Donald Trump Jr emails show Russia communication

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vouthon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mary_Gail_36 said:
That’s what was told to Jr. Who said “I love it” when going to meet her ( and now the numbers at the meeting are growing)

If she is or isn’t we don’t know yet.

We don’t even know what the meeting actually consisted of. We just have Don Jr.'s account of it.
Click to expand...
You are aware that Hillary colluded with a foreign entity (Ukraine) to find dirt on Trump, right?
 
josie_L said:
Contact with a Russian person was made, but this does not equate with the spewing of a Russia-Trump narrative from the Media, wherein we are to believe that Russia helped Trump win the presidential election and that Trump and his administration were in on it. Where’s the evidence that the Russians helped, where’s the evidence that Trump benefited from this collision with Russia?

My goodness, if all we have is one failed attempt to meet up with a Russian/s citizens, which we have yet to confirm is legal or not., then we’re making a much ado about nothing.
Click to expand...
You have a point up to a point.

  1. *]We know that Trump’s people entertained an overture to collusion with an adversarial foreign power.
    *]Our IC has concluded that that foreign power undertook illegal activities and interfered in our election to benefit Trump.
    *]Collaboration in this effort between Russia and Trump’s campaign remains to be seen.
    *]Trump’s people has been slow to comply with legal requirements for reporting their Russian contacts and have lied about them.

    The overall disposition of this case hinges largely on item 3; that is open. But the investigation continues, and it is ado about something.
 
dvdjs said:
You have a point up to a point.

  1. *]We know that Trump’s people entertained an overture to collusion with an adversarial foreign power.
    *]Our IC has concluded that that foreign power undertook illegal activities and interfered in our election to benefit Trump.
    *]Collaboration in this effort between Russia and Trump’s campaign remains to be seen.
    *]Trump’s people has been slow to comply with legal requirements for reporting their Russian contacts and have lied about them.

    The overall disposition of this case hinges largely on item 3; that is open. But the investigation continues, and it is ado about something.
Click to expand...

  1. I’m okay with continued investigations, but thus far, matters look far worse for the Democrats than they do for Trump.
 
josie_L said:
You are aware that Hillary colluded with a foreign entity (Ukraine) to find dirt on Trump, right?
Click to expand...
Hillary? I don’t think so.
People have been careful to distinguish Trump, from Trump associates, Trump campaign officials, Trump business partners, and Trump children. I think that we would have to get to a level of supporter to make this a statement resemble the truth. And collusion?
secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.
Click to expand...
Don’t think so.
And collusion with an hostile, adversarial foreign government.? Nope.

You want to say “this” is the same as “that”. And you have some criteria to make the comparison work. But you skip over the criteria that are germane to the serious matters here. Hence your faulty assessment.
 
dvdjs said:
You have a point up to a point.

  1. *]We know that Trump’s people entertained an overture to collusion with an adversarial foreign power.
    *]Our IC has concluded that that foreign power undertook illegal activities and interfered in our election to benefit Trump.
    *]Collaboration in this effort between Russia and Trump’s campaign remains to be seen.
    *]Trump’s people has been slow to comply with legal requirements for reporting their Russian contacts and have lied about them.

    The overall disposition of this case hinges largely on item 3; that is open. But the investigation continues, and it is ado about something.
Click to expand...

  1. Your fourth point leads to a question for me: If what the Trumps did wasn’t illegal…then why have they been lying about it, and continue to lie about it? Why not just admit it and go on with life?
 
dvdjs said:
Hillary? I don’t think so.
People have been careful to distinguish Trump, from Trump associates, Trump campaign officials, Trump business partners, and Trump children. I think that we would have to get to a level of supporter to make this a statement resemble the truth. And collusion?
Click to expand...
Oh, and do you believe that the media was making that distinction, please? But just for the record, when I say Hillary I do mean her campaign, i.e., their her people.
Don’t think so.
And collusion with an hostile, adversarial foreign government.? Nope.
Click to expand...
You want to say “this” is the same as “that”. And you have some criteria to make the comparison work. But you skip over the criteria that are germane to the serious matters here. Hence your faulty assessment.
Click to expand...
That depends on who they met in the Ukraine, i.e., the pro-Russian party of Regions??
 
Mary_Gail_36 said:
She could have been a hostess at IHOP for all that matters.

She was presented as a Russian government official.

By someone very familiar to the Trumps.

So all this time of investigation Don Jr kept this to himself. And his brother in law. For a year.

Why?
Click to expand...
Hope you can explain this to me???
The effort to prove collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government has proven to be little more than a conspiracy theory desperately in search of evidence. With only “rumors… newspapers stories… (but) not necessarily evidence” in the recent words of Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein (Calif), the left has tried to take down President Donald Trump and ignore the issues the American people care about.
Click to expand...
The recent New York Times stories aimed at Donald Trump Jr. are the latest attempt to provide evidence of collusion where none exists. The Times reported Monday that Trump Jr. accepted a meeting with a Russian lawyer after being told that she might provide damaging information about Hillary Clinton that was part of a Russian government effort to aid Trump.
Click to expand...
This micro story about a Trump Jr. meeting with a purported Kremlin-related attorney has been opportunistically harnessed by some to prove a broader, evidence-free, macro story of Trump campaign collusion with Russians in hacking the DNC and releasing Hillary Clinton’s emails to the public. But the micro fails to prove the macro, though the left breathlessly alleges it does.
Click to expand...
As the Times stories aimed at Donald Trump Jr. emerged, Trump Jr. and those involved opted for transparency every step of the way.
Click to expand...
In the Times’ first story published Saturday, reporting a meeting among Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, Paul Manafort, and a Russian lawyer, the meeting is curiously described as “previously unreported,” despite the fact that both Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort disclosed the meeting before the Times’ reporting.
Click to expand...
The Times’ own reporting admits this several paragraphs down and then adds, “Because Donald Trump Jr. does not serve in the administration and does not have a security clearance, he was not required to disclose his foreign contacts.” In short, this meeting, which was portrayed as nefarious across several anti-Trump media outlets, was disclosed and openly reported by its attendees — Kushner and Manafort.
Click to expand...
The Times’ Monday night reporting went further in suggesting the email setting up the meeting promised damning Clinton information provided by the Russian government.
Click to expand...
Again, in a move of full transparency, Trump Jr. publicly released the entire email chain on Twitter. The initial email states that the “Crown prosecutor of Russia” offered to provide the Trump campaign with “information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia.”
Click to expand...
In other words, the information Trump Jr. initially expressed interest in receiving was not hacked emails or illegally obtained documents but apparently information about Clinton’s official Secretary of State dealings with Russia. At the time the information was offered on June 3, 2016, there was no information suggesting Russian hackers were responsible for the hacking of the DNC. Donald Trump Jr., in other words, had no reason to believe that the information he sought was little more than opposition research.
Click to expand...
thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/media/341493-opinion-forget-don-jrs-email-its-hillary-clinton-who-colluded-with
Click to expand...
 
Mary_Gail_36 said:
She could have been a hostess at IHOP for all that matters.

She was presented as a Russian government official.

By someone very familiar to the Trumps.

So all this time of investigation Don Jr kept this to himself. And his brother in law. For a year.

Why?
Click to expand...
**Columbia Law Professor Richard Briffault Explains To MSNBC Why Donald Trump Jr. Can Not Be Guilty Of “Treason,” “Perjury,” Or “Collusion”
**

realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/07/14/columbia_law_professor_briffault_explains_why_trump_jr_not_guilty_treason_perjury_collusion.html
 
dvdjs said:
Please be explicit. I think the charge is bogus, but it is hard to refute when the charge is so vague.
Click to expand...
Nothing to be explicit about, unless you’ve been living under a rock, i.e., the DNC wikileaks prove that there was a collaborative effort to give the presidential nominee to Hillary Clinton at the expense of Bernie Sanders. People had to resign because of this scandal (Debbie Wasserman Shultz).
It appears that she did. This is unethical.
Click to expand...
Yes, she resigned.
It was not a Russian dossier. This ostensible dirty trick was not used in the election as a dirty trick. The information was turned over by the investigator to the FBI. Some of the contents have been denied.
Click to expand...
Christopher Steele got his sources from “high level Russian officials”, yet admitted that these sources were NOT VERIFIABLE and that the dossier was not meant to be leaked to the Public, and yet Fusion GPS (whose owner was summoned to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee) and the Democrats leaked this information to the media, i.e., Buzzfeed is getting sued because of this, and the FBI. Moreover, this dossier was used many months later (by the FBI and the Democrats) even though the contents of said dossier were flawed and much of it already disproved.

Get with the program, dvdjs, I’ve only said this about a million times.
Tin-foil.
Click to expand...
Hmmm, Seth Rich worked for the DNC and was a Bernie supporter, Seth Rich dies days before the DNC wikileaks, the DNC wikileaks inform us that collaborative efforts were made to deny Bernie a possible presidential nomination, DNC staffers resign, Julian Assange of wikileaks tells us that someone other than Russia hacked into the DNC, the DNC refuses to give over their server to the DHS or the FBI and uses a private organization, Crowd Striker, Comey admits he never saw the DNC server and took the word of the DNC/Crowd Striker that it was the Russians. . . . . .
Overall, you have talked about things that alternatively have little or no substance behind them or or are of little consequence.
Click to expand...
I’m a conservative Catholic who wants to talk about it, any Catholic would.
The column was by Ross Douhat. A conservative Catholic.
And yes he wants to talk of that. Any Catholic should.
Click to expand...
Good for him, now let him surmise and write an article about the corrupted/conniving actions of the Democratic party during the Hillary campaign.
 
As for this collusion with a foreign, HOSTILE, adversary:
Trump Jr. did, however, have full reason to suspect Clinton had operated nefariously in her dealings with Russia. Bill Clinton had given a $500,000 speech in Russia. Clinton had given her approval in handing one-fifth of U.S. uranium to Russia, after which her foundation received $2.35 million from the Russian-controlled company. Suspiciously, Clinton did not disclose the transaction.
Click to expand...
Likewise, Clinton campaign chief John Podesta sat on the board of a company that received $35 million from the Russian government alongside fellow board members Anatoly Chubais, a senior Russian official, and Ruben Vardanyan, an oligarch.
Click to expand...
Given this context, why wouldn’t Trump Jr. be open to taking a meeting that offered evidence of incriminating Clinton dealings with Russia, particularly when most of the media refused to look into Clinton’s question-raising actions?
Click to expand...
Trump Jr. honestly stated days ago that he was interested in “claims of potentially helpful information.” His email chain confirms his intentions even though, in the end, the information was merely a pretext for the Russian lawyer to push her own agenda related to the impact of Western sanctions on adoption of Russian children.
Click to expand...
Trump Jr.’s interest in attaining opposition research is nothing new. Where was the outrage when “Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump,” according to Politico? It was non-existent because Clinton is a darling of the media, where the left and the right are held to different standards.
Click to expand...
thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/media/341493-opinion-forget-don-jrs-email-its-hillary-clinton-who-colluded-with
Click to expand...
 
josie_L said:
Oh, and do you believe that the media was making that distinction, please? But just for the record, when I say Hillary I do mean her campaign, i.e., their her people.
Click to expand...
Yes, serious outlets made the distinction with consistency in text.
That depends on who they met in the Ukraine, i.e., the pro-Russian party of Regions??
Click to expand...
Who went over to Ukraine?
You might want to review the Politico story. It will help you appreciate the differences with Junior’s case.

politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446
 
dvdjs said:
Yes, serious outlets made the distinction with consistency in text.
Click to expand...
I think we’re going to disagree to some extent, because the fact of the matter is that the leftist MSM were using for the most part flawed information. The fact that they got this one thing right, in that they produced a source that verified Trump Jr. met with a Russian contact, does not corroborate the false narrative of a Russia/Trump collusion.
Who went over to Ukraine?
You might want to review the Politico story. It will help you appreciate the differences with Junior’s case.
Click to expand...
politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446
Click to expand...
Thank you, I will read it.
 
josie_L said:
As for this collusion with a foreign, HOSTILE, adversary:
Click to expand...
  1. Again. Collusion: secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.
  2. Junior’s imagination about Clinton as an excuse for the meeting? LOL. In that case you invite law enforcement to the meeting, not the campaign chairman.
 
josie_L said:
The DNC cheated Bernie Sanders of his presidential nomination, Donna Brazile gave Hillary questions beforehand, Democrats used a fake Russian dossier and lauded it before the media and the FBI as proof of Russia/ Trump collusion . . .

Oh, and the suspicious death of a DNC staffer, a Bernie supporter, right before the DNC wikileaks.

And the NYT wants to talk about the morality of lying.
Click to expand...
👍 so true!
 
josie_L said:
As for this collusion with a foreign, HOSTILE, adversary:
Click to expand...
If Hillary Clinton colluded with a foreign power to win the election it was wrong. As it would be wrong if the Trump campaign engaged in this kind of collusion (and it certainly looks as if Donald Trump, Jr., was enthusiastically *trying *to collude).

On the other hand, if it was alright for Donald Trump (or Donald Trump, Jr., on his behalf) to do it, then it was perfectly alright for Hillary Clinton to do it.

Can you not see that?
 
What is the connection between Trump junior meeting with the Russian lawyer and Podesta being tricked into handing over his password?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top