Donald Trump Jr emails show Russia communication

[dvdjs]

It doesn’t matter, my point is that much of the media were making claims with no evidence,

Really? Consider the story that is the topic of this thread: are you suggesting that there isno evidence behind what has been reported?

So, if you’re going to promulgate the narrative that Trump and Russia colluded then have the friggin evidence to prove it first.

Promulgate a narrative? It is a story. News outlets investigate and report on emerging details on the story. You may think that they should be looking at other stories, but they are free to investigate adn report what they find important.

 

[dvdjs]

Continued:

Thanks for the Greenwald article.

He acknowledges that Junior’s story is noteworthy, but then diminishes its importance, not legally, but politically, by claiming somehow the according to the Democrats, the issue is collusion on the stealing of information from Podesta and the DNC.

Another semantical riff on “hacking”.

Legally, if the Trump team did not join in the theft, but only in making use of the ill-gotten gains, then that would be criminal conspiracy. The idea that that focus is a change of goalposts is silly, both because the conspiracy is still a serious crime, and the idea that the goalposts were somehow fixed by what Harry Reid once said is risible. They are fixed by the law.

To compound the nonsense, he then shifts to a discussion that is uniformed by legal boundaries at all, just some whataboutism regarding foreign contacts.

This is a hack job, by someone who ought to know better.

 

[josie_L]

Really? Consider the story that is the topic of this thread: are you suggesting that there isno evidence behind what has been reported?

No, I’m saying that for months they were promulgating this narrative with nothing but rumors and a flawed and much dis-proven dossier. As for the “evidence”, now that we finally have something to connect Trump campaigners with Russia, what does this actually mean, i.e., does this support the claim that Russia/Trump worked together to hack the DNC (and Podesta’s email), and win the election?

Promulgate a narrative? It is a story. News outlets investigate and report on emerging details on the story. You may think that they should be looking at other stories, but they are free to investigate adn report what they find important.

Yes, a story based on a very flawed dossier and information, even the NYT in their article admitted that the meeting was the first connection made between Russia and Trump campaign.

 

[Sophie_Lawrence]

I don’t remember the contents of the dossier appearing any place else but Buzzfeed. Cnn didn’t report on the content, to my recollection. Just the existence of it.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Excepts from:

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

About allegations of treason against Trump Jr., the law professor explained: “Treason is a little extreme for this… [Russia] may not be our friend, but it is not clear they are our enemy. We are not at war.”

About allegations of perjury against President Trump, his son, or members of his administration, the law professor explained: "I’m not sure any of this has been under oath yet… but you would have to prove [one] was knowingly and maliciously misleading, and [their] claim is to say he just forgot. So we’re in a gray area there. "

About collusion, the law professor explained: “Collusion isn’t really a crime, I think we are getting at things like conspiracy to commit a crime, or coordination of campaign finance stuff. Collusion is more of a political term than a legal term.”

About the final alegation, that Jared Kushner might have forgotten something on his security clearance form, but added it later, the law professor explained: *“That’s irrelevant… The thing was that he was at the meeting and he didn’t report having been at the meeting --as I understand it-- in his intial filing to get the security clearance. So, at the very least, he has corrected that, but there is still some question about how knowing that was. So, perjury no, lying to the government maybe.” *

 

[lmachine]

Yes, it was CNN instead of NYT, but she explained why she couldn’t put a link. She didn’t know how. Neither do I (not via phone).

She does know how to type, so it doesn’t explain why she kept replacing “CNN” with “NYT”.

 

[lmachine]

In comedy news Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow is trying to blame the Secret Service for Trump Jr.'s meeting which is hilarious.

 

[dvdjs]

No, I’m saying that for months they were promulgating this narrative with nothing but rumors and a flawed and much dis-proven dossier.

This is nonsense. Journalists in good media outlets write stories on the basis of information received from sources and fact checked through additional research. That is not a rumor. I have asked you before to bring forth evidence that the dossier is “much dis-proven”. Can you cite sources that disprove much of the items in the dossier, r is this just rumor?

As for the “evidence”, now that we finally have something to connect Trump campaigners with Russia, what does this actually mean, i.e., does this support the claim that Russia/Trump worked together to hack the DNC (and Podesta’s email), and win the election?

We’ see. I cannot wee why they would work together to steal information - why would Russia need help from the Trump campaign. But I could see other levels of cooperation in the dissemination of materials and messaging associated with the dissemination. Is that a stretch? Yes and no. There s no specific evidence for that, but we now know that members of the Trump campaign were interested in playing ball with the Russians.

Yes, a story based on a very flawed dossier and information, even the NYT in their article admitted that the meeting was the first connection made between Russia and Trump campaign.

Interesting point.
Whether or not the dossier should have been released is academic. Most media outlets deferring from publication, since it was salacious and not independently verifiable. Buzzfeed published anyway, but did not claim that all of the facts in the dossier were true; that wasn’t their story angle.

The point about the NYT is interesting. so up until this point, the “narrative” was about Russian interference, about which only Trump among those in government, seems to have any doubt. Did the dossier bring others around to purse this story? Did the Flynn episode? Did the Session recusal? Did the drip-by-drip release of contact information? Did the firing of Comey and the appointment of a special counsel? Whatever it was, and there are so many possibilities, we are where we are. Trump hasn’t gotten out in front of the story and it will remain as a cloud until it is all resolved.

 

[dvdjs]

Excepts from:

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

We’ve had this before.

It should be noted that this refers to conviction on the basis of present, public knowledge and on these specific charges.

In that sense some if it is trivial - no one can be convicted of “collusion”.

The article does not represent an exoneration, just a clarification of what charges are possible, or rather which are not, and the challenges to proving perjury or treason.

 

[ProVobis]

Let’s take care of that.

On iOS, Android, and other operating mobile operating systems posting a link is just a matter of copying and pasting text. For completeness of the instructions I write these for someone that doesn’t know how to use the copy and paste features.

• Open a new tab in your browser
• find the story of interest
• tap and hold in the address bar
• tap “select all”
• Tap “copy.”
• Navigate to CAF
• start a new post/respond to a post
• begin typing your
• tap and hold the text box when you are ready to insert the link
• select “paste.”

This works the same way on all the touch screen interfaces I’ve tried (Android, iOS, Windows, Tizen, and some others you may not be familiar with). Additionally if you’ve got access to a desktop and now how to copy and paste from it then it may sometimes be worth using it to send a link to an article.

Thanks for that. It took me a while to figure it out. And then only by accident. And then it took a little practice.

 

[Sojourner003]

One of President Donald Trump’s personal lawyers defended a meeting that the president’s son had with Russian nationals during the 2016 campaign, suggesting the fact that the Secret Service allowed the meeting showed it was not “nefarious.”
“Well, I wonder why the Secret Service, if this was nefarious, why the Secret Service allowed these people in. The president had Secret Service protection at that point, and that raised a question with me,” Jay Sekulow, a member of Trump’s legal team, said on Sunday on the ABC news program “This Week.”

rawstory.com/2017/07/trump-lawyer-defends-don-jr-meeting-and-blames-secret-service-for-allowing-it/

And this appears on Twitter.

“Jay Sekulow implied Secret Service vetted Don Jr’s meeting. But Jr didn’t have Secret Service protection at the time. Only Trump did.”
Malcolm Nance‏Verified account @MalcolmNance
Following
More
Malcolm Nance Retweeted Dandelion Dollars
Wow! So Secret Service presence meant that Donald Trump was present at RU meeting or meeting was inside his close security perimeter.
Malcolm Nance added,

 

[7_Sorrows]

Thanks for that. It took me a while to figure it out. And then only by accident. And then it took a little practice.

Even with those instructions I still would not be able to figure it out.
If I knew where to find the link, I would have to physically type it out and I tried that not long ago and it still didn’t work. Another kind poster posted the link correctly
for me.

 

[7_Sorrows]

You also 7. You gave us inaccurate news. It wasn’t NYT it was CNN. And then you couldn’t even give us a reference.

MY APOLOGIES!!! MEA CULPA! There is so much fake news out there and retractions I got my stories confused.
Indeed it was CNN that had 3 journalists resign.
NYT had to retract the story inaccurately reporting the 17 intelligence agencies and
the Russia story.

I AM SORRY for posting inaccurately! :doh2:

 

[Luke6_37]

MY APOLOGIES!!! MEA CULPA! There is so much fake news out there and retractions I got my stories confused.
Indeed it was CNN that had 3 journalists resign.
NYT had to retract the story inaccurately reporting the 17 intelligence agencies and
the Russia story.

I AM SORRY for posting inaccurately! :doh2:

You are still posting inaccurately.

The NYT never retracted the story, they simply added a correction at the bottom. See…

**Trump’s Deflections and Denials on Russia Frustrate Even His Allies **
nyti.ms/2u4faI1

 

[7_Sorrows]

You are still posting inaccurately.

The NYT never retracted the story, they simply added a correction at the bottom. See…

**Trump’s Deflections and Denials on Russia Frustrate Even His Allies **
nyti.ms/2u4faI1

RT reported NYT retracted the story that 17 intelligence agencies…
They did later issue a correction.

 

[Michael_Mayo]

MY APOLOGIES!!! MEA CULPA! There is so much fake news out there and retractions I got my stories confused.
Indeed it was CNN that had 3 journalists resign.
NYT had to retract the story inaccurately reporting the 17 intelligence agencies and
the Russia story.

I AM SORRY for posting inaccurately! :doh2:

Thank you for acknowledging and apologizing.

 

[Sojourner003]

RT reported NYT retracted the story that 17 intelligence agencies…
They did later issue a correction.

Do you know what RT stands for?

 

[Sojourner003]

You are still posting inaccurately.

The NYT never retracted the story, they simply added a correction at the bottom. See…

**Trump’s Deflections and Denials on Russia Frustrate Even His Allies **
nyti.ms/2u4faI1

From the article:
Or, as he claimed during the first general election debate, the hacking could have been the work of a lone wolf weighing 400 pounds, sitting on his bed at home.

At least now we have an idea who that guy might be.

 

[7_Sorrows]

Do you know what RT stands for?

I am sure I can “google” and find other sources, but I am not going to take the time.

The real story is how many months the information about 17 intelligence agencies was inaccurately reported. There are probably many people who still
think it is true.

 

[jtauke]

I am sure I can “google” and find other sources, but I am not going to take the time.

The real story is how many months the information about 17 intelligence agencies was inaccurately reported. There are probably many people who still
think it is true.

RT is state sponsored news.

May as well be called the Putin Propaganda Network.