Tiberius Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 This meeting with jr. is proof they were trying to collude with the Russians and exactly what the Russians wanted in return. Who Leaked this info on the meeting? Interesting if it was Russia... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 Undoing BO's EO: That is an agenda? That is simply vindication... Ask a question. Get a solid answer. Dismiss answer out of hand. Pretend you used to be a Republican. All the predictability of a morning dump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 I see it as a positive thing that a Presidential contender is opening dialogue with Russia, this is a country that the US needs as a somewhat-friendly ally in this present day and age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 Michael Walsh: The Times ‘exposé’ on Donald Trump Jr. is a big yawn. The news was delivered by the New York Times in the breathless tones that might announce a cure for cancer or the discovery of life on Mars: “President Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., was promised damaging information about Hillary Clinton before agreeing to meet with a Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer during the 2016 campaign, according to three advisers to the White House briefed on the meeting and two others with knowledge of it.” To which a rational response is … who wouldn’t? And also: so, what? According to the younger Trump, the Clinton angle was just a ruse: “Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered,” he told the Times. “The real reason, it seems, was that Veselnitskaya wanted to lobby for the repeal of the Magnitsky Act, an Obama-era law that allows the US to deny visas to Russians thought guilty of human-rights violations.” In retaliation, the Russians promptly ended the adoption of Russian orphans by Americans. And that’s what all the fuss is about? No campaign in its right mind would turn down an offer of information on their opponent. That is what opposition research is all about. You can bet Hillary wouldn’t have hung up on the person who claimed to have dirt on the Donald. After all, the Clinton campaign lobbied the comedian Tom Arnold two days before the election to release potentially embarrassing footage from Trump’s TV show, “The Apprentice.” Arnold declined. But in the end, the lawyer had nothing, gave nothing, got nothing in return, in a meeting that lasted 20 minutes. This is a scandal? They hope that the rubes will think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 The New Yorker has a 10 pager on how the National Enquirer is buying up all kinds of magazine and helped get Trump elected, missed the usual 12 mentions of the Koch Brothers for some reason.... It's come to this for them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 Anyone who thinks Russia is an ally is seriously mistaken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 Anyone who thinks Russia is an ally is seriously mistaken What qualifies as an ally of the US? 10th place would be very hostile, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 Anyone who thinks Russia is an ally is seriously mistaken Whoaaaa. Easy there, Mitt. The 80's called, they'd like their foreign policy back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 In the 80's Reagan would press the Russians on violence and silencing of disodents. Trump just envys it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 In the 80's Reagan would press the Russians on violence and silencing of disodents. Trump just envys it. That was a real President, the last one, probably ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 The more I hear and read about these Russian allegations of collusion the more I am convinced that this is one of the greatest McCarthy-like nothing burger stories ever to have been incessantly broadcast by the dishonest mainstream media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 The more I hear and read about these Russian allegations of collusion the more I am convinced that this is one of the greatest McCarthy-like nothing burger stories ever to have been incessantly broadcast by the dishonest mainstream media. what'd i read today, not even a pubic hair's width of proof presented so far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 The more I hear and read about these Russian allegations of collusion the more I am convinced that this is one of the greatest McCarthy-like nothing burger stories ever to have been incessantly broadcast by the dishonest mainstream media. Well I am sure glad the people in charge of our security are taking this seriously. Anyone tied up with that gang of thugs in the kremlin can't be trusted with our nations secrets. Claiming it's just a media conspiracy shows the outrageous lengths people will go to avoid the truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 (edited) Well I am sure glad the people in charge of our security are taking this seriously. Anyone tied up with that gang of thugs in the kremlin can't be trusted with our nations secrets. Claiming it's just a media conspiracy shows the outrageous lengths people will go to avoid the truth More like the outrageous lengths people will go to fabricate nonstories to stories. You stated: This meeting with jr. is proof they were trying to collude with the Russians and exactly what the Russians wanted in return. A) Where is the proof of collusion? B) If this was collusion this lawyer would have to be some sort of a Russian foreign agent. Is she? C) In order for there to be collusion, there would have to be a quid pro quo. Where is the quid pro quo? You stated definitively that this is proof, now that you've made the claim, explain in detail with facts and respond to each three of the points that I've brought up. Edited July 10, 2017 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 So the New Republic finally wakes up to clumsily tie Trump to a postmodern presidency, nice try, not quite though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 You stated definitively that this is proof, now that you've made the claim, explain in detail with facts and respond to each three of the points that I've brought up. Given that Tiberius/gator and baskin are the same person, you will find that asking them to provide details and facts to back their comments is like throwing holy water at a vampire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 I see it as a positive thing that a Presidential contender is opening dialogue with Russia, this is a country that the US needs as a somewhat-friendly ally in this present day and age. I don't know what to think of Russia and Putin. The general vibe I got from various news outlets over the years is that both Bush and Obama were optimistic in having a positive working relationship with Putin at the beginning of their term only to be disappointed by the end. I don't mean to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but the intelligent agencies have lied to us before and maybe Trump is right in that Russia didn't hack the election to the extent where meant to believe. Maybe I'm being too naive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 I don't know what to think of Russia and Putin. The general vibe I got from various news outlets over the years is that both Bush and Obama were optimistic in having a positive working relationship with Putin at the beginning of their term only to be disappointed by the end. I don't mean to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but the intelligent agencies have lied to us before and maybe Trump is right in that Russia didn't hack the election to the extent where meant to believe. Maybe I'm being too naive. I hope for a world in which the US and Russia would be shaky friends. I await any evidence at all for all the charges that have rained down the last 8 or so months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 I don't know what to think of Russia and Putin. The general vibe I got from various news outlets over the years is that both Bush and Obama were optimistic in having a positive working relationship with Putin at the beginning of their term only to be disappointed by the end. I don't mean to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but the intelligent agencies have lied to us before and maybe Trump is right in that Russia didn't hack the election to the extent where meant to believe. Maybe I'm being too naive. It's naive to think the usic has nothing to gain by pushing this narrative, not to suspect them of malfeasance. Elements within the usic - more so than the dems and the MSM - are the primary pushers of the neo McCarthyist narrative because of the desire to prolonge the regime change wars that inflate their budgets. Russia, since they stepped up in Crimea, has been the biggest foe for that policy. Not just in the Ukraine, but in Syria and the rest of the ME - not to mention NK. Imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 10, 2017 Share Posted July 10, 2017 Anyone who thinks Russia is an ally is seriously mistaken Never thought they were. Most I ever thought is that we had an occasional intersection of interests with them. Don't think they're overtly hostile, as in the old Comintern days, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Never thought they were. Most I ever thought is that we had an occasional intersection of interests with them. Don't think they're overtly hostile, as in the old Comintern days, either. Monica was a commie? Honey trap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fridge Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 (edited) I see it as a positive thing that a Presidential contender is opening dialogue with Russia, this is a country that the US needs as a somewhat-friendly ally in this present day and age. This is not meant to be sarcastic... how you did arrive at this opinion? I'm genuinely curious how amidst all of the allegations, your interpretation is simply...they were getting to work early. Edited July 11, 2017 by fridge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 More like the outrageous lengths people will go to fabricate nonstories to stories. You stated: A) Where is the proof of collusion? B) If this was collusion this lawyer would have to be some sort of a Russian foreign agent. Is she? C) In order for there to be collusion, there would have to be a quid pro quo. Where is the quid pro quo? You stated definitively that this is proof, now that you've made the claim, explain in detail with facts and respond to each three of the points that I've brought up. A) the proof is right out, they met with this person, and on top of that five Trump campaign aids lied under oath about meeting with Russians B) she worked for Kremlin, on top of that the meetings by Kushner with a "company/bank" connected to Putin and wanting to set up a secret back channel. C) The quid pro quo is obvious, they wanted sanctions dropped that the Democrats had placed on Russian criminals D) Dems were actively promoting democracy n Russia which was a threat to the correct Putin regime Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 A) the proof is right out, they met with this person, and on top of that five Trump campaign aids lied under oath about meeting with Russians B) she worked for Kremlin, on top of that the meetings by Kushner with a "company/bank" connected to Putin and wanting to set up a secret back channel. C) The quid pro quo is obvious, they wanted sanctions dropped that the Democrats had placed on Russian criminals D) Dems were actively promoting democracy n Russia which was a threat to the correct Putin regime You're like a little four year old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 You're like a little four year old. What comrad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatorbait Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 (edited) Donald Jr. received an email saying the damaging information he was expecting to receive about Hillary Clinton was part of a Russian effort to help Donald Trump's campaign. That is just one email, I'm sure Mueller will find more. Gentlemen, that is evidence of collusion. Edited July 11, 2017 by gatorbait Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Email!! But Hillary used email! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 What qualifies as an ally of the US? 10th place would be very hostile, right? Whoaaaa. Easy there, Mitt. The 80's called, they'd like their foreign policy back. A few simple questions What country has been fighting against US intentions in Syria? What country has been causing issues in Europe against democracy? (be it internet hacking or sending military personnel into the Ukraine) Why would an ally buzz US planes and harass US Navy ships? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 A) the proof is right out, they met with this person, and on top of that five Trump campaign aids lied under oath about meeting with Russians B) she worked for Kremlin, on top of that the meetings by Kushner with a "company/bank" connected to Putin and wanting to set up a secret back channel. C) The quid pro quo is obvious, they wanted sanctions dropped that the Democrats had placed on Russian criminals D) Dems were actively promoting democracy n Russia which was a threat to the correct Putin regime A) That isn't proof of collusion ----- Strike one B) The Russian lawyer who met with Donald Trump Jr. during the 2016 election campaign said Tuesday she is not linked to the Kremlin. http://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/11/russian-lawyer-who-met-trump-jr-denies-shes-connected-to-the-kremlin.html ----------- Strike two C) That is a wild eyed conspiracy, provide proof of your claim (it doesn't exist) - Strike Three In other words everything you said was a bunch of bull **** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 A) That isn't proof of collusion ----- Strike one B) http://www.cnbc.com/2017/07/11/russian-lawyer-who-met-trump-jr-denies-shes-connected-to-the-kremlin.html ----------- Strike two C) That is a wild eyed conspiracy, provide proof of your claim (it doesn't exist) - Strike Three In other words everything you said was a bunch of bull **** A) yes, they were meeting with the Russians about campaign info B) Oh, she denies she acted for the Kremlin! Putin also says he isn't a murderer so that settles that, huh? Ok! I notice you had nothing to say about the five that lied under oath about meeting Russians C) So this is a media conspiracy? And global warming is a science conspiracy...ok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gatorbait Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Email!! But Hillary used email! Haha I would be shocked if someone didn't try to point to Obama or HRC and say look but they did this. After this newest drip it is no surprise Trump distanced himself from the meeting ASAP. Except no one believes that because it was in Trump Tower, with his son, son-in-law and campaign manager at the time. Someone from Russia tried to contact and help the Bill Clinton campaign team and you want to know what they did? Immediately went to the FBI. The treason word being thrown around by Bush's ethics lawyer Richard Painter and others is nothing to take lightly. This is just the beginning, with all the other stuff taken into account and the revelations still to come, by January even BMan will be saying what idiots Trump and his campaign were to knowingly collude with Russia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyDays Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Haha I would be shocked if someone didn't try to point to Obama or HRC and say look but they did this. After this newest drip it is no surprise Trump distanced himself from the meeting ASAP. Except no one believes that because it was in Trump Tower, with his son, son-in-law and campaign manager at the time. Someone from Russia tried to contact and help the Bill Clinton campaign team and you want to know what they did? Immediately went to the FBI. The treason word being thrown around by Bush's ethics lawyer Richard Painter and others is nothing to take lightly. This is just the beginning, with all the other stuff taken into account and the revelations still to come, by January even BMan will be saying what idiots Trump and his campaign were to knowingly collude with Russia. Treason is very unlikely to be the charge. There is a federal law that states you cannot solicit something of value from a foreign national. But currently there is no proof that the Trump team requested anything in return which would usually be the smoking gun in these cases. That being said these are all leaks from the White House so far. It's very possible that Mueller and his investigation have uncovered much worse. No leaks from them as of yet. Was this a one-time meeting? How many emails were exchanged and what was discussed? These are questions that Mueller probably already knows the answer to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Treason is very unlikely to be the charge. There is a federal law that states you cannot solicit something of value from a foreign national. But currently there is no proof that the Trump team requested anything in return which would usually be the smoking gun in these cases. That being said these are all leaks from the White House so far. It's very possible that Mueller and his investigation have uncovered much worse. No leaks from them as of yet. Was this a one-time meeting? How many emails were exchanged and what was discussed? These are questions that Mueller probably already knows the answer to. You can almost smell the desperation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyDays Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 You can almost smell the desperation. From who, Trump? Yes, trying to distance himself from his own son by claiming he knew nothing about the meeting, that is very desperate indeed. Mind you I don't think any of this was plotted out in secret conference rooms with Russian spies. If any crimes were committed the Trump family committed them in a Mr. Magoo kind of way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 (edited) From who, Trump? Yes, trying to distance himself from his own son by claiming he knew nothing about the meeting, that is very desperate indeed. Mind you I don't think any of this was plotted out in secret conference rooms with Russian spies. If any crimes were committed the Trump family committed them in a Mr. Magoo kind of way. No, from you. You're clinging on to the hope that something, ANYTHING is found. Edited July 11, 2017 by joesixpack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 A) yes, they were meeting with the Russians about campaign info B) Oh, she denies she acted for the Kremlin! Putin also says he isn't a murderer so that settles that, huh? Ok! I notice you had nothing to say about the five that lied under oath about meeting Russians C) So this is a media conspiracy? And global warming is a science conspiracy...ok Not one bit of what you said proves collusion. As a matter of fact if anything has a whiff of a characteristic of communism or what Russia would do is what you are doing. Which is to apply tangential and peripheral evidence and equate that as being guilty. Guilty until proven innocent. Again, start over and show me actual "proof" that there was collusion. Up to now, you haven't provided one iota of proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Not one bit of what you said proves collusion. As a matter of fact if anything has a whiff of a characteristic of communism or what Russia would do is what you are doing. Which is to apply tangential and peripheral evidence and equate that as being guilty. Guilty until proven innocent. Again, start over and show me actual "proof" that there was collusion. Up to now, you haven't provided one iota of proof. Your view has been stated by everyone who regularly participates here, it makes no diff at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Your view has been stated by everyone who regularly participates here, it makes no diff at all. I usually go the philosophy written in my sig. I try to give people the benefit of the doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 I usually go the philosophy written in my sig. I try to give people the benefit of the doubt. That's okay, we've all fallen for it, some still try for the 100th time.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Anybody looking for proof of anything at this moment will be disappointed. That proof, if it exists, won't be made known until the investigations are complete. Smoke is not proof of fire and those insisting that it is aren't being intellectually honest about the situation. That said, those denying even the existence of smoke are in denial. There is smoke. And that explains the leaks from both in and outside of the White House. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts