ChrisWeigant.com

Junior's Smoking Gun

[ Posted Tuesday, July 11th, 2017 – 17:13 PDT ]

Donald Trump's story, up until now, has been that "there was no collusion with Russia" during his campaign. That is now -- as the Nixon White House used to say -- no longer an operative statement. The best they can now claim is that while such collusion was attempted, it ultimately wasn't successful. That's pretty weak, though, and with the shifting nature of the story even that may soon become impossible to claim. We'll have to wait and see where the next smoking gun points, before we find out what Trump's next party line will be.

It has been revealed over the past couple of days that Donald Trump Junior actively tried to collude with the Russian government to obtain dirt on Hillary Clinton during the 2016 campaign. The emails he just released show that beyond a shadow of a doubt. He was offered a meeting with someone supposedly in possession of this dirt, which supposedly came from the Russian government, who was vying for influence with Trump. Junior not only set the meeting up, he also included Jared Kushner and Trump's campaign manager at the time, Paul Manafort. No matter what actually took place at that meeting, the intent of all three was crystal clear. Russia was offering opposition research, and Team Trump was not just willing but eager to see what it was.

Note that none of this changes no matter what actually happened in the meeting itself. If, as is now claimed, they talked about Russian-American adoption laws, it doesn't matter. The intent to collude was present before anyone walked in the room, whether it happened or not, in other words. Even if you take their statements at face value, just because they were disappointed when the dirt wasn't offered up doesn't excuse them from sitting there eagerly anticipating it.

Now, "collusion" is more of a political term than a legal term. "Conspiracy" is, though, and conspiracy is just two or more people planning a crime, at its heart. Doesn't matter if the crime ever actually happens or not -- just ask anyone convicted of planning a terrorist attack, for instance. Planning a crime is also a crime.

I, however, am not a lawyer, so the preceding paragraph was just offered up hypothetically. Whether any laws were actually broken or not (again, no matter what actually took place in the meeting) is a subject that Robert Mueller will assuredly be looking into, with a fine-tooth comb. There are all kinds of laws that might be relevant to this meeting, and until Mueller releases his conclusions we simply won't know whether Junior will ever have to face charges or not.

That's not going to stop anyone from speculating, of course. Democrats, so far, have been fairly restrained in their condemnation of Junior's meeting. By "fairly restrained," what I really mean is: "as opposed to what Republicans would now be saying if the same thing had happened with, say, Chelsea Clinton." If Chelsea were in the middle of such a collusion scandal with Russia, you can just imagine what would be happening right about now. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to have GOP congressmen calling for Chelsea to immediately be sent to Guantanamo Bay for some "enhanced interrogation," in other words. Any Republicans now claiming that Democrats are going too far in calling Junior treasonous would -- if this shoe were on Chelsea's foot -- doubtlessly be using the exact same word (and probably a lot louder).

Alternate universes aside, though, it will indeed be interesting to see how this episode plays out. Junior has previously indicated that he'd be happy to testify before the Senate and House committees looking into the Russian election tampering, but now that he's lawyered up he might decide this isn't such a good idea. If he does eventually testify, it will surely be riveting must-see television, that's for sure.

Junior's not the most important player here, though. If the meeting had taken place one-on-one between Junior and the Russian lawyer, then President Trump could shut down the investigation into the meeting by just pre-emptively pardoning his son. He would face a storm of political criticism for doing so, but there would simply be no way to get around it. The presidential pardoning power is one of the strongest cards in the executive's hand, and there is nothing that can stop him from using it. Sure, there are Justice Department procedures which are traditionally supposed to be followed before a pardon is issued, but they are nothing more than suggestions, really. Bill Clinton faced a huge storm of controversy over the propriety of his last-minute pardons, but it didn't result in anyone being "unpardoned," in other words. The Constitution's pardon power is only limited "in Cases of Impeachment." Since Junior doesn't really hold an impeachable job, that wouldn't be a problem. If his dad decided that the political blowback for doing so was acceptable, then nobody could stop Trump from pardoning his son, or even reverse it after the fact. Trump could go down in history as the president who used his first pardon to get his son off the hook for treason, but that probably wouldn't faze him all that much (after all, nothing else seems to).

But Junior didn't set up this meeting just for himself. Now, Paul Manafort got tossed under the bus by Donald Trump long ago, so metaphorically backing the bus up and bumping over him a few more times wouldn't really have much of an impact (on anyone other than Manafort). But Jared Kushner is a lot more central to the Trump White House than even Junior is. Kushner's got all kinds of responsibilities he's supposed to be in charge of (by way of an example, just one of these tasks is: "forge peace in the Middle East between Israel and its neighbors").

Junior is supposed to be running Trump's business empire until he leaves office. That job has nothing to do with politics (or, at least, it is theoretically not supposed to). So if Trump pardoned Junior, he'd be free to continue running the family business. But if Kushner faces the same legal jeopardy that Junior does, that's going to hurt the Trump administration a lot more. Even if Trump pardoned his son-in-law along with his son, Kushner would almost certainly have to quit being a senior White House advisor in any sort of official capacity. At the very least, he would probably lose his security clearance (being pardoned for committing possible treason seems completely incompatible with having the keys to the nation's secrets, to state the obvious).

Tomorrow, we will get a preview of how the politics of Junior's bombshell email dump are going to play out, when the nominee to be the new F.B.I. director is scheduled to appear before the Senate to answer any and all questions. This hearing was already slated to be pretty contentious, since Trump fired the previous F.B.I. director for "this Russia thing." The questions (from Democrats, at least) about Russian involvement in the election were already going to be as sharp as can be imagined. Now, there's a whole new area of concern that will be asked about. Will there be an extended dialog about what "treason" means? It's now certainly a possibility, and the answers will likely be fascinating to hear, since they are no longer all that hypothetical.

Donald Trump began by desperately pressuring people to tell the media that he "wasn't under investigation." Then he tried to shift to "no collusion has ever been found" between anyone on his campaign and Russia. It'll be interesting to hear what he comes up with next, perhaps in an early-morning tweet tomorrow.

The Russia scandal has already sent some big shockwaves out. James Comey is gone. Jeff Sessions had to recuse himself. Michael Flynn is gone. Paul Manafort was thrown overboard a long time ago. But the next dominoes are a lot closer to Trump, because they are both members of his extended family. Cleaning up the mess would be a lot easier if it were just a matter of pardoning Junior, and then sending him off to New York to run Trump's corporate empire. But I'm keeping my eye on what happens to Jared Kushner, because he's a lot closer to Trump than any of the rest of the people impacted by this scandal, to date. And even pardoning him wouldn't solve the problem, because it would still mean Kushner would have to quit being part of the Trump White House's inner circle. Even Junior's smoking-gun emails still haven't reached Donald Trump himself yet, but the scandal is getting a lot closer to him by the day. And it's far from over.

An investigation into a political scandal is usually a marathon, not a sprint. This is by no means the end of the Russia story. There will doubtless be further revelations along the way, and perhaps more smoking guns (pointing in different directions). Trump and all those around him certainly seem to be bending over backwards to appear as guilty as possible, instead of just getting all the information out there as soon as possible. At this point, such guilty behavior leads to only one possible response: "What else are they trying to hide?!?"

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

88 Comments on “Junior's Smoking Gun”

  1. [1] 
    Paula wrote:

    Among the "what else are they trying to hide" is: what did Priebus, McConnell, Pence and Ryan know and when did they know it?

  2. [2] 
    Kick wrote:

    CW: Junior's not the most important player here, though. If the meeting had taken place one-on-one between Junior and the Russian lawyer, then President Trump could shut down the investigation into the meeting by just pre-emptively pardoning his son.

    Something to keep in mind about that whole pardon issue: Trump can't be pardoned nor can he pardon his crime family for offenses committed in the State of New York. Did y'all see Preet Bharara at Comey's testimony? That wasn't by accident. It was really nice of Preet to hand over his files to the New York Attorney General when he was fired by Trump and even nicer of him to show up to support Director Comey after his firing.

    Say... I wonder what AG Schneiderman has been up to lately? ;)

  3. [3] 
    Kick wrote:

    CW: At this point, such guilty behavior leads to only one possible response: "What else are they trying to hide?!?"

    Sure seems like a Benedict Donald situation.

    Who knew?

  4. [4] 
    Kick wrote:

    [2] EDIT

    Something to keep in mind about that whole pardon issue: Trump can't be pardoned nor can he pardon his crime family for offenses committed against the State of New York.

  5. [5] 
    Steedo wrote:

    "I went home with a waitress,
    The way I always do.
    How was I to know
    She was with the Russians too?"

  6. [6] 
    Kick wrote:

    Steedo
    5

    Yeye zvali Natasha i yeye aktsent.

  7. [7] 
    TheStig wrote:

    As the NY Times noted on the 10th of July, Putin is using adoption American adoption of Russian orphans as political leverage against the Magnitsky Act (US sanctions against Russia). As the Times succinctly states in it's title: "When the Kremlin Says ‘Adoptions,’ It Means ‘Sanctions.’" This linkage between adoptions and sanctions is where Junior gets into criminal conspiracy trouble by meeting with a foreign agent and needs to lawyer up.

  8. [8] 
    Kick wrote:

    TS
    7

    This linkage between adoptions and sanctions is where Junior gets into criminal conspiracy trouble by meeting with a foreign agent and needs to lawyer up.

    Tip of the iceberg.

    Interesting bit from DJTJ's email:

    Subject: Re: Russia - Clinton - private and confidential

    He's hired himself Alan Futerfas, a criminal defense attorney with extensive experience representing mafia families: Genovese, Gambino, Bonanno, and Colombo. Now he can add the Trump crime family to his list of famous clients.

    Where is Roy Cohn when you need him? ;)

  9. [9] 
    LeaningBlue wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller wrote [in previous thread]: Cautious about what?

    I misspoke; my meaning was to be careful of being distracted by the the addictive simplicity of following along with Boris and Natasha and Sergey as they bumble up against the Trump campaign.

    Transparency can be convenient with or without parallel sinister conspiracy. For example, observe how easy it was for the Russian lawyer to alibi Kushner in her NBC interview this morning. Ten minutes and gone. Easy to forget a meeting like that, right? Manafort rudely stayed on his phone and tuned out the whole meeting. She and the other young gentleman spoke of helping orphans.

    Overall, another misadventure for naive Fredo, a meme which the msm has bitten down on hook, line, and sinker.

    Meanwhile, watch Maddow's C-block from this evening (either on the channel's dot com or available for taping on re-run later tonight) for a nice list of what Russia has accomplished thus far.

  10. [10] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You lost me, completely.

  11. [11] 
    Steedo wrote:

    Kick 6- Bit of a disadvantage here but very kind, I'm sure.

  12. [12] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Is Junior the dumb one? So hard to keep track.

    Anyway, think Glenn Miller, Chattanooga Choo Choo with a twist of Grandpa Simpson...

    Pardon me dad!
    I've made a statutory boo boo.
    I could do time!
    Can't get off with a fine.

    Don't make me face
    my little statutory boo boo.
    It's just not fair,
    but you've got pardons to spare!

  13. [13] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    I'm glad CW, that you picked up on the Russian's attempt to rescue Kushner and Manafort.

    I've been wondering though, as I follow this, whether this is THE collusion story, or simply a side story about Don Jr. trying to get 'in on' collusion that was already occurring elsewhere.

    I mean, sure, it's hard to look away from a grinning idiot holding a smoking gun, saying 'I did it!' in fairly uncertain terms.

    But there is also such a thing as a 'false flag' operation, in which the enemy (us, in this case) is deceived into believing that its target is in one place, when it is actually in another. In other words, I'd counsel Mueller that this could be a stray thread, rather than the one that holds the garment together. I'd say: keep following the money, Bob.

    There's also some logic to running a 'false flag' operation now. It's now sixteen months and change until the midterms. If I'm a GOP loyalist, I'd like to see this all wrapped up BEFORE then, because the President and his team would have maximum political cover regardless of the findings. If they can get the Democrats to push for impeachment before they have any power, then Republicans can dispense with it politically as well, before it harms the party, and even look good in the process.

    If, on the other hand, this drags out for another year - if Mueller takes his sweet time and doesn't even produce a report until sometime next year, this could land in the hands of the next Democratic chairman of the House Oversight committee, and would surely remain a hot topic through 2020.

    So why not shed all pretense of innocence now, while the whole team is more or less protected politically? Tell the world that you were inexperienced and fell into Putin's trap, mea culpa, issue pardons as needed, and get it the hell off the table without any actual harm done.

    It it were MY team in the trenches, I might suggest exactly that.

  14. [14] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    I also meant to acknowledge LB's insight at [9], which prompted my post, in part.

  15. [15] 
    goode trickle wrote:

    Just a random thought that has popped into my head.

    Given that I tend to come from the point of view that "collusion" in the most sinister of senses probably did not happen, but more in the terms of winning at all costs did happen.

    I have to wonder if the whole thing that will come from this investigation is that yes, laws were broken and they thought they could get away with it like all others that live in the super rich bubble where laws really don't apply to them as they have access to infinite amounts of lawyers.

    Much like the old infinite amounts of monkey's with typewriters reproducing the works of Shakespeare, infinite amounts of lawyers will produce a not guilty verdict or just cause the charges not to be even filed....

  16. [16] 
    michale wrote:

    Yaawwnnnn

    ANOTHER "smoking gun"...

    ANOTHER TRUMP IS TOAST prediction...

    If there is another TRUMP IS TOAST prediction, it MUST be a day that ends in 'Y'...

    Don't ya'all EVER get tired of being wrong?? :D

  17. [17] 
    Kick wrote:

    Steedo
    5, 11

    "I went home with a waitress,
    The way I always do.
    How was I to know
    She was with the Russians too?"

    Yeye zvali Natasha i yeye aktsent.

    Translation: Her name was Natasha and her accent.

  18. [18] 
    michale wrote:

    All we have to do to show how pointless the point is, is to turn it around..

    Imagine that NOT-45 was losing to President Trump as bad as Trump was losing to NOT-45... Further imagine that NOT-45 Russian buddies offered NOT-45 opposition research on Trump...

    Is there ANYONE here with more than 2 brain cells to rub together that would think that NOT-45 wouldn't JUMP at the chance for opposition research???

    And when she did, would ya'all call it Russian collusion then???

    Of course ya'all wouldn't...

    Ya'all are SOOOO *DESPERATE* to nullify a legal, fair and free election that ya'all are grasping at ANY straws whatsoever...

    But it's ALL for naught...

    President Trump *IS* ya'all's President..

    And *NOTHING* is going to change that...

  19. [19] 
    michale wrote:

    And I am ALSO constrained to point out that some Russian trying to help an American candidate is absolutely *NO DIFFERENT* than Odumbo and his minions trying to help the candidates in Israel against Netanyahu...

    Or Odumbo and his minions trying to influence the Brexit vote..

    Ya'all have absolutely NO problem with that, eh??

    The hypocrisy is strong here...

  20. [20] 
    michale wrote:

    It's also VERY funny that the Russian lawyer who tried to entrap Trump Jr met with Odumbo officials just a few days before...

    Of course, when a DEMOCRAT meets with Russians it's completely innocent and meaningless..

    Yep, the hypocrisy is strong here...

  21. [21] 
    michale wrote:

    By the by, I missed ya'all!! :D

    It's good to be back amongst civilization.. :D

  22. [22] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Ivanka Trump and husband Jared have just launched their new men's fragrance:

    Collusion.

    Using Russian technology originally developed for nerve agents, micro-encapsulated Collusion "starts out subtle, but builds to a level that simply won't go unnoticed.....from Main St to K ST to Pennsylvania Ave."

    Everybody is talking about Collusion! Are you well connected enough to wear it?

  23. [23] 
    michale wrote:

    Ivanka Trump and husband Jared have just launched their new men's fragrance:

    Collusion.

    That's what passes for Democrat activism these days...

    Lame jokes..

    Well, I guess when yer Party has been devastated to the lowest point in over 100 years, ya have to do SOMETHING to make it thru the day...

    Yunno... PRETEND to have relevance.. :D

  24. [24] 
    michale wrote:

    Ya notice how the Democrats lurch from one incident of collusion to another??

    They throw one out there and it falls flat on it's face..

    Then it's a completely different incident..

    THAT'S COLLUSION!!! the Dumbocrats scream!!

    Then THAT one falls utterly apart and then it's a completely different incident that is collusion..

    THERE'S THE COLLUSION!!! the Dumbocrats screech!!

    And so on and so on and so on...

    And each time the Dumbocrats *NEVER* have any PROOF of anything!!!!

    But, like I said.. The Dumbocrats should continue...

    It is total garbage like this that will secure a super majority in the Senate and push the majority in the House a lot higher... :D

  25. [25] 
    michale wrote:

    Near the end of its Tuesday story on Donald Trump Jr.’s meeting with a Russian lawyer, the New York Times casually noted that the news “blunted whatever good feeling the president’s team had after his trip to Europe.”

    Excuse me, but wasn’t blunting the president’s success the whole point of the latest installment of the Russia, Russia, Russia story?

    Isn’t that why the leakers leaked when they did, and why the Times splashed the story on its front page day after day?

    Excuse the cynicism, but there is a relentless pattern, and we don’t need a crystal ball to see the future. It looks like the past and the present. No better, no worse, just more of the same.

    A year from now, Donald Trump still will be president and the media and the permanent bureaucracy still will be hounding him in a ruthless bid to drive him from office.
    http://nypost.com/2017/07/11/why-the-latest-russia-story-is-just-another-trump-witch-hunt/

    Let me repeat that last part for the cheep seats and those who are mentally challenged..

    A YEAR FROM NOW, DONALD TRUMP STILL WILL BE PRESIDENT AND THE MEDIA AND PERMANENT BUREAUCRACY STILL WILL BE HOUNDING HIM IN A RUTHLESS BID TO DRIVE HIM FROM OFFICE

    And, just let me add that it will be a RUTHLESS and ULTIMATELY FUTILE bid to drive President Trump from office...

    The Dumbocrat Party lost... And LOST BIG TIME...

    Get over it... It's time to accept the facts and accept reality and move on..

    NOT-45 will *NEVER* be POTUS...

    NEVER....

    "It's over... Go home..."
    -Ferris Beuhler, FERRIS BEUHLER'S DAY OFF

  26. [26] 
    michale wrote:

    Remember when ya'all predicted gloom and doom and other assorted fear mongering (STOCK MARKET WILL TANK!!!!!)when President Trump got elected??

    21,532..... Dow sets record-high close; Fed signals gradual rate hikes
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-stocks-idUSKBN19X1F7

    Lemme know when ya'all get tired of being wrong... :D

    Me??? I'll never get tired of pointing it out.... :D

  27. [27] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Is there ANYONE here with more than 2 brain cells to rub together that would think that NOT-45 wouldn't JUMP at the chance for opposition research??

    You and Fox News are deliberately missing the point: nobody hacked into US election systems to help Hillary, as the Russians apparently did on Trump's behalf. Hacked emails from the Trump campaign didn't land on Wikileaks.

    And Vincente Fox never invaded a neighboring country while in office.

    You see? There's a difference between the Russians and nearly everyone else in these regards: you just can't compare Ukrainians, who were invaded, to Russians, who were the invaders, any more than you would equate a rapist with his victim.

    And assigning the hopelessly broken moral compass of Trump apologists to Democrats is the worst part - that's why FBI nominee Chris Wray was asked today about his views on treason and torture: in the fever swamp of Trumpism, these things are actually deemed acceptable by some.

  28. [28] 
    michale wrote:

    You and Fox News are deliberately missing the point: nobody hacked into US election systems to help Hillary, as the Russians apparently did on Trump's behalf.

    PROVE IT..

    Give me ONE SINGLE IOTA of evidence that PROVES a NOT-45 vote was changed to a Trump vote.

    YOU CAN'T because absolutely NO SUCH EVIDENCE exists...

    Ya'all keep spewing the same old hysterical bullshit about one incident..

    And then, when ya'all have egg all over your faces because it was NOTHING, you move on to a different incident..

    And when THAT is proven to be bupkis, ya'all move on to a DIFFERENT incident..

    Rinse and repeat ad nasuem...

    Ya'all got nothing..

    Ya'all KNOW ya'all got nothing..

    That's why ya'll lurch from bullshit to bullshit to bullshit...

    And a year from now, there will STILL be President Donald Trump and he will STILL be YOUR President and NOT-45 will NEVER BE PRESIDENT...

    "These are the facts of the case.. And they are undisputed."
    -Captain Smilin' Jack Ross, A FEW GOOD MEN

  29. [29] 
    michale wrote:

    You see? There's a difference between the Russians and nearly everyone else in these regards: you just can't compare Ukrainians, who were invaded, to Russians, who were the invaders, any more than you would equate a rapist with his victim.

    And yet, 4 years ago, the Dumbocrats LOVED the Russians and Odumbo was colluding with Putin and telling him thru his proxy that he needed space to win the election and then Odumbo will be free'er to frack the United States even more than Odumbo has...

    You simply CANNOT face the fact...

    Ya'all don't CARE about Russians... Ya'all don't CARE about Russian collusion when it's Odumbo or NOT-45 who is doing the colluding..

    Ya'all just want to bring down the President and nullify a free, fair and legal election..

    THAT is *ALL* that it's about..

  30. [30] 
    michale wrote:

    Ya'all just want to bring down the President and nullify a free, fair and legal election..

    THAT is *ALL* that it's about..

    And NO ONE here has ever denied that either... :D

  31. [31] 
    michale wrote:

    http://www.theamericanmirror.com/fifth-time-nancy-pelosi-calls-trump-president-bush/

    And I see that Dumbocrat leader Pelosi is still as adle-brained as ever...

    No wonder Dumbocrats can't win any elections..

    Their leader is brain-dead....

  32. [32] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    And yet, 4 years ago, the Dumbocrats LOVED the Russians

    Really? From August, 2013:

    Relations between the United States and Russia deteriorated further on Wednesday when Barack Obama abandoned a presidential summit with Vladimir Putin that was due to be held next month, amid fury in Washington over Moscow's decision to grant asylum to the NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.

    And from Sept. 2013:

    Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin do not have a good relationship. Just as Russia and the U.S. are attempting to work out a delicate deal to rid Syria of chemical weapons, the Russian president published an op-ed in The New York Times thumbing his nose at President Obama.

    Don't you realize that we can look this stuff up?

  33. [33] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    No wonder Dumbocrats can't win any elections..Their leader is brain-dead..

    Actually, Pelosi could probably run intellectual laps around Trump.

  34. [34] 
    michale wrote:

    Don't you realize that we can look this stuff up?

    And you ignore what happened in 2012 and when NOT-45 frak'ed up a "reset" with Russia..

    Thanx for proving my point... :D

    Actually, Pelosi could probably run intellectual laps around Trump.

    She doesn't even KNOW that Trump is President!!!!

    But, again, you prove my point..

    Pelosi is obviously having very severe mental issues and YOU still defend her...

    PARTY UBER ALLES...

    Even when your blind loyalty is actually HURTING your Party...

    How else do you explain the *FACT* that the Dumbocrat Party is in the WORST place it's been in over a century??

    Yer deluding yerself, dood...

  35. [35] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    And you ignore what happened in 2012 and when NOT-45 frak'ed up a "reset" with Russia.

    Ah, the ceremonial 'moving of the bar'. Let me know when you settle on a time frame.

    Pelosi is obviously having very severe mental issues and YOU still defend her...

    Pelosi forced Ryan to choke on a healthcare vote last month, because she could hold her coalition together an Ryan couldn't. She sounds fine to me.

    But on the subject of defending the mentally unstable, have you noticed that no one seems to be able to get Trump to stop tweeting? Seems to be a serious addiction...

  36. [36] 
    michale wrote:

    Ah, the ceremonial 'moving of the bar'. Let me know when you settle on a time frame.

    The time frame of the 2012 election... DUH...

    Or maybe Odumbo was colluding with Putin and telling him thru his proxy that he needed space to win the election and then Odumbo will be free'er to frack the United States even more than Odumbo has... Was somehow confusing to you???

    Pelosi forced Ryan to choke on a healthcare vote last month, because she could hold her coalition together an Ryan couldn't. She sounds fine to me.

    And, to you, NOT-45 was going to run the 50 states and win the election..

    Maybe your analysis is a bit skewed when it comes to the Dumbocrat Party.... ya think?? :D

    But on the subject of defending the mentally unstable, have you noticed that no one seems to be able to get Trump to stop tweeting? Seems to be a serious addiction...

    And yet, he is STILL your President.. :D

    That's fact... Deal with it..

  37. [37] 
    michale wrote:

    But on the subject of defending the mentally unstable, have you noticed that no one seems to be able to get Trump to stop tweeting? Seems to be a serious addiction...

    Our own Victoria would call that deflecting and would make personal attacks against you over it..

    Oh, that's right. Yer a fellow Dumbocrat so you get a pass...

    Hypocrisy at it's finest.. :D

  38. [38] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    The time frame of the 2012 election...

    So you'd like to rewind back, back to a time before Putin accused Hillary of fomenting protests that erupted after the rigged elections in his country in 2011 and 2012. Back to a time before Obama signed the Magnitsky Act into law, before the Snowden affair, before Russia's annexation of Crimea, and support for war in eastern Ukraine. Before the Obama administration placed more (and more specific) sanctions on Russia following that invasion. Before Obama placed the latest sanctions on Russia following their meddling in the 2016 elections.

    In other words, back to a time that has no relevance to the present. Is that the time frame you mean?

  39. [39] 
    Aloysius McG wrote:

    CW: There will doubtless be further revelations along the way, and perhaps more smokier guns (pointing in different directions)

    So true! Lots of new information already presented by contributors above which will add to the description of us blind folks describing the metaphoric elephant in the Oval Office.

    Some other factoids or perhaps fake news I ran across on the internet include:

    The Russian "rock star" who requested the meeting also had Senior "fire" him in his music video. He had only 34 Twitter accounts he followed.....and that list included Senior, not Junior.

    Shortly after Preet Bharara was fired as U.S. Attorney, before he could begin a trial for a Russian company accused of money laundering via real estate transactions in New York, the new U.S. Attorney settled the case for a mere $6M.The company lawyer described that settlement as "almost an apology from the government."

    The lawyer for that company was (Surprise!) Natalia Veselnitskaya, the lawyer who flew from Moscow to meet Junior. She is described as a connected Moscow player, with a high level government client named Katsyv, who is VP of the state-owned Russian Railway. She was the public face of efforts in Moscow to reverse sanctions, the Magnitsky Act, which so angered Putin that he stopped the adoption of Russian babies by Americans. Nonetheless, the Kremlin denied ever hearing of her.

    Manafort attended the meeting with Natalia Who? despite having to miss the first part of a meeting with megadonors to the Trump campaign.....while he was the head of the campaign. The "nobody" trumped the dollars? I suppose it could happen......

    One interpretation of the above was that the initial contact for a meeting was with Senior, who delegated the job to Junior. For deniability? I haven't read the e-mail chain, which originated where?, and I am not up to snuff on authentication for such things. Could there be another chain that was not leaked by the WH?

    Someone, I forget who, has opined that Bannon has decided to throw Junior under the bus (shouldn't that be "to the wolves" the better to fit the Russia narrative?). Very plausible, given the pardon scenario.

    It was also observed that Kushner was in charge of voter metrics and analysis for the campaign, and that the Russian messaging and voter base penetration in key rustbelt counties could have been coordinated.

    I think the description of the elephant will be much more accurate in the relatively near future........not the "very like a rope" and "very like a tree", which we now have.

    Oh, to be a fly on the wall of the Mueller war room! I just love a good spy thriller.

  40. [40] 
    michale wrote:

    “If there’s been any evidence of collusion in 2016 actually happening, it would have been between the DNC and the Ukrainian government.”
    -Bernie Sanders

    Sanders was referring to a Politico report published in January. The report cited a meeting between Ukrainian government officials who allegedly tried to help Clinton undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office and shared research and damaging information on Trump and his advisers with Clinton allies.

    There is ya'all's "collusion"...

    Yet, ya'all are completely quiet about that..

    Why??

    Because it's DUMBOCRAT collusion and ya'all have absolutely **NO PROBLEM** with that...

  41. [41] 
    michale wrote:

    In other words, back to a time that has no relevance to the present. Is that the time frame you mean?

    It has EVERY relevance to the accusation of hypocrisy ya'all are committing...

    And ya'all can't address that so ya'all continue to just throw crap on the wall against President Trump and HOPE something sticks..

    And yet, NOTHING has...

    That's because that is all ya'all have..

    That is ALL that the entirety of the Dumbocrat Party has...

    **NOTHING**....

  42. [42] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    M: So far, here's the genesis of your defense of Trump:

    1. No one from the Trump transition met with Russians.

    2. Okay, Flynn met with Russians, but it was official business. But he didn't discuss sanctions.

    3. Okay, Flynn lied about that, he did discuss sanctions, but now he's gone, it's all over.

    4. Okay, other folks met with Russians too, but that's perfectly normal isn't it? Nothing to see here.

    5. More meetings? Slipped their mind. Campaigns are hectic, you know. Didn't collude, though.

    6. And Comey was fired for due cause, not for Russia.

    7. Okay, Comey was fired over Russia. But it wasn't obstruction.

    8. Sure, Don Jr., Manafort & Kushner took a meeting with a lawyer representing a Russian oligarch, but they weren't colluding, they were discussing adoptions.

    9. Okay, so Donald was looking to collude with the Russians. So would you, wouldn't you? In fact you did! Bernie said so! You're just as bad as we are!

    10. So it's a draw. You lose.

  43. [43] 
    michale wrote:

    M: So far, here's the genesis of your defense of Trump:

    No.. I have never said anything of the sort..

    I have always said that meeting Russians is normal and not nefarious..

    I have also said that NOT-45 has met a LOT more Russians for a LOT more nefarious reasons than Trump has.

    And ya'all say NOTHING about that...

    So, ergo, the *ONLY* logical conclusion is that ya'all don't CARE about meetings with Russians.

    You just want to bring down a free, fair and legally elected President just because he DEVASTATED yer lame champion...

  44. [44] 
    michale wrote:

    Still waiting for ANY **FACTS** from ya'all that prove collusion...

    Do ya'all have ANY??

    Ya'all have been going at this in earnest for almost 7 months now.. Do ya'all have **FACTS** to prove collusion??

    No, ya'all do not..

    And the FACT that ya'all have NO FACTS is the only *FACT* that is relevant here..

    All ya'all have is a scorching case of PTDS.....

  45. [45] 
    michale wrote:

    “If there’s been any evidence of collusion in 2016 actually happening, it would have been between the DNC and the Ukrainian government.”
    -Bernie Sanders

    My mistake..

    That wasn't BERNIE Sanders that said that...

    It was WH spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders that said that...

    I'm surprised no one caught that.. :D

  46. [46] 
    michale wrote:

    Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire
    Kiev officials are scrambling to make amends with the president-elect after quietly working to boost Clinton.

    Donald Trump wasn’t the only presidential candidate whose campaign was boosted by officials of a former Soviet bloc country.

    Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found.

    A Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia, according to people with direct knowledge of the situation.
    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446

    There's out and out proven collusion people..

    And yet, because it's NOT-45, ya'all don't CARE about the collusion..

    That is why it's simply NOT possible for a reasonable intelligent person to take ya'all's hysteria seriously...

    Because it's *ALL* nothing but wild hysterical ideological zealotry...

    That's it....

    The facts are clear...

  47. [47] 
    michale wrote:

    And the plot thickens!!

    Exclusive: DOJ let Russian lawyer into US before she met with Trump team

    The Russian lawyer who penetrated Donald Trump’s inner circle was initially cleared into the United States by the Justice Department under “extraordinary circumstances” before she embarked on a lobbying campaign last year that ensnared the president’s eldest son, members of Congress, journalists and State Department officials, according to court and Justice Department documents and interviews.

    This revelation means it was the Obama Justice Department that enabled the newest and most intriguing figure in the Russia-Trump investigation to enter the country without a visa.

    Later, a series of events between an intermediary for the attorney and the Trump campaign ultimately led to the controversy surrounding the president's eldest son.

    http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/341788-exclusive-doj-let-russian-lawyer-into-us-before-she-met-with-trump

    Every time the Dumbocrats try to push an Anti-President Trump collusion fantasy, we always come to find out that Odumbo's hand is in it, setting it up... :D

    Talk about the gang that couldn't shoot straight!! :D

  48. [48] 
    michale wrote:

    Sorry, Democrats. The holy grail of a Trump crime is still missing.

    What has really happened since Donald Trump Jr. released his email chain setting up a meeting last June with a Russian lawyer? Are Democrats and their allies in the media any closer to having their high crime or misdemeanor?

    Answer: No.

    As Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz stated yesterday, “it is unlikely that attendance at the meeting violated any criminal statute.”

    Well said, Mr. Dershowitz.

    And yet, the media would have you believe that the meeting Trump Jr. described as “literally just a wasted 20 minutes” is a smoking gun that will inevitably take President Trump, his administration and his entire family down forever.

    In reality, Trump Jr.’s emails show he has nothing to hide.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2017/07/12/sorry-democrats-the-holy-grail-of-a-trump-crime-is-still-missing/?utm_term=.8d851b65ae45

    Ya'all just don't get it..

    There is no THERE there...

    This Russia Collusion thing is EXACTLY like ya'all's complaints against the GOP over Benghazi..

    They hypocrisy is as blatant as it is conclusive..

  49. [49] 
    michale wrote:

    And ya'all want to know the funny thing??

    Ya'all want to know the one so frakin' hilarious thing!???

    Even if the Dumbocrats PROVES beyond a single solitary shadow of a doubt....?????

    IT'S NOT ILLEGAL!!!!!

    The Dumbocrats can PROVE collusion up the ying yang.. They can have President Trump on tape saying, "Puty-Poo I want you to help me win this election!!" and it's NOT even a misdemeanor, let alone a "high crime"...

    So, even if ya'all win, even if the Dumbocrats win, ya'all and the Dumbocrats STILL lose!!!

    It won't move the impeachment needle a single iota... Not at all!!!

    So, to sum things up..

    Ya'all have absolutely NO FACTS to prove a "crime" that isn't even a crime!!!

    Now how fraking hilarious is THAT!!!!

    :D

  50. [50] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michale,

    You are screaming that we aren't upset when Democrats commit collusion, only when Republicans commit it. If there is evidence that Clinton colluded with a foreign government directly, then that should be investigated. I think everyone here would agree with that....well, almost everyone. You are the ONLY one whining that someone accused of collusion should not even be investigated, not us!

    Also, Clinton lost the election and she is not the President. Therefore, the foreign government she supposedly colluded with would have no influence in our government -- making it far less a priority of our concern. It raises the question why you have no problem with our President having colluded with Russia? You said the "facts" show Clinton is guilty. But those same "facts" do not make Trump guilty you claim.

    This Russia Collusion thing is EXACTLY like ya'all's complaints against the GOP over Benghazi..

    You are so correct! We said the GOP's Benghazi investigations were nothing more than an attempt to smear Hillary's reputation....and WE WERE RIGHT!

    We said Trump's campaign was colluding with the Russians to help Trump get elected, and Junior's email shows WE WERE RIGHT AGAIN!

  51. [51] 
    michale wrote:

    If there is evidence that Clinton colluded with a foreign government directly, then that should be investigated. I think everyone here would agree with that....well, almost everyone.

    And when you advocate as strongly for Clinton being investigated for collusion as you do for Trump??

    THEN you will have an argument to make against ya'all's hypocrisy..

    But not before..

    Also, Clinton lost the election and she is not the President.

    So, you agree that the ONLY reason ya'all are pushing this collusion bullshit is because YER candidate lost...

    OK, glad we could find some common ground..

    We said Trump's campaign was colluding with the Russians to help Trump get elected, and Junior's email shows WE WERE RIGHT AGAIN!

    Whatever you have to tell yourself to sleep at night.. :D

  52. [52] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    49

    The Dumbocrats can PROVE collusion up the ying yang.. They can have President Trump on tape saying, "Puty-Poo I want you to help me win this election!!" and it's NOT even a misdemeanor, let alone a "high crime"...

    *LOL* In your monotonous and repetitive rant against Democrats, you seem to have forgotten some FACTS:
    * The Special Counsel is a Republican, and his prosecution team contains Republicans and Democrats.
    * Yes, asking Vladimir Putin to help you win an election would definitely qualify under the definition of "high crime." It would also qualify under several felony statutes... solicitation, etc.

    It's hard to believe you were ever a police officer; have you perhaps lost your mind recently or have you always been this intellectually and morally bankrupt? Either way, you have officially lost your moral foundation to lecture about crime.

    In case anyone was wondering, this kind statement by Michale is exactly why they're referred to as USEFUL IDIOTS. *LOL*

    Crack a law book! :)

  53. [53] 
    michale wrote:

    This Russia Collusion thing is EXACTLY like ya'all's complaints against the GOP over Benghazi..

    You are so correct!

    AND we agree that this Russia Collusion thing is EXACTLY like ya'all claim the GOP's Benghazi thing was..

    And you STILL don't get the FACT that there is NOTHING illegal about collusion... :D

  54. [54] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    I can't believe that a former military/law enforcement guy like yourself would be so accommodating to the idea that top officials of an American presidential campaign would be so eager to meet with someone they believed to be an official representative of a supportive foreign adversarial government who would give them very important and sensitive information about their main political opponent.

  55. [55] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    When people use the term "collusion" in the political realm, you can safely assume that they are defining it as "conspiring with a foreign adversary to influence or undermine an election" -- which is a crime. Junior's email shows that he crossed the line on conspiracy to commit election fraud or conspiracy to obtain information from a foreign adversary. I

  56. [56] 
    michale wrote:

    When people use the term "collusion" in the political realm, you can safely assume that they are defining it as "conspiring with a foreign adversary to influence or undermine an election" -- which is a crime.

    Move the goal posts much?? :D

    Ya know what happens when ya make an assumption??

    You make an ASS out of U.... And umption... :D

    The *FACT* is ya'all are going on and on about COLLUSION and it's not even a CRIME!!! :D

    How frakin' ridiculous is that!!!

  57. [57] 
    michale wrote:

    Victoria,

    In case anyone was wondering, this kind statement by Michale is exactly why they're referred to as USEFUL IDIOTS. *LOL*

    And, per yer norm, you ignore the point because you cannot address the point.

    COLLUSION IS NOT A CRIME....

    Yer wrong, Victoria... AGAIN....

  58. [58] 
    michale wrote:

    Liz,

    I can't believe that a former military/law enforcement guy like yourself would be so accommodating to the idea that top officials of an American presidential campaign would be so eager to meet with someone they believed to be an official representative of a supportive foreign adversarial government who would give them very important and sensitive information about their main political opponent.

    I never gave my opinion on the issue..

    I merely state that it's a FACT that collusion is not a crime..

    And ya'all's hysterical accusations claiming that it IS a crime is nothing but hot air...

    There are NO FACTS that prove collusion, even if collusion WAS a crime..

    This is the ONE solid, irrefutable and INARGUABLE fact of this entire hysterical mess ya'all are making...

    Ya'all simply have NO FACTS that prove your case...

    So, wouldn't the RATIONAL thing to do would be to QUIT hysterically hyperventilating about it until ya'all DO have some facts???

    I mean, honestly.. Wouldn't that be the SMART thing??

  59. [59] 
    michale wrote:

    Liz,

    There is also evidence that Democrats were working with the Russians to PREVENT President Trump from being elected..

    How is that any different than what ya'all accuse President Trump of???

    You see, this is EXACTLY why I can't get excited over ya'all's claims.

    They are not based on facts...

    They are SOLELY motivated by PTDS and the desire to nullify a free, fair and legal presidential election...

    If the motivations are nefarious, as in this case, then the claims are immediately suspect..

    This is what the facts CLEARLY show beyond any doubt...

  60. [60] 
    michale wrote:

    You have to ask yourself one question..

    Why don't we hear hardly anything about the Comey firing anymore??

    When it occurred, ya'all were like, "THIS is going to be what brings down Trump!!! THIS will push 45 out of office!!!"

    And now....

    {{{{ccchhhirrrrpppppppp}}}} {{{ccchhhiirrrrrrrppppppp}}}

    Nothing but crickets over Comey...

    The simple fact is, NOTHING the Democrat (and ya'all, incidentally) have latched onto has any staying power.. It's a shiny.......

    "I'd rather be...

    Shiny
    Like a treasure from a sunken pirate wreck
    Scrub the deck and make it look...

    Shiny
    I will sparkle like a wealthy woman's neck
    Just a sec!"

    -MOANA

    ..... new object that ya'all hysterically play with for a day or so and then it goes nowhere, so ya'all latch onto a NEW shiny object and IT goes nowhere...

    Rinse and repeat....

    Seriously.. Take a step back and look at all this objectively.. You are only one of two people (Three with certain subjects) who can actually DO this...

    There has easily been a half dozen "revelations" that have gone absolutely NOWHERE in taking Trump down and nullifying a fair, free and legal election...

    With so many failures, so many THEREs not there....

    Isn't it LOGICAL to at least CONSIDER the possibility that it's nothing more than a witch hunt??

  61. [61] 
    michale wrote:

    Junior's email shows that he crossed the line on conspiracy to commit election fraud or conspiracy to obtain information from a foreign adversary. I

    The email shows no such thing, as even the NY GRIME admits..

    “The precise nature of the promised damaging information about Mrs. Clinton is unclear, and there is no evidence to suggest that it was related to Russian-government computer hacking that led to the release of thousands of Democratic National Committee emails.”

    I am also constrained to remind you that NOT-45's campaign ALSO received opposition research from a foreign government..

    According to you, that's... how did you put it..."conspiracy to commit election fraud"

    You see how easy it is to refute ya'all's claims and PROVE that they are nothing but PTDS... :D

    conspiracy to obtain information from a foreign adversary.

    Russ... Please please PLEASE tell me you are not this ignorant...

    Show me the law that says this... Show me the law that says it's illegal to conspire to obtain information from a foreign adversary..

    This is exactly my point about ya'all's hysterical PTDS...

    It makes ya'all to say really really REALLY stoopid stuff.... :^/

  62. [62] 
    michale wrote:

    Not that I am immune to saying really REALLY stoopid stuff.. :D

    But when I say stoopid things it's because of mistakes or ignorance..

    When ya'all say stoopid things it's because of Party zealotry...

    Which is much MUCH worse.. :D

  63. [63] 
    michale wrote:

    Democrats' Real, Pervasive Collusion With Russia Somehow Lost In Media's Hysterical Anti-Trump Campaign

    Russia Collusion: If there is bipartisan agreement on anything these days, it is that Donald Trump Jr. was foolish to have met with someone who represented herself as someone with ties to the Russian government in order to get some dirt on Hillary Clinton. But the hypocritical and selective outrage of the Democrats in attacking the younger Trump is mind-boggling.

    Let's put what young Donald did into perspective: He and Trump campaign official Paul Manafort met for 20 minutes with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, who Trump thought could help his father's campaign by dishing dirt on his opponent. He got exactly nothing, except a lecture about U.S. sanctions against Russia. Nothing was exchanged, as far as anyone knows. A one-off meeting that led to nothing other than more anti-Trump Democratic hysteria.

    Now, for the Democrats.

    It's an unfortunate and well-documented truth that the Democratic Party and its allies have for years fallen all over themselves actually colluding not just with Russia, but with its predecessor, the Soviet Union, which truly was an Evil Empire and a sworn enemy of the U.S. They've neither acknowledged it nor appear to feel that it's in any way a problem. And now they act shocked — shocked! — a Republican dared to speak to a Russian.
    http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/democrats-real-pervasive-collusion-with-russia-somehow-lost-in-medias-hysterical-anti-trump-campaign/

    Where is the outrage at Dumbocrat collusion with Russia??

    Non-existent..

    Which PROVES beyond ANY doubt that no one on the Left cares about Russia collusion...

    They ONLY care about nullifying a free, fair and legal election...

    "These are the facts of the case. And they are undisputable"
    -Captain Smilin' Jack Ross, A FEW GOOD MEN

  64. [64] 
    michale wrote:

    Last January, Politico reported that the Democratic National Committee, acting on behalf of Hillary, actually contacted officials in the corrupt government of the Ukraine seeking opposition research against Trump. "Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office," Politico said. "They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton's allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisors."

    Is that not collusion? By the way, Ukrainian-supplied information about Manafort meeting with Russian officials led to him being fired by Trump. So the DNC actually used the information.

    Where is the outrage from ya'all??

    Where is the denunciations??

    Non-existent because, for ya'all, it's PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE for a DEMOCRAT candidate to approach a foreign government for opposition research...

    It's just unacceptable when a person with a -R after their name to do it..

    It's amazing to me that ya'all are completely blinded to the hypocrisy...

  65. [65] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    57

    And, per yer norm, you ignore the point because you cannot address the point.

    And, per your norm, you ignored what I wrote and spewed the Fox News Entertainment propaganda that they spoon-feed the Trump sycophants. Why don't you read it again until it sinks in. I said it violated federal laws for solicitation, etc.

    Do you ever get tired of LYING about other posters? Do you ever get tired of being lied to by Fox News and right-wing propaganda and rushing back here to spew the LIES?

    COLLUSION IS NOT A CRIME....

    Wrong again, bleating sheeple.

    Example: LYING is NOT a crime. Wrong. LYING can be a crime. When you lie on your SF-86 form, it is a crime as is plainly stated in multiple places on the form on multiple pages. When you lie under oath, it is a crime. When you lie to the FBI, it is a crime.

    COLLUSION is NOT a crime. Wrong. As a legal term, collusion is generally used in antitrust lawsuits where business entities COLLUDE to fix prices or defraud consumers or another businesses. It is definitely a crime, and anyone telling you it isn't is simply lying to you because of the whole "useful idiot" thing.

    http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=232

    As a general definition (look it up), collusion means "secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose acting in collusion with the enemy." Illegal is right there in the definition. I found several definitions which all contained the word illegal.

    So you want to know what law has been violated? Federal law prohibits the solicitation of campaign contributions (including things of value) from a foreign individual or entity. 52 USC 30121, 36 USC 510.

    "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."

    The email exchange showed that information was promised from a foreign national — in this case the Russian government — and would be presented by a Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer. The line "other thing of value" would covers opposition research or damaging information on another candidate.

    "No person shall knowingly solicit, accept, or receive from a foreign national any contribution or donation prohibited by" the law. Regardless of whether DJTJ received any information, which he insists he did not but he is known to lie, the solicitation of the meeting violates the statute in the eyes of the law. DJTJ knew that the information was coming from the Russian government.

    So there is a strong case to show that DJTJ solicited information which would be valuable to the campaign along with Manafort and Kushner, which also raises the specter of conspiracy. It's being reported now that there were two others in attendance at this meeting, which DJTJ lied AGAIN when he said he told everything, and one of them was reportedly a former Soviet counter-intelligence officer now lobbyist with links to the Kremlin... I would guess from the description that it was Rinat Akhmetshin. Wonder who the other person was... hmmmmm.

  66. [66] 
    michale wrote:

    Victoria,

    And, per your norm, you ignored what I wrote

    Of course I ignored what you wrote..

    It has NOTHING to do with the point so there was no reason to address it..

  67. [67] 
    michale wrote:

    As to the rest of your spewage, NO WHERE in the laws you quote is the word "collusion"...

    In and of itself, collusion is NOT a crime..

    If it were, then NOT-45 would have been in jail a LONG time ago because she has colluded up her arse....

    So you want to know what law has been violated? Federal law prohibits the solicitation of campaign contributions (including things of value) from a foreign individual or entity. 52 USC 30121, 36 USC 510.

    And Don Jr didn't SOLICIT anything...

    Ergo, he committed no crime..

    On the other hand, NOT-45 solicited a WHOLE bunch of garbage "from a foreign individual or entity." and you ignore that..

    Ergo, you don't CARE about anything but nullifying a free, fair and legal election...

    You lost.. Get over it, already..

  68. [68] 
    michale wrote:

    Victoria,

    So there is a strong case to show that DJTJ solicited information which would be valuable to the campaign along with Manafort and Kushner, which also raises the specter of conspiracy. It's being reported now that there were two others in attendance at this meeting, which DJTJ lied AGAIN when he said he told everything, and one of them was reportedly a former Soviet counter-intelligence officer now lobbyist with links to the Kremlin... I would guess from the description that it was Rinat Akhmetshin. Wonder who the other person was... hmmmmm.

    Waaaaa waaaaaa waaaaaaaa

    President Trump is my president and I don't like it!!!!

    Waaaaaaa waaaaaaa waaaaaaa

    "I know your speaking because I see your lips move, but I don't understand you because I don't speak whiney little bitch."
    -Demon, SUPERNATURAL

    :D

  69. [69] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale

    Waaaaa waaaaaa waaaaaaaa

    President Trump is my president and I don't like it!!!!

    Waaaaaaa waaaaaaa waaaaaaa

    Don't cry widdle snowflake; it's just the tip of the iceberg yet... save your tears for the recordings... or as John McCain would call them... the other shoes of the centipede.

    "I know your speaking because I see your lips move, but I don't understand you because I don't speak whiney little bitch."
    -Demon, SUPERNATURAL

    Now, now... you mustn't sell yourself short. You speak "whiny little bitch" just fine nearly every day on these boards, and you're DOBA at speaking "ignorant bastard" too! *LOL* :)

  70. [70] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    There is also evidence that Democrats were working with the Russians to PREVENT President Trump from being elected.. How is that any different than what ya'all accuse President Trump of???

    I think it's time for Chris to consider using a professional moderator on this blog ... or something that will eliminate at least some of the nonsense that permeates the place.

  71. [71] 
    michale wrote:

    Liz

    I think it's time for Chris to consider using a professional moderator on this blog ... or something that will eliminate at least some of the nonsense that permeates the place.

    And therein lies ya'all's problem..

    It's WELL DOCUMENTED that NOT-45 colluded with foreign governments to obtain opposition research on President Trump...

    This has been posted on several occasions....

    But, because it upsets the Dumbocrat Party apple cart, you write it off as "nonsense"...

    Basically, what you are doing is the equivelant of sticking your fingers in your ears and saying, "Nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa nyaaa I'm not listening"

    Hardly enlightened and, frankly, that's something I would expect from an emotionally challenged moron like Veronica or Paula...

    But I wouldn't have expected that from you...

  72. [72] 
    michale wrote:

    Victoria,

    Now, now... you mustn't sell yourself short. You speak "whiny little bitch" just fine nearly every day on these boards, and you're DOBA at speaking "ignorant bastard" too! *LOL* :)

    Ahh yes... The old I know you are but what am I rebuttal..

    Which proves I have taxed yer skills beyond the breaking point.. :D

    Time to run away and lick yer wounds again, Victoria... :D

    "Don't cross brains with Spock. He'll cut you to pieces every time."
    -Ensign Sulu, STAR TREK

    :D

  73. [73] 
    michale wrote:

    Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire
    Kiev officials are scrambling to make amends with the president-elect after quietly working to boost Clinton.

    Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found.
    http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446

    FACTS....

    But no one here wants the FACTS if they PROVE that NOT-45 used foreign governments and solicited info from foreign governments to beat Trump...

    Which PROVES beyond ANY doubt that ya'all DON'T CARE about foreign governments involvement in the US election..

    Ya'all just want to nullify a free, fair and legal election because ya'all backed the luser....

    THAT is what it's all about...

  74. [74] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Your problem, Michale, is that you want us to believe that you think whatever bad thing one party does the other party does exactly the same thing so we're all guilty of hypocrisy.

    That is the nonsense I am sick of.

    You say that you don't have an opinion on the issue ... any issue.

    That's another thing I've grown tired of. You never offer a coherent opinion on an issue because that is not why you are here. Unfortunately, that's the only reason I'm here - to offer up my opinions on issues and see where everyone else stands on them and maybe, if I'm extremely lucky, have a bit of a discussion on those expressed opinions and, perhaps, engage in a bit of the vanishing art of persuasion.

    Here's an opinion of mine ... I'd like to see Trump serve two terms to test the idea of America and how strong it is and to see if the opposition party is capable of doing anything to make a bad situation better. I'm not sure anymore if America can survive that test - at least the America I love - but I think its important to put your country to that test.

  75. [75] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale ... I'm moving my comment above to the newest thread ...

  76. [76] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    72

    Ahh yes... The old I know you are but what am I rebuttal..

    Nope. It's the "you're-projecting-your-whiny-shit-onto-everybody-else-like-you-ALWAYS-do-by-making-up-lies-about-posters-beginning-with-the-words-YOU-BELIEVE-followed-by-a-LIE" rebuttal... or the "same-repetitive-bullshit-from-Michale-different-day" rebuttal.

    Which proves I have taxed yer skills beyond the breaking point.. :D

    Which proves you're repeating the same shit... as per usual. Your repetitive and monotonous drivel doesn't even tax yourself... how do you figure it taxes anyone else? *LOL* You almost never debate issues. You simply make up lies about posters and insist it's what they believe and then call them hypocrites for believing the shit you just make up about them. The funniest thing of all is that you genuinely seem to act as though you've got something new to say when it's the same tedious utter made up LIES over and over.

    Time to run away and lick yer wounds again, Victoria... :D

    See there... your same old repetitive, monotonous and utterly made up dull bullshit... as if it's new.

    "Don't cross brains with Spock. He'll cut you to pieces every time."
    -Ensign Sulu, STAR TREK

    As if on cue... It is long past well-documented that Spock cut your brain to pieces because you bleat it out constantly like a witless pull toy with a few recorded phrases, a fixed stare, and an empty head. Say... I have an idea; next time you feel compelled to explain why you're brainless, why don't you explain to us how Spock actually managed to locate your tiny little mind? At least it would give you something new to talk about instead of the same lame tired mindless dialogue. :)

  77. [77] 
    michale wrote:

    And STILL you don't address the original point, Victoria..

    Nothing but lame and childish name-calling and personal attacks..

    When are you going to get new material??

  78. [78] 
    michale wrote:

    Victoria,

    It is long past well-documented that Spock cut your brain to pieces because you bleat it out constantly like a witless pull toy with a few recorded phrases, a fixed stare, and an empty head.

    Cite???

    Of course you can't cite ANY facts to support your claim because, as it is with ALL your claims, it's nothing but bullshit...

    Face it, Veronica...

    "You can't win!! I've got god on my side!!!"
    -Leland Gant, NEEDFUL THINGS

    :D

  79. [79] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    77

    And STILL you don't address the original point, Victoria..

    The "point" where you insist that Trump on tape asking Vladimir Putin to help him win an election wouldn't be a crime was addressed at length.

    Nothing but lame and childish name-calling and personal attacks..

    When are you going to get new material??

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2017/07/11/juniors-smoking-gun/#comment-105039

  80. [80] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    78

    "You can't win!! I've got god on my side!!!"
    -Leland Gant, NEEDFUL THINGS

    :D

    How utterly devoid of brain matter does one's head have to be in order to state endlessly and often that they've "got god on my side" while insisting they've been an "agnostic" for decades? Spock cutting your brain to pieces is kind of obvious. *LOL* :)

  81. [81] 
    michale wrote:

    How utterly devoid of brain matter does one's head have to be in order to state endlessly and often that they've "got god on my side" while insisting they've been an "agnostic" for decades? Spock cutting your brain to pieces is kind of obvious. *LOL* :)

    "You really are a sad simple little creature, aren't you?"
    -Bartleby, DOGMA

    :D

    The "point" where you insist that Trump on tape asking Vladimir Putin to help him win an election wouldn't be a crime was addressed at length.

    Cite???

  82. [82] 
    Kick wrote:

    "You really are a sad simple little creature, aren't you?"
    -Bartleby, DOGMA

    That Bartleby sure seems to know you quite well.

    Cite???

    Up the page you "sad simple little creature." Props to Bartleby. :)

  83. [83] 
    michale wrote:

    Victoria,

    That Bartleby sure seems to know you quite well.

    Ahh yes.. Your same old same old gibberish..

    I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I!!

    What are you, like 12???

    Up the page you "sad simple little creature." Props to Bartleby. :)

    TRANSLATION: I got caught in another lie...

  84. [84] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    83

    TRANSLATION: I got caught in another lie...

    You needn't keep reiterating how much you lie; it's quite obvious. :)

  85. [85] 
    michale wrote:

    You needn't keep reiterating how much you lie; it's quite obvious. :)

    Ahh yes.. The old I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I rebuttal...

    The hallmark of a human being at 7 years old....

  86. [86] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    85

    The hallmark of a human being at 7 years old....

    Well, I'm not 7 years old... so yet another lie from YOU.

    Your hallmark is you lie constantly about others. You're a liar who seems to enjoy lying. Sad.

  87. [87] 
    LeaningBlue wrote:

    MTP roll delayed by chanting demonstrators in the Chamber.

    After roll was called, there's out on the field at 45-2.

  88. [88] 
    LeaningBlue wrote:

    That's time out.

Leave a Reply

[If you have questions as to how to register or log in, to be able to post comments here, or if you'd like advanced commenting and formatting tips, please visit our "Commenting Tips" page, for further details.]

You must be logged in to post a comment.
If you are a new user, please register so you can post comments here.

[The first time you post a comment (after creating your user name and logging in), it will be held for approval. Please be patient (as it may take awhile). After your first comment has been approved, you will be able to post further comments instantly and automatically.]