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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BTW, the Steele dossier is proven to be correct again that Agaralov is the conduit from trump campaign to Russia.

Yes, where are all the DCUMers ranting about how nothing in the Steele Dossier has been proven true?

Actually I have read quite a few Steele Dossier points being proven correct right here in DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh, here comes another psycho: InfoWars founder Alex Jones says Donald Trump Jr. was just ”doing his job" by "trying to find Russian spies”

This would be one hell of a sarcasm if it were not from Alex Jones...

Ah, the old "I was conducting my own investigation" gambit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BTW, the Steele dossier is proven to be correct again that Agaralov is the conduit from trump campaign to Russia.

Yes, where are all the DCUMers ranting about how nothing in the Steele Dossier has been proven true?

You do know many of Steele's sources were from Russian government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I haven't seen it either, but hope the FBI is only being circumspect about its knowledge and sources. If not, isn't it likely Russia is feeding this to NYT? Not arguing that makes it untrue; it's all clear as day in the email, but to sow unrest here. I mean, we are handicapped right now. Also, not trying to say it shouldn't have been reported. Obvs it should. I've just been crazy curious about who the leakers have been throughout this whole debacle and what their true motivation is.

While I think it's possible Russian hands may be in every element of this, I think it's more likely that this specific information was given to NYT by someone in Kushner and/or Pence Camps. Apparently Kushner legal team came across these emails in the last few weeks (Twitter). Pence released a statement that basically said "I have nothing to do with these losers." Those two (and their associates) have separate things to gain by tossing Jr. to the wolves, whether Sr. goes down with him or not.

[Anonymous]

The lesson from Watergate is that it is the coverup that always brings you down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't seen it either, but hope the FBI is only being circumspect about its knowledge and sources. If not, isn't it likely Russia is feeding this to NYT? Not arguing that makes it untrue; it's all clear as day in the email, but to sow unrest here. I mean, we are handicapped right now. Also, not trying to say it shouldn't have been reported. Obvs it should. I've just been crazy curious about who the leakers have been throughout this whole debacle and what their true motivation is.

While I think it's possible Russian hands may be in every element of this, I think it's more likely that this specific information was given to NYT by someone in Kushner and/or Pence Camps. Apparently Kushner legal team came across these emails in the last few weeks (Twitter). Pence released a statement that basically said "I have nothing to do with these losers." Those two (and their associates) have separate things to gain by tossing Jr. to the wolves, whether Sr. goes down with him or not.

I thought it was Manafort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't seen it either, but hope the FBI is only being circumspect about its knowledge and sources. If not, isn't it likely Russia is feeding this to NYT? Not arguing that makes it untrue; it's all clear as day in the email, but to sow unrest here. I mean, we are handicapped right now. Also, not trying to say it shouldn't have been reported. Obvs it should. I've just been crazy curious about who the leakers have been throughout this whole debacle and what their true motivation is.

While I think it's possible Russian hands may be in every element of this, I think it's more likely that this specific information was given to NYT by someone in Kushner and/or Pence Camps. Apparently Kushner legal team came across these emails in the last few weeks (Twitter). Pence released a statement that basically said "I have nothing to do with these losers." Those two (and their associates) have separate things to gain by tossing Jr. to the wolves, whether Sr. goes down with him or not.

I thought it was Manafort.

I didn't see that verified (in as much as private sources can be), but I figure it could as easily be any or all of those three. I'm re-reading the 'Rancor' times article and it looks like they suggested Manafort and/or Kushner legal time finding/bringing up these emails very recently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't seen it either, but hope the FBI is only being circumspect about its knowledge and sources. If not, isn't it likely Russia is feeding this to NYT? Not arguing that makes it untrue; it's all clear as day in the email, but to sow unrest here. I mean, we are handicapped right now. Also, not trying to say it shouldn't have been reported. Obvs it should. I've just been crazy curious about who the leakers have been throughout this whole debacle and what their true motivation is.

While I think it's possible Russian hands may be in every element of this, I think it's more likely that this specific information was given to NYT by someone in Kushner and/or Pence Camps. Apparently Kushner legal team came across these emails in the last few weeks (Twitter). Pence released a statement that basically said "I have nothing to do with these losers." Those two (and their associates) have separate things to gain by tossing Jr. to the wolves, whether Sr. goes down with him or not.

Is Mother our Deep Throat 2.0?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The lesson from Watergate is that it is the coverup that always brings you down.

Indeed. Whomever is the source for the NYT on this, they have an exquisite level of detail - this article is thorough:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/11/us/politics/russia-trump.html

...according to people familiar with the discussions.

Ultimately, the people said, the president signed off on a statement from Donald Trump Jr. for The Times that was so incomplete that it required day after day of follow-up statements, each more revealing than the last.

Key coverup element being that Trump Sr. signed off on Trump Jr's false statement(s). Question is can investigators establish that Trump Sr. actually knew about the meeting. They've lied so darn much about everything I don't see how they can even keep the web straight anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/11/opinion/donald-trump-jr.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region®ion=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region

Sometimes the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. Sometimes the apple is also considerably dimmer than the tree. And sometimes the apple must be thrown under the bus so that the tree and a few of its most crucial limbs don’t tumble to the forest floor, where they’ll be chopped up and used as firewood by Democrats.

Is that the fruity fate of Donald Trump Jr.?

love the writing in the editorials this morning.

Bruni opinion piece. No an editorial. This is an editorial:

https://www.nypost.com/2017/07/11/donald-trump-jr-is-an-idiot/amp/

That piece was funny as well.

Our former colleague Kyle Smith put it nicely: “Don Jr. is why Nigerian email scammers keep trying their luck.”)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lesson from Watergate is that it is the coverup that always brings you down.

Indeed. Whomever is the source for the NYT on this, they have an exquisite level of detail - this article is thorough:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/11/us/politics/russia-trump.html

...according to people familiar with the discussions.

Ultimately, the people said, the president signed off on a statement from Donald Trump Jr. for The Times that was so incomplete that it required day after day of follow-up statements, each more revealing than the last.

Key coverup element being that Trump Sr. signed off on Trump Jr's false statement(s). Question is can investigators establish that Trump Sr. actually knew about the meeting. They've lied so darn much about everything I don't see how they can even keep the web straight anymore.

+1 What little credibility this administration had has been shot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't seen it either, but hope the FBI is only being circumspect about its knowledge and sources. If not, isn't it likely Russia is feeding this to NYT? Not arguing that makes it untrue; it's all clear as day in the email, but to sow unrest here. I mean, we are handicapped right now. Also, not trying to say it shouldn't have been reported. Obvs it should. I've just been crazy curious about who the leakers have been throughout this whole debacle and what their true motivation is.

While I think it's possible Russian hands may be in every element of this, I think it's more likely that this specific information was given to NYT by someone in Kushner and/or Pence Camps. Apparently Kushner legal team came across these emails in the last few weeks (Twitter). Pence released a statement that basically said "I have nothing to do with these losers." Those two (and their associates) have separate things to gain by tossing Jr. to the wolves, whether Sr. goes down with him or not.

Is Mother our Deep Throat 2.0?

What a mind-bending thought!

[Anonymous]

So now they've moved from saying 'no collusion' to 'no laws were broken'?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So now they've moved from saying 'no collusion' to 'no laws were broken'?

Yes. Hannity and others have been floating the "collusion is okay and not illegal!" tidbits for a few weeks. Sick.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a question to all you brilliant DCUM legal minds out there. What's the legal standard/definition for collusion in this context? The more that comes out, the more certain it sounds like the Trump campaign had at least some knowledge of Russian involvement in the election during campaign season. However, this doesn't necessarily mean they acted on this knowledge. But would being complicit meet a collusion threshold test?

My pure speculation here. I have a feeling all these meetings that took place were about the Russians telling the Trump campaign what kind of information they had and what they were going to do with the information, while team Trump so sat there and nodded their heads.

I don't know. But let me ask you this,

Guy talks to a 14 YO girl online. Agrees to meet her for sex.

Shows up, no sex. Instead, an officer waiting to arrest him.

He's guilty of attempting to have sex with her and goes to jail.

Uday electronically agreed to meet with the Russians to get info. Showed up, no info. But he still went to the meeting. Question is what was his intent? Was his intent to collude? Is attempted treason illegal or just successful treason?

I am beginning to think Richard Nixon was merely a man before his time.

So the proper comparison isn't to Hillary but to Weiner?

The proper comparison is a setup.

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/885001097420697606

https://twitter.com/SenJohnMcCain/status/588019015198625792

Lol. No. The emails show Trump Jr got himself into this mess himself.

I’d like to apologize to Eric Trump. We always thought you were the dumb one. We were wrong.” — STEPHEN COLBERT

It appears that this lawyer is an anti-trump plant. She was with McCain on anti putin meeting. Senator Grassley is asking how he got into this country when her permission to visit was not renewed.