BREAKING: Donald Trump Jr.’s Russia emails shake the presidency ***UPDATE: Gowdy Excoriates Trump***

[Hans Gruber]

National Review is the test man. Those guys are legit.



Spells doom.


Love it.

@Hans Gruber

Love what? That a month from now nothing will have changed. No crime was committed. This is nothing ...just like the rest of the Russia nonsense.

What do you see happening here besides more Sadmick and Cubic Zirconia Jim tears?

 

[Overtures]

Love what? That a month from now nothing will have changed. No crime was comitted. This is nothing ...just like the rest of the Russia nonsense.

What do you see happening here besides more Sadmick and Cubic Zirconia Jim tears?

I see confirmation of two things) my unwavering certainty that Trump would be trash, and 2) that people who voted for him were duped.

I also see constant self delusion, like what you're up to. No tears with us libs. It's all sweet satisfaction.


Lastly, It's too soon to call this a nothing burger

 

[Madmick]

@Hans Gruber

This is just one possible-- and quite credible-- scenario I speculated above:

For example, they could have conspired and coordinated a strategy wherein they urged (or possibly even aided) the Russians to hack bodies like the DNC and the computers (issued or privately owned) of other American government employees in order to mine for damaging material to Clinton, and also directed the Russians to launder this "counter-intelligence", as Trump's own top intelligence officials have described it, through Wikileaks, and specifically to distribute it drip by drip in a fashion that would prove not earnestly noble with regard to pure transparency, but that would have a deliberate, maximized political impact against one of our nation's two ruling parties.

If Trump accepted money, or perhaps made promises conducive to Russians that he could influence from the position of President, then this could prove to be possibly the greatest political scandal in American history: greater than Watergate, Iran Contra, the Teapot Dome Scandal, the Credit Mobilier scandal, the Whiskey Ring, or anything involving a President and his penis.

In light of the fact that they (the media alone; this doesn't even include findings of the FBI yet) have already uncovered half a dozen senior Trump officials covering up and/or lying about meetings with Russian officials more innocent speculations and narratives have become far less compelling and likely. I imagine that @Overture probably entertains more detached, objective, cogently deductive theories into possible narratives such as this.

In fact, I think a strong, strong majority probably do at this point. Who knows? That's the truly terrifying thing. We don't know enough yet.


We need to dig much more aggressively to find out. We need to keep people alerted and unsettled until we do. We can't be complacent with potential malfeasance on this scale.

 

[Hans Gruber]

I see confirmation of two things) my unwavering certainty that Trump would be trash, and 2) that people who voted for him were duped.

I also see constant self delusion, like what you're up to. No tears with us libs. It's all sweet satisfaction.


Lastly, It's too soon to call this a nothing burger

Trash? How does this show that?

Duped? How does this show that?

What crime was committed? None.

The lawyer isn't affiliated with the Russian gov.
Nothing of value was exchanged. No quid pro quo.


I will check in on you guys in a few weeks. You will remain disappointed

 

[WiolentOne]

Weird. That word isn't in my dictionary. Maybe it's exclusive to the "Zionist Scum" edition for English on your bedside table. I tend to deal in non-imaginary terms, so I'm afraid I won't spin well in this casino. Gambling is a lottery, and the lottery-- as my wealthy maternal grandfather used to say-- is the "idiot tax".

The Question Hanging Over Washington: Did Donald Trump Jr. Break The Law?

Oh I see you're still butt hurt, zionist scum.

Too bad things didn't go your way huh?

Let me know when you grow a pair and decide to put your money where your mouth is with this nothingburger.

Another scalp collected!

 

[Madmick]

Oh I see you're still butt hurt, zionist scum.

Too bad things didn't go your way huh?

Let me know when you grow a pair and decide to put your money where your mouth is with this nothingburger.

Another scalp collected!

Wow, you're taking this so personally.

I'm just asking questions.

 

[Overtures]

Trash? How does this show that?

Duped? How does this show that?

What crime was committed? None.

I will check in on you guys in a few weeks. You will remain disappointed

Cofveve is your answer.

 

[WiolentOne]

Wow, you're taking this so personally.

I'm just asking questions.

Please, you're an emotional wreck. It is you who takes things personally.

 

[Hans Gruber]

Cofveve is your answer.

Like I said. You have nothing. You can't even tell me how you think this is a crime and what you think the result of this big nothing will be.

 

[Fawlty]

Bannon has reportedly put duct tape over his own mouth and is refusing to leave an on-deck circle that he has drawn in chalk on his living room floor. He is said to be wearing his lucky kangaroo underwear and is frequently seen glancing at a voodoo doll of Kushner.

 

[Overtures]

Like I said. You have nothing. You can't even tell me how you think this is a crime and what you think the result of this big nothing will be.

Plenty of articles by legitimate experts have been posted providing what you demand, some from conservative outlets.


So, stay salty

 

[Limbo Pete]

LARPers gonna LARP.

It's good to have you back, Hans

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

More needs to be revealed to see if this is treason but just conspiring to commit a crime is criminal.
Don't play innocent you support trump

Our conversation is in regards to whether or not a law was broken. It seems you aren't willing to commit

 

[KnightTemplar]

Why do a lot a people don't like Pence? Traditional politician?

- Trump talked the lanquage of the Right in order to get elected. Pence is a True Believer; he never met a Gay he didn't want to wire up to the mains.

- The Donald has no experience of politics at the highest level, which is one reason it's been easy to cock-block a lot of his moves so far. Pence is a veteran career politician. He won't make schoolboy errors.

- Pence is younger and fitter than Trump. No chance he will be forced to retire through ill health, or decide he's had enough after one term.

- Very little chance of scandal derailing a Pence presidency. He's far too savvy; refusing to eat dinner with a woman unless his wife is with him is just one example. Pence knows how to play the Game of Thrones better than most.

Pence on the Iron Throne is an absolute nightmare for Democrats.

 

[Fawlty]

And here I always thought Eric Trump was the mildly autistic one.

"Don Jr. makes up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our fuck-ups."

So, does it sound to you like Russia is behind all of this? At first I thought it was an FBI leak, but that seems unlikely now, since the email was worded with so much loaded, obvious language associated with collusion, like the things informants say when wearing a wire. They're still undermining our democracy, even though the shoe is on the other foot, imo.

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

You people are so dumb it hurts. The evidence is all over the place.

There is no fucking way if this was a democrat, Obama or Hillary you wouldn't be calling for their scalps.

I see your posts here. I know exactly how you would feel if it was reversed.

Trump already obstructed justice and the republicans won't act on it. They're spineless

If it's so obvious then you should have some evidence of something illegal right? Not like talking to people and stuff...

 

[Madmick]

Feel like Trump has already decided that he's going to throw Donald Jr. under the bus:

Trump lawyer: President didn't see email until Trump Jr. released it
http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/12/politics/jay-sekulow-response-donald-trump-jr/index.html

(CNN)Jay Sekulow, an attorney representing President Donald Trump, said Tuesday that Trump was not aware his son was offered information last year purportedly from Russia.

In an interview with CNN's Jake Tapper late Tuesday night, Sekulow said that Trump had not been aware of a meeting his top campaign officials had with a Russian lawyer last year until "very recently," as the story emerged from The New York Times over the weekend.

"The President, by the way, never saw an email -- did not see the email -- until it was seen today," Sekulow said, referring to Donald Trump Jr.'s disclosure of the email thread on Twitter shortly before a Times story containing the same information was published.
"So I want to be clear on that," he added.

The email chain disclosed by Trump Jr. showed emails from Rob Goldstone, a music publicist, referring to potentially damaging information on Hillary Clinton as part of a Russian effort to bolster Trump's campaign.

Sekulow said it made no sense that Trump Jr. or anyone else at the meeting, which took place in June 2016, would have informed Trump about it.
"Why would you do that?" Sekulow asked.

At the meeting and copied on the email thread were Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law and a senior White House adviser, and Paul Manafort, then the chair of the Trump campaign.
Sekulow added that in his view Trump Jr.'s actions were legal, though he seemed to allow that they might not have been advisable in retrospect.

"We can look at it and say a year and a half ago, or a year ago, in the middle of a campaign, would you, should have, could you?" Sekulow said. "That's really easy to say a year later."
Tapper noted Trump's relative quiet about the story involving his son and Russia, including a lack of tweets about the issue as the story has unfolded. Asked if Trump was not tweeting at the advice of counsel, Sekulow denied offering Trump legal advice about Twitter but declined to get into specifics about his conversations with the President.

"We're not telling the President what to tweet or not tweet," Sekulow said. "Nobody wants to see their child going through this."

Sort of feels like the lady doth protest too much, right? Like why are they so aggressive about insisting that Trump didn't know about it? So far everything I've seen has focused on Trump Jr., but they've already got the full court press out there for Trump.

Remember that this is the same lawyer, Jay Sekulow, who insisted that Trump wasn't a subject of the Russian investigation, despite a tweet where Trump insisted that he was, and when Republican journalist Chris Wallace questioned the logic of this, Sekulow reasoned that it was impossible for himself and Trump to know if Trump was under investigation, because no one had informed them Trump was, but then at 2:52 of the interview in the video below trips up and explicitly asserts that Trump is under investigation by the DOJ, following which Wallace presses him, with Sekulow losing his temper, and ultimately barking that they know Trump isn't under investigation despite earlier saying that it was impossible to know because "he isn't a mind reader".





Yeah, it's about as easy to wrap your head around those mental gymnastics as Sean Spicer's circular Twitter logic:

Please, you're an emotional wreck. It is you who takes things personally.

I'm sorry you feel that way. Not sure why you feel that way. I don't think I've been impolite to you in this thread. People who know me tend to say I'm a great guy.

 

[Fawlty]

Here's the latest blog post from that Vox article's first-listed legal expert - the one who was most stridently insisting criminality.

TLDR version: Hay guize, you know that stuff I wrote last night? Well I was kinda excited and may have gotten ahead of myself.

"Update on Don Jr. emails and criminal case: What is a “thing of value”? What is “collusion”?


When I posted on the breaking news last night, I was working with the claim that receiving opposition research information from foreign sources could be a violation of campaign finance laws. The question is if this information is a “thing of value” and if it could be covered by the criminal statute 52 USC 30121. The problem is that, even if opposition research (“dirt”) is surely something of value, it is also speech. I can find no precedent interpreting information as a “thing of value” under 52 USC 30121, and there is probably good reason for this caution.

There is a lot of damning material in Don Jr.’s emails released today, but nothing makes the meeting more than sharing information.

Here are the new details: Family friend Rob Goldstone identified the lawyer as a “Russian government attorney” who had “documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.” The material is “ultra sensitive” because it was “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.” Trump Jr., responded, “If it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer.” It appears that Trump Jr. forwarded this thread to Kushner and Manafort, so they seem to know this context.

On the one hand, it doesn’t matter if the lawyer wasn’t in fact a Russian government attorney and that she didn’t deliver any real information. The issue is intent.

On the other hand, there is no additional evidence that Trump Jr. had any reason to believe that this information was obtained illegally (by hacking or otherwise). My concern is that it may be too big a leap to criminalize the sharing of information from a foreign national or a foreign official.

There is no free-standing crime of “collusion.” A criminal case may turn on a link between the Trump campaign and the illegal hacking, in terms of awareness, coordination, and encouragement. The bigger questions may now be about Kushner and Manafort, their lack of disclosures, and perhaps any lies or obstruction of justice."

The foreign national probably isn't practicing American free speech when giving the thing of value to the American, particularly if it's related to espionage. As to the other stuff, that's way over my head.

 

[Madmick]

Our conversation is in regards to whether or not a law was broken. It seems you aren't willing to commit

Why would someone-- like a jurist-- commit to a verdict before a trial has been completed?

I agree that it's critical we commit to this trial.

 

[Madmick]

Plenty of articles by legitimate experts have been posted providing what you demand, some from conservative outlets.

So, stay salty

Yeah, I'm not sure what will fit the criteria of real news.

I see so many who are protesting this coverage loved to post articles by newspapers like Breitbart the past few years: a paper that is directly under the control of 1/2 of Trump's Chief of Staff office.


It doesn't make sense to me that anyone would consider that trustworthy or objective: hardly an impartial source.