Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 2764
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 12 Jul 2017, 7:32 am

Well, I don't think the Trump Administration has a right to complain that they been a target of unfair investigations at this point. At best their acts have been colossally stupid in doing things that smack of wanting to do business with a foreign power without considering US interests.. Witness this cyber security nonsense. And of course Donald, Jr. willing to get negative information on a political opponent from a representative of the Russian government.

Objectively speaking, they have done wrong things with regard to Russia such that we need to ascertain whether what they have done rises to the level of impeachment. Now, I'm not sure why these emails came out. Is it political or was it an investigative tactic? I guess we'll see.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15856
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 12 Jul 2017, 8:16 am

Doctor Fate wrote:
freeman3 wrote:Reading the New York Times Article it said "one person who was briefed on the emails." Hmm, Mueller investigation? Seems to be prosecutorial-type lingo.


The issue, for me, is the crossing of politics into legal issues. I don't care if legitimate prosecutions are carried out. I am concerned that this will turn into a sort of jihad for Hillary supporters--nothing more and nothing less.

You mean like "Lock her up!"?
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 10744
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 12 Jul 2017, 9:35 am

fate
The issue, for me, is the crossing of politics into legal issues. I don't care if legitimate prosecutions are carried out. I am concerned that this will turn into a sort of jihad for Hillary supporters--nothing more and nothing less.


Nothing like 13 Ben Ghazi hearings....

The issue has been whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians.
Krauthamer, on FOX, says this ....
If you get a call to go to a certain place in the middle of the night to pick up stolen goods, and it turns out stolen goods don’t show up but the cops show up, I think you’re going to have a weak story saying, ‘well, I got swindled here,'” Krauthammer explained.
“The denial of collusion is very weak right now because it looks as if Don Junior was receptive to receiving this information,” Krauthammer explained. “It’s a hell of a defense to say your collusion wasn’t competent and it didn’t work out.”
“Come on, that is pathetic,” Krauthamer said of those making excuses for Trump, Jr.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/07/patheti ... -russians/

There's campaign finance law that has been broken. There's Kushner lying on his security clearance. There's admitted acceptance of Russian interference in the US political system. (If that isn't a crime, shouldn't it be?)
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 20590
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 12 Jul 2017, 10:14 am

danivon wrote:
Doctor Fate wrote:
freeman3 wrote:Reading the New York Times Article it said "one person who was briefed on the emails." Hmm, Mueller investigation? Seems to be prosecutorial-type lingo.


The issue, for me, is the crossing of politics into legal issues. I don't care if legitimate prosecutions are carried out. I am concerned that this will turn into a sort of jihad for Hillary supporters--nothing more and nothing less.

You mean like "Lock her up!"?


Yeah, well, I wasn't a chanter, so immaterial to me.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 20590
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 12 Jul 2017, 10:16 am

freeman3 wrote:Well, I don't think the Trump Administration has a right to complain that they been a target of unfair investigations at this point. At best their acts have been colossally stupid in doing things that smack of wanting to do business with a foreign power without considering US interests.. Witness this cyber security nonsense. And of course Donald, Jr. willing to get negative information on a political opponent from a representative of the Russian government.

Objectively speaking, they have done wrong things with regard to Russia such that we need to ascertain whether what they have done rises to the level of impeachment. Now, I'm not sure why these emails came out. Is it political or was it an investigative tactic? I guess we'll see.


Yes, it's a real question as to whether Don Jr. might be impeached.

Erm.

At worst, it looks like he showed poor judgment. As far as I know, that is not against the law. I think they've got a long way to make a legal case against him.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 20590
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 12 Jul 2017, 10:18 am

rickyp wrote:fate
The issue, for me, is the crossing of politics into legal issues. I don't care if legitimate prosecutions are carried out. I am concerned that this will turn into a sort of jihad for Hillary supporters--nothing more and nothing less.


Nothing like 13 Ben Ghazi hearings....

The issue has been whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians.
Krauthamer, on FOX, says this ....
If you get a call to go to a certain place in the middle of the night to pick up stolen goods, and it turns out stolen goods don’t show up but the cops show up, I think you’re going to have a weak story saying, ‘well, I got swindled here,'” Krauthammer explained.
“The denial of collusion is very weak right now because it looks as if Don Junior was receptive to receiving this information,” Krauthammer explained. “It’s a hell of a defense to say your collusion wasn’t competent and it didn’t work out.”
“Come on, that is pathetic,” Krauthamer said of those making excuses for Trump, Jr.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/07/patheti ... -russians/

There's campaign finance law that has been broken. There's Kushner lying on his security clearance. There's admitted acceptance of Russian interference in the US political system. (If that isn't a crime, shouldn't it be?)


Ever think about changing your monicker? You know what they call the last person taken in the NFL draft each year?

"Mr. Irrelevant."

It suits you.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 20590
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 12 Jul 2017, 10:40 am

Another perspective. http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/t ... usion-just


Today, Trump Jr. released his emails on Twitter. One states, “the crown prosecutor of Russia” had offered “to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.” Rod Goldstone, a publicist, stated, “This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.”

That would clearly constitute at least initial communications and possible coordination between the Russians and the Trump campaign. However, the article raises more questions than answers. If the Russians were making such a play to influence the election in favor of Trump, this is a curious way of going about it. The most obvious question is why the Russians would call such a meeting but not actually produce any evidence or even substantive allegations.

One obvious explanation is that Trump Jr., Kushner, and Manafort fell for a classic bait-and-switch. Veselnitskaya was representing people seeking to lift the adoption ban, and it was certainly amateur hour in Trump Tower. If this is the best the Russians can do as their big play, we have little to worry about.

They question is whether the Trump team is a bunch of click-bait chumps or criminals. In other words, does any of this constitute a clear crime or even a vague inkblot image of a crime?
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 2764
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 12 Jul 2017, 11:58 am

Yeah, sure, Donald, Jr and Kushner met with a representative of the Russian government and did not tell Trump about it. The meeting was held one floor below Trump's office at Trump Tower! It's laughable to think Trump did not know about it.

As for your link...I don't think he is considering the overall context. I'll give you a hypotthetical. Let's say there is a businessman T and another one R. And businessman T has a product S and businessman R has a product D. And at some point businessman T meets with businessman R. And some point after that businessman T receives product D and then some point after that business T tries to send S to businessman R. What would you conclude about what was discussed at the meeting? Here, we know that Russia had dirt on the meeting when a representative of their government met with Donald, Jr, within a month after that they did send out dirt that hurt Hillary, and after since then Trump has been feverishly trying to get those sanctions lifted off of Russia. And we're supposed to believe nothing of consequence was discussed at that meeting?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 20590
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 12 Jul 2017, 12:33 pm

freeman3 wrote:Yeah, sure, Donald, Jr and Kushner met with a representative of the Russian government and did not tell Trump about it. The meeting was held one floor below Trump's office at Trump Tower! It's laughable to think Trump did not know about it.

As for your link...I don't think he is considering the overall context. I'll give you a hypotthetical. Let's say there is a businessman T and another one R. And businessman T has a product S and businessman R has a product D. And at some point businessman T meets with businessman R. And some point after that businessman T receives product D and then some point after that business T tries to send S to businessman R. What would you conclude about what was discussed at the meeting? Here, we know that Russia had dirt on the meeting when a representative of their government met with Donald, Jr, within a month after that they did send out dirt that hurt Hillary, and after since then Trump has been feverishly trying to get those sanctions lifted off of Russia. And we're supposed to believe nothing of consequence was discussed at that meeting?


If you believe that, you're welcome to it. You probably shouldn't be on a jury re the matter.

Like I said, let me know when Jr. is arrested.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 10744
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 13 Jul 2017, 6:54 am

freeman3 wrote:
Yeah, sure, Donald, Jr and Kushner met with a representative of the Russian government and did not tell Trump about it. The meeting was held one floor below Trump's office at Trump Tower! It's laughable to think Trump did not know about ti



Yet the day after Trump Jr. received the first email and presumably had his phone conversation about the supposedly incriminating material, his father promised to give “a major speech” in which “we’re going to be discussing all of the things that have taken place with the Clintons. I think you’re going to find it very informative and very, very interesting.”

That speech targeting Hillary Clinton didn’t take place. But on June 15, the first leak of stolen Democratic materials did.


Fate
Like I said, let me know when Jr. is arrested.

Well, if you are so sure, put your money here...
https://www.predictit.org/Contract/7183#data
I tend to agree that Trump Jr. will skate. He's admitted to attempted collusion which is corrupt and disloyal .... but despite this he isn't a felon unless they charge him under the election financing laws. And there's bigge fish to fry.

More likely Kushner...
Trump Jr. forwarded the emails to Kushner, whose response was to attend the meeting, although he apparently left within 10 minutes. Kushner later neglected to report the meeting and others with Russians on his SF-86 forms to receive national security clearance (intentional omission is a felony).
The meeting gave the Kremlin potential blackmail material against the Trumps, and thus possibly leverage over them.
In addition, McClatchy reports that investigators in Congress and the Justice Department are exploring whether the Trump campaign digital operation — supervised by Kushner — helped guide Russia’s remarkably sophisticated efforts to use internet bots to target voters with fake news attacking Hillary Clinton.
Then there was the extraordinary initiative by Kushner in the transition period to set up the secret communications channel.


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/13/opin ... eft-region

Why were secure back channel communications required by Kushner et al, if not to hide communications that couldn't be eventually made public?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 20590
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 13 Jul 2017, 11:39 am

rickyp wrote:freeman3 wrote:
Yeah, sure, Donald, Jr and Kushner met with a representative of the Russian government and did not tell Trump about it. The meeting was held one floor below Trump's office at Trump Tower! It's laughable to think Trump did not know about ti



Yet the day after Trump Jr. received the first email and presumably had his phone conversation about the supposedly incriminating material, his father promised to give “a major speech” in which “we’re going to be discussing all of the things that have taken place with the Clintons. I think you’re going to find it very informative and very, very interesting.”

That speech targeting Hillary Clinton didn’t take place. But on June 15, the first leak of stolen Democratic materials did.


Fate
Like I said, let me know when Jr. is arrested.

Well, if you are so sure, put your money here...
https://www.predictit.org/Contract/7183#data
I tend to agree that Trump Jr. will skate. He's admitted to attempted collusion which is corrupt and disloyal .... but despite this he isn't a felon unless they charge him under the election financing laws. And there's bigge fish to fry.

More likely Kushner...
Trump Jr. forwarded the emails to Kushner, whose response was to attend the meeting, although he apparently left within 10 minutes. Kushner later neglected to report the meeting and others with Russians on his SF-86 forms to receive national security clearance (intentional omission is a felony).
The meeting gave the Kremlin potential blackmail material against the Trumps, and thus possibly leverage over them.
In addition, McClatchy reports that investigators in Congress and the Justice Department are exploring whether the Trump campaign digital operation — supervised by Kushner — helped guide Russia’s remarkably sophisticated efforts to use internet bots to target voters with fake news attacking Hillary Clinton.
Then there was the extraordinary initiative by Kushner in the transition period to set up the secret communications channel.


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/13/opin ... eft-region

Why were secure back channel communications required by Kushner et al, if not to hide communications that couldn't be eventually made public?


So many "ifs," so little factual basis.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 2764
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 13 Jul 2017, 1:24 pm

On June 7 Trump teased a major speech regarding the Clintons that he was going to give regarding the misdeeds of the Clintons.

"I am going to give a major speech on probably Monday of next week, and we're going to be discussing all of the things that have taken place with the Clintons," he continued. "I think you're going to find it very informative and very, very interesting. I wonder if the press will want to attend, who knows. Hillary Clinton turned the State Department into her private hedge fund — the Russians, the Saudis, the Chinese — all gave money to Bill and Hillary and got favorable treatment in return. It's a sad day in America when foreign governments with deep pockets have more influence in our own country than our great citizens."

June 7 was the day Donald, Jr set up the meeting with the Russian attorney.

Trump never gave the speech (ostensibly due to the Pulse nightclub tragedy).

The emails indicate that the dirt was based on Hillary's dealings with Russia. So that's apparently what Trump was planning to reveal on June 13. So two possibilities, (1) Donald, Jr was telling the truth and nothing happened, or (2) something did happen...but obviously hacked emails was not something that Trump could talk about.

But this talking about giving a major Clinton address on June 7 and then canceling it is circumstantial evidence that Trump knew about the meeting.

By the way, even if Donald, Jr is telling the truth...all that means is that the Russians were probably trying to gauge how interested the Trump campaign was in the information. I heard it described as a dangle. If the Russians went to all this trouble to set up the meeting just to see if Trump would take the bait if offered...it's hard to believe that they would not have tried further contact. After all, if they just wanted to help the Trump campaign by releasing the hack emails without getting something directly in return, they did not have to make direct contact at all.

To sum up the evidence thus far:

(1) June 7 Donald, Jr sets up meeting with Russian attorney for June 9
(2) June 7 Hours later Trump promises major Clinton speech for June 13. This speech is never given.
(3) The Russians had hacked emails as of June 9 when their representative met with Donald, Jr.
(4) June 9. Donald, Jr meets with Russian attorney and indicated serious interest in getting negative information on Hillary, not caring it was from Russian government
(5) By June 15 a hacker linked to Russia began releasing emails hacked from the DNC
(6) Wikileaks releases DNC emails in July 22
(7)Wikileaks releases Clinton emails on October 7
(8) on the repayment side we have Flynn trying to mollify the Russian ambassador on sanctions, all these contacts between Trump associates and the Russian ambassador, meetings between Kushner and sanctioned Russian Bank, Kushner trying to set up back-channel communication system with Russia, Administration wants to give back Russian compounds lost due to sanctions, the appointment of Russian-friendly appointees--Flynn and Tillerson--to two out of three important foreign policy posts and the Administration's clear softness on sanctions and on relations with Russia in general
(9) Trump making extraordinary attempts to shut-down Russia investigation

The jigsaw puzzle...is filling up. So Trump was willing to collude, met with the Russians in order to collude and we don't know what was said, the Russians delivered the good after the meeting, Trump's actions regarding sanctions indicated reciprocity, and his actions regarding shutting down the Russia investigation indicated of consciousness of guilt that he did something wrong. Now we just did need a weak link (Kushner?) to confess that there was an explicit agreement.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 20590
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 13 Jul 2017, 2:59 pm

freeman3 wrote:On June 7 Trump teased a major speech regarding the Clintons that he was going to give regarding the misdeeds of the Clintons.

"I am going to give a major speech on probably Monday of next week, and we're going to be discussing all of the things that have taken place with the Clintons," he continued. "I think you're going to find it very informative and very, very interesting. I wonder if the press will want to attend, who knows. Hillary Clinton turned the State Department into her private hedge fund — the Russians, the Saudis, the Chinese — all gave money to Bill and Hillary and got favorable treatment in return. It's a sad day in America when foreign governments with deep pockets have more influence in our own country than our great citizens."

June 7 was the day Donald, Jr set up the meeting with the Russian attorney.

Trump never gave the speech (ostensibly due to the Pulse nightclub tragedy).

The emails indicate that the dirt was based on Hillary's dealings with Russia. So that's apparently what Trump was planning to reveal on June 13. So two possibilities, (1) Donald, Jr was telling the truth and nothing happened, or (2) something did happen...but obviously hacked emails was not something that Trump could talk about.

But this talking about giving a major Clinton address on June 7 and then canceling it is circumstantial evidence that Trump knew about the meeting.

By the way, even if Donald, Jr is telling the truth...all that means is that the Russians were probably trying to gauge how interested the Trump campaign was in the information. I heard it described as a dangle. If the Russians went to all this trouble to set up the meeting just to see if Trump would take the bait if offered...it's hard to believe that they would not have tried further contact. After all, if they just wanted to help the Trump campaign by releasing the hack emails without getting something directly in return, they did not have to make direct contact at all.

To sum up the evidence thus far:

(1) June 7 Donald, Jr sets up meeting with Russian attorney for June 9
(2) June 7 Hours later Trump promises major Clinton speech for June 13. This speech is never given.
(3) The Russians had hacked emails as of June 9 when their representative met with Donald, Jr.
(4) June 9. Donald, Jr meets with Russian attorney and indicated serious interest in getting negative information on Hillary, not caring it was from Russian government
(5) By June 15 a hacker linked to Russia began releasing emails hacked from the DNC
(6) Wikileaks releases DNC emails in July 22
(7)Wikileaks releases Clinton emails on October 7
(8) on the repayment side we have Flynn trying to mollify the Russian ambassador on sanctions, all these contacts between Trump associates and the Russian ambassador, meetings between Kushner and sanctioned Russian Bank, Kushner trying to set up back-channel communication system with Russia, Administration wants to give back Russian compounds lost due to sanctions, the appointment of Russian-friendly appointees--Flynn and Tillerson--to two out of three important foreign policy posts and the Administration's clear softness on sanctions and on relations with Russia in general
(9) Trump making extraordinary attempts to shut-down Russia investigation

The jigsaw puzzle...is filling up. So Trump was willing to collude, met with the Russians in order to collude and we don't know what was said, the Russians delivered the good after the meeting, Trump's actions regarding sanctions indicated reciprocity, and his actions regarding shutting down the Russia investigation indicated of consciousness of guilt that he did something wrong. Now we just did need a weak link (Kushner?) to confess that there was an explicit agreement.


Uh-huh.

I can hardly wait until this is over. You'll look back and realize you spent too much time sucking down the wildest fantasies of lefty journalists.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 2764
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 13 Jul 2017, 3:23 pm

Oh come on. They were willing to accept campaign dirt from Russia in order to win. That's not even disputable at this point. The only issue is whether in return for that help they would help Russia with regard to sanctions. Once you cross that moral Rubicon in willing to accept help from the Russians...it's crossing a little stream to get to trading sanctions help for it.

And we know that they were willing to give Russia help on sanctions, went out of their way to try and do it. Which is pretty inexplicable...unless it was done in payment for services rendered.

It's not wild liberal fantasies. It's pretty much the only rational explanation for what happened here.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 6593
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 13 Jul 2017, 4:52 pm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_electoral_intervention

It is hardly a new item... Both sides do it. Can we at least agree on that?