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

Forum Index » Political Discussion

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

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
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.  [/quote]

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? 
[/quote]

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

He hired Steele.  He paid him money in exchange for something of value.   And Steele, though a British citizen, wasn't acting (or at least Jeb Bush didn't believe he was acting) on behalf of the British government (or any other government).  He was acting as a contract employee for Bush.  In addition, even were Steele to have been acting as a British government agent, Great Britain is not considered a hostile nation to the US, so there's that.

This is in almost every was not similar to what Trump Junior did.   Actually in every way.
[/quote]

No - there was not an email that said this meeting or information was part of the Russian governments efforts to influence the US election.  Is Steele linked to a government?[/quote]

Steele was a long time intel officer so yes, at least as connected to the UK government than the two Russians in the Donald Jr meeting were connected to the Russian government.

And the question about about nations being hostile or alloes, it,s not relevant to the questiom of whether the campaign accepted a "thing of value". My point was it's a stretch to think campaign finance laws were broken here. 
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics