You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#851 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 486 weeks ago
The Russia scandal has entered a new phase, and there’s no going back.
For six months, the White House claimed that this scandal was nothing more than innuendo about Trump campaign collusion with Russia in meddling in the 2016 election. Innuendo for which no concrete evidence had been produced.
Yes, there were several meetings with Russian officials, some only belatedly disclosed. But that is circumstantial evidence at best. Meetings tell you nothing unless you know what happened in them. We didn’t. Some of these were casual encounters in large groups, like the famous July 2016 Kislyak-Sessions exchange of pleasantries at the Republican National Convention. Big deal.
I was puzzled. Lots of coverup, but where was the crime? Not even a third-rate burglary. For six months, smoke without fire. Yes, President Trump himself was acting very defensively, as if he were hiding something. But no one ever produced the something.
My view was: Collusion? I just don’t see it. But I’m open to empirical evidence. Show me.
The evidence is now shown. This is not hearsay, not fake news, not unsourced leaks. This is an email chain released by Donald Trump Jr. himself. A British go-between writes that there’s a Russian government effort to help Trump Sr. win the election, and as part of that effort he proposes a meeting with a “Russian government attorney” possessing damaging information on Hillary Clinton. Moreover, the Kremlin is willing to share troves of incriminating documents from the Crown Prosecutor. (Error: Britain has a Crown Prosecutor. Russia has a Prosecutor General.)
Donald Jr. emails back. “I love it.” Fatal words.
Once you’ve said “I’m in,” it makes no difference that the meeting was a bust, that the intermediary brought no such goods. What matters is what Donald Jr. thought going into the meeting, as well as Jared Kushner and then-campaign manager Paul Manafort, who were forwarded the correspondence, invited to the meeting, and attended.
“It was literally just a wasted 20 minutes, which was a shame,” Donald Jr. told Sean Hannity. A shame? On the contrary, a stroke of luck. Had the lawyer real stuff to deliver, Donald Jr. and the others would be in far deeper legal trouble. It turned out to be incompetent collusion, amateur collusion, comically failed collusion. That does not erase the fact that three top Trump campaign officials were ready to play.
It may turn out that they did later collaborate more fruitfully. We don’t know. But even if nothing else is found, the evidence is damning.
It’s rather pathetic to hear Trump apologists protesting that it’s no big deal because we Americans are always intervening in other people’s elections, and they in ours.
This defense is pathetic for two reasons. First, have the Trumpites not been telling us for six months that no collusion ever happened? And now they say: Sure it happened. So what? Everyone does it.
What’s left of your credibility when you make such a casual about-face?
Second, no, not everyone does it. It’s one thing to be open to opposition research dug up in Indiana. But not dirt from Russia, a hostile foreign power that has repeatedly invaded its neighbors (Georgia, Crimea, eastern Ukraine), that buzzes our planes and ships in international waters, that opposes our every move and objective around the globe. Just last week the Kremlin killed additional U.N. sanctions we were looking to impose on North Korea for its ICBM test.
There is no statute against helping a foreign hostile power meddle in an American election. What Donald Jr. — and Kushner and Manafort — did may not be criminal. But it is not merely stupid. It is also deeply wrong, a fundamental violation of any code of civic honor.
I leave it to the lawyers to adjudicate the legalities of unconsummated collusion. But you don’t need a lawyer to see that the Trump defense — collusion as a desperate Democratic fiction designed to explain away a lost election — is now officially dead.
-Charles Krauthammer
#852 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 486 weeks ago
Similar to what I said earlier: For a group of people who are totally innocent, they sure seem to lie an awful lot about this.
"The deception is mind boggling."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5LftyJmNtA
#853 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 486 weeks ago
#854 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 486 weeks ago
Interesting that you chose to attack addicatiom as an illness or disease. You know it can be treated right?
Sounds like you have some research to do.
He's both a lawyer and a doctor. 
#855 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 487 weeks ago
They are just starting to put their toes in the lifeboats now...
#856 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 487 weeks ago
It's a lawyer tactic too...they try to get you to take a position that you did not intend because they know it's a losing position. Once you start defending the contrived position, you've lost.
This.
Ignore all the noise that people like Lyin' Randy kick around. It's meant to put everybody on the defensive (those who are asking questions/demanding answers are in charge-not the other way around) and muddy the waters. False comparisons, character attacks, word play, hoping from one foot to the next. Another tactic is this massive wall of text that includes a combo of all of these moves. I watched these psychos do this with Iraq, they'll lie all day long, point fingers, and eventually run away from any accountability once the dust settles. They'll do the same thing when this is all over too, just watch.
#857 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 487 weeks ago
Keep in mind, this is only the info the Press obtained, including Jrs email. How many other meetings, discussions, emails and all were there. And of them, how many do the FBI & CIA have?
Don Jrs a douche who was out there on TV claiming the Russia connection was completely untrue just weeks after this meeting. And the whole 'She didn't deliver anything' part in unknown as well. She may have clearly indicated they do have the hacked emails, might have put a price onto them we don't know. Kushners a douche too, how many meetings has this guy "forgotten" about.
I agree, Collusion, on its own isn't a crime I don't think. However I heard Conspiracy is. If there's a pattern of meetings & discussions about this, then it goes down that road. Also, gotta wonder "who" leaked this email to the press. And, how many others are there.
It also goes against the "fake news" narrative Trump and his gang constantly push. NYT was going to run with those emails, so Jr. released them first. Hardly fake.
Jr. lied about meetings. Jr. lied about the subject of the meetings, several times. Kushner didn't disclose them initially. Manafort and Kushner went along to get the "scoop", which sure sounds like conspiracy to me. For a group of people who aren't guilty, they sure seem to lie an awful lot about what they do. It might be different if it were one thing, but it's not. It's an enormous pile of things, including wanting to set up a back channel that excluded our government, using Russian infrastructure, and Trump pushing hard to re-open those Russian camps that Obama closed. On and on...there is a reason Brian William acts like he's got a huge scoop every night, because something insane comes to light almost every day with this group.
Also to your point, this is what we're getting from the media. I can only imagine what the Feds have which we don't know about.
The Ukraine "story" is not even remotely the same. I read the article, clearly Flagg did not. It's another series of "whataboutism" and false equivalency put up by the right. It's meant to distract and muddy the waters, which is what the GOP are pros at. They want everybody to talk about that, and not Trump. That's their game, and that's Flagg's MO 24/7.
#858 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 487 weeks ago
I'm just shocked he released these emails. They do him no favors. I'll give him credit for transparency, but it doesn't alleviate him from what he's entering into. This is getting really bad.
Turns out the NYT were going to release the emails, so he wanted to beat 'em to the punch.
From today (really read this):
"The June 3, 2016, email sent to Donald Trump Jr. could hardly have been more explicit: One of his father’s former Russian business partners had been contacted by a senior Russian government official and was offering to provide the Trump campaign with dirt on Hillary Clinton.
The documents “would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father,” read the email, written by a trusted intermediary, who added, “This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.”
If the future president’s eldest son was surprised or disturbed by the provenance of the promised material — or the notion that it was part of a continuing effort by the Russian government to aid his father’s campaign — he gave no indication.
He replied within minutes: “If it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer.”
Four days later, after a flurry of emails, the intermediary wrote back, proposing a meeting in New York on Thursday with a “Russian government attorney.”
Donald Trump Jr. agreed, adding that he would most likely bring along “Paul Manafort (campaign boss)” and “my brother-in-law,” Jared Kushner, now one of the president’s closest White House advisers."
#859 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 487 weeks ago
False equivalency, whataboutism, strawmen, lies and semantics.
You could give Conway a run for her money.
#860 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 487 weeks ago
You mean the part where he says "borderline" and caveats it with "if this story is true" meaning JR met with Russian spies.
1) We know the story is true. Dummy. We have email proof provided by Jr.
2) Wow, I never saw this coming. Facts mean nothing to you. When two legal experts -both lawyers with decades of experience-step up and say this is a crime, I tend to believe them. But that's not good enough for the arm chair legal expert Flagg, who can't admit somebody could possibly know more than he does. Perhaps you should give them a call and explain the law to them?

