So he has experience working on a campaign?

---

~
"You lie!" The Prophet Joe Wilson

Of all the political operatives running around Washington that one could choose for a campaign manager, I wonder how many can claim this on their resumé.

I know, I know. Just liberal media lies. They should just stop reporting on this stuff.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

I'm thrilled that reporters are back to their role of investigating and vetting after 8 years of doing nothing but ball washing.

Why are people so anti-Russia? The goddam UK is spying on us. That where our attention should be.

It doesn't seem that you are, seeing as all you do is piss and moan about it.

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

Me? Piss and moan?

There are actaully big things happening to drain the swamp and yet all you guys can do is continue to focus on November 8th. It's insanity.

I don't know what you're smoking but I could sure use some.

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

Big things I tell you. They are the biggest. Huge in fact.

I'm still waiting on that 30 day plan to defeat ISIS though. THAT will be amazeballs.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

Why are you so focused on November 8th you god damn snowflake!!

---

Long Chile was a silly place.

What makes your reply funny is that it goes back to the OP. The unhinged and what they think is smoking.

To JPO and other unhinged, we're inside the first 100 days and it looks like a conservative will be approved for the SCOTUS. You might not think that's big but most sane people do.

"To JPO and other unhinged, we're inside the first 100 days and it looks like a conservative will be approved for the SCOTUS. You might not think that's big but most sane people do. "

Gratuitous strawman alert!

Of course it's a big deal. I think he'll make a fine Justice. That, of course, has zero to do with our concerns about his campaign's potential involvement with Russian efforts to influence our election. If you think those concerns are politically motivated nothingburgers, take it up with the Justice Department. They seem to disagree.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

You need to get over the election. You lost. Suck it up.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

This was quite a leap - am I missing the connection? I really don't see it. The swamp looks as well populated and as deep as any over the past 30 years. Bonus points for getting so much of the family biz in on the action.

Because Hillary lost the election and they need someone to blame.

Sometimes I feel like I've woken from a coma in some weird upside down universe, where the people claiming fake news are mostly generating it themselves, lying blatantly from podiums in the White House, and their supporters all the while cheer enthusiastically and call any critics "unhinged".

And this from someone who a year ago considered voting for Trump because the other Republican primary candidates were terrible and Hilary repugnant to me. I was defending Trump to friends, saying things like, "he's just doing what he believes will get himself the primary win, and will moderate before the general election" and "he'll surround himself with a good, experienced team - you shouldn't be so concerned." But frankly he is showing himself to be an unmitigated disaster. When he called the Taiwanese president many thought it could be a brilliant tactic and gave him the benefit of the doubt. But since then all the evidence points to him not having a clue about foreign affairs and being a narcissistic jerk.

I'm totally over it.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

Bwahhahahahahahaha, that's fucking hilarious. You mean we had too much influence from big corporate donors before, so now we just cut out the middle man (or woman) and appoint them directly to cabinet positions?

It's pretty damning. Wow.

The meat of it starts at 5:50 into this video.
http://video.foxnews.com/...3001/?#sp=show-clips

---

----
Don't hold back

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

Just more smoke. Smoke, smoke, smoke.


Now we get to see some of the regulars spin, spin, spin.

Why are people so anti-Russia? The goddam UK is spying on us. That where our attention should be.


Don't forget about Obama, he's listening right now in your microwave. The U.K and Obama are the real threats, forget Russia. I mean, what has Russia ever done wrong?...

You can't actually believe that "the swamp" is being drained can you?!

Have you seen his cabinet? Have you seen the access his family has? Have you seen how much money he is wasting playing golf every weekend (not to mention lying about it)?

I would love to know, on balance, how the swamp is any drier than it was.

Edited to say, I get that one can hate democrats, and I get that people may believe the Obama administration got away with a lot, but don't be disingenuous about whether or not the Trump regime is any better.

don't be disingenuous about whether or not the Trump regime is any better.


You must be new around here...

I thought this was going to be a cooking thread. :( Talk about bad luck.

I could have wrote the same exact thing.

His presidency so far has been an absolute embarrassment. That stated, it's been two months. Maybe he pulls something together but if we're still talking about this same nonsense a year from now then holy shit this is going to be a long four years.

He chose to go to battle against the main stream media. I will agree that the MSM probably needs a good punch in the mouth on occasion but it does seem that many news orgs have made it their mission to hit Trump hard and as often as they can. They are going to go over his life and presidency with a fine toothed comb in an effort to uncover everything about him personally, politically, financially, etc. If Nixon thought the WaPo stuff on Watergate was a lot then Trump is about to feel that times 10.

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

It's pretty damning. Wow.


So the Trump campaign is offered documents damaging to Hilary's campaign and in return, the Trump campaign has to downplay Russia's involvement in Crimea (which they have done) and to distract people by focussing on demanding member countries of NATO pay their 2% dues (which they have done).


Then, prior to the convention, the Republican platform is changed to remove a section that allows Ukraine defensive weapon, at the insistence of the Trump campaign. Right after the convention, the first e-mails critical of Hilary start appearing on Wiki-leaks.


Stone then "predicted" John Podesta's personal e-mails would soon be published.


What I find most incredible though is the number of Trump supporters who are okay with this. I really can't understand it to be honest.

It's just some freak coincidences.

Just like it was a coincidence that Flynn and Sessions both lied about meeting Kislyak. Coincidence too that Flynn was paid $30k by Russian state-sponsored RT TV for a speech in Dec 2015. Also coincidence that Kushner has alleged real estate deals with Russians (Trump Jr. extolled about how much Russian money was buying Trump real estate in 2008). Even coincidence that Paul Manafort received millions from pro-Russian interests. Huge coincidence that Tillerson was awarded Order of Friendship by Putin for his work overseeing a deal between ExxonMobil and Rosneft. Probably coincidence that Wilbur Ross, Commerce Sec, served on a board of the US-Russia Investment Fund. Certainly coincidence that Carter Page, ex-foreign policy adviser for the Trump campaign (which they all now deny), met with Kislyak at the Republican convention and allegedly helped broker the recent $11bn sale of a 19.5% stake in Russian oil company Rosneft (by the way, did anyone see the train wreck of an interview Carter Page gave to CNN? It's truly unbelievable!).

So yes, nothing to see here... we should all just move on.

I don't want to defend Trump here, but I don't understand the motivation for Russia to get Manafort in charge of the Trump campaign.

So is the idea that the Russians needed someone they knew had worked for them before to lead the Trump campaign? Why?
I guess the Russians have some kind of US Presidential campaign strategy that's more powerful than anything generated here in the United States?
What I mean is that wouldn't Russian spooks have found this course of action very risky? And with what reward?
Either they had Trump as a known ally or they didn't. If they did then Manafort is totally unnecessary.

I thought this would be the thread talking about Trump being proved correct: he was wiretapped by the Obama administration.

---

________
It doesn't really matter what Phil is saying, the music of his voice is the appropriate soundtrack for a bicycle race. HTupolev

No. Actually, the only change was that the platform was amended to ADD condemnation of the Russian interference in Ukraine. During the crafting of the amendment the Trump campaign changed the language calling for supplying "lethal defensive weapons" to instead calling for taking "appropriate actions".

If you repeat a lie enough times, people will believe it.

---

************************
#WeAreTheForge #BlackGunsMatter

"Look, will you guys at leats accept that you are a bunch of dumb asses and just trust me on this one? Please?" BarryP 7/30/2012

If you repeat a lie enough times, people will believe it.


Why do you hate Donald J. Trump?

Hate is such a wasted and negative emotion, it gets otherwise rational people to behave in an irrational and childish manner. It's a fine line between love and hate.

Indifference, you might consider giving that a try.

---

************************
#WeAreTheForge #BlackGunsMatter

"Look, will you guys at leats accept that you are a bunch of dumb asses and just trust me on this one? Please?" BarryP 7/30/2012

-
HA! Good one, but I think Trump is doing for "fake news!" what liberals have done to "racist!", in using it to argue against anything he disagrees with and close discussion, he has de-fanged to whole concept...yet we still have to be vigilant for fake news, and racism. Sad that people are willing to make damage, for personal gain, in the middle of real issues.

on the pub platform issue:
http://amarillo.com/...weaken-stance-russia

et tu Brutus?

Trump allies being surveilled as part of investigations into other people, as Nunes claimed he had been shown evidence of, is not the same as "Obama wiretapping Trump".

A quick fact check on some other Trump claims:

- Thousands of Muslims in NJ cheering 9-11 attacks (false)
- Massive voter fraud in the 2016 election (specifically claiming in VA, NH and CA) (no evidence)
- What happened in Sweden last night (nothing had happened)
- The biggest ever crowds witnessing a presidential inauguration (false)
- The NSA and FBI tell congress Russia did not meddle in the election (false)
- The murder rate in the US is the highest in 47 years (false)
- Americans don't care about my tax returns (polls disagree)

In addition to the claim about softening the party platform's language about Russia being wrong, the claim about NATO doesn't make much sense. Trump was saying those things about NATO well before June/July 2016.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

'ere ya go mate :-)

---

RayGovett
Hughson CA
Be Prepared-- Strike Swiftly -- Who Dares Wins- Without warning-"it will be hard. I can do it"

I don't pretend to know how any of this fits together, if in fact it does in some meaningful way. But I think it's reasonable to acknowledge that there are tentacles reaching to and from Russia and Trump's business and political operations, and there are far more questions than answers at present, and they seem to be doing everything in their power to pretend it isn't so.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

It bears investigation, but to be honest, a story about Manafort working for the Russians a decade ago is mostly smoke.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

No. Actually, the only change was that the platform was amended to ADD condemnation of the Russian interference in Ukraine. During the crafting of the amendment the Trump campaign changed the language calling for supplying "lethal defensive weapons" to instead calling for taking "appropriate actions".

Removing sanctions and blocking lethal military assistance to the Ukraine were the 2 main goals for Putin and the Trump team handed that to him on a silver platter. Don't you think it at least a little coincidental, that Mannafort was in Russia just before the convention and this change occurred at the same time?

My question is why, on the eve of the convention, would the Republicans suddenly change their policy platform towards Russia? Then, after the convention, another member of the team announces that more damaging e-mails are on the way. In a few days, almost like magic, out come some wiki-leaks and the Podesta e-mails. Don't you find that at all curious?

It's "almost" as if some in the Trump administration knew what was coming in advance.

I refer you to post 36.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Facts do NOT "Trump" talking points. ;)

---

************************
#WeAreTheForge #BlackGunsMatter

"Look, will you guys at leats accept that you are a bunch of dumb asses and just trust me on this one? Please?" BarryP 7/30/2012

Because Russia is taking over the United States right before our eyes!!!!

May I suggest you find a hobby to occupy your time? Again, when will the Crazy on the left go away?

Oh bitch please. If Clinton won and these kinds of things were being said you'd be going nuts about Russia.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

There are actaully big things happening to drain the swamp and yet all you guys can do is continue to focus on November 8th.


Trump himself seems to spend an inordinate time talking about Nov 8th as well - It seems to come up in every public interview, and speech that he gives. A good portion of the rather incoherent interview with Time yesterday was spent talking about Nov 8th.

Why? Why does he keep going on and on about this? He won (we hope fairly) and the Republicans won - why the need to keep going back again and again to Nov 8? Move on. Move forward!

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Why? Because he never wanted to be President. He only wanted to win. Winning is what matters to him. He won, so he's letting everyone know it.

It will always be about November 8th for Trump.

That was a big day, the biggest. A HUGE DAY!

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

yeah, because what Sanuk wrote above would be crazy if it weren't true. you really think the FBI are investigating all this when it's just a baseless left wing conspiracy theory? if so, you're either immensely naive or just choosing to keep your head in the sand in thinking Trump and other Pubs can do no wrong.

Um, I'm guessing it's the latter.

Maybe I wasn't clear in my description of what happened. The only way the Republicans changed their policy platform was to make it MORE critical of Russian foreign policy. Until they amended the platform on that day there was no mention of the Ukraine situation.

What the Trump team did was tone down the language of one phrase within that new amendment.

The only way the Republicans changed their policy platform was to make it MORE critical of Russian foreign policy. Until they amended the platform on that day there was no mention of the Ukraine situation.

What the Trump team did was tone down the language of one phrase within that new amendment.

My understanding is that prior to the convention, a Republican delegate (he was pro-Ted Cruz) proposed an Amendment that called for the U.S to provide "lethal defense weapons" to Ukraine, in their fight against Russia. That Amendment (not the existing platform) was changed with the quoted words now reading "appropriate actions." That is the language that was toned down and raised some eyebrows.

There is no doubt that the Amendment was changed from it's original proposal but of course now the argument is who was behind the change with the Trump team denying it. It's not going to look good however, since Mannafort was in Russia just before the convention, the Russian ambassador was in the auditorium and there are at least allegations of more involvement. It might not be a smoking gun, but added together with other things, it does look suspicious.

Really, post #36.

Here is the final language that was added to the platform as a result of Denman’s amendment: “We support maintaining and, if warranted, increasing sanctions, together with our allies, against Russia unless and until Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity are fully restored. We also support providing appropriate assistance to the armed forces of Ukraine and greater coordination with NATO defense planning.”

“The platform ended up tougher than it started, compared from the beginning to the end,” Denman told me, although she added she still believes her lethal aid provision should have been included in the final document. Nevertheless, not long after the platform subcommittee meeting, The Washington Post published a story headlined, “Trump campaign guts GOP’s anti-Russia stance on Ukraine.”

It charged that Trump had weakened the platform, and a new conventional wisdom began to form: The Trump team, doing the bidding of Vladimir Putin, gutted the GOP platform’s position on behalf of Russia. That is precisely the opposite of what happened. In the end, the platform, already fairly strong on the Russia-Ukraine issue, was strengthened, not weakened, as a result of the subcommittee meeting.


Fake news, in other words, and you're buying into despite being shown what really happened.

Yeah, I can't imagine why people don't trust the media . . . .

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

It charged that Trump had weakened the platform, and a new conventional wisdom began to form: The Trump team, doing the bidding of Vladimir Putin, gutted the GOP platform’s position on behalf of Russia. That is precisely the opposite of what happened. In the end, the platform, already fairly strong on the Russia-Ukraine issue, was strengthened, not weakened, as a result of the subcommittee meeting.

Fake news, in other words, and you're buying into despite being shown what really happened.

Yeah, I can't imagine why people don't trust the media . . . .

If the media can't be trusted, how do you know the article quoted from the Washington Examiner is trustworthy?

That shit is as fake as Trump!

And if you want , he'll blow it up yer arse, I believe.

---

RayGovett
Hughson CA
Be Prepared-- Strike Swiftly -- Who Dares Wins- Without warning-"it will be hard. I can do it"

Did you read it?

I kind of wish you would. The reporter actually talked to the delegate who initially proposed the "lethal weapons" phrase.

It's really not that difficult to tell what reporting is trustworthy and what reporting is biased.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

https://www.scribd.com/...?skip_app_promo=true

---

~
"You lie!" The Prophet Joe Wilson

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3283349-Raw-12333-surveillance-sharing-guidelines.html


declassified for the huddled masses

---

~
"You lie!" The Prophet Joe Wilson

More smoke? Really not sure what is or isn't, but this episode has the former Blackwater owner trying to set up back channel communications for Trump and Putin. You hear about that kind of thing often enough, usually after some breakthrough or failure of negotiation.
-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/...m_term=.d5bf654e13af

Jan 9th, just before Trump is sworn in? I thought Trump already had a open communication with his puppet master Putin?

Exactly...what does Trump need with a secret Seychelles meeting between a donor and an unnamed 'Russian with close ties to Putin?' How is it he and Putin orchestrated this takedown of Hillary and their future plans without already having backchannels?

My god is the media grasping here. Actually, just above this Rodred posted a few whistleblower articles from loony right wing sources, it's pretty striking that a WaPo article is just as sensationalist and thin as something from Rodred's sites.

Also, I'm sincerely interested in this: the media, politicians on the left, much of the intelligence community has been working on this Trump/Russia connection for the better part of six months now, right? We know that Flynn's legal communication with a Russian official was illegally leaked a month or two ago, so the info will get out if it exists.

What has been uncovered, what CONCRETE evidence has been released to tie Trump and/or his officials to Russia and/or Putin? You'd think with all the surveillance that's gone on, with all the might of the intelligence community, there'd be one intercepted phone conversation or one e-mail that either expressly or tacitly supports the notion there was some cooperation/quid pro quo.

Otherwise this 'smoke' is just nonsense, it's shit that belongs in Rodred's far right conspiracy sites...billionaires talking to other billionaires in remote locations? Private jets crossing runways? Business ties between people who have literally hundreds of interwoven, international business interests apiece? I mean come on...

I went to the link, read the story, again; nothing there, again.

It is getting really embarrassing and now we have the media covering for Susan Rice. A person, who when asked just 2 weeks ago about the unmasking lied to Judy Woodruff on NPR. But according to "Talking Points Memo", unmasking Americans and reverse targeting Americans is okay, as long as the target is a Trump associate. Yet, not that long ago the left and the Democratic Party were up in arms, even proposing legislation. Now? Crickets.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/susan-rice-unmasked-1491262064

As for the Washington Post. This is the first time I've visited their site since the election. Can anyone with a straight face, look at what constitutes their online front page and differentiate between them and any other loony left wing site on the internet?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/

Can anyone with a straight face, look at what constitutes their online front page and differentiate between them and any other loony left wing site on the internet?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/

Wow. No.

I often read individual stories from the Washington Post, but I don't think I've ever visited their front page. Loony tunes.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Man, that's some strange smoke. Definitely not fire, though.

Quote:

Russian ambassador told Moscow that Kushner wanted secret communications channel with Kremlin

Russia’s ambassador to the U.S. reported to his superiors in December that Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law and adviser, asked him about setting up a communications channel between the transition team and the Kremlin using Russian facilities in the United States, an apparent move to shield pre-inauguration discussions from monitoring, according to U.S. officials briefed on intelligence reports.

Ambassador Sergey Kislyak reported to his superiors in Moscow that Kushner, son-in-law and confidant to then-President-elect Trump, made the proposal during a meeting on Dec. 1 or 2 at Trump Tower, according to intercepts of Russian communications that were reviewed by U.S. officials. Kislyak said Kushner suggested using Russian diplomatic facilities in the United States for the communications.

The meeting also was attended by Michael Flynn, Trump’s first national security adviser.

Quote:

Jared Kushner and the Kremlin: Trump Son-in-law and Adviser Had Undisclosed Contacts With Russian Ambassador

U.S. President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and close adviser, Jared Kushner, had at least three previously undisclosed contacts with the Russian ambassador to the United States during and after the 2016 presidential campaign, seven current and former U.S. officials told Reuters.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

I look forward to seeing the final results of this investigation. I do have some questions for you though.

1.) Have you ever considered the possibility that there is no evidence of Russian collusion?
2.) How would that reflect on this broader effort you (and many others) are involved in?
3.) How would you feel about being subsequently labeled a facilitator of fake news?

I'm not asking this as a cheap troll. Personally, I'm questioning the public good of the concept of fake news -- other than a very narrow interpretation where specific, underlying facts are simply wrong. It seems to me that fake news has a much more generic definition in the broader public right now.

I say again, this IS actually just more smoke. Still no fire.

We already knew the Trump gang had been trying to set up back channel communications with Russia.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

1. Of course. I think it's more likely than not that there was no collusion regarding the campaign.
2. I have no idea what you mean by this. The only effort I'm involved in is to understand why Trump and co. have behaved toward Russia in unprecedented and secretive ways, consistently, and from the very beginning. Why?
3. A major media outlet is reporting direct from their intel sources. If that's fake news, it's not on me.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

There were unsubstantiated and uncorroborated reports of that in the general sense, that weren't exactly worth reporting on. This is highly specific, and very curious.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

I don't agree- the previous reports were just as specific as this story. I don't really see much of a difference in reporting between the Prince story and this one, actually.

What's so curious about it? What about this story rises to the level of fire?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Show me prior reports from our intel intercepts that have Kushner asking Russians to establish communications with the Kremlin on Russian infrastructure, for the ostensible purpose of evading U.S. intel monitoring.

I recall a story about a meeting in the Seychelles by a guy associated with the campaign trying to arrange something similar. This is different in both content, association, and veracity.

Nothing about it rises to the level of fire, in terms of illegality, to my knowledge.

But it's also exactly the kind of thing you'd expect to find if there were something to be concerned about regarding American interests and Russian influence in the White House.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

I recall a story about a meeting in the Seychelles by a guy associated with the campaign trying to arrange something similar. This is different in both content, association, and veracity.

The only difference is who the subject of the story is- Kuchner this time, instead of Prince. The other stories were actually more specific in terms of content- they had Prince trying to set up a specific meeting for a specific purpose. I don't see anything different in terms of veracity. I don't remember anyone doubting the veracity of either report anyway.


Nothing about it rises to the level of fire, in terms of illegality, to my knowledge.

But it's also exactly the kind of thing you'd expect to find if there were something to be concerned about regarding American interests and Russian influence in the White House.

So . . . more smoke, still no fire.

As far as I know there's nothing illegal about it, and there's nothing particularly unusual about it. Back channels are set up and used all the time. Yes, I suppose it's the kind of thing you'd expect to see if there's collusion. It's also the sort of thing you'd expect to see if the Trump team wanted to deal through a back channel for more standard reasons.

I'm not seeing much here. The most damning evidence in my mind continues to be candidate Trump's comment that the Russians should maybe release more of Clinton's emails.

I generally hate the "plausible deniability" line of defense, but so far, the defense against collusion seems far more plausible than the case for it, which looks to be based on leaks, innuendo, and Red baiting.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

i haven't been following this closely, but i think we're up to something like 20 conversations kushner had with russians - bankers, oligarchs, govt officials - that he "forgot" took place. didn't flynn, sessions, manafort also forget their conversations? and the money they directly made from them?

nothing to see there? that okay with you? or am i getting bad information?

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

 
i think we're up to something like 20 conversations kushner had with russians
or am i getting bad information?

Looks that way.

U.S. President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and close adviser, Jared Kushner, had at least three previously undisclosed contacts with the Russian ambassador to the United States during and after the 2016 presidential campaign, seven current and former U.S. officials told Reuters.

Separately, there were at least 18 undisclosed calls and emails between Trump associates and Kremlin-linked people in the seven months before the November. 8 presidential election, including six calls with Kislyak, sources told Reuters earlier this month.

Is there something to see here? I don't know yet. Is there reason to be concerned? I don't know yet. That's why I support the independent investigation. But so far, it's a lot of smoke.

What do you think happened, Dan? Please describe the nature of the collusion you apparently believe occured.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

I agree with you that as of yet, nothing rises to the level of "fire" but there certainly is plenty of smoke to investigate.

This could have gone away quickly if The Persimmon Pol Pot and crew had just not lied, obfuscated, covered up, and criticized investigations. Where there is smoke there isn't necessarily fire, but investigating a source of smoke seems like the right thing to do, no?

How many Benghazi investigations were there?

---

===============
Proud member of the MSF (Maple Syrup Mafia)

This could have gone away quickly if The Persimmon Pol Pot and crew had just not lied, obfuscated, covered up, and criticized investigations. Where there is smoke there isn't necessarily fire, but investigating a source of smoke seems like the right thing to do, no?

Absolutely. That's why I supported the FBI investigation, and that's why I was very pleasantly surprised to see an independent investigator appointed. It's also why I'm on record as saying that if it turns out that there was collusion, Trump should be impeached and possibly jailed.

But as of now, the case seems weak. Almost non-existent.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

a lot of people at the highest levels of the trump campaign intentionally lied about their contacts with russians when questioned about these for their security clearances. i marry this to a president who is mighty cozy with russia, and a son (don) who brags about the money flowing in from russia. i see a president who is very reticent to let anyone know about his finances. right now that's all i know.

i see no evidence of a crime, other than the felony (it is a felony, right?) to lie on your disclosure statements. i'm interested to see where this leads. of course all of this pales to the high crimes of the last administration, such as saluting with a cup of coffee in your hand. still, i think it's worthy of a look.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Some of Trumps clowns are either dumarses or trying to conceal things that are illegal, immoral, self serving, stupid, add own adjective. How does one omit recent Russian contacts on security clearance forms? " I forgot about that meeting where I asked the Russians to set up direct secure link to Puty". Right Noah!

So . . . smoke, no fire. Got it.

I'm in favor of the investigation. I don't know if it will turn up anything or not. So far, my impression is that there's nothing of substance to turn up, but it's Trump and Company, so who knows. If something turns up, the guilty parties should get hammered for it.

Good enough?

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Here's the chronology on Flynn:

Obama placed new sanctions on Russians
Russians said they'd retaliate
Flynn spoke to Russians (reportedly about sanctions)
Russians decide not to retaliate
Trump calls Putin "smart"
Yates tells WH about Flynn phone calls/investigation and his vulnerability to black mail
Trump denies knowing anything about Flynn/Russia connection and possible Logan act violation when the white house had been told 2-3 weeks earlier.


Does anyone think Trump didn't know about Flynn, Sessions, Kushner conversations with Russia? For how open Trump was during the election about working with Russia, why did he start denying working with the Russians? It goes against his usual "I can do whatever" attitude. Why would Trump call Putin "smart" for not retaliating against OBAMA's sanctions if Trump had not had a hand in it.

well, a bunch of very high up people lying about their meetings with russians. that's at least a small fire.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

It's hard to know what you are getting at with this question. Are you saying that the Benghazi investigations were good ideas and money well spent -- even if they ultimately brought no actionable legal proceedings -- and, following similar logic, these Russian collusion investigations (in whatever form they are taking) are also good ideas?

That's the gist of my assessment as well.

Someone some time ago posted a cartoon of an empty box of evidence of collusion. What was absent from that cartoon was Trump splayed over the box, doing everything humanly possible to prevent anyone from looking into it. His behavior is exceptionally curious for someone with nothing to conceal. Even the Trumpeteers here have to acknowledge that.

I think it comes down to money. He's the only President in modern history who hasn't disclosed his tax information, which is a little curious given that he's also the only one with a vast business empire, and who hasn't divested himself of those interests. That's problematic, and the fact that it is shouldn't be controversial. I also think he's heavily indebted to Russian creditors, who are intrinsically linked to Putin. He doesn't want the full extent of that information disclosed, and he's literally put Putin's reputation above that of our own intelligence community. His fragile ego, intemperance, and inability to entertain the thought that Russian interference may have helped him to victory, with or without his campaign's cooperation, has led him to behavior that may well have crossed the line into obstruction, even if what he's trying to conceal isn't illegal.

Release the tax returns. Divest of his business interests. Provide all the documentation requested. Let the investigations run their course. If he and his associates have nothing criminal to hide, then step aside and let it be demonstrated.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

In the end, it will be the emoluments that do him in. The Russian inquiry may not uncover proof of collusion. But the investigation will uncover an emoluments problem. That's my guess.

Of course that's small beans compared to obama, who failed to place his hand over his heart for the natl anthem (clear proof of treason).

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

If it weren't for that small transgression Obama would already be annointed as a saint; as that is the only mistake that he ever made.

There are a number of cases in US history where smoke was enough. Nixon and Capone come to mind.

Umm... excuse me. He also saluted that one time with coffee in his hand and he didn't wear a flag lapel pin and he is Muslim and born in Kenya.

Worse than hitler.

---

===============
Proud member of the MSF (Maple Syrup Mafia)

Release the tax returns. Divest of his business interests. Provide all the documentation requested. Let the investigations run their course. If he and his associates have nothing criminal to hide, then step aside and let it be demonstrated. //

Yes but what about the tape of him getting urinated on by a Russian hooker? HE knows Putin will always have that ace in the hole so to speak, and as long as he doesn't go completely bat shit crazy on Russia, it will probably stay in the vault with all the others he has on rich guys that thought they were having a nice Russian holiday...

Don't forget the time he asked for fancy mustard on his hamburger. So much evil!

BTW, if you are finding it hard to keep track of the various probity investigations into Trump & Co (5 so far, but it's early days) I found this to be a good summary.

https://www.theguardian.com/...-trump-a-short-guide

Lots of smoke hunting underway.

Looks as though The Wall Street Journal has joined the ranks of Fake News purveyors.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

Fake news

Rgds

Jim in MO

I'm afraid that may be correct.

I can't read the WSJ article as I'm not a subscriber. However, I did read this critique of the article on National Review.

McCarthy has always been a straight shooter as far as I've been able to tell. He's a former prosecutor who lead the prosecution in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing case. Also National Review is conservative but no Trump fan site. They published an issue during the primaries completely devoted to canning Trump and are the home of many never-Trump republicans. Seems half of their articles are critical of Trump.

If you happen to peruse the NR article and have read the WSJ article, I'd be interested to hear your opinion on McCarthy's analysis.

---

________
It doesn't really matter what Phil is saying, the music of his voice is the appropriate soundtrack for a bicycle race. HTupolev

There is and has been an enormous market for conservative news, and there are a host of reporters/pundits in that area. They assiduously investigated and reported over the past eight years. In many markets conservative media is the MSM. Where the hell were you?

I've read only the summary of the WSJ article (not a subscriber, either) so I can't really offer anything worthwhile regarding the NR piece.

My first thought was that the reference to a "Russian-speaking" individual created an immediate impression of straw grasping. My final thought is that Mueller will determine if that's the case.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

It's interesting that NR cites this as Exhibit A of media malfeasance, when the vast majority of reporting I've heard and read (largely from Fake News sites like CNN, MSNBC, et al.) explicitly and consistently cited his lying to Pence as the primary reason for his firing.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

And the fake news rarely mentions that Trump lied about knowing about Flynn being investigated. Not that there's anything wrong (anymore) about lying. The interesting thing about Flynn is he is one of the few people Trump has not at some point thrown under the bus (including Trump himself!). Why so much protection of Flynn?

*cough* *wheeze* *cough*

Somebody open a damn window, already.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

Hope this is within Mueller's investigation:

---

________
It doesn't really matter what Phil is saying, the music of his voice is the appropriate soundtrack for a bicycle race. HTupolev

Don't candidates take meetings with individuals for information about other candidates?

And this part?

Quote:

Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information.”

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Are you suggesting that since it was a Meeting With Individual For Information About Other Candidate that none of the particulars matter?

Because it seems like that's what you're suggesting.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

Nothing to see here. No Collusion.

There is nothing wrong with dropping all your activities and bringing the top two Trump campaign advisors to a meeting with a Russian who says they have dirt on Clinton.

Nor is there anything wrong with amending security forms three different times where you 'forgot' to mention meeting with Russians.

I'm sure anyone would get a top level security clearance if they put this on their resume.

Why? If she does not have info about the Hillary-Russia connection, then what good is that? The investigation should focus on people who have information about the Hillary-Russia connection.

---

________
It doesn't really matter what Phil is saying, the music of his voice is the appropriate soundtrack for a bicycle race. HTupolev

Yep, but professional politicians are soooooo much better at hiding it or lying about it.

Sleazy politics 101: Never get your own hands dirty or anyone within 6 degrees of separation of you.

---

--------------------------
The secret of a long life is you try not to shorten it.
-Nobody

He didn't know who they were when he met with them just some dude he met that one time set it up, wait, no, he met with them about adoption and it had nothing to do with the campaign, urrrrmmm, no, he met with them because they said they had dirt on Hillary then they only wanted to talk about adoption, shit, no, THE DEMOCRATS TRICKED HIM!. Yea, that's the ticket.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

Trump Jr. only made this statement to deflect your attention away from what they are actually doing. It's all part of the master plan.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

In a statement on Sunday, Donald Trump Jr. said he had met with the Russian lawyer at the request of an acquaintance. “After pleasantries were exchanged,” he said, “the woman stated that she had information that individuals connected to Russia were funding the Democratic National Committee and supporting Ms. Clinton. Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information.”

So we are supposed to believe that after Trump won the nomination, the high level trio of Mannafort, Trump Jr. and Kirshner went to a meeting with a Russian lawyer without knowing in advance what it was about and because an acquaintance suggested it?

And if they went on the pretense that this lawyer had information that could damage Clinton, we are supposed to believe that they wouldn't have taken the opportunity if it had presented itself?

Okay.

Evidence of willingness to collude isn't the same as evidence of collusion.

Also, Hillary's emails.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

The meeting was also conveniently forgotten in security clearance forms as well.

Don't candidates take meetings with individuals for information about other candidates?

You mean with Russian lawyers suggesting they have inside information in the operations of a foreign government?

Sure, it happens all the time...nothing more to see here.

But that's not true. What operations of a foreign government? Lawyer said she had dirt on Hillary. My question still stands. Would other candidates take this meeting?

You forgot that he smokes weed and supports sharia law. (never mind that pesky constitution thing)

A foreign operator is never going to admit they are a foreign operator. Nor is the foreign government going to reveal who their operatives are.

So either you have to figure out if someone might be a foreign operator, or you're a dupe.

Would other candidates take the meeting?

2008 - 2016

He's a Kenyan! Benghazi! Where's his birth certificate? Benghazi! He won't hold his hand on his heart, can't bowl, doesn't drink coffee except when giving a salute. BENGHAZI!




2017

Colluding with Russians in the election? That's so 6 months ago. You guys lost, get over it.



If there's one thing you ditto heads are consistent about its flipping your positions when it suits your needs.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

I hope most would have the common sense not to send their top officials to gather intel like this. At best it's stupid, at worst criminal.

Who knows? The question is pointless because only one candidate's representatives took the meeting.

To answer your question, potentially, yes. However, I think if there were representatives sent to meet, they would have been lower level and not the highest people involved in your campaign.

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

In the past they have not. After being offered debate prep videos of Bush, Gore contacted the FBI.

http://thecabin.net/stories/091400/wor_0914000052.html#.WWPG8YgrKUk


So essentially, in the past, a normal politician would have contacted the FBI, and not attended the meeting with 3 others.


This year, matters that were illegally obtained by foreigners (Podestas emails), were part of the debates!

Is this the same as CNN giving Hillary advanced notice of Debate questions?

If CNN was a hostile foreign entity that was currently employed by the hostile foreign entity, we would have a much more comparable case.

Im referring to Gore.

No, you're grasping at straws to hopefully find something that will fit your narrative because Trump is your guy. JSA pointed out many times in the past, Trump was not a conservative. He's the Republican president so it doesn't matter his politics, he's your guy.

I don't think he's a conservative, or liberal for that matter. He's a narcissist and out for himself. The fact that many can't see that astonishes me.

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

Not really.

1) Donna brazile gave info to clinton during the primaries against bernie. The democratic party election is different than that of president. For better or for worse, the DNC is a private entity (so is the RNC). So I believe there are specific election laws that flow for running for president versus running for your party's representative.

2) Opposition research is vastly different in comparison to questions asked. If Hillary had received bernies answers and the questions presented, it would be more comparable.

If you want to make the comparison that clinton's campaign did something wrong, and argue that excuses trump's campaign from doing everything wrong, so be it. Killing someone will driving because you were talking on your phone is different than driving at someone to run them over.

Regardless, Hillary should have refused the info that was given to her and possibly reported it.

None of this excuses anything Trump does.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

Completely agree.

I was just responding to the question asked.

Lawyer said she had dirt on Hillary. My question still stands. Would other candidates take this meeting?

My bet is there would be some willing to talk but not while the accusations of Russian meddling were swirling, and not with the top 3 advisers and not in Trump tower. And then, if they did have the meeting, not to have the same people happen to exclude the meeting from the forms to get security clearance or to completely disavow any meetings with Russians,

Isn't there anyone on the Trump team that stops and thinks maybe this isn't such a good idea?

I'm so confused. Shouldn't Trump Jr. have already known that the Russian's were not funding the DNC and supporting Hillary? I keep hearing that The Donald was working directly with Putin. You guys need to get your story straight. Once again, there is nothing here. It is becoming a joke.

Oh, and what the NY Times does not want to mention. Obama has the blood of Russian orphans on his hands. His asinine and incompetent meddling in Russian politics has left thousands of kids to fend for themselves in a society that deems them to be unworthy of being allowed to live. Russian children who age out of orphanages die at a rate of 90% by the age of 25. But our former dear leader needed to raise more political money so he took the bait and screwed up a lot of kids lives. Thanks Obama.

Oh, and what the NY Times does not want to mention. Obama has the blood of Russian orphans on his hands. His asinine and incompetent meddling in Russian politics has left thousands of kids to fend for themselves in a society that deems them to be unworthy of being allowed to live.

The reason the NYT didn't mention it is because it's ridiculous. It is Putin who has the blood of Russian orphans by using them as a political tool.

Why so many of the Trump supporters trust Putin is really hard to believe. He is playing all of you.

Please Adress this question:

I'm so confused. Shouldn't Trump Jr. have already known that the Russian's were not funding the DNC and supporting Hillary? I keep hearing that The Donald was working directly with Putin.

I'm not sure who is saying that The Donald is working directly with Putin and that Putin is telling both him and Trump Jr. every detail of everything the Russians are doing.

I know you and your Comrades don't want to accept this but Putin may, in some very rare circumstances, not tell the whole truth.

I'm still trying to figure out how the traditionally Republican party supporters are now fully behind having Russia as an ally and who have no problems with Russian involvement in the U.S election. It's like living in a bizarro world.

I'm not saying the Russians were not involved. Im saying Trump was not involved with the Russians. Big difference.

Yes, Obama is guilty of killing helpless Russian orphans. He is also guilty of stealing candy from babies and wanted to destroy the United States of America because he is a foreign born Islamist working for ISIS. He is also Satan. The end.

And Putin is such a nice guy. We should give him access to our computers because he wants to help make them secure. The world needs a strong leader that will bring the stability of the old Soviet Union, just like Stalin.

Know nothing of the Russian orphans or what Obama did or didn't do in that situation. I do know he knew long before Nov that the Russian's were meddling and did nothing. Why? Because his girl was sure to win.

That's interesting. Because I've never heard that even once.

It's also not my story. I don't have a story. Just following it as it unfolds.

Speaking of...

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

How does that work. Putin is working against Hillary for at at least around a year (by everyone's account). And you assert that Obama did nothing (ignoring for a second, the multiple stages of sanctions).

I think you have some work to do to make some sort of plausible narrative out of that.

Better give orphius, jwbeuk, old hickory, etc. time to stretch before making them twist themselves into knots explaining this away. Even if don jr didn't succeed in colluding, it is looking like he meant to. His story on this has changed at least twice. Every time more info comes out he has to dream up another excuse.

If Trump had any friends he wouldn't have to use family for this and could let people fall on their swords for him. This is why the Ollie North's, Rahm Emanuel's, and Scooter Libby's of the world exist.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

The second round of sanctions came after the election was over. Obama knew months before.. I think was August. My assertion is it didn't matter until after the election was over and Hillary lost.

From the NY Times

So once again, all smoke and nothing of substance. Like I said earlier, name one politician that wouldn't take a meeting to get information about the opposing candidate.

Actually, that is "from Alan Futerfas, the lawyer for the younger Mr. Trump." Gee, if we can just take his lawyer's word for it, why do we spend all this time on courts, prosecutors and cops?


That is kind of like your mom saying you wouldn't do anything wrong because you are such a good boy.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

I'm not saying the Russians were not involved. Im saying Trump was not involved with the Russians.


The problem is that the only one who is saying Trump isn't involved is Trump Jr. The same Trump Jr. who denied meeting with the Russians, then said the meeting was about adoptions and then admitted that he attended the meeting because he was told the Russians had dirt on Clinton.


So, he was told the Russians had dirt on Hilary and the top 3 advisors attend a meeting in Trump tower and we are supposed to believe Trump had no knowledge?


Politics aside, that is more than a little hard to believe.

It was no-win for Obama. If he'd "done something" he would have been interfering in an intelligence operation and criminal investigation for political (Hillary's benefit).

And I fail to see how he thought it would have helped Hillary.

And then there's the obvious issue that if you think Obama failed to act then you almost certainly have to conclude that Trump is also failing to act even worse. (joint cyber unit? eye-roll)

Is there a reason you didn't bother mentioning that your quote above was from DJT Jr's lawyer?

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

Maybe. Though if I were Trump's political adviser I'd sure advise my employers to start acting like it were all smoke instead of acting guilty, like lying about the purpose of the the perfectly innocent meeting until your lie is disproven (the meeting was about "adoptions"....riiiiight).

So then I have to wonder if they did receive some good info on Clinton. Which could all be perfectly fine! Who doesn't want to get information on your opposition?

But the Trump team is on dangerous ground because even if they're covering up things that just have somewhat bad optics (say, getting intel from a Russian when you said you hadn't in the past), when you're part of multiple ongoing Federal investigations that's not a good thing. Coverup worse than etc.

And now there's this email thing, which - if true - isn't good. I know that in my job I got an email saying that the Russian state wanted to help me politically, I'd run-not-walk to my local NCIS office (specific to my job)

http://www.nbcnews.com/...-didn-t-have-n781631

So the attorney in question had not been a Russian prosecutor since 2001. States she has no ties to the Russian government. Disputes the claim by the NY Times as to what the purpose of the meeting was, disputes the tone of the email (not seen by the NY Times) and lot of course, like anyone the American media think will get them Trump, is having her life ruined. Good job American Left. You win the prize for being the biggest assholes on the planet.

Hillary lost an election. The media and Democratic supporters were wrong. Your amazed that the United States would elect Donald Trump. Appalled at how Trump acts. But just like every other time, you and those who think like you will be disappointed as nothing comes from this.

Sorry if this offends, I'm far more concerned about kids suffering then playing a game of political gotcha. Maybe we as American's, especially the "I feel your pain" Left should re-think their priorities in life. My hope is that the outcome of this big investigation by the NY Times will be that the American Left get their act together and understand the affect Obama's meddling in Russian politics, for campaign cash had on Russian orphans. Nice job Obama. While GW Bush's foundation is saving millions of African kids, Obama's legacy will be one of punishing Russian orphans, again, so the Left on ST understand, he did it for campaign cash.

So once again, all smoke and nothing of substance. Like I said earlier, name one politician that wouldn't take a meeting to get information about the opposing candidate.

Not sure if you know the answer as it is a legal question. In this case, Trump Jr. and the other top aides met with the Russian lawyer after being promised that they had some dirt on Hilary. The Whitehouse and Trump Jr.'s lawyer are saying there is nothing to it because they didn't hear anything of consequence. However, is that result important or is the intent, going into the meeting being promised something from a foreign national, the issue?

What I find incredulous is that despite the constant reporting by the "fake media" about the administrations contact with the Russians, that this incident was never disclosed, and that they attended it in Trump tower. Did all of them forget the meeting despite it happening after Trump won the nomination?

And then, at the end of the G20 meeting, Trump publicly calls for an end to the investigation so the country can move on.

And to top it off, his supporters would be perfectly happy to put an end to all this and pretend nothing happened. This is becoming far more than smoke.

Where in the article did it say that email said it was the Russian State that wanted to help? I would like to see the actual email that was sent. I agree this looks really bad for Don Jr but I'm not quite there with collusion yet. To me it looks like someone said "here take a meeting with this lawyer, she has some dirt on Clinton".. I don't think there's a candidate alive that wouldn't go to at least hear the info. Serious question.. if he had colluded, would just receiving info count as collusion or would it have to be he acted on the information as well?

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

3 anonymous sources? How are those working out for NYT and CNN so far? I want to see the email 1st.

Really well actually. It has forced Jr. to change his story multiple times.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

-
I actually agree with your take, so it is interesting to see stories in the last few weeks where obama insiders are bagging on him for "not doing more"; I think the latest is his former leaker in chief, nat sec advisor Tom Donilon.

Sure, someone covertly working for the Russians are going to freely admit that they are doing so. I'm also sure there would be a clear paper trail that clearly shows who all the Russian operatives are. And a Russian operative is going to be completely honest about their activities when confronted.

Breaking news this morning. Personally, I'm getting tired of all the leaks on both sides. I get the sense that there are competing factions of leakers, and I think what they're all doing is illegal and wrong. So I'm not seeking out the actual email, nor will I give it a shit-ton of credence. I'm increasingly in the "let Mueller do his job" camp. (yes, I know arguing here is pretty much the opposite of that - it's a problem I have).

Now there is something we can agree on!

NYTimes now has the email (thread).

What's the next defense? That the NYTimes is being duped by #FakeEmail?

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/884789418455953413/photo/1

If a Russian contacts you and tells you they have dirt of a candidate and alarm bells aren't running in your head, you're stupid or don't give a shit about doing the right thing. So you're either a dupe or worse. And being a dupe doesn't absolve you from anything.

3 anonymous sources? How are those working out for NYT and CNN so far?

I'd say having anonymous sources has worked extremely well for the NYTimes. They have been right on just about 100% of their stories. Can you point to a single event in the last year where 3 anonymous sources were all wrong?

I want to see the email 1st.

A confirmed e-mail will not change any Trump supporters mind. They are in it for the long haul.

LOL The high and mighty have spoken!!! Riiiiiiiight. Im sure thats what anyone running a campaign would do. Welp.. It is does look really really bad for Don Jr and I will interested to see what if anything comes of this.

Not really high and mighty. Self preservation is a better motivation. You have to be pretty stupid to not realize how many things can go wrong in such a situation.

That doesn't appear to be the whole email chain, as it seems to start in the middle about the meeting, and not about why the meeting occurred.

Did you note the reference to the "Russian government attorney"? You know, that woman who is not a Russian government attorney?

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

Damn....


http://www.politico.com/...ussian-lawyer-240402

You might want to do some research on campaign finance laws and how it relates to foreign nationals. I'm not sure Jr's lawyer is very thrilled with him putting that out there.

ETA - though this puts a little more mud in the water on that front than some others I have read

http://www.nbcnews.com/...n-even-crime-n781571

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

You gonna give them some credit now?

You mean like this?

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/14/us/the-2000-campaign-the-debate-gore-aide-receives-then-lets-go-of-hot-potato.html


http://articles.latimes.com/2000/sep/14/news/mn-20941

---

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava

Obama has the blood of Russian orphans on his hands.

Here is the reason Putin retaliated with the adoption ban: a bipartisan bill signed by Obama.

The Magnitsky Act, formally known as the Russia and Moldova Jackson-Vanik Repeal and Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2012, is a bipartisan bill passed by the U.S. Congress and signed by President Obama in November–December 2012, intending to punish Russian officials responsible for the death of Russian lawyer Sergei Magnitsky in a Moscow prison in 2009.

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

Who knew that #FakeNews started in 2000?

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

“The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting 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,” Goldstone writes. “This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump — helped along by Aras and Emin.”

Wow. I wonder what documents the Trump administration received.

Trump Jr. said they didn't receive anything of value but he has consistently lied so you can pretty much ignore what he says. You can bet that Mueller and the other teams investigating the relationships are going to be looking into this.

Yup! I'm happy to admit when I am wrong. I said earlier this looks really bad for Don Jr. I wonder what his lawyer thinks of him releasing the email. I hope to god he testifies on live TV in front of the Senate. Will be entertaining to say the least. I dont know campaign law at all but if laws were broken with this, I believe he should be prosecuted. Now the question becomes what did Sr know and when or if he knew at all. Short of a confession I doubt we will ever know that.

I said earlier this looks really bad for Don Jr. I wonder what his lawyer thinks of him releasing the email. I hope to god he testifies on live TV in front of the Senate. Will be entertaining to say the least. I dont know campaign law at all but if laws were broken with this, I believe he should be prosecuted.

Would Trump Jr. face charges if he is a private citizen?

Trump Jr. is the one coming out but Kirshner was also involved along with Mannafort so I assume they would be in the same position.

No the question becomes what did Sr know and when or if he knew at all. Short of a confession I doubt we will ever know that.

Yes, you can bet that there is no documentation to link Trump to those conversations and if there is, I would be very surprised. There is also probably a zero chance that Trump didn't know about the meetings but it will be impossible to prove.

If I'm not mistaken, he released them just minutes before NYT did, so I'm guessing his lawyers were advocating for it, getting out ahead of it, and all.


Trump has been the quintessential politician in stepping on or jettisoning anyone and everyone who creates a problem for him, so it will be interesting to see how he responds now that the inevitable has happened.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

So, let's play this out. Don Jr. has some dialogue/meetings with what appears to be Russian operative(s) promising dirt on HRC. Meeting(s) take place and either no dirt was forthcoming or not anything we've know about or have seen.

Pres Trump has denied any knowledge of such meetings or emails, etc.

Either no useful information was provided, or useful information was provided and used by the Trump campaign, not sure at this point.

What are the realistic outcomes? Trump Jr charged with a crime? Wouldn't dad just pardon him? Pres Trump charged with collusion and/or other crimes? Seems very unlikely given what information is out there at the moment on this topic.

Brings the entire election into question and 'Pubs get on board with tossing Trump and his family out of DC? (I can actually see this happening, frankly).

Other realistic outcomes that could happen? If there's a there there - what are the realistic outcomes?

I guess, again, it depends on how we're defining there.

If we're defining it as a core Trump Campaign advisor being shown to have knowingly met with a proxy of the Russian government for the purpose of receiving material that was likely obtained via espionage, and then lying about it and denying it didn't happen, it seems pretty clear that there is there.

I have no idea how that would affect Donald Sr., legally speaking. Probably not at all, though his constant, otherwise inexplicable pattern of denying, defusing, and deflecting Russia's involvement in the election, even at the expense of our own intelligence community's reputation, would certainly give the impression he was operating that way to protect himself or his family.

We're treading squarely in Occam's Razor territory now.

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

Other realistic outcomes that could happen? If there's a there there - what are the realistic outcomes?

One of the things that confuses me is that there are investigations to see if there was collusion between the Trump administration and the Russians involving the election. If the Trump administration met with a Russian to talk about some dirt on Hillary, that appears to me to be collusion.

So, then what? As another article posted above notes, it may not be illegal to collude so then why are there so many investigations into collusion?

It appears they it is illegal if the Russians gave something of value. I assume information has value so how do you quantify it? Do they have to prove that the information they received changed the vote?

I don't think there is any way for this to end other than establishing that the Trump administration did work with the Russians, the Russians were involved but no one can prove the impact so nothing more can be done.

This is what I believe. Republicans aren't happy with Trump, establishment never really was, so any way to get him out and they will jump at the chance. You will see Ryan, et al saying, "He wasn't our guy anyway, he was keeping us from getting things done."

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

That's an interesting point. Is meeting with a foreign official for dirt on a candidate a crime as a private citizen? At that time he would be a private citizen working on a campaign would he not?

I wouldn't believe he could claim he was a private citizen working in his own interest if he/they are officially campaign directors/advisors.

Of course, with the way most laws are written, nothing would surprise me.

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

The other outcome and unfortunately what appears to be happening is Russia is taking advantage of our inept corruption to completely devalue the democratic process. Russia is sitting back with the biggest smile on their faces because of not only how stupid our politicians are, but how divided our country has become. I can only imagine the dirt they have on everyone, including Trump. They are sitting back playing high level chess and we are trying to figure out where the checkers get placed on the board. In the end, it doesn't matter what happens as long as it causes mass chaos. It is getting tough to watch.

He released the irrelevant details of arranging the meeting. He tellingly didn't release the emails that specified *why* there was a meeting in the first place. "Transparency," my eye. It's CYA and obfuscation time.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

It's not just Trump Jr. though. Manafort and Kushner were there. In particular Kushner, who omitted this meeting from his security clearance form.

Can a normal person amend their security clearance form multiple times in the span of months and still get a top level clearance?

Can a normal person amend their security clearance form multiple times in the span of months and still get a top level clearance?

I thought it was illegal (or at least that it would mean you don't get security clearance) to file an incorrect security clearance but I see a lot of them being "amended" which means the initial one was wrong. How many times can you amend it after your memory improves before someone says enough.

Don't know. One thing I can say is this whole thing is fascinating to watch no matter which side of the aisle you fall on. I asked the question earlier, is it still collusion if no information was passed and nothing was actually used? I think they have long way to go with this. I mean its bad that he knowingly met with the Russian Lawyer. Technically, if true, and no info was passed, so technically, in this instance, Russia did not interfere. And again if the nature of the meeting was true, the promise of info on Hillary was used to nothing more get into a meeting with Don Jr.

Impact doesn't matter. If you break into someone's house but don't steal anything, it is still a crime.

Kushner may be in trouble. He keeps misremembering his contacts with Russians, which calls into question his honesty in things like security clearance applications. This email chain indicates that he was informed of the reason for this meeting (dirt on Clinton from the Russian government).

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

I'm sure the dialogue will now shift to 'intent', and Don Jr is going to have a problem explaining away the intent. And he may very well have received some real dirt on HRC which we may actually never know or can't be definitive one way or another. I personally suspect it was Russia's way to get to the Trump inner circle by pretending to have some dirt and they had some other motive (which we'll also never know).

Still ends with the question about the end result here. If no laws were broken or if Trump can simply pardon if any actual charges are filed then this is all for show. Not to say it isn't bad, really bad, as noted by Sanuk and Sphere, regarding the US election process and Russia's ability to make a mockery of our system, but no one gets punished therefore not much changes in the future.

Let's face it, political campaigns, particularly for POTUS, are nasty, dirty all-out sewer fests with billions of dollars spent. I'm sure all campaigns in our history have had some salacious underground bullshit going on but the operatives were way too smart to get caught and this crew just don't have the political sophistication to operate effectively and are too arrogant to heed strong legal/political advice.

I hadn't cared much up to this point about the 'Russia' topic and the screaming media - but now I'm starting to see some real clever manipulation by Russia and has me wondering how far this all goes and what additional issues will arise. I also hope Mueller does a very thorough job and releases all the findings so we have some chance to change laws/behaviors/campaigns in the future.

If anyone is interested and can stomach watching Hannity, Trump Jr will be on the show tonight on Foxnews at 10pm.

Someone pointed out that a special counsel is under no obligation to release everything (especially if the ultimate finding is "no laws were broken"), as opposed to a commission (like the 9/11 Commission) where a detailed report is expected.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

I'm sure we can look forward to some tough questions and hard-hitting journalism.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

The Trumpsters are calling the emails a giant nothingburger. This is routine campaigning they say.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

One thing I can say is this whole thing is fascinating to watch no matter which side of the aisle you fall on.

Pick one:
1. He has no lawyer
2. He is ignoring his lawyer
3. His lawyer is an idiot

From a legal perspective nothing good can come from this.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

I read that as well. However, if there is a report, you can bet it'll make it's way to the media whether or not Mueller releases it.

I'll be busy re-watching American Psycho.

---

_____________________
Fester from Detroit, Mi

Maybe not. Ill still watch to hear what he has to say.

4. Hannity is his lawyer?

---

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W

He hired a lawyer yesterday - yea, I don't understand it as most competent lawyers would not have their clients talk

According to users on Reddit who listen to hannity's radio show - hannity's. version is:
1) this is Obama/democrats fault - they should have barred the Russian lawyer from entering the country - she was in the US to appeal the revocation of her visa in court
2) this was a set up by the democrats

http://insider.foxnews.com/...mp-jr-media-meltdown

Maybe if the new information is self-reported. When you're just filling in gaps as information becomes public from other sources, that's a problem. Generally speaking, the biggest single red flag in a security application is unreported foreign contacts. You can do all sorts of things wrong and get some leeway. The leash for unreported foreign contacts is very, very short. At least for worker-bee clearances.

Wow, just wow.

Ok, who is on the drinking game rules?

1) Drink at shot if Hannity mentions:
a) Seth Rich murder
b) Benghazi or
c) Clinton Foundation
2) Chug a beer if Hannity claims:
a) Putin is actually in league with Hillary to embarrass Trump
b) ???

Let's go guys I need a reason to stay up to 10pm for this.

How can this guy still have a security clearance? Going to a meeting for the purpose of receiving intel from a Russian government operative? How can that not be a red flag to the FBI?

Kushner? I don't know. If he were a "normal worker" he'd be done. You can't participate in what by all appearances is a recruitment attempt by a foreign intelligence service and not report it. You're done. But it seems some leeway is granted to direct Presidential appointments, particularly when the events in question happened before they fully understood security "best practices."

So the meeting, alone, may be survivable. What wouldn't be is lying to the FBI or the Office of Special Counsel when questioned about it. Better not do that.

Nothing to see here.

---

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?

There were lots of stalls in that stable.

Here comes the but Clinton defense again...

Quote:

“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,” Trump said at the time. “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?”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-clinton-don-jr-russia_us_596562fee4b09b587d633d10?d6w&ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009


Clinton lost. Nearly everyone who supported her has moved on. Nobody cares.

// Clinton lost. Nearly everyone who supported her has moved on. Nobody cares. //

Except 100% of the Dems in Congress. There will be no moving on. Frankly, I'd like to let the Mueller investigation play out although I think we'd all agree nothing will actually happen regardless the facts laid out - I'd still like to know.

HRC and the DNC have proven to be gutter dwelling criminals. Now let's see if the Trump family will be joining them.

At the end of the day we ended up w the HRC mafia and the Trimpians as our two choices - damn pathetic IMHO.

One problem Trump has is that other than his campaign there is one person who knows every contact with Russia and exactly what took place and what did not. And that person has no loyalty to Trump. And doesn't have to worry about what he puts out is true.

The only question is how long Vlad strings out the disclosures. If you ever wanted to know what being susceptible to blackmail looks like, this is it. It doesn't even have to be serious. Just things you denied previously.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

Really?

How often did your 'business partners' shake you down in the past without you noticing?

Russian Lawyer/Emissary/Agent: " I got dirt on you and I am gonna tell if you don't let my client off the hook for the crimes he committed in the US."

Kushner: "Uh, oh....mhh PLEASE give us some time until the election is over"

Russian Lawyer: "OK, I'll sit tight, but you owe us big time!"

Trump wins election.

Russian Lady calls: "So remember. we have dirt on you, so what about the deal we had last fall?"

Kushner: "Yeah, let's see if we can get something worked out with the DOJ"

Russian criminal gets off the hook for a nominal fine.

Russians still have dirt on Trump


Easy enough for you?