DJT JR Was Set Up by the DNC. Russian Lawyer worked for Fusion GPS, Group behind phony Dossier

The top 3 articles about this right now on google news are from WaPo, NYT and CNN.

I think it speaks for itself.

a reply to: dragonridr

His statement convinces me that the Trump administration was activity seeking dirt on Hillary. And really didn't are where they got it from.

1. how is this a crime

a reply to: dragonridr

His statement convinces me that the Trump administration was activity seeking dirt on Hillary. And really didn't are where they got it from.

That is pretty much exactly what happens in a political campaign.

Even if she had damaging information and the Trump campaign took it and ran with it, no laws would have been broken... unless it was classified information. Since there was no information, we can pretty much rule that out.

a reply to: Ares2493


The way I see this there are two possibilities and both are disturbing.

1. This lawyer was a set up by the DNC to attempt to discredit the Trump campaign and fuel the Russia collusion allegations.

or.

2. This lawyer "got the dirt" on the DNC because she was connected to them and then she sought to pass this information on to Trump possibly under the direction of the Russian state as part of their attempts to get Trump in office.

Both of these possibilities are disturbing yet regardless of this he should have been open about the meeting at the time.

One thing is for sure, this whole thing is getting very messy.

a reply to: RazorV66

Yeah and I already answered it. Where would you say your major fail was?

The evolving narrative:

No one from the Trump team met with Russians

There may have been meetings but it wasn't about the campaign

There may have been meetings about the campaign but that's not collusion

There may have been collusion but that's not illegal

and or

The Democrats set up Jr.

a reply to: Ares2493

Another case of 'but...but...Clinton!'

Face it, Dunce Jr was caught red handed and this could lead to further investigations, there is no proof of collusion yet but i've gotta tell the Trump groupies it's looks worse for your man with the plan.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: RazorV66

Yeah and I already answered it. Where would you say your major fail was?

are you tired of all the WINNING yet?

a reply to: RazorV66

I'd watch my tone when talking with her if I was you. She was almost POTUS. Do you know how many people her and her husband have suicided?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: RazorV66

Yeah and I already answered it. Where would you say your major fail was?

Your answer of "maybe there is a lawyer somewhere that might know of a law that was possibly broken" is ridiculous.
Your entire premise is a major fail.

a reply to: Sillyolme

So in other words......you don't know what if any law, was broken.

It's one of the stages.....acceptance.

Narrative is already falling apart.

Russian lawyer: Donald Trump Jr. wanted DNC info ‘so badly’

Speaking via a translator, Veselnitskaya denied that she was ever in possession of any "damaging or sensitive information" about Clinton and that "it was never my intention to have" such information. Further, she denied having any ties to the Russian government and said her meeting with the president's son, son-in-law and campaign chairman was intended only to benefit her client's interest related to sanctions leveled back and forth between Russia and the U.S.

So we already know parts of this is false from the email. She also said she was there specifically to lobby against the sanctions that weren't even discussed. She's clearly lying.

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: dragonridr

His statement convinces me that the Trump administration was activity seeking dirt on Hillary. And really didn't are where they got it from.

That is pretty much exactly what happens in a political campaign.

Even if she had damaging information and the Trump campaign took it and ran with it, no laws would have been broken... unless it was classified information. Since there was no information, we can pretty much rule that out.

Not from foreigners who obtained it illegally. Come on...

originally posted by: Kali74

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: dragonridr

His statement convinces me that the Trump administration was activity seeking dirt on Hillary. And really didn't are where they got it from.

That is pretty much exactly what happens in a political campaign.

Even if she had damaging information and the Trump campaign took it and ran with it, no laws would have been broken... unless it was classified information. Since there was no information, we can pretty much rule that out.

Not from foreigners who obtained it illegally. Come on...

Obtained what illegally?
There was nothing obtained, transferred or used.
How could anyone know that something was obtained illegally if it doesn't exist?

a reply to: Konduit

And Putin was being honest when he denied hacking right?

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Kali74

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: dragonridr

His statement convinces me that the Trump administration was activity seeking dirt on Hillary. And really didn't are where they got it from.

That is pretty much exactly what happens in a political campaign.

Even if she had damaging information and the Trump campaign took it and ran with it, no laws would have been broken... unless it was classified information. Since there was no information, we can pretty much rule that out.

Not from foreigners who obtained it illegally. Come on...

Obtained what illegally?
There was nothing obtained, transferred or used.
How could anyone know that something was obtained illegally if it doesn't exist?

That we know of. Regardless, Jr. went to the meeting specifically to get dirt on HRC. How would a Russian have dirt on HRC if not obtained illegally?

a reply to: Kali74

what law was broken?

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: dragonridr

His statement convinces me that the Trump administration was activity seeking dirt on Hillary. And really didn't are where they got it from.

That is pretty much exactly what happens in a political campaign.

Even if she had damaging information and the Trump campaign took it and ran with it, no laws would have been broken... unless it was classified information. Since there was no information, we can pretty much rule that out.

Don't be naive information isn't given for free. That means he would have entered into a deal with a Russian agent to do something. That is illegal as a member of government. So at the very least would have exclufed himself from the white house. Luckily for stupid aka Trump Jr the woman didn't have anything. If she did his butt could be in jail.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: butcherguy

They never answer that question.
At all levels.

Because there is no answer. They think if the say "collusion" and "Russia" often enough they can brainwash people into believing something is wrong. Apparently a conversation about opposition research is a problem now. Not sure why, perhaps the left will be kind enough to say why?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Kali74

what law was broken?

I see this question being raised quite a lot.

I think there is a degree of misunderstanding.

Its not about what law has been broken but what law might have been broken, or what ethical violation may have taken place.

For example, Trump may have fired Comey for the purposes of obstructing justice, right now he has not broken any law but if he was found to have acted in such a way as to obstruct justice then a law has been broken.

Its like any law that is broken, you are have only broken it when found guilty really, if i commit murder I have broken the law but only if you can prove if have broken the law. That is why these investigations are ongoing to determine if any laws have been broken or if there is suspicion that laws have been broken that may warrant further investigation.