• Xenforo is upgrading us to version 2.3.7 on Tuesday Aug 19, 2025 at 01:00 AM BST (date has been pushed). This upgrade includes several security fixes among other improvements. Expect a temporary downtime during this process. More info here

Don Jr., Kushner, and Manafort met with Kremlin lawyer in June: Don Jr. confirms meeting.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Colluding with a hostile foreign power to interfere with our elections and extend favors in return would be the greatest political scandal in US history.

Are they officially hostile, or is that just what Dems are selling? Seems like they fit into a grey area, and at worst are soft allies, that the United States have certain beneficial relations with.

They're not ISIS.
 
Are they officially hostile, or is that just what Dems are selling? Seems like they fit into a grey area, and at worst are soft allies, that the United States have certain beneficial relations with.

They're not ISIS.
They are when it's trump though
 
Are they officially hostile, or is that just what Dems are selling. Seems like they fit into a grey area, and at worst are soft allies, that the United States have certain beneficial relations with.

They're not ISIS.
They were considered the greatest threat to the US by Republicans very recently.
 
Are they officially hostile, or is that just what Dems are selling?

While assuring that you are asking these questions. Its quite troubling that these questions werent reflected on internally prior to your stances on news related to this subject.

Either you dont have resources to comprehend these matters, or youre trolling.
 
They were considered the greatest threat to the US by Republicans very recently.

That's nice. Why is America trading with them, then? Wouldn't that act be treasonous in itself, if they were in fact an official enemy of the United States?

Seems like receiving information on a politician is a little low on the totem pole, if they are in fact the United States' sworn enemy.
 
While assuring that you are asking these questions. Its quite troubling that these questions werent reflected on internally prior to your stances on news related to this subject.

Either you dont have resources to comprehend these matters, or youre trolling.

I'll ask you the same question. Worst case scenario, what is the crime?
 
That's nice. Why is America trading with them, then? Wouldn't that act be treasonous in itself, if they were in fact an official enemy of the United States?

Seems like receiving information on a politician is a little low on the totem pole, if they are in fact the United States' sworn enemy.
They wouldn't give a shit about "collusion" if it led to Hillary winning. Look at the dude's av. He is just butthurt.
 
They wouldn't give a shit about "collusion" if it led to Hillary winning. Look at the dude's av. He is just butthurt.

I know, but I would think they would at least be able to identify a crime that they are so hellbent on believing occurred.

I have this strange feeling that they don't really know.
 
Are they officially hostile, or is that just what Dems are selling? Seems like they fit into a grey area, and at worst are soft allies, that the United States have certain beneficial relations with.

They're not ISIS.
First, it doesn't really matter if a foreign power or person is "hostile" or not; colluding with foreigners to influence U.S. elections is illegal, period. That's why foreigners are not allowed to donate money to political campaigns.

Secondly, is the act of trying to unduly influence and undermine another nation's democratic elections not hostile in and of itself?
 
Last edited:
I did. That article has proof

Prove breitbart is fake

No prove breitbart isn't.

I'm not disputing palmer report as bullshit.

You're trying to tell me breitbart isn't.

Prove it
 
Trump surrogates...
pwVqOE3.jpg
 
First, it doesn't really matter if a foreign power or person is "hostile" or not; colluding with foreigners to influence U.S. elections is illegal, period. That's why foreigners are not allowed to donate money to political campaigns.

Are they allowed to donate information?
 
There were two lies. First he said that there were no planned meetings with Russians during the campaign. Then he said there was a planned meeting but they didn't discuss campaign issues. Then he admitted that they did discuss planned issues but he didn't get anything good. Given the timing of the statements and the increased detail with the more-recent ones, it doesn't seem possible that they were honest mistakes (one came a day after the other). The collusion was in the meeting. He openly said that they discussed policy asks for the Russian gov't and had dirt on Trump's opponent.

Are you going to finally admit that junior lied or are you going to continue trying to move goalposts and change the subject? I wouldn't think "lying is bad" and "colluding with a foreign gov't to undermine the U.S. electoral process is bad" would be partisan positions.
What's a "planned meeting"? This meeting was already disclosed as it was and was more ad hoc than planned. And there was not then, nor has there been evidence that this lawyer was a Russian official or agent.

Nothing wrong with meeting anyone who might have helpful information so long as the information accessed is not top secret or is then used illegally.

So no lie
No collusion
No apparent wrongdoing at this point.

There is however a big fat nothingburger with special leftard sauce and special fake cheese.
 
Google dictionary ftw!

Now, I'm assuming your beyond the 6th grade. Want to try answering the question?
Kushner admitted he met a foreign operative with the intention of taking advantage of illegal foreign espionage. Derp!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top