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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ok just one tiny little question...WHY IS NO ON IN JAIL YET?? WHY ARE THESE PEOPLE STILL WALKING AROUND AND RUNNING OUR GOVERNEMENT? I just don't understand...what more do we need to hear????

You do realize.... 1) that wasn’t just ONE tiny little question 2) it is spelled “no one” 3) it is spelled “government”
I think we know why you don’t understand.

Oh please. I'm upset and typing fast. but you did answer my question in a way, because you trumpsters are morons and only care about your pocket book and nothing else. You think you will somehow be better off financially if the mob is running our country. GFYS. do I need ot spell that out for you?

[Anonymous]

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.

I mean, the unbelievable part of this is that he says "well, I'm not the first person to take a meeting with someone promising dirt while in a campaign." When is this rubber man/rubber woman defense going to start troubling conservatives? I mean, these are the people who pride themselves on having PRINCIPLES, unlike those snowflake liberals. If my kid lied, I'm going to make sure he knows it's WRONG type people. But suddenly, we get to leaders being unethical and doing illegal things, and it's all like... well, what do you think they do? Do you think anyone is following the law?

The cognitive dissonance is staggering. When it comes to family, "I'm a great parent and that is why my kids aren't running all over the place shitting on other people." When it comes to our President, "he's a great leader and strong man, and this is why his kids are... colluding with our enemy." Yeah, OK then.

[Anonymous]

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.

In the emails released by Trump Jr. she is specifically referred to as a "Russian government attorney".

I'm not sure you know what a "smoking gun" means.

I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think you need to prove that the campaign colluded with the Russian government "systematically".

Really, just colluding once is probably more than enough.

[Anonymous]

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?

[Anonymous]

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.

I mean, the unbelievable part of this is that he says "well, I'm not the first person to take a meeting with someone promising dirt while in a campaign." When is this rubber man/rubber woman defense going to start troubling conservatives? I mean, these are the people who pride themselves on having PRINCIPLES, unlike those snowflake liberals. If my kid lied, I'm going to make sure he knows it's WRONG type people. But suddenly, we get to leaders being unethical and doing illegal things, and it's all like... well, what do you think they do? Do you think anyone is following the law?

The cognitive dissonance is staggering. When it comes to family, "I'm a great parent and that is why my kids aren't running all over the place shitting on other people." When it comes to our President, "he's a great leader and strong man, and this is why his kids are... colluding with our enemy." Yeah, OK then.

Someone needs to tell him that "everyone does it" is not an accepted legal defense.

[Anonymous]

Does Trump Jr. have a lawyer?

[Anonymous]

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?

It's "asking something of value," not "taking money". Do you want to argue that opposition research showing Es between HRC and Russia, that Uday could "use late summer" is not "something of value" to the Trump campaign.

This one proves itself. Donny, Manafort and Kushner all took the meeting. Therefore, they thought "something of value" was at stake.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does Trump Jr. have a lawyer?

Yes, hired a criminal defense lawyer yesterday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does Trump Jr. have a lawyer?

He just hired one. Towhom he very clearly is not listening. Expect him to sign in 3..2..1..

[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?

It's "asking something of value," not "taking money". Do you want to argue that opposition research showing Es between HRC and Russia, that Uday could "use late summer" is not "something of value" to the Trump campaign.

This one proves itself. Donny, Manafort and Kushner all took the meeting. Therefore, they thought "something of value" was at stake.

If you want to read the legal analysis, here it is (published before today's email revelations):

https://www.justsecurity.org/42956/open-door-moscow-facts-potential-criminal-case-trump-campaign-coordination-russia/

[Anonymous]

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

[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."


+1. I'm a single private citizen. Thee 3 stooges were the CAMPAIGN MANAGER and 2 family members, serving as senior advisors. Nt the same thing. Or in the same universe.
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/

[Anonymous]

What a bunch of crooks -- stupid crooks.