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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Thanks for posting the Chris Wallace piece. I don't watch Fox, but it appears that Chris Wallace is not a stooge. He seems to think.

New poster. Agreed, although watching that video it occurs to me that if the oppo research offered by the russian lawyer is illegal because it is a "thing of value" offered to a campaign by a foreign power, then what does that say about the "dossier" that was compiled by a British national against Trump and was provided to Hillary's campaign?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Thanks for posting the Chris Wallace piece. I don't watch Fox, but it appears that Chris Wallace is not a stooge. He seems to think.

New poster. Agreed, although watching that video it occurs to me that if the oppo research offered by the russian lawyer is illegal because it is a "thing of value" offered to a campaign by a foreign power, then what does that say about the "dossier" that was compiled by a British national against Trump and was provided to Hillary's campaign?

Not the same. Russian government vs private British citizen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting. Trump attorney Jay Sekulow complained that if the people attending the meeting were so nefarious, then the Secret Service should have vetted them.

First of all, it is not the SS job to vet who the POTUS or PEOTUS meets with in terms of political safety, just physical safety.

Second, at the time of this meeting, Trump had captured enough delegates to win the nomination, but was still a month away from the Cleveland RNC and as such, was not entitled to SS protection (was he?)

Third, if the SS should have been away of this meeting per Trump's attorney, that means Trump himself would have had to be present for it.

Was he?

Excellent, excellent point. Boy, Team Trump needs to have a strategy meeting or something, they are not coming at this defense in a unified way. Their story is changing by the hour-long cable news interview.

Sekulow doesn't know what the f*ck he's talking about. And yet that doesn't stop him. Why anyone would listen to anything this lying sack of turds has to say is beyond me.

Why *is* Sekulow even still making the rounds, after all of his "Jews for Jesus" scandal and how his family skimmed millions that were supposed to be for charity?

Why is this scam artist on TV? Because Trump views him as being an effective attack dog. He's done with Spicer and Sanders. And Conway is beyond pathetic.

Effective attack dog? Hold that thought. Chris Wallace handed Sekulow his ass this morning.

I like Chris Wallace.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Thanks for posting the Chris Wallace piece. I don't watch Fox, but it appears that Chris Wallace is not a stooge. He seems to think.

New poster. Agreed, although watching that video it occurs to me that if the oppo research offered by the russian lawyer is illegal because it is a "thing of value" offered to a campaign by a foreign power, then what does that say about the "dossier" that was compiled by a British national against Trump and was provided to Hillary's campaign?

The dossier was not provided to the Clinton campaign. It was provided to just about everyone else, however.

[Anonymous]

Actually, many attorneys have suggested that even the email chain irrespective of the actual meeting, is a crime. The meeting itself is a crime (and how anyone takes the word of the attendees that nothing happened is beyond me) and the fact that Trump and others have taken steps that are overtly friendly to Russia and Russian Oligarchs suggests further crimes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if any Russian money is finding its way to Kasowitz's firm.

Probably, since he has clients with ties to the Kremlin.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/trumps-lawyer-in-russia-probe-has-clients-with-kremlin-ties/2017/06/09/5dba9518-4d4a-11e7-a186-60c031eab644_story.html?utm_term=.a8b59a426010

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I wonder if any Russian money is finding its way to Kasowitz's firm.

Maybe that's why he got a little touchy on the email ("I now where you are b**tch").

[Anonymous]

So this happened a month after the meeting on June 9th. This is from the RNC platform discussion around Ukraine.

http://politics.blog.mystatesman.com/2017/03/06/how-diana-denmans-singular-stand-for-ukraine-revealed-the-trump-campaigns-soft-spot-for-russia/

Any Trump supporters care to comment?

[Anonymous]

In a twist that shocks no one, The Secret Service has taken issue with Sekulow's latest alternative fact:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/secret-service-dismisses-trump-lawyers-claim-russia-meeting/story?id=48673067

Except they just called it a lie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So this happened a month after the meeting on June 9th. This is from the RNC platform discussion around Ukraine.

http://politics.blog.mystatesman.com/2017/03/06/how-diana-denmans-singular-stand-for-ukraine-revealed-the-trump-campaigns-soft-spot-for-russia/

Any Trump supporters care to comment?

SHE'S a Trump supporter! She thinks some of the people around him, maybe, are a bit sketchy though.

[Anonymous]

Apparently half the journalists in DC knew about the Steele document during the campaign but their news orgs wouldn't let them report on it. Even Buzzfeed held off until it was included in an intel briefing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Thanks for posting the Chris Wallace piece. I don't watch Fox, but it appears that Chris Wallace is not a stooge. He seems to think.

New poster. Agreed, although watching that video it occurs to me that if the oppo research offered by the russian lawyer is illegal because it is a "thing of value" offered to a campaign by a foreign power, then what does that say about the "dossier" that was compiled by a British national against Trump and was provided to Hillary's campaign?

I thought Jeb! initially hired Steele and then--after his campaign folded--Steele was so alarmed that he continued the research gratis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Thanks for posting the Chris Wallace piece. I don't watch Fox, but it appears that Chris Wallace is not a stooge. He seems to think.

New poster. Agreed, although watching that video it occurs to me that if the oppo research offered by the russian lawyer is illegal because it is a "thing of value" offered to a campaign by a foreign power, then what does that say about the "dossier" that was compiled by a British national against Trump and was provided to Hillary's campaign?

I thought Jeb! initially hired Steele and then--after his campaign folded--Steele was so alarmed that he continued the research gratis.

Yes, this is the scenario.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So this happened a month after the meeting on June 9th. This is from the RNC platform discussion around Ukraine.

http://politics.blog.mystatesman.com/2017/03/06/how-diana-denmans-singular-stand-for-ukraine-revealed-the-trump-campaigns-soft-spot-for-russia/

Any Trump supporters care to comment?

SHE'S a Trump supporter! She thinks some of the people around him, maybe, are a bit sketchy though.

She is a die hard Reagan republican who was confused and irate that the Trump people diluted the Ukraine policy in the GOP platform at Cleveland.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So this happened a month after the meeting on June 9th. This is from the RNC platform discussion around Ukraine.

http://politics.blog.mystatesman.com/2017/03/06/how-diana-denmans-singular-stand-for-ukraine-revealed-the-trump-campaigns-soft-spot-for-russia/

Any Trump supporters care to comment?

SHE'S a Trump supporter! She thinks some of the people around him, maybe, are a bit sketchy though.

She is a die hard Reagan republican who was confused and irate that the Trump people diluted the Ukraine policy in the GOP platform at Cleveland.

Denman is a Trump supporter. She just think his problem was bad staff.

So having triggered some of the suspicions by her actions, does Denman have a clear sense of what if any connection the Trump campaign had to the Russians?

No, it’s not clear what’s going on. And I’m really distressed.

I want Trump to have a chance and a good chance. I want him to have a chance of being a good president.

But we have to get his appointees who are all twisted up in this every day. I have never in all these years, it just looks like you get up in the morning and you think you might just have a clear day and then another bomb drops, and it’s gone on long enough.

I like what he says. I support what he says. I just want him to have some running time to just go ahead and get it done and see if he can turn America around.


Hes’ got to get his people in place to get anything working. He’s really been held back too long on this. I don’t have any idea whether the Russian thing is credible or not. It certainly has gone on too long. We have to get on about running America.

I really think as far as Trump personally, that there’s nothing here. It’s just beating a dead horse to death again. I don’t know. I really don’t know. But my gut feeling is that he himself is not involved in this. Staff is a different problem, former staff.