You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: US Politics Thread
I'm just shocked he released these emails. They do him no favors. I'll give him credit for transparency, but it doesn't alleviate him from what he's entering into. This is getting really bad.
Turns out the NYT were going to release the emails, so he wanted to beat 'em to the punch.
From today (really read this):
"The June 3, 2016, email sent to Donald Trump Jr. could hardly have been more explicit: One of his father’s former Russian business partners had been contacted by a senior Russian government official and was offering to provide the Trump campaign with dirt on Hillary Clinton.
The documents “would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father,” read the email, written by a trusted intermediary, who added, “This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.”
If the future president’s eldest son was surprised or disturbed by the provenance of the promised material — or the notion that it was part of a continuing effort by the Russian government to aid his father’s campaign — he gave no indication.
He replied within minutes: “If it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer.”
Four days later, after a flurry of emails, the intermediary wrote back, proposing a meeting in New York on Thursday with a “Russian government attorney.”
Donald Trump Jr. agreed, adding that he would most likely bring along “Paul Manafort (campaign boss)” and “my brother-in-law,” Jared Kushner, now one of the president’s closest White House advisers."
Re: US Politics Thread
mitchejw wrote:"if this story is true" meaning JR met with Russian spies.
How can it not be true? JR posted it himself...on twitter...
just like his Dad posted that Obama had illegal surveillance on him during the campaign. A lot of people believe that and there is far less evidence to support that than anything else being discussed here.
Again, what is true? That Jr met with a lawyer from Russia. Yep. That he knew she allegedly had dirt on Clinton? Yep.
100% agreed. What crime is committed based on these truths?
What some of you are trying to do, is conflate the truth with unknowns or unverified claims. Like this lawyer was a Russian intelligence operative or that she was/is connected to the hacking. Or that Jr knew she was either of those.
The DNC bought the piss tape dossier from a British spy. Clinton's campaign met with the Ukrainian ambassador to get dirt on Trump. If these actions aren't illegal, and I don't believe they are, what crime do we know Jr committed?
This is what I want to understand. Jr didn't admit to what you believe - that this woman was KGB and had hacked information.
Don't confuse your gut feelings with objective fact.
The only question I am asking here it is: if nothing strange or possibly illegal is going on here then why not just say what happened from the get go question
Just answer truthfully the first time you're asked. Why do you have to wait to tell the truth about supposedly legal actions until you were forced to?
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: US Politics Thread
I am so worn out over this shit. Every fucking night Brian Williams acts like he has the bombshell.. Donald Trump Jr. is an idiot..
I still don't see how this is a big deal but the Ukraine thing is not.
Re: US Politics Thread
Stepping outside Trump for a moment, I just wanna post this here for our American posters:
https://www.battleforthenet.com/
Thanks.
Re: US Politics Thread
Again, what is true? That Jr met with a lawyer from Russia. Yep. That he knew she allegedly had dirt on Clinton? Yep.
100% agreed. What crime is committed based on these truths?
IANAL, but... according to Title XI, Chapter I, Subchapter A, Section 110.20 of the election law as per the Counsel for Foreign Relations ( https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20 ):
Contributions and donations by foreign nationals in connection with elections. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution or a donation of money or other thing of value, or expressly or impliedly promise to make a contribution or a donation, in connection with any Federal, State, or local election.
Opposition research clearly qualifies as a thing of value, IMHO.
Of course, the quoted paragraph doesn't imply wrongdoing on Trump Jr's part yet, but...
(4)Knowingly means that a person must:
(i) Have actual knowledge that the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national;
(ii) Be aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to conclude that there is a substantial probability that the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national; or
(iii) Be aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to inquire whether the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national, but the person failed to conduct a reasonable inquiry.
I'm pretty sure no sane person will argue that Trump Jr. did not know the information came from a foreign national, so clearly - if you accept the premise that opposition research holds value - he committed a crime by replying the way he did and by not reporting this to authorities.
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: US Politics Thread
Randall Flagg wrote:Again, what is true? That Jr met with a lawyer from Russia. Yep. That he knew she allegedly had dirt on Clinton? Yep.
100% agreed. What crime is committed based on these truths?IANAL, but... according to Title XI, Chapter I, Subchapter A, Section 110.20 of the election law as per the Counsel for Foreign Relations ( https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20 ):
Contributions and donations by foreign nationals in connection with elections. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution or a donation of money or other thing of value, or expressly or impliedly promise to make a contribution or a donation, in connection with any Federal, State, or local election.
Opposition research clearly qualifies as a thing of value, IMHO.
Of course, the quoted paragraph doesn't imply wrongdoing on Trump Jr's part yet, but...
(4)Knowingly means that a person must:
(i) Have actual knowledge that the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national;
(ii) Be aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to conclude that there is a substantial probability that the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national; or
(iii) Be aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to inquire whether the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national, but the person failed to conduct a reasonable inquiry.
I'm pretty sure no sane person will argue that Trump Jr. did not know the information came from a foreign national, so clearly - if you accept the premise that opposition research holds value - he committed a crime by replying the way he did and by not reporting this to authorities.
Is this the same thing the DNC/Clinton did with Ukrain in Oppo research against Trump?
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: US Politics Thread
TheMole wrote:Randall Flagg wrote:Again, what is true? That Jr met with a lawyer from Russia. Yep. That he knew she allegedly had dirt on Clinton? Yep.
100% agreed. What crime is committed based on these truths?IANAL, but... according to Title XI, Chapter I, Subchapter A, Section 110.20 of the election law as per the Counsel for Foreign Relations ( https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20 ):
Contributions and donations by foreign nationals in connection with elections. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution or a donation of money or other thing of value, or expressly or impliedly promise to make a contribution or a donation, in connection with any Federal, State, or local election.
Opposition research clearly qualifies as a thing of value, IMHO.
Of course, the quoted paragraph doesn't imply wrongdoing on Trump Jr's part yet, but...
(4)Knowingly means that a person must:
(i) Have actual knowledge that the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national;
(ii) Be aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to conclude that there is a substantial probability that the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national; or
(iii) Be aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to inquire whether the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national, but the person failed to conduct a reasonable inquiry.
I'm pretty sure no sane person will argue that Trump Jr. did not know the information came from a foreign national, so clearly - if you accept the premise that opposition research holds value - he committed a crime by replying the way he did and by not reporting this to authorities.
Is this the same thing the DNC/Clinton did with Ukrain in Oppo research against Trump?
For some unspecified reason they'll claim it wasn't. And to the point, what information was received? If no transfer took place, ignoring the loose interpretation of value, absolutely nothing of value was transferred.
It's a direct parallel of their obstruction claims. Actual circumstantial evidence of obstruction by the Democrats exists. Utter silence. Speculation (ignoring that Trump can't actually be charged with Obstruction) exists only for Trump. But SLC and co just know, cause he thinks he heard a lawyer on MSNBC say so. If only our justice system could function that quickly. 5 minute panel on MSNBC determines the facts and guilt in any case.
Re: US Politics Thread
TheMole wrote:Randall Flagg wrote:Again, what is true? That Jr met with a lawyer from Russia. Yep. That he knew she allegedly had dirt on Clinton? Yep.
100% agreed. What crime is committed based on these truths?IANAL, but... according to Title XI, Chapter I, Subchapter A, Section 110.20 of the election law as per the Counsel for Foreign Relations ( https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20 ):
Contributions and donations by foreign nationals in connection with elections. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a contribution or a donation of money or other thing of value, or expressly or impliedly promise to make a contribution or a donation, in connection with any Federal, State, or local election.
Opposition research clearly qualifies as a thing of value, IMHO.
Of course, the quoted paragraph doesn't imply wrongdoing on Trump Jr's part yet, but...
(4)Knowingly means that a person must:
(i) Have actual knowledge that the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national;
(ii) Be aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to conclude that there is a substantial probability that the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national; or
(iii) Be aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to inquire whether the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national, but the person failed to conduct a reasonable inquiry.
I'm pretty sure no sane person will argue that Trump Jr. did not know the information came from a foreign national, so clearly - if you accept the premise that opposition research holds value - he committed a crime by replying the way he did and by not reporting this to authorities.
Is this the same thing the DNC/Clinton did with Ukrain in Oppo research against Trump?
If equally damning proof of this exists, then yes, absolutely, no doubt. Why does it matter though? "She did it too" is not a valid defense.
Re: US Politics Thread
And to the point, what information was received? If no transfer took place, ignoring the loose interpretation of value, absolutely nothing of value was transferred.
Attempting to commit a crime is not illegal as long as you fail? Is that your argument? The fact that the Trump campaign is basically a bunch of bumbling buffoons is NOT a good reason to let them off the hook.
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: US Politics Thread
Smoking Guns wrote:TheMole wrote:IANAL, but... according to Title XI, Chapter I, Subchapter A, Section 110.20 of the election law as per the Counsel for Foreign Relations ( https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20 ):
Opposition research clearly qualifies as a thing of value, IMHO.
Of course, the quoted paragraph doesn't imply wrongdoing on Trump Jr's part yet, but...
I'm pretty sure no sane person will argue that Trump Jr. did not know the information came from a foreign national, so clearly - if you accept the premise that opposition research holds value - he committed a crime by replying the way he did and by not reporting this to authorities.
Is this the same thing the DNC/Clinton did with Ukrain in Oppo research against Trump?
If equally damning proof of this exists, then yes, absolutely, no doubt. Why does it matter though? "She did it too" is not a valid defense.
Because that info came out months ago and nobody gave a fuck in the MSM. Just like nobody gave a fuck about the Clinton foundation, the emails, and they thought Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton meeting on the tarmac was coincidence.
This side show does not help America. I prefer we debate policy, etc. This frustrates me all the way around. Trump and his tweets piss me off. But this Russia shit pisses me off too. Who Fucking cares. He wanted some dirty on Hillary. Big fucking deal. Let's move on. Let's scold him for it. But the fucker isn't going to to be forced to resign and if he is Pence will be the president. What the fuck is the end game here??
