Donald Jr, someone offers up irrefutable evidence of Clinton corruption and you'll walk away without interviewing them?
Ironical isn't it?
If it is against the law I would expect them to walk away. You are creating a straw man argument with the Clinton stuff, that does not mean the Trump campaign gets the authority to act illegally and no one here is arguing against the shadiness of the Clintons.
Didn't Al Gore receive information about Bush that was obtained illegally back in 2000 and turned it over to the FBI instead of using it? Kind of sad that we have to look at Al Gore as some sort of moral compass.
Averageman
07-12-17, 10:22
From what I understand the meeting was arranged under a false pretext.
The Russian Attorney had nothing and changed the subject to adoption.
Report the meeting, what do you report? At most you have a meeting that was made and amounted to nothing.
Should it have been reported, in hind sight yes.
My point wasn't that "Team Clinton" was getting away with multiple criminal acts, it was that the Justice Department, the FBI and the media were acting in collision to benefit "Team Clinton".
I could see why taking a meeting was necessary and why it should have been reported, but in this case which unbiased department would you like to go to?
Doc Safari
07-12-17, 10:24
If anything this controversy strengthens Trump Jr. as a future conservative politician. It will teach him to be tough, cover his ass, and fight like a rabid dog.
Winning for the Trump people again.
skywalkrNCSU
07-12-17, 10:32
From what I understand the meeting was arranged under a false pretext.
The Russian Attorney had nothing and changed the subject to adoption.
Report the meeting, what do you report? At most you have a meeting that was made and amounted to nothing.
Should it have been reported, in hind sight yes.
My point wasn't that "Team Clinton" was getting away with multiple criminal acts, it was that the Justice Department, the FBI and the media were acting in collision to benefit "Team Clinton".
I could see why taking a meeting was necessary and why it should have been reported, but in this case which unbiased department would you like to go to?
Taking the meeting was not necessary and it was stupid. He likely didn't gain any valuable information, could have done something illegal, and did something that makes him look bad.
I find it amazing how people can be nonchalant and defensive about this yet if it was Chelsea who did this the pitchforks would be out in full force.
Personally I don't think it is a big deal and it sure isn't the nail in the coffin the left hopes it will be but I am not blinded enough to see that the optics are terrible and that the right would be acting completely different if the same thing happened with the Clinton camp.
He's a very famous guy, and I always liked his radio show. Didn't he just get a show on MSNBC?
Yes he did, he has become their pet Republican. Good for him, he can speaks some truth and make money I am all for it.
Some people have said we would be screaming like crazy if one of the Clinton's had such a meeting. They have had many such meetings where they walked away from the meeting with big money, all tax free cause it went to their foundation. If the IRS would just investigate use of foundation funds I am sure all 3 of the Clinton's would be wearing orange for years.
Taking the meeting was not necessary and it was stupid. He likely didn't gain any valuable information, could have done something illegal, and did something that makes him look bad.
I find it amazing how people can be nonchalant and defensive about this yet if it was Chelsea who did this the pitchforks would be out in full force.
Bullshit.
This is no different than CNN, NYT, WaPo meeting with someone claiming to have info, and every bit as lawful.
And that's particularly relevant, since this woman is associated with the same group that was shopping around the Piss Dossier - which various outlets heard out and discarded, just as Don Jr. heard her out and sent her packing.
skywalkrNCSU
07-12-17, 10:53
Bullshit.
This is no different than CNN, NYT, WaPo meeting with someone claiming to have info, and every bit as lawful.
And that's particularly relevant, since this woman is associated with the same group that was shopping around the Piss Dossier - which various outlets heard out and discarded, just as Don Jr. heard her out and sent her packing.
Yeah it actually is different because Jr, Manafort, and Kushner were part of the Trump campaign. There are laws that pertain to campaign members that don't apply to news outlets or private citizens.
Whiskey_Bravo
07-12-17, 11:18
Yeah it actually is different because Jr, Manafort, and Kushner were part of the Trump campaign. There are laws that pertain to campaign members that don't apply to news outlets or private citizens.
Don't those laws pertain to meeting with officials of foreign governments? Is/was this lady an official of Russia?
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-12-17, 11:20
Yeah it actually is different because Jr, Manafort, and Kushner were part of the Trump campaign. There are laws that pertain to campaign members that don't apply to news outlets or private citizens.
As far as AI can tell, it is only because of campaign finance laws and the 'trading' of things that could be valuable. Information could be valuable,and seen as a contribution. Foreign contributions are illegal. That people can whitewash something through people like Steele and oppo research firms and totally turn a blind eye to the MSMs in kind contributions like favorable coverage shows the laughable absurdity of these rules.
The "Russian" issues become even more laughable when you look at the $2 billion in essentially bribes the flowed through the Clinton 'charities' and the money for speeches- a lot of it foreign. How much of that money continued to flow after HRC became politically irrelevant...
We all did raise flags when Bush saw into Putties soul, and the Clintons and BHO 'reset', and BHO promised Putin a blow job after the election if Putin could just hold off until then. Russia saw the largest gain in power in a generation under BHO, but Trump is the bad guy.
Crazy.
skywalkrNCSU
07-12-17, 11:24
Don't those laws pertain to meeting with officials of foreign governments? Is/was this lady an official of Russia?
From what I can tell the laws pertain to accepting or soliciting from a foreign national, not necessarily an official from the government. Either way, below is taken straight from the emails and if there wasn't an official from the Russian government involved it sure sounds like they made it appear as if there was.
"The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.
This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin."
Here's the thing, Donald J Trump, against all possible odds, with everything stacked against him, prevented Madam President Hillary Rodham Clinton.
If you have a problem with that in any way, shape or form, there is something ****ing wrong with you.
I pretty much have to agree. What exactly is 50% of society... actually probably more than that... but 50% of the voting society, supposed to do when the opposition has become overtly criminal and have the support and front line minute by minute assault of the main stream media.
Clinton and Lynch... no problem.
Wasserman-Schultz steam rolling Bernie... nothing to see here.. it's how the game is played.
Dan Rather creating documents to defeat Bush.... it was just a little mistake.
Private servers for government officials that can not be accounted for... a necessity.
At some point in time, someone was going to have to walk carefully through the snake's den. The problem is, rather than admit they made it through without being fatally bit, the media is instead trying to say they were the snake in the pit.
There is no such thing as a fair fight or fair game with a Liberal. They will constantly break the rules. When a Conservative even steps onto the playing field, they cry foul.
From what I can tell the laws pertain to accepting or soliciting from a foreign national, not necessarily an official from the government. Either way, below is taken straight from the emails and if there wasn't an official from the Russian government involved it sure sounds like they made it appear as if there was.
"The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.
This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin."
So, there are three issues. 1) Was she an agent of a foreign country (i.e., speaking on behalf of the government)? If not, then there is ambiguity about the FARA law. 2) Is the "information" being treated with the same weight as material goods/services/contributions? 3) Can they stick him with an "intent to buy" crime? He went with the intention of getting damaging info on HRC, but it turned out to be a dud, and no crime was committed. BUT, can he still be charged because he had the intent of getting info from an agent?
Outlander Systems
07-12-17, 12:21
Mantafort, Kushner and Stone apparently had Chinese takeout one evening during the campaign.
Mueller's TOP MEN are currently investigating the Chinese joint to make sure there wasn't any collusion via OTPs passed through fortune cookies.
:rolleyes:
If anything this controversy strengthens Trump Jr. as a future conservative politician. It will teach him to be tough, cover his ass, and fight like a rabid dog.
Winning for the Trump people again.
Doc Safari
07-12-17, 12:47
Trump won because the democrat party produced and ran with a candidate that was so polarizing for so many moderate voters that they either held their nose and voted for Trump or voted for a third party. He lost the popular vote for a reason - he is not a popular candidate, he is purely the lesser of two evils the electoral system produced.
If you truly think he's someone that "a huge number of Americans love" then you're living in a dream land. The only reason anyone would support him to succeed is the knowledge he directly impacts everyone in this country with his rhetoric and action.
No. People wanted him to be another Reagan, or at least 180-degrees opposite of the job-killing Obama.
By that standard, everyone who supports Trump should have spent the past eight years supporting Obama (his actions directly affected everyone in the country), but we all know that is nowhere close to the truth.
This just doesn't make any sense. Trump is the antithesis of Obama and that's why Hillary got her "coronation" taken away from her.
Averageman
07-12-17, 12:50
So if She had the goods on Hillary, Bill, the Clinton Foundation or the DNC, who in the Justice Department does he turn it over to?
Jim Comey or Loretta Lynch? Instead maybe he should have alerted the Media?
You see where this is going?
The Trump Campaign had no allies at the time even the GOP were talking contested convention.
So no money or information changed hands, so where's the crime?
This smells and it isn't Jr who took a dump all over this.
BoringGuy45
07-12-17, 13:15
No. People wanted him to be another Reagan, or at least 180-degrees opposite of the job-killing Obama.
I think another thing was that people are, rightfully so, sick of politicians and political correctness. So the GOP nominated the guy who had never held office and is highly politically incorrect.
I just wonder what the end game the left has in mind for this Russia thing. Are they hoping to prove that somehow, the Russians influenced enough votes to beat Hillary, thus nullifying the election results, and putting her in office?
skywalkrNCSU
07-12-17, 13:17
So, there are three issues. 1) Was she an agent of a foreign country (i.e., speaking on behalf of the government)? If not, then there is ambiguity about the FARA law. 2) Is the "information" being treated with the same weight as material goods/services/contributions? 3) Can they stick him with an "intent to buy" crime? He went with the intention of getting damaging info on HRC, but it turned out to be a dud, and no crime was committed. BUT, can he still be charged because he had the intent of getting info from an agent?
This sums it up very well.
So if She had the goods on Hillary, Bill, the Clinton Foundation or the DNC, who in the Justice Department does he turn it over to?
Jim Comey or Loretta Lynch? Instead maybe he should have alerted the Media?
You see where this is going?
The Trump Campaign had no allies at the time even the GOP were talking contested convention.
So no money or information changed hands, so where's the crime?
This smells and it isn't Jr who took a dump all over this.
This has already been discussed multiple times now. You don't get to break the law because someone promised you dirt on someone else. See chuckman's post above for the bullet points.
Doc Safari
07-12-17, 13:27
I think another thing was that people are, rightfully so, sick of politicians and political correctness. So the GOP nominated the guy who had never held office and is highly politically incorrect.
I just wonder what the end game the left has in mind for this Russia thing. Are they hoping to prove that somehow, the Russians influenced enough votes to beat Hillary, thus nullifying the election results, and putting her in office?
I'm remembering all the threats from Maxine Waters and others that Trump will be impeached. This Russian was a democrat party operative and they have known all along that the meeting with Trump Jr. was a setup. Combine that with the piss dossier and the dems were building a portfolio to try to prove on circumstantial evidence that Russia was colluding with Trump to get him elected. The problem is: their tactics are too old-school. In this age of Wikileaks and 24-hour information their secret is out. My prediction is that the dems will end up being outed for their underhanded attempt to set Trump up and as usual he will come out unscathed.
Averageman
07-12-17, 13:45
In the meantime nothing gets done, no wall, no tax cuts, no repeal of the ACA.
The Left is winning here.
My prediction is that the dems will end up being outed for their underhanded attempt to set Trump up and as usual he will come out unscathed.
I think the dems will either use Junior as bate to get Senior to do something stupid or will try to just drag things out so long and so hard so as to stall any agenda; a delaying action. I don't think the dems will push too strenuously for any indictment because it takes them past MAD info full-scale war. I imagine if that was to happen Trump will use every shred of HRC/Comey/email scandal/etc to throw shit far and wide that everyone will be splattered.
Doc Safari
07-12-17, 14:02
I think the dems will either use Junior as bate to get Senior to do something stupid or will try to just drag things out so long and so hard so as to stall any agenda; a delaying action. I don't think the dems will push too strenuously for any indictment because it takes them past MAD info full-scale war. I imagine if that was to happen Trump will use every shred of HRC/Comey/email scandal/etc to throw shit far and wide that everyone will be splattered.
I have this private little fantasy that Trump senior will be so backed into a corner over a false narrative that he will dig in and allow the government to shut down without extensions in the fall. Entire bureaucracies will cease to exist; Congressmen will be forced to do their own office work; regulations will go unenforced; and the piece de resistance is that the government will be so decimated by this that the huge overblown Feddle Gummunt will never be the same.
I know, I know.....pigs are being fitted for flight suits, but I like my little fantasy. I think I will spend some time with it now.
How is this different than the dossier collected on Trump using Russian sources? Does adding a Brit ex-spy as a go between really make a difference?
The dossier was delivered after the election, and It was not given to the Clinton campaign. Apples to oranges.
Hillary is not The POTUS. Not sure why it's hard to imagine the POUTS of the United States is being scrutinized and held to a higher standard than the losing candidate.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-12-17, 15:13
This sums it up very well.
This has already been discussed multiple times now. You don't get to break the law because someone promised you dirt on someone else. See chuckman's post above for the bullet points.
This has been discussed multiple times now, he didn't break the law. Them offer was for information that HRC had illegal activities related to Russia. Even in the most extreme examples of campaign finance law the issue is something of value- we ran this survey and got these results for expats living in our country or something that they expended money on. What is the value of criminal activity information?
And let's take it to the next level, why would the Russians take evidence of HRC illegality to US authorities directly? How many investigations of the Clintons got whacked by our 'Justice' system?
Averageman
07-12-17, 15:16
The dossier was delivered after the election, and It was not given to the Clinton campaign. Apples to oranges.
Hillary is not The POTUS. Not sure why it's hard to imagine the POUTS of the United States is being scrutinized and held to a higher standard than the losing candidate.
Mmmmm, but She was Secretary of State while a lot of the e-mail malarkey was in full swing. She only stepped back to run for POTUS.
So no reason for some accountability?
So Lynch gets a pass for meeting with Bill?
So Comey was fired to shut down the Russia investigation?
No, really let's let the Dems write the whole rule book.
Nothing gets done, no investigation, no charges .
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-12-17, 15:20
The dossier was delivered after the election, and It was not given to the Clinton campaign. Apples to oranges.
Hillary is not The POTUS. Not sure why it's hard to imagine the POUTS of the United States is being scrutinized and held to a higher standard than the losing candidate.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Reddit talking point. It was broached by CNN on Jan 10th, but different iterations of it had been passed around and were in DNC operatives hands in mid 2016 through the fall. It was frickin paid for by DNC operatives for crimes sake. Read the full Wikipedia article, not just the introductory summary paragraph.
skywalkrNCSU
07-12-17, 15:22
This has been discussed multiple times now, he didn't break the law. Them offer was for information that HRC had illegal activities related to Russia. Even in the most extreme examples of campaign finance law the issue is something of value- we ran this survey and got these results for expats living in our country or something that they expended money on. What is the value of criminal activity information?
And let's take it to the next level, why would the Russians take evidence of HRC illegality to US authorities directly? How many investigations of the Clintons got whacked by our 'Justice' system?
We don't know at this time if he broke the law or not, making an absolute statement either way is silly at this point. Chuckman already mentioned the different items of note here and we will just have to see how they play out.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-12-17, 15:23
The best part of this is you have a Trump talking to the Russians and I'm sure there are many on the left thinking that Trump is about to be goosestep marched to the gallows----- and nothing is going to happen.
Doc Safari
07-12-17, 15:25
The best part of this is you have a Trump talking to the Russians and I'm sure there are many on the left thinking that Trump is about to be goosestep marched to the gallows----- and nothing is going to happen.
I second that emotion.
This is going to fizzle bigger than a bucket of soaking wet M88 firecrackers and I'm going to love every minute watching the dems choke back the tears when they realize that it was all for nothing and Trump is going to get re-elected in another landslide.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-12-17, 15:30
We don't know at this time if he broke the law or not, making an absolute statement either way is silly at this point. Chuckman already mentioned the different items of note here and we will just have to see how they play out.
That's the major issue a lot of people, and even Dershowitz has with it. Usually you have a crime and then investigate. Here, there is no evidence of a crime, but they keep on starting new investigations. Look at the genesis of all this, the dossier. That is all but dead, but they keep on throwing new smoke grenades and yelling fire. You take evidence that points away from illegality and they look at the entrails of the fact pattern and see all these crimes.
That in contrast with HRC where we have the evidence and then weasel out of legality by being myopic and seeing fluffy bunnies and unicorns in the fact pattern.
The Russian email syntax smells suspicious to me.
Dershowitz has already said DJR did nothing wrong. I do not agree with Dershowitz on all things, but he says what he truly feels regarding the law whether it hurts Democrats or Republicans. Hell, he's even been pro-2A when he felt the Constitution, state, or local laws were wrong.
Don't get me wrong, he's liberal, but he is intellectually honest in his assessments. He has been a thorn in liberals side before, and his statements about DJR's meeting/conduct are going to severely hurt them if it gets traction. And I think it will. It may not cause the collapse of the onslaught against the Trumps, but it will certainly take away momentum and give the other side excellent, high-quality ammunition.
and Trump is going to get re-elected in another landslide.
No. What will happen is that nothing is going to get done and the Republicans are going to get hammered in the mid-terms.
There will be some of you rejoicing about the destruction of the party because, as you say, it had become Dem lite. The rest of us will be living in sucksville for the next ten years.
No. What will happen is that nothing is going to get done and the Republicans are going to get hammered in the mid-terms.
As long as the economy keeps chugging along, they'll get a pass, albeit begrudgingly.
I phuckin' hate both parties at this point. Where are the tar and feathers?
It still seems like the biggest threat to the Trumps is the Trumps. The Progressives/MSM have learned that all you have to do to counter them is keep throwing things, anything, at the wall and Trump will get distracted and damage himself.
Agreed. As I said before the election and still maintain, when he gets a US ambassador and his staff killed due to (at best) wilful negligence or straight up criminal negligence, wake me up.
SeriousStudent
07-12-17, 18:28
Another day in the political thread, another poster banned.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-12-17, 19:40
I've got the conch!
I've got the conch!
Lord of the Flies, right?
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-12-17, 22:59
Lord of the Flies, right?
Winner, winner. About the only thing I took away from that book.
For those deprived of having to read the book or never have seen the movie, they boys stranded on the island have 'circle time' when the boy with a conch shell is supposed to be the recognized speaker.
Trying to culture up place here after some of our recent abandonments.
Moose-Knuckle
07-13-17, 04:31
IIRC special elections post Trump is DNC 0 / GOP 4.
Even Micheal Bloomberg has advised the DNC to knock off the Russian albatross and focus their efforts on the mid-terms. This as they say is a clue.
Trump has been holding rallies with numbers that exceed his campaign numbers and has been raking in millions of re-election contributions. The MSM has not changed the minds of a single Trump voter. They have done the exact opposite and only have served to bolster them.
I hope they do not heed Bloomberg's advice, I hope they keep this bullshit up non-stop 24/7. They are committing political suicide.
Going after his children is only going to stoke Trump's fire.
I'd love to see that in writing. Are you aware that DNC people did the same thing with Ukraine?
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446
Except soliciting or accepting information from a foreign national is illegal.
That's a good question, I'm not sure but I'd like to learn more from someone that is qualified to answer that.
Donald Jr tweeted them out himself
Voodoochild
07-13-17, 05:05
I smell a DNC setup. Not to mention the Russian lawyer was in the country illegally.she overstayed here Visa and was seen meeting with Democrats around the same time.
The Russian lawyer who penetrated Donald Trump’s inner circle was initially cleared into the United States by the Justice Department under “extraordinary circumstances” before she embarked on a lobbying campaign last year that ensnared the president’s eldest son, members of Congress, journalists and State Department officials, according to court and Justice Department documents and interviews.
This revelation means it was the Obama Justice Department that enabled the newest and most intriguing figure in the Russia-Trump investigation to enter the country without a visa.
Later, a series of events between an intermediary for the attorney and the Trump campaign ultimately led to the controversy surrounding the president's eldest son.
Just five days after meeting in June 2016 at Trump Tower with Donald Trump Jr., presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner and then Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Moscow attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya showed up in Washington in the front row of a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on Russia policy, video footage of the hearing shows.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/341788-exclusive-doj-let-russian-lawyer-into-us-before-she-met-with-trump
I smell a DNC setup. Not to mention the Russian lawyer was in the country illegally.she overstayed here Visa and was seen meeting with Democrats around the same time.
That seems to be the trending thought, but you won't here it from the MSM. A more experience political operative than DJR may have sniffed that out.
Russia have lot of problems, but being clumsy in intelligence operations is not one of those. They have over a century of experience in manipulating West and using useful idiots to their advantage. And they did it in very secretive way.
Now think, what is best way to bring harm to politician that is very dangerous for Russia? Make him look like he is under Russian control. Make some clumsy, meaningless and unsuccessful attempts to help him. Just make sure they are noticed and they have Russia written all over them. Easy job. Now guy will be forced to fight "Russian Agent" badge to the end of his life.
Polish Minister of Defense is actually under attack of having "Russian ties" and that his deputy was once in Russia and maybe met someone there (or maybe not). This MoD purged from Polish Army offciers that have real ties to Russia (from Warsaw Pact days), orgized Territorial Defense (kind of national guard), signed memorandum with USA to get to Poland Patriot missile defense (that BHO administration refused us, because Putin said that he does not like this idea). And all traces of this accusations go to... you guessed it!... Moscow.
Now apply that to Trump, jr. case.
In the meantime nothing gets done, no wall, no tax cuts, no repeal of the ACA.
The Left is winning here.
I wouldn't call it winning. They may be holding back the water a bit, but that's all.
I'm happy to delay those other items for a SCOTUS judge or three and watch the Liberals wear themselves out trying to sandbag a breaking levee about to crush their world.
skywalkrNCSU
07-13-17, 10:19
Let's be honest, the ACA is not getting repealed because the Republicans are incompetent and can't draft a decent healthcare plan. It's not the left and the Russia story that is the problem with that one.
Let's be honest, the ACA is not getting repealed because the Republicans are incompetent and can't draft a decent healthcare plan.
Or don't want to.
This newest "Russian" story simply gives some of the Republicans another means to not support Trump. It will be interesting to hear what the grumblings are today when the newest incarnation of the bill is released.
platoonDaddy
07-13-17, 12:49
Putin loved Trump so much, Trump has agreed to sell Poland the US Patriot system with Israeli-made missiles.
WHY DID NATALIA VESELNITSKAYA MEET WITH JOHN MCCAIN IN 2015?
Natalia Veselnitskaya posted a pic from inside McCain's office in Dec 2015
http://www.pacificpundit.com/2017/07/12/why-did-natalia-veselnitskaya-meet-with-john-mccain-in-2015/
Ron Dellums a huge Hillary Clinton supporter was Natalia Veselnitskaya’s chaperone.
http://www.pacificpundit.com/2017/07/13/clinton-dem-ally-ron-dellums-was-veselnitskayas-chaperone/
I find it sad that the MSM dropped the Hillary class email issue, after Comey stated, that while there were in fact crimes committed, too numerous to list, he couldn't find any instance of intent. So "no reasonable blah blah blah...
And so now with Jr, in regards to any quid pro quo with the Russian lawyer...there was no crime committed so they now focus SOLEY on the intent.
Bizarro land.
And since this woman solicited them, and not vice versa, I think he's off the hook.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.