If anyone from the Clinton campaign can be tied to Steele then yes, and lock them up. The problem is that they X group can fund Y research group who can hire Steele. Incredibly shady, but not illegal.
Seems Like Donald Trump Jr admitted to looking for Russian Info
- Thread starter cernjSHU
- Start date
If anyone from the Clinton campaign can be tied to Steele then yes, and lock them up. The problem is that they X group can fund Y research group who can hire Steele. Incredibly shady, but not illegal.
Isn't that shocking. My views tend be consistent instead of wasting time on the past, fix the present for the future. If you cut both sides open, you'd see nothing but black and filth inside. Time to clean it all up.
They all should be locked up on both sides for having the best interest of the lobbyists at heart not the American people. They took an oath to serve the American people. How many can honestly say they have?
Lol... Yeah according to Donald Trump Jr. Nothing to see here folks. That's a wrap.
Yea sounds perfectly reasonable... I bet he takes meetings with unnamed people all the time, and bring along Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner for shits and giggles. You have to be kidding me. You actually buy that nonsense?
It's just as believe as the $400 million to Iran wasn't a ransom for hostages. The entire system is corrupt and full of smoke and mirrors. To act like you can't believe this is happening or this is something new is idiotic.
The story evolves so rapidly it is hard to keep pace.
1. Statement 1 was the meeting was about adoptions
2. Statement 2 was the explanation above
This morning, DTJr tweeted
"Obviously I'm the first person on a campaign to ever take a meeting to hear info about an opponent... went nowhere but had to listen."
"Information helpful to the campaign" (Statement 2) could have meant anything. Now we know it was info about an opponent.
I am amazed that DTJr. ever admitted he was lured by the prospect of dirt. I give him credit for owning up to it, even at this relatively late date.
1. Statement 1 was the meeting was about adoptions
2. Statement 2 was the explanation above
This morning, DTJr tweeted
"Obviously I'm the first person on a campaign to ever take a meeting to hear info about an opponent... went nowhere but had to listen."
"Information helpful to the campaign" (Statement 2) could have meant anything. Now we know it was info about an opponent.
I am amazed that DTJr. ever admitted he was lured by the prospect of dirt. I give him credit for owning up to it, even at this relatively late date.
The tweet from Donald Trump Jr is as follows
"Obviously I'm the first person on a campaign to ever take a meeting to hear info about an opponent... went nowhere but had to listen."
He went to hear info about an opponent. I am going to make two suppositions.
1. The opponent was Clinton
2. He took the meeting to hear negative info, not positive info
Perhaps I am wrong but I think they are reasonable suppositions.
Collusion is an acceptable practice depending on who you collude with. CNN and Washerman-Schultz can work together to prepare Clinton to beat Sanders and that was quite alright. Let's face it. Both sides were dirty. The way election was conducted was a disgrace. It was all about getting as dirty as you can. Neither candidate took any moral integrity. I wasn't happy to see Obama get elected twice. I lived with it. It was the choice of the American people. People who aren't happy with Trump, can't respect the choice of the people. So they search for anything they can to discredit the man. It's disgusting.
In your line of work, how many meetings do you take based on a recommendation without knowing the name of the person you are going to meet?
In my line of work that would be 0. Now imagine you are worth hundreds of millions of dollars. You gonna take a meeting without knowing who you are meeting with and for what purpose? Come on.
The reason he said he didn't know who it was is because it would be illegal to accept help from them.
There are two issues
1. Did Trump Jr solicit information during the meeting?
2. Did the woman offer information in exchange for help with the potential easing of the adoption rule?
If either thing happened and the woman is a foreign national, can that be construed as an illegal campaign contribution? It is entirely possible. I am not qualified to make any legal suppositions but if the tweet is accurate, Trump Jr. incriminated himself at least a little.[/QUOTE]
Didn't really bother me. Probably because i would prefer her to be there over him...
This whole thing is bizarre we can't work with a foreign government, but at the end of the day our leader needs to work with other foreign governments. If other leaders have dirt on our people shouldn't the American people know? If our leaders are not using our funds properly and another country's leader informs the opposing candidate of that should we ignore it? Or should we continue to let our elected officials act corruptly if that is happening?
Not to defend CNN, because Vkted for Bernie, but colluding with a hostile government is slightly different (and illegal) and giving preferential treatment to Hillary.
Preferential treatment. LOL I didn't know that was part of the job description in journalism.
So a journalist helping a candidate you can harp on, but a hostile foreign government interfering with an election and we should move on because it happens all the time.
I will defer to our resident constitutional scholar SPK, but I believe the Logan Act specifically prevents the kind of activity you mention. It has been in effect for over 200 years. Private citizens cannot negotiate with foreign governments as far as I know.
The issue with Trump Jr. is a little different and would take many more suppositions than I would be willing to make to call his meeting a violation of the Logan Act (as I understand it).
Absolutely, nobody elected her. Does she even have proper clearance if sensitive subjects are discussed?
I'm not harping on it, I'm just pointing out that neither side of the aisle is clean. As I previously posted the people spoke with Obama. It may not have been liked by all, but it was respected. This time the losers are not respectful of the democratic process at all. Part of the wussification of America. You people still want a trophy because your candidate didn't win. Or your candidate didn't win, so you are taking your ball amd going home so no one can play.
I believe the President can choose whomever he pleases to represent him in a meeting of this type. The fact it broke protocol is not great (apparently the Secretary of State should have filled the seat) but the other 19 leaders will have to get over it.
My question is events of this type are completely scripted and time budgeted. I don't understand how the President was, in effect, double booked. It leads to the impression that we couldn't control the schedule. It isn't that difficult, yet we made it look that way.
And if Putin walked out of the recent meetings with a lot of dirt on Trump, would you want to know or not??
Beyond your partisan opinion, supposition, and conjecture, do you anything to support a definitive contradiction to his statement. "You have to be kidding me" is not a particularly strong argument.
I kidded no one. I asked how you could draw your conclusion based on his statement. You can't and so the next best thing is to call him a liar. Brilliant.
Not really. I am not an expert on G20 meeting scheduling so maybe this happens all the time. If he left to take a leak, no big deal. If he left take another meeting it is my opinion he was being disrespectful to the other leaders and to the speaker for whom this was an important topic. .
I have no evidence other than Trump admitting he took a meeting from a Russian national who wanted to help his father win an election.
Trump says he didn't know who he was meeting with, but brought along kushner and manafort. My opinion is that is absurd. The reason he is saying he didn't know who it was is because the premise of the meeting would be illegal.
Sorry, that's not a very good answer, you're better than that, this answer makes you look like a crazy anti-Trumper hack.
Last edited:
Yes but nobody cares. A schlub like John Kerry can violate this law and still run for president.
And that was before I had seen tonights reporting that Jr knew it was coming from Russia before he took the meeting... what a shock.
This could be a game-changer although it's from the unreliable NY Times and the author of the email denies he had any knowledge of the Russian government's involvement:
WASHINGTON — Before arranging a meeting with a Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer he believed would offer him compromising information about Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump Jr. was informed in an email that the material was part of a Russian government effort to aid his father’s candidacy, according to three people with knowledge of the email.
Last edited:
Just stating the obvious via logic and the reporting followed. Unless you also schedule 30 minute meetings with people who you don't know or why they want to meet?
Game changer? Some people wouldn't jump to that conclusion. Apparently they didn't even like it
Yeah NY Times is unreliable news. SPK is a constitutional scholar. The above two examples are garbage that is being spewed on this board. If anyone has any integrity or has any bit of passion for this country should be very concerned what the smell is coming from the White House. If you don't, then you might as well be a traitor to this country. Okay perhaps that is too strong of language. But, the point is you have to be concerned and all you have to do is connect the dots.
Last edited:
I think it's obvious Don Jr, Kuschner, and Manafort were trying to trick Russian agents into handing over proof of hacking by their country so they could immediately turn it over to the authorities and prevent foreign meddling in our elections!
