plenzmd1

Game over?

So to be clear, you deny Trump senior changed his story on the Trump Tower meeting. Is that correct? @Deranged Rhino, too many beers watching the game, text too small for my old eyes...morning argument in order!!!!

Dude, are you really denying Trump Senior changed his story on the Trump Tower meeting? @Deranged Rhino, @KD in CA am I nuts here?

Just sos ya know @Deranged Rhino, think my chrome book had lots of issues with response and length, hope it makes sense. For some reason, i cannot edit out duplicative To catch a Pedo thing..apologies in advance That stop denying what is in the public record as fact...one cannot discuss ideas when someone just flat out denies what is in the public record. Have more respect for the people on here who oppose your views, as i do yours

your boy @3rdnlng denies that took place...cant talk to people who just cannot accept the facts

It's not a belief, it's a fact the meeting was set up by Fusion GPS on behalf of the Clinton campaign. It's a fact NV was only allowed into the country thanks to the Obama State Department intervening on her behalf at the eleventh hour. ( show me definitive evidence of this, not speculation, not linking dtaes, definitive evidence) Those are facts backed by evidence, not speculations. (Show me) * NV has a history with Fusion GPS which mueller omitted. * NV met with Glenn Simpson immediately before and after the meeting. * Fusion GPS had been hired weeks before by the Clinton campaign to run an informational operation agains the Trump campaign. Those are not speculations. That's not my opinion, that's the law. Unless you sell me coke in that meeting, there's no crime committed. You'd not be able to make a case unless a purchase was made. Going to the meet isn't a crime. Arranging the meet isn't a crime. *Narco laws might be different - I don't know that law cold but I'm trying to keep it apples to apples. Okay, maybe a bad analogy...how bout this guy locking up pedo's..no teenagers present..intent is what matterd It's not a belief, it's a fact the meeting was set up by Fusion GPS on behalf of the Clinton campaign. It's a fact NV was only allowed into the country thanks to the Obama State Department intervening on her behalf at the eleventh hour. ( please show me definitive proof of this..not links to links to links...no conspiracy theories, actual proof state intervened on her behalf for her to attend this meeting) Those are facts backed by evidence, not speculations. ( we shall see by above..just cause you say so so, or your sources say so, does not make it fact) * NV has a history with Fusion GPS which mueller omitted. * NV met with Glenn Simpson immediately before and after the meeting. * Fusion GPS had been hired weeks before by the Clinton campaign to run an informational operation agains the Trump campaign. Those are not speculations. See above That's not my opinion, that's the law. Unless you sell me coke in that meeting, there's no crime committed. You'd not be able to make a case unless a purchase was made. Going to the meet isn't a crime. Arranging the meet isn't a crime. *Narco laws might be different - I don't know that law cold but I'm trying to keep it apples to apples. Same here. Taking the meeting isn't a criminal or a crime. Taking information illegally obtained MIGHT be, but it didn't happen so it's moot. Maybe really bad analogy, but how bout how many guys this dude put away with no child present I never said I didn't see a problem with it. I said it's not a crime, and it's not.( Agree) Meetings like that one are done all the time by every campaign.( dont agree, show or point me to another campaign that worked with Russia) You take the meeting, and see what they have - if only to report bad actors to the authorities if it turns out it is something nefarious. This was nefarious - just not in the way the mueller report wants you to think. It's nefarious because NV wasn't there on behalf of Putin but on behalf of fusion GPS and the Clinton campaign. There were crimes committed here.( prove this beyond a reasonable doubt, as you want the flip side to be) Just not by Trump Jr. I wonder if your moral outrage stretches enough to be outraged over the fact the Clinton campaign and Obama administration were actually paying Russian intelligence assets to creat fake dirt on their political opposition at the very same time this meeting took place. Doesn't that put them both "in debt" to a foreign government? Isn't that a worse crime - considering how deceitful they were with the public about the realities of that meeting and the dossier? ( any involvement with a foreign government that can compromise our political leaders is awful, and should be snuffed out and the public should know,,agreed.) They lied about this for two years, perpetrating fraud on the public and FISC in the process. Dividing the country in the process purely for CYA reasons.

just stop...so silly..no one denies he changed his story..yall lose all credibility when you do. https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-and-his-attorney-change-story-on-trump-tower-meeting

@Deranged Rhino, I am on phone and too long too respond, will do so this evening.

oh stop...you know damn well what the lie was ...when does that man not lie...

cmon brother, you more than anyone knows ya can't time the market!!!!! How long do you have?..i know nothing bout SEPs

Okay, we are just gonna have to disagree here. I am saying Trump JR and the Trump campaign thought they were meeting with someone officially connected to Russia..but you are saying your belief, and i stress belief at this time, that she was not there on behalf of Russia but the Clintons somehow mitigates the intent. Sounds like to me if I have you believe you are buying a kilo of coke from me but I actually work for the government and there are no drugs involved, no crime has taken place. And to reiterate, I am not saying there was a crime, but the intent to get information from a foreign government on the opposition, and you see no problem with that. We will forever disagree on that. I find it morally reprehensible to think our president and his kin would be in debt to a foreign government. Any government. And obviously Trump Sr thought it was bad to have that info out in the public realm, as he lied about the meeting too. So yes, that information could have been leveraged against him And to say you believe the Russian government was a friendly..cmon now ..i know you better

okay, thank you. Now, here si the actual text of the email Goldstone sent to Trump jr..please refute Couple of points. Goldstone told Don JR the Russiam government was involved..plain and simple 1) Of course, it is okay to take a meeting with someone claiming to have dirt on the opposition..should not be elected President if you dumb enough to say no to that. 2) The second okay you got there.. I don't see the wiggle room. Indebtedness is indebtedness no? And to Russia? In terms of the last sentence, does not matter who she is working for ..if Trump JR believed she was working for the Russian government, that is all that matters. Again, you okay with the campaign knowingly taking information for an adversarial government?

That was not my question...as I understand it there is not even a legal definition of collusion..so no collusion is relatively meaningless no? But again, the Trump campaign staffers attended the meeting as they understood the Russian's to have dirt on Hilary and that they wanted to get their hands on that dirt. 1) Do you have a different interpretation of the context of that meeting? 2) If you accept that as the context for why the meeting was arranged, do you have an issue with them accepting the meeting with the expectation that a foreign government would help in their campaign? I have not asked if it was legal, I have asked do you have an issue with it I refer specifically to the Trump Tower meeting ..and as mentioned above I am not asking about the legality of attending the meeting with the express expectation of getting dirt on an opponent from a foreign government, but rather if you think it okay. Rudy has said he thought it fine, I am asking if YOU think it is fine

Thanks for the welcome back!!!! I do not think that is what it says in the report...and lets say it is even correct.I .thought Trump was yapping yesterday about people negotiating with foreign entities that did have authority too..so I guess there is that as well Just a simple yes or no would suffice ..is it okay to accept help from a foreign government in your mind

This dude is pretty tied into the Chiefs..but might be on the move elsewhere?