Nothing on Jr.'s Emails?
- Thread starter bqknight
- Start date
Wow, how exactly do you think political surrogates work? Of course it's only "one" person. It's the surrogate that assumes all of the risk. That's the person that loses their job if discovered and then goes to work for a PAC or charity for awhile. That's the way that the people receiving the information have plausible deniability. That's the entire point of having, and being, a political surrogate. She's not stupid and neither are the people she's working for. She's not going to admit that she was directed and they aren't going to admit that either.
But it's funny that you offer an "ends justify the means" rationalization about Manafort yet you denounce the information released that showed DNC collusion against Bernie Sanders and the Panetta leaks which were much more troubling. Also totally ignoring the leaks that have consistently shown information damaging to the elected President's administration, many of which were patently inaccurate, coming from within the government.
Now we really know how smart you are. 70% of the GOP was against Trump during the primaries because they didn't want an idiot as their candidate.LOL
This tells me how much you keep up with things. NRO has been the leading Never Trumper from Day 1.
For God's sakes, in the primary they devoted an entire issue to it:
I know. They're smart people.LOL
This tells me how much you keep up with things. NRO has been the leading Never Trumper from Day 1.
For God's sakes, in the primary they devoted an entire issue to it:
Hillary n Dems colluded with Ukraine, Reps may have colluded with Russia, and neither broke the law.
Lol!
I thought Putin was a nobody- leading a "regional power"? So puny that Obama and the entire DNC mocked Romney just 4 years ago for suggesting Russia was a foe?
Now, suddenly, Putin is Hitler-esque and amassing his troops for another invasion of Poland and France.
Lulzzzzx
I thought Putin was a nobody- leading a "regional power"? So puny that Obama and the entire DNC mocked Romney just 4 years ago for suggesting Russia was a foe?
Now, suddenly, Putin is Hitler-esque and amassing his troops for another invasion of Poland and France.
Lulzzzzx
The only people that even care about this is the ((media)). Quoting each other and going on their stupid expert panels. With their hairspray and powdered faces.
Trumps doomed this week. Yea ok. There's dope to smoke yo
There hasn't even been a decent anti trump protest since when? The pussy hat march.
But he has to take down the NYT.
He has to take down the NYT
He has to take down the NYT
What they have done is sedition.
There must be consequences. Shut them down temporarily for a year to investigate.
F0ck twitter, bring in Hillary or Bush, kidnap Bernie the commie
Do something.
Indict coney.
Do focking something
Trumps doomed this week. Yea ok. There's dope to smoke yo
There hasn't even been a decent anti trump protest since when? The pussy hat march.
But he has to take down the NYT.
He has to take down the NYT
He has to take down the NYT
What they have done is sedition.
There must be consequences. Shut them down temporarily for a year to investigate.
F0ck twitter, bring in Hillary or Bush, kidnap Bernie the commie
Do something.
Indict coney.
Do focking something
I think that was before Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the attack on the airliner, Russia helping Assad, Russia hacking our election(s), etc.
People didn't think Hitler was that bad in 1935 but changed their minds in 1939. Guess what? 4 years later
Russia is pulling off a master stroke of destabilization. Prey on the competitiveness and corrupt nature of our election process; inject a sense of fear through cyber attacks; prop up the populist, anti-establishment candidate; and just sit back and watch us eat each other alive. It will be interesting to read the books on this period of politics.
Tucker is decent to watch. Good interviewer, etc. That face, yo:
Here's Tucker pissed off:
Here's Tucker confused:
Here's Tucker laughing:
Here's Tucker finding out someone just called him Hitler:
Here's Tucker after his wife told him she's pregnant:
Here's Tucker getting a hummer:
Here's Tucker finding out he's taking over for Bill O'Reilly:
It's a really big stretch, but it *could* be considered a violation of Federal Campaign laws that forbid soliciting something "of value" from a foreign entity. It does not restrict that value to be solely monetary contributions, and information *could* be considered as having "value," but as I said that's a really large stretch of interpretation of the law to come to that conclusion. It's really more of a morality/ethics issue than a legal one.
It could also be a precursor to a collusion charge if there's any evidence discovered (none so far) that information was traded for promises of influencing legislation, like the Magnitsky Act, a sanctions law against Russia which led Russia to prohibit adoptions of Russian children by US parents (something allegedly discussed at the meeting with the Russian lawyer). Obviously, this hasn't happened (yet) and is something Trump couldn't overturn on his own.
Here's the problem though. If this meeting is such an innocuous act, why all the months of denials by everyone who was at the meeting? Even today, Trump tweeted that it's still a witch hunt, even though some in his own party are calling for further investigation.
I continue to say nothing will come of this, other than maybe some campaign rhetoric fodder in 2020. Maybe.
Last edited:
It was in Jr's Security Clearance disclosure forms. The Senate committee members have already confirmed this.
They've denied meeting with Russian officials which still holds- this lawyer is loosely "linked" to Moscow, at best, and was not a former official of the State.
It was a totally dumb meeting but at the end of the day, appears to be nothing more than Jr stupidly thinking it was worth it to get a bit of dirt on HRC. There's a massive jump to make to assert that he was "colluding" or promising anything in return.
The first actions of Trump's presidency included striking Russia's ally in Syria and sending a UN Ambassador to advocate for strengthened sanctions against Russia. If they were promised anything it sure seems like that was one, giant, shitty deal.
Do you even understand what you wrote that I highlighted? You minimized Chalupa's actions by trying to cast her as a lone operator (which you did because you're trying to prove that Democrats don't do the same thing) and then added that her information was material to the Manafort issues. Which you wouldn't have brought up if you didn't think that was an important and good thing. Context matters.
I only brought up the facts. I brought up the fact that her information was on Manafort and that information may have lead to his resignation. I never qualified it as being good or bad, and certainly didn't suggest anything regarding end justifying the means. Just a fact. Context does matter, and you're putting context in printed words that does not exist.
I cast Chalupa in the facts that she was a researcher, rather than a hacker with stolen information which is what the Russians are accused of being. It wasn't a minimization, just relaying the facts. There was nothing judgmental in what I wrote, only in how you inferred it.
Her little known associate, Nikita Gordita contributed to the research. Also involved were Ivan Fire Sauce and Ekaterina Tostada.
Jr.'s story is that the only contact was through email, but there's holes in that story based on the email chain. The lawyer wasn't the only Russian at the meeting as well.
This lawyer was granted a visa under "extraordinary circumstances" by the Obama DOJ.
She was totally known by people throughout government and the Obama DOJ went out of their way to get her into the US.
Hmmmmmm.
It's been past due to investigate the DNC for their collusion with Ukraine. Now we should be investigating the Obama Admin role and association with this "rogue actor!"
She was totally known by people throughout government and the Obama DOJ went out of their way to get her into the US.
Hmmmmmm.
It's been past due to investigate the DNC for their collusion with Ukraine. Now we should be investigating the Obama Admin role and association with this "rogue actor!"
This part doesn't bother me, as she was in the country involved with a civil lawsuit against her client's company.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-lawyer-got-into-us-for-trump-jr-meeting.html
"The type of parole Veselnitskaya was granted is given “sparingly” and in “extraordinary circumstances,” including urgent humanitarian reasons, such as medical or family emergency. Broadly speaking, Christensen told Fox News that parole may be requested for a person who “believes his or her presence in the United States will be a significant public benefit,” and cited participation in a civil court case as an example."
"Veselnitskaya was working as an attorney for a Cyprus-based real estate holdings company called Prevezon, run by Denis Katsyv, son of Pyotr Katsyv, one of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s closest advisers,"
http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...sian-lawyer-into-us-before-she-met-with-trump
Katsyv was testifying in a civil lawsuit against him and his company, Prevezon, and was assisted by his attorney, Veselnitskaya.
“In October the government bypassed the normal visa process and gave a type of extraordinary permission to enter the country called immigration parole,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Paul Monteleoni explained to the judge during a hearing on Jan. 6, 2016.
“That's a discretionary act that the statute allows the attorney general to do in extraordinary circumstances. In this case, we did that so that Mr. Katsyv could testify. And we made the further accommodation of allowing his Russian lawyer into the country to assist,” he added."
However, the Fox article points out something very suspicious:
“Ms. Veselnitskaya was subsequently paroled into the U.S. several times between 2015 and 2016, ending in February 2016. In June 2016, she was issued a B1/B2 nonimmigrant visa by the U.S. Department of State,” a DHS spokesperson told Fox News Thursday night."
I am guessing she had more that 1 court date.
FYI, a B1/B2 non-immigrant visa is a visitors visa, which is usually valid for 1 year, 5 years or 10 years but it doesn't mean you can stay that long. When you get to customs, they stamp your passport and tell you how long you can stay (usually 6 months max that can be extended to 1 year). If you overstay, you get in trouble even if the visa is still valid for a few more years.
How many lies does this Administration need to be caught in for the zombies to finally throw in the towel?
He said he met with them, no? Everything I've heard both Trump and Jr said he met with them. It was in Trump's PC in Paris yesterday.
Now we have a big plot twist - Junior and the Russians say the meeting was regarding info that the DNC was accepting Russian money, which is VERY illegal.
https://apnews.com/dceed1008d8f45afb314aca65797762a
It sounds plausible but it raises a few questions:
Something like this (even as rumor) would totally destroy the Democrats, yet the Trump campaign just lets it go? I mean, you want to talk bombshell - that would do it. That's a pretty 'HOLY SHIT" moment IYAM. I would think there would be some digging going on into it at the very least, not a "lost interest."
Second, it's brought up now as just another layer of the onion, so it raises skepticism of its veracity. The cover ups have gone (in the span of a week) from "I didn't meet with the Russians" to "Ok I met with them but didn't get anything and didn't know what the meeting was about" to "OK I knew what the meeting was about but still didn't get anything" to now "OK I got something, but they couldn't back up their bombshell claim, and we just didn't bother looking into it." Why is this coming to light now? Is it another cover up?
If the claim is true, I actually applaud the Trump campaign for not running with an unsubstantiated rumor. It's just the story has changed so many times, I can't just believe that it's true now.
https://apnews.com/dceed1008d8f45afb314aca65797762a
It sounds plausible but it raises a few questions:
Something like this (even as rumor) would totally destroy the Democrats, yet the Trump campaign just lets it go? I mean, you want to talk bombshell - that would do it. That's a pretty 'HOLY SHIT" moment IYAM. I would think there would be some digging going on into it at the very least, not a "lost interest."
Second, it's brought up now as just another layer of the onion, so it raises skepticism of its veracity. The cover ups have gone (in the span of a week) from "I didn't meet with the Russians" to "Ok I met with them but didn't get anything and didn't know what the meeting was about" to "OK I knew what the meeting was about but still didn't get anything" to now "OK I got something, but they couldn't back up their bombshell claim, and we just didn't bother looking into it." Why is this coming to light now? Is it another cover up?
If the claim is true, I actually applaud the Trump campaign for not running with an unsubstantiated rumor. It's just the story has changed so many times, I can't just believe that it's true now.
All of this thanks to Podesta being a moron and failing for a phishing scam. Honestly this is the height of what all of this hysteria is about. A phishing attack that most 10 year old computer nerds can pull off.
Which produced leaked emails that were totally benign and boring. So much so that the media was laughing at their hype when it appeared HRC was cruising for victory.
jr is an idiot who took a stupid meeting with unsavory people. But to suggest this goes beyond this kid being a nitwit is hilarious.
Which produced leaked emails that were totally benign and boring. So much so that the media was laughing at their hype when it appeared HRC was cruising for victory.
jr is an idiot who took a stupid meeting with unsavory people. But to suggest this goes beyond this kid being a nitwit is hilarious.
Similar threads
