By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - NYT : "Trump Jr. Was Told in Email of Russian Effort to Aid Campaign"

 

Collusion?

yes 116 50.43%
 
no 22 9.57%
 
too early to tell? 35 15.22%
 
fake news 57 24.78%
 
Total:230

Seems like the nothing burger had a surprise filling eh? :p



Around the Network
epicurean said:
Machiavellian said:

So are you telling everyone that she was just there to talk about abortion to people who had no power to remove sanctions that were the cause of abortions being denied to Americans in the first place.  Who do you think benefits if those sanctions are removed.  Who do you think has to pay up and remove those sanctions for information.  So who exactly was she doing this work for.  Also if the real subject was the sanctions then Trump Jr was definitely in the wrong place talking about things he had no authority to talk or make deals on which if I remember correctly is a criminal act.

So what is your opinion they were talking about or what do you think the cost of this information Trump Jr and his father would have to pay if it was relevant.  The key is that you only have Trump Jr word that nothing came from this meeting.  You know the same person who continue to change his story as new information comes out.

I don't have any idea what they were talking about - I'm guessing it probably WAS about Hillary. I just didn't think there was anything tying her to the Russian government. I must be missing some of the emails, from what I've looked up, she was usually referred to as the "Russian Lawyer", though once she was referred to as the "Russian Government Lawyer", which I don't believe is actually correct. However the post above yours states that she was called something else, or got info from someone else, in the Russian Government, which as I mentioned, I haven't seen.

Before ya'll get to revved up, I'm in no way a fan of Trump, I just think the Russian narrative has been blown wildly out of proportion. It's basically been the lead story for 6 months now via CNN, the NY Times, and Post. They covered the DNC scandel for about 2 days, and that invovled one party doing everything they could to make sure someone was nominated. If the biggest thing they find is that Trump Jr met with a lawyer from Russia for 20 minutes, then I'm not nearly as worried about this as I am that the DNC is completely corrupt.

Reading the emails it's clear that it paints her and the information she had as coming from the government itself.  The issue is not that she is actually part of the government in any way, most times agents ties are hard to find anyway.  Its the fact that Trump JR is acting on the information in the emails and thus accepted the meeting with the full knowledge that the information and the person giving it could be a Russian agent.  This part you cannot just ignore as him being naive because Paul Manafort was also part of the meeting.

I would have agreed with you that the Russian narrative was something very hard to prove since it really did not need Trump personal involvement and even if he were involed in anyway would be hard to prove with private meetings like this where you have no clue as to the conversations that took place.  The thing is that little by little, information keeps leeking where Trump and his people have to change their stories.  You have had many reports of Trump trying to find ways to remove the sanctions against Russia and now you get these little nuggets from Trump Jr meeting with this lady who just happens to be on the subject of those same Sanctions.  The same sanctions that caused Flynn to get booted, Jeff Sessions to recuse himself etc.  I can care less bout the DNC, but what I do wonder is how many deals are on the table Trump has to pay for to stay in office.



epicurean said:

Cool - I'll just leave this here then and you can point me to when you were equally up in arms about the Dems doing the exact same thing (if not worse):

http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/10/everybody-is-forgetting-that-clinton-allies-did-the-same-thing-as-don-jr/

Hillary Clinton is not the President.

epicurean said:

And I think you're using quite a bit of hyperbole in your statement. There's no proof at all that this has anything to do with the Russian govt. The tabloid dude seems to indicate that its from a person in the Russian gov't (for a position that doesn't exist). There's no evidence that's true AND DTJ never comments on it. And again, see the link above.

I have no proof that the 13 year old kid I met online is actually a 13 year old kid, so it's totally cool for me to just show up at his house with a six pack to see what's up.

epicurean said:

And the nothing burger consists of everything prior to this. As i said, its been the biggest story on those network for 6 months. Prior to this, what was the biggest report indicating this that justified all that coverage?

Pick one:

Michael Flynn misleading Mike Pence about his foreign contacts and being asked to resign.

President Trump's constant undermining of the intelligence community's conclusions on the Russia hacking.

The WH pushing back on Russia Sanctions that congress is largely supportive of.

The President firing Jim Comey.

The President contradicting the official explanation of Comey's firing on national TV, opting instead to say that he was fired over the Russia investigation.

Jim Comey's memos, which revealed Trump requesting a pledge of loyalty, for Comey to drop the Flynn investigation, and for Comey to publicly clear Trump's name of suspicion regarding the Russia investigation.

Reports that Trump made similar requests of the DNI and the Director of the NSA.



outlawauron said:
deskpro2k3 said:

https://nyti.ms/2u4ojEc

Russian Dirt on Clinton? ‘I Love It,’ Donald Trump Jr. Said

If he was a good American, he would've contacted the FBI. Jail time.

No one actually believes any politician would do this, right? In any country.

Probably a lot would but of note from the Al Gore 2000 Campaign (quoted from the bbc)

"When Gore campaign was sent Bush debate brief book, they called FBI," he tweeted. "If foreign interests offer you info on former [secretary of state], you call the FBI."



Machiavellian said:
epicurean said:

I don't have any idea what they were talking about - I'm guessing it probably WAS about Hillary. I just didn't think there was anything tying her to the Russian government. I must be missing some of the emails, from what I've looked up, she was usually referred to as the "Russian Lawyer", though once she was referred to as the "Russian Government Lawyer", which I don't believe is actually correct. However the post above yours states that she was called something else, or got info from someone else, in the Russian Government, which as I mentioned, I haven't seen.

Before ya'll get to revved up, I'm in no way a fan of Trump, I just think the Russian narrative has been blown wildly out of proportion. It's basically been the lead story for 6 months now via CNN, the NY Times, and Post. They covered the DNC scandel for about 2 days, and that invovled one party doing everything they could to make sure someone was nominated. If the biggest thing they find is that Trump Jr met with a lawyer from Russia for 20 minutes, then I'm not nearly as worried about this as I am that the DNC is completely corrupt.

Reading the emails it's clear that it paints her and the information she had as coming from the government itself.  The issue is not that she is actually part of the government in any way, most times agents ties are hard to find anyway.  Its the fact that Trump JR is acting on the information in the emails and thus accepted the meeting with the full knowledge that the information and the person giving it could be a Russian agent.  This part you cannot just ignore as him being naive because Paul Manafort was also part of the meeting.

I would have agreed with you that the Russian narrative was something very hard to prove since it really did not need Trump personal involvement and even if he were involed in anyway would be hard to prove with private meetings like this where you have no clue as to the conversations that took place.  The thing is that little by little, information keeps leeking where Trump and his people have to change their stories.  You have had many reports of Trump trying to find ways to remove the sanctions against Russia and now you get these little nuggets from Trump Jr meeting with this lady who just happens to be on the subject of those same Sanctions.  The same sanctions that caused Flynn to get booted, Jeff Sessions to recuse himself etc.  I can care less bout the DNC, but what I do wonder is how many deals are on the table Trump has to pay for to stay in office.

I mean, it's totally cool that you believe that, and anyone is free to believe what they want. There's just no proof of it yet, and it's my opinion (just opinion, yes), that there isn't anything there. I could certainly be proven wrong, I just don't see it yet. 

It certainly seems like literally everything Trump or his inner cirlce does is liable to get leaked. I can't imagine that any president and officials in this position would have some negative things come out. I'm actually suprised we haven't heard worse - though I think we eventually will. I just don't trust the gov't in general that much. 



Owner of PS4 Pro, Xbox One, Switch, PS Vita, and 3DS

Around the Network

I'm just wondering where all these militant groups are? For decades they've been claiming that they're in charge of protecting the US from corruption within, yet here we are, a traitor and enemy from "within" and they're all in his corner.

The human race is so... *sigh*



AlfredoTurkey said:
I'm just wondering where all these militant groups are? For decades they've been claiming that they're in charge of protecting the US from corruption within, yet here we are, a traitor and enemy from "within" and they're all in his corner.

The human race is so... *sigh*

They're probably too busy taking up arms for some stupid cause. Like a rancher's "right" to have his animals graze off of land owned by the BLM.



specialk said:
epicurean said:

Cool - I'll just leave this here then and you can point me to when you were equally up in arms about the Dems doing the exact same thing (if not worse):

http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/10/everybody-is-forgetting-that-clinton-allies-did-the-same-thing-as-don-jr/

Hillary Clinton is not the President.

epicurean said:

And I think you're using quite a bit of hyperbole in your statement. There's no proof at all that this has anything to do with the Russian govt. The tabloid dude seems to indicate that its from a person in the Russian gov't (for a position that doesn't exist). There's no evidence that's true AND DTJ never comments on it. And again, see the link above.

I have no proof that the 13 year old kid I met online is actually a 13 year old kid, so it's totally cool for me to just show up at his house with a six pack to see what's up.

epicurean said:

And the nothing burger consists of everything prior to this. As i said, its been the biggest story on those network for 6 months. Prior to this, what was the biggest report indicating this that justified all that coverage?

Pick one:

Michael Flynn misleading Mike Pence about his foreign contacts and being asked to resign.

President Trump's constant undermining of the intelligence community's conclusions on the Russia hacking.

The WH pushing back on Russia Sanctaions that congress is largely supportive of.

The President firing Jim Comey.

The President contradicting the official explanation of Comey's firing on national TV, opting instead to say that he was fired over the Russia investigation.

Jim Comey's memos, which revealed Trump requesting a pledge of loyalty, for Comey to drop the Flynn investigation, and for Comey to publicly clear Trump's name of suspicion regarding the Russia investigation.

Reports that Trump made similar requests of the DNI and the Director of the NSA.

So wait - you're totally cool with the fact that Clinton's camp met with and worked with the Ukranian gov't to get damaging info on Trump simply because she lost the election. Just admit you're a Democrat shill then, because that's fucking ridiculous. What DTJ did doesn't come CLOSE (as far as we know) to what the dems did, yet you're completely up in arms over this, and Clinton's camp is completely non-noteworthy. What a joke.  



Owner of PS4 Pro, Xbox One, Switch, PS Vita, and 3DS

epicurean said:
sundin13 said:
I'd say that a conspiracy charge is pretty clear here if you cannot prove actual collusion from this. If the meeting did turn out to be a dead end, you still have (imo) clear proof of a conspiracy to collude with the Russian government. Whether or not those attempts were successful is important but not an end all, be all.

They could easily get out of that if no info was exchanged, or even further, if there's no proof info was exchanged. 

Even though I don't think for a second that this is actually the case, DTJ could simply see he met with them to see if what they said was real, then he would report it. If everything someone offered in email was true I'd be a millionaire by helping a Prince in Africa get his money out of a bank.

A conspiracy charge involves a plan to commit a crime, it does not require the crime to have actually been committed. 

Also, that last metaphor is a laughable false equivalency and a disastrous way to run a political campaign. 



epicurean said:
Machiavellian said:
I believe the key here is that he accepted the meeting knowing if the information was good he would need to pay up. So what would be the price of this information. For the people defending what he did as not being illegal, you may be right but you have to think about what the cost of the information to truly understand the situation.

While they say they were discussing adoptions who in their right mind believe that crap. First, at the time, Trump and his people had absolutely no pull to remove sanctions that were the cause of the Russia denying the US adoptions in the first place. So if the conversation was about adoptions, then what it really was about were the sanctions put in place. So here we are again where sanctions are the top of discussions and if Trump were to remove them you can be sure it was for payment for services rendered.

It continues to amaze me that people who continue to defend Trump and his people do not see the very obvious. No matter how you slice it, Trump and his people were making deals to remove sanctions and thus profit on the outcome. Since Trump and his people were not in the white house at this time, this would definitely be criminal acts on the order of Treason. Anyway, the fact these emails and other tidbits keep dropping peace meal make me believe that there are people with strings to damaging information and they keep dropping these little tidbits because Trump as usual never keeps his end of business deals.

It would not surprise me that Trump made some deals, got the Presidency then started to forget. Now these people start to drip out pieces at a time which always seem to catch his people off guard where they have to recant previous statements or reveal more then they disclose while looking completely stupid because of on camera statements they made denouncing anything was going on.

What makes you think they were going to have to "pay" for anything? I don't see anything in any of the emails, or even anything claimed by the Times, that any compensation - money or otherwise - is involved. 

I understand your further logic - I just don't agree with it. The Times, CNN, the Post, and others have been digging for over 6 months non-stop looking for info, and this is the biggest thing they've found (with the help of inside sources that are willing to leak literally everything he does). I just don't think the Russia story is going to get the Dems the endgame they want - impeachment - because I don't think there's enough there, unless they find a technicality (though that wouldn't suprise me).

I think there's probably other things he's done/said that would severly damage him, and I wish news outlets would stop with what thusfar has been a "nothing burger" and damage him for things that are more apparent and obvious.

When the last time someone was willing to give you something for nothing.  Why would this lawyer go on about the adoption stuff if that was not the agenda.  It's the information that Trump Jr gives out that he thinks is no big deal that reveals the payout.  If you really think about it, you should be very surprised they even got this info.  Just think about it, how did this email get leaked.  An email as damaging as this, released at a time like this not being purged from their system seems very suspect.  You go on about how many months these sites has been digging for dirt as if there is a time limit on such things.  Dirt get release when its convenient for interested parties to throw a broadside shot.  This is that broadside shot.  There isn't enough here to do anything but raise a lot of questions where a lawyer will probably wiggle Trump Jr out but you can believe this is a shot directly at Trump himself saying pay up or find your family in jeopardy.

My problem is that you are way to quick to throw away intent as if it means nothing.  Read the emails and you will see that from those emails there is definitely intent to collude with Russia for information on Clinton.  The key is that this type of information puts Trump Jr in jeopardy more than his Papa.  If Trump loves his son so much he got the wake-up call this leak intended.  You think this is all about Dems getting Trump impeached.  That is just one part of the story.  This is about getting Trump to pony up his part of the deal and every time he keeps waffling more like leaks like these will find their way into news site hands.  At the end of the day there will be a fall guy, it’s a matter of who that person will be.  My money is on Trump Jr taking the fall for his dad but we will see.