Kushner, Manafort and Don Jr. met with a Russian lawyer with Kremlin ties during the campaign

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Tell Vlad I'll be more flexible after the election"

Different President. This isn't about Obama. Who was Prerssident, and could speak for the US to foreign leaders. Please keep up. Also Hilary, emails! Beghazzii! All not the issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Tell Vlad I'll be more flexible after the election"

"tell Vlad I'm going away for he rest of my natural lifespan."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just so I'm clear- the outrage here is that Trump's son met with a Russian lawyer with "government ties" who claimed to have dirt on Hillary?

Yes. Because that is a crime (aka colluding with a hostile foreign government to influence an election). What, you think NBD? It's a HUGE deal. It also stops the "months of investigation and no collusion shown" narrative of Trumpkins. Collusion not just shown-- admitted in writing. Game. Set. Match.

PP you responded to and not a Trump supporter, but the ethics double standard here and what people will forgive their own candidate of choice for vs the opponent is quite rich.

A Russian lawyer with "ties" to the Russian gov soliciting Trump's son for a meeting with dirt on Hillary hardly seems like a smoking gun for the campaign systemically colluding with the Russian gov.

thanks for the qualifier, the bar keeps getting higher and higher, eh.

1. No evidence, its all smoke
2. Well no evidence of collusion, its just alleged obstruction of justice
3. no HARD evidence. In public.
4. Its not hard evidence of SYSTEMATIC collusion.

Is circumstantial evidence of systematic collusion enough for you? If this was the first time they had heard about Russia helping them, why didn't they react with more surprise?

Happy to be corrected as I don't have any skin in this game, but it's evidence of a single private citizen with tenuous ties to the Russian gov soliciting a meeting and not circumstantial evidence of systemic collaboration. The desired narrative that the Russian gov won the election for Trump (otherwise it would've went to Hillary) has defined media coverage non-stop since November like it's Watergate 2.0. Facts and hard evidence should be defining the stories and narrative and right now it's just the opposite, a fishing expedition for page views. Comey hearings were a complete blowout (and if anything made the media look worse than before) and this is the closest they've gotten, so I won't froth at the mouth like some of you just yet.

er. no. First off, you should read more closely - its not one private citizen. It was three individuals - TRumpJR, Kushner and Manafort. Manafort was at the time head of the Trump campaign. Kushner was a leading figure in the campaign, and now has a WH office and an important role in the admin. Both Manafort and Kushner were copied in on the emails, so knew that Russia was offering info.

Second, the fact that the email elicited no surprise, indicates to me that there was earlier contact, and that TRump Jr at least, was already aware of Russian activities on behalf of electing his father.

Third, this should be seen in context of Trumps long standing expressions of admiration for Putin, his changing the GOP position on Ukraine, his call for Russia to find HRC's emails, his repeated suggestions that the hacks were not done by Russia, etc.

Fourth, I find it hard to believe that over the months when the President was stating in no uncertain terms that no one is his campaign had contacts with Russia related to the campaign, that all three of these figures failed to inform him that that was incorrect.

Fifth, this puts the Comey firing in context. We have a better idea of what the obstruction of justice was designed to cover up.

Sixth, it does not matter if HRC would have won the election absent the Russian interference - that has no bearing on illegality, or on impeachment. However I would suggest that given how close the election was (another thing DJT oddly regularly denies) - a modest shift in votes in three states would have given her the electoral college - pretty much anything could have changed the results of the election.

[Anonymous]

it's Waterexpedition for paggate 2.0. Facts and hard evidence should be defining the stories and narrative and right now it's just the opposite, a fishing e views.

you do realize that virtually the same arguments were made about Watergate? It was a second rate burglary. President Nixon was never proven to have known about the burglary in advance. The House Judiciary comm passed articles of impeachment based on obstruction of justice. It was not until two years after the burglary, and multiple long investigations, press leaks, etc, etc that hard evidence of the obstruction came out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible these people are just that naive? I can see Kushner and Donnie Jr. not knowing that receiving stolen information about an opposition candidate from the Russian government would be illegal, but Manafort had to know.

Ignorance of the law is not a defense anyway.

Woo hoo! Measure Uday for a jumpsuit! Manafort and Kushner too! yipee!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Happy to be corrected as I don't have any skin in this game, but it's evidence of a single private citizen with tenuous ties to the Russian gov soliciting a meeting and not circumstantial evidence of systemic collaboration. The desired narrative that the Russian gov won the election for Trump (otherwise it would've went to Hillary) has defined media coverage non-stop since November like it's Watergate 2.0. Facts and hard evidence should be defining the stories and narrative and right now it's just the opposite, a fishing expedition for page views. Comey hearings were a complete blowout (and if anything made the media look worse than before) and this is the closest they've gotten, so I won't froth at the mouth like some of you just yet.

Let me correct you then. It's not "a single private citizen with tenuous ties," but rather a specific offer and acceptance of information from the Russian government for the Trump campaign. Relevant parts of the emails are below.

GOLDSTONE: "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.

TRUMP: "... if it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer."

GLDSTONE: "Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday."

The full email transcripts are here - https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/07/donald-trumps-jrs-email-exchange/533244/

You can bet mueller just got a warrant for that email server. Because the only reason junior would cough up such damaging emails is to avoid more scrutiny of that server. But mueller is no fool.

[Anonymous]

A better man would put the country first and do what's right and resign as president after these unbelievable revelations about his campaign and ultimately how he won the election.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Need a DCUM prediction: when do we get thee Trump tweet about how. Donny was right and this is HRC and Obama's fault (because emails or Benghazi or a crime having to do with Russia that has never been shown?). This afternoon? Tomorrow am's toilet time? Or does he STFU and stay off Twitter. (That last one is a joke. We all know the tweet is coming...).

So, DCUM, place your bets now on tTrump tweet time. I say 6:30 tomorrow am. Needs some time to watch Fox and Friends.

Actually, I wonder...do you think Putin is currently creating some kind of incriminating evidence against Hillary to show that there's some truth to the story?

It doesn't matter. Even if it is proven that HRC did whatever in the library with the candlestick, takinnga meeting with a foreign government Rep to get this info is still a crime. "But HRC was guilty" is not a defense. She could end up with her own legal problems if she did something wrong. But it does not get Uday (I like that, but then who is Jared?) out of this clusterf*ck.

Which crime? Taking for money is prohibited by election laws, but what crime is it to take info?

The crime is soliciting or accepting something of value. The law is not just about actual cash.

There is no indication of solicitation. Even under the broad definition of "solicitation" propounded by the FEC. What was accepted?

I am sure there are plenty of other crimes committed elsewhere, like failing to disclose this meeting in the first place. The prohibition on private diplomacy. Etc. But hearing about proffered information? that apparently never materialized . . . .

[Anonymous]

And yet Republicans will do nothing even with this. Hatch already declares this a non issue.

I sincerely believe this is the end of the United States and our Constitution. I don't see how we get out of this.

[Anonymous]

Dear legal minds of DCUM, I'm wondering what the relevant legal standard/threshold for "attempt" in this context.

[Anonymous]

Can't wait to hear Don Sr's excuse. Given his past form, it should go something like: "Donald Trump Jr? Don't really know him. I think I met him, like, once."

[Anonymous]

still a nothing burger. at most just a slice of lettuce in it. pass!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And yet Republicans will do nothing even with this. Hatch already declares this a non issue.

I sincerely believe this is the end of the United States and our Constitution. I don't see how we get out of this.

What? No spending $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ on Benghazi-style witch-hunts? I'm shocked, I tell you. Shocked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Happy to be corrected as I don't have any skin in this game, but it's evidence of a single private citizen with tenuous ties to the Russian gov soliciting a meeting and not circumstantial evidence of systemic collaboration. The desired narrative that the Russian gov won the election for Trump (otherwise it would've went to Hillary) has defined media coverage non-stop since November like it's Watergate 2.0. Facts and hard evidence should be defining the stories and narrative and right now it's just the opposite, a fishing expedition for page views. Comey hearings were a complete blowout (and if anything made the media look worse than before) and this is the closest they've gotten, so I won't froth at the mouth like some of you just yet.

Let me correct you then. It's not "a single private citizen with tenuous ties," but rather a specific offer and acceptance of information from the Russian government for the Trump campaign. Relevant parts of the emails are below.

GOLDSTONE: "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.

TRUMP: "... if it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer."

GLDSTONE: "Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday."

The full email transcripts are here - https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/07/donald-trumps-jrs-email-exchange/533244/

You can bet mueller just got a warrant for that email server. Because the only reason junior would cough up such damaging emails is to avoid more scrutiny of that server. But mueller is no fool.

One doesn't need to be a fool to find a basis for a warrant...Junior's lawyer on the other hand....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A better man would put the country first and do what's right and resign as president after these unbelievable revelations about his campaign and ultimately how he won the election.

I think his tiny, tiny hands prove that he isn't a man at all.