Was the Russian Lawyer Colluding With Democrats to Trap Jr?

Posted by Tina

Well…anything’s possible…we’re talking politics in DC.

The left has yet to learn the lesson of the new media reality…they no longer control the narrative.

They tried like he77 to convince the good citizens of America that, although Hillary used an inappropriate private email server to conduct her duties as Secretary of State and then destroyed emails and devices in an attempt to hide the contents of those emails, she did nothing wrong. The public at large didn’t swallow the bilge.

But now the left media are who are committed to destroying Trump by any means wants us to believe a handful of emails to Don Trump Jr requesting a meeting with a Russian lawyer on the pretext of having dirt on Hillary Clinton, constitutes “treason” and (hopefully) the end of the Trump administration.

Give me a break…if the idea is to demean and destroy the Trump administration the left media should, a) check their own credibility, and, b) do some research, research like the folks at Breitbart and Gateway Pundit have done in just 24 hours time:

At the heart of the current media Russian narrative du jour is a story about Donald Trump Jr. meeting with a Russian attorney named Natalia Veselnitskaya. That meeting took place on June 9th 2016 in Trump Tower.

Now it is discovered via video and images, that only 5 days later, June 14th 2016, Ms. Veselnitskaya was a guest of former Obama administration Russian Ambassador Michael McFaul in Washington DC for a House of Representatives hearing on U.S. Policy Toward Putin’s Russia. (video at the link)

It should be noted that Ambassador McFaul was very publicly discussing the ‘Muh Russia’ conspiracy narrative in the media and appeared on numerous NBC and MSNBC broadcasts during the 2016 campaign, and immediately after the election.

Additionally, it was Michael McFaul who was the architect of the Obama/Clinton “Russian Reset”, that eventually led McFaul to becoming the Ambassador to Russia (NYT Link).

Ambassador Michael McFaul immediately caused quite a bit of controversy while in Russia as he indulged with various anti-Putin operatives.

Michael McFaul, the U.S. ambassador in Moscow from 2012-2014, was accused by Russian state television of seeking to orchestrate the overthrow of President Vladimir Putin after hosting opposition activists and Kremlin critics at the embassy in his second day on the job. (Politico Link)

Another example of McFaul’s in-your-face antagonism is HERE. (article continues)

Yes there’s much more including all of the anti-Trump lawyers with ties to this woman and the following:

Natalia Veselnitskaya was/is also a very vocal anti-Trump person on all of her social media accounts

The piece is quite long…take it all in. This woman is everywhere in DC. Her involvement with the Democrats goes back to at least 2008!

This entry was posted in Constitution and Law. Bookmark the permalink.

56 Responses to Was the Russian Lawyer Colluding With Democrats to Trap Jr?

  1. J. Soden says:

    Donald Jr. met with a woman he was told by a 3rd party that she had dirt on $hrilLIARy. She didn’t, and the meeting didn’t last long.
    And now the LunaticLeft is again trying to somehow find a crime there but STILL gives $hrilLIARy a pass on her Bubba Foundation and email shenanigans.
    Here’s a cartoon that says it all – Ben Garrison, 12JULY:
    http://grrrgraphics.com/index.html
    So far, all this story has done is make the anti-Trumpers look even more ridiculous – if that’s even possible!

    • Chris says:

      J. Soden, let me add some important context to your first sentence (I’ll leave the grammar, spelling mistake and terrible wordplay unchanged):

      Donald Jr. met with a woman he was told by a 3rd party that she had dirt on $hriLIARy that she received from the Russian government, and that the Russian government supported his father’s campaign.

      There. Now we have an honest (though still messy) summary of the Don Jr. story. You can’t just leave out the most important information, and the entire reason it’s a story in the first place, and not expect anyone to notice.

      • Tina says:

        It’s called opposition research; it’s done by every campaign. It is NOT illegal.

        The important thing about this story is the hype, the distortion, the assumption and assertion of guilt.

        You can’t just leave out the iresponsible, partisan reporting and not expect anyone to notice!

        • Libby says:

          No, if the source of this “opposition research” is from a foreign government … we do have some federal campaign law on the books about that sort of thing.

          And Tina … the other two sentences in this post … don’t they sound even a little bit hysterical to you … you always were a sucker for hyperbole.

        • Chris says:

          I already said that it might not be illegal. But the fact that Don Jr. was told the info came from the Russian government *is* the story, and leaving that out is just silly.

        • Chris says:

          I already said that it might not be illegal. But the fact that Don Jr. was told the info came from the Russian government *is* the story, and leaving that out is just silly.

        • Chris says:

          Tina, I already said it might not be illegal. Your comment doesn’t address a single part of my comment.

      • J. Soden says:

        Thanx! You just proved my point. Don Jr was acting on info from a THIRD PARTY – which continues to get lost in the moron media hysteria.

        • Chris says:

          What are you talking about, J. Soden? Find me a single mainstream media source that leaves out the fact that Don Jr. was acting on info from a third party. You can’t, because there isn’t one–you literally just made up that claim.

          • J. Soden says:

            Chris, YOU show me where the contact was by the Russians. Read the emails!
            For those unable to read anything that might poke holes in his theories – evidently like Chris – Rob Goldstone’s initial contact to Don Jr. on JUN 03, 2016 stated that he’d been contacted by the Russians and offered “to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia”
            For those who would like to read the email themselves,
            http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/07/11/donald-trump-jr-releases-russia-email-chain/

          • Chris says:

            J. Soden, that was non-responsive. I never said Don Jr. was contacted directly by the Russian government. No one ever said that. You are accusing the media of leaving out the fact that he was contacted by a third party, but they have not left that out.

    • Tina says:

      Great cartoon and the origination of the “nothingburger” to boot.

      Even better the obvious point…THEY DIDN’T CARE THEN SO THEIR OUTRAGE NOW RINGS HOLLOW!

      I have to say that after thirty years of following this stuff as an adult it is delicious to see the hard left and their media mouthpieces revealed for the delinquent phonies they are.

      Thanks for sharing!

  2. Tina says:

    Related: Walk down memory lane at The American Thinker, “When Ted Kennedy’s Russian Pal Wanted to Kill the Pope.”

    The evidence of Kennedy’s connection is found in a Kremlin documents of May, 1983 and released in February, 1992:

    The subject head of the document, carried under the words, “Special Importance,” read: “Regarding Senator Kennedy’s request to the General Secretary of the Communist Party Y. V. Andropov.” According to the memo, Senator Kennedy was “very troubled” by U.S.-Soviet relations, which Kennedy attributed not to the murderous tyrant running the USSR but to President Reagan. The problem was Reagan’s “belligerence,” said the memo, and made worse by Reagan’s stubbornness. “According to Kennedy,” reported Chebrikov, “the current threat is due to the President’s refusal to engage any modification to his politics.” That refusal, said the memo, was exacerbated by Reagan’s political success, which made the president surer of his course, and more obstinate — and, worst of all, re-electable.

    To address this Reagan problem, Kennedy offered various suggestions to his Russian friends — or, as Chebrikov, put it: “Kennedy believes that, given the state of current affairs, and in the interest of peace, it would be prudent and timely to undertake the following steps to counter the militaristic politics of Reagan.” He described certain ideas from Kennedy to help the Soviets “influence Americans,” including Kennedy arranging for Kremlin officials to meet with certain major American media organizations and reporters, such as Walter Cronkite and Barbara Walters, both of whom were named in the memo.

    Again, this was so important because Reagan, as Kennedy saw it — and conveyed to his Russian pals — was so belligerent and, apparently, dangerous.

    This was decidedly different from how Kennedy reportedly felt about Andropov and his cohort. As Chebrikov noted in his memo, “Kennedy is very impressed with the activities of Y. V. Andropov and other Soviet leaders.”

    What does the law say about working with America’s enemies against the president of the United States, hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

    Such a phony, deceiving bunch!

    • Chris says:

      Again, “they did it too” isn’t an argument, and there’s nothing we can do about an unethical dead guy. I can’t imagine any defense of Kennedy’s actions. But he’s long gone. Trump is in the White House, and Kushner still has security clearance despite lying on his clearance forms. That is the issue right now. Everything else is a distraction.

      • Tina says:

        Well that’s okay Chris, since “they did it to” is NOT the argument!

        The argument is that neither members of the Democrat Party, nor our supposed impartial media, thought that was a big story, worthy of investigation or reporting when Kennedy WAS ALIVE!

        They were colluding together to demonize and defeat Reagan.

        The point is to EXPOSE the fact that our main stream media, and your party, collude together and have for decades for political power. They are corrupt…totally corrupt.

        The anti-Trump movement’s pony agenda is the distraction.

        The American people deserve better.

        And by the way…being snarky with J Soden for his sentence construction rings hollow from someone who reads but continues to miss the point ENTIRELY, again and again!

        • Libby says:

          And once again … Donald, Jr., will be thrilled to hear that his emails are the product of a corrupted media, and do not exist at all.

          Tina, it’s you who can’t seem to grasp that your argument is nonsense. Any supposed nefarious doings by the media, at any time in the past, have no bearing whatsoever on the current fiasco. Fredo’s emails exist. The NSA does indeed have recorded material that does not cast Team Trump in a good light.

          You’re trying to kill the messenger … but the message still exists. The Donald is having a lot of trouble with this concept too … if that makes you feel any better.

          • Tina says:

            If the (fake) message is such a barn burning blowout of a scandal what is the crime and where is the evidence of a crime?

            “The emails exist”

            So what!

            Lotsa emails “exist.”

            These emails prove he took a meeting with a lawyer from Russia who met with a lot of people and the meeting lasted all of 20 minutes resulting it zip. (Wow)

            You got nothing but a bunch of hard left angry sore losers he77 bent on getting revenge revenge. If this is the best they can do you’re in for big, big, heap of disappointment.

            What’s the hurry anyway…you got four years, maybe eight. (Wasn’t it two congress critters who tried to sell impeachment today-pathetic!)

            And of course the past record of a corrupted politicized media is relevant to the here and now. Decades of fake news, twisted and spun news, decades of covering up corruption in the Dem Party…YOU BET IT’S RELEVANT!

            And it might help to explain this. Seems the billionaire owners of the NYT, WaPo and Buffalo News (Bezos, Slim, and Buffett…lefties all?) are looking for a government bailout for their money losing rags.

  3. Libby says:

    Poor Tina … (I say that a lot, don’t I?)

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/russian-officials-overheard-discussing-trump-associates-before-campaign-began-1499890354

    It just get worse and worse, and your attempts to dismiss and deny, and retreat into the past, are futile.

    What if I told you that I know someone who knows someone who has psychic dreams? … that mostly, in some fashion or other, materialize in the real world. She dreamed about The Donald back before the election, before the DNC hack, before the dossier. And in this dream Donald told her not to worry about his presidential run. He told her he couldn’t possibly win, and was only doing it because “The Russians” told him to.

    Is that weird, or what?

    • Tina says:

      You do say that a lot Libby. Wasted energy on your part.

      What exactly gets worse and worse?

      Coming from you? Not weird at all.

      I know someone who is psychic. She told us that Donald Trump would be president one day…twenty years ago.

      My psychic is better than yours!

  4. Peggy says:

    Mark Levin had an interesting interview with Wash. Times writer Rowan Scarborough tonight. It was about the democrats paying the Russians, through different means, for information used against Trump before the election and still today. He ticked off a long list of phony information that has not only been spread through the media, but has also been read into the record by congressmen at congressional hearings and on the House and Senate floors. All of which are verifiable acts of collusion on the part of democrats with Russia.

    His point being to lay out a clear path of collusion between the democrat party and Russia to influence the election. The whole article is worth reading.

    Democrats intentionally used disinformation from Russia to attack Trump, campaign aides:

    “Democrats cite Russia’s dirt:

    Even before the Yahoo story, then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, was using the Russian-sourced dossier.

    On Aug. 27, with the campaign in high gear and knowledge that Russian hackers had penetrated Clinton campaign computers in the public domain, Mr. Reid released a letter to then-FBI Director James B. Comey.

    Mr. Reid called for an investigation into Mr. Page’s trip to Moscow, where he supposedly “met with high-ranking sanctioned individuals. Any such meetings should be investigated and made part of the public record.”

    Mr. Reid’s evidence surely came from the dossier and its Russian sources.

    In the dossier, Mr. Steele clearly states that his anti-Trump accusations are from the Kremlin, which means some Democrats have been willingly repeating Moscow propaganda for public consumption in Washington.

    No Democrats have embraced the Russian-sourced dossier more than members of the House intelligence committee, which is investigating Moscow’s interference in the election.

    Mr. Schiff read from the dossier extensively at a March hearing featuring Mr. Comey and Navy Adm. Michael Rogers, who leads the National Security Agency.

    As Mr. Schiff and other Democrats were bemoaning Kremlin activities against Mrs. Clinton, they were more than willing to quote Kremlin sources attacking Mr. Trump during the election campaign.

    Mr. Schiff lauded Mr. Steele for disclosing that Rosneft, a Russian-owned gas and oil company, planned to sell a 19.5 percent share to an investor and that Mr. Page was offered a brokerage fee.

    Trouble is, the 19.5 percent share was announced publicly by Moscow before Mr. Steele wrote that memo. Mr. Page said he was never involved in any talk about a commission.

    Mr. Schiff was more than willing to quote Kremlin sources.

    “According to Steele’s Russian sources, the campaign has offered documents damaging to Hillary Clinton, which the Russians would publish through an outlet that gives them deniability like WikiLeaks,” he said.

    Mr. Schiff also said: “According to Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer, who is reportedly held in high regard by U.S. intelligence, Russian sources tell him that Page has also had a secret meeting with Igor Sechin, CEO of the Russian gas giant, Rosneft. Sechin is reported to be a former KGB agent and close friend of Putin’s.”

    Mr. Page has said repeatedly that he does not know Mr. Sechin and did not meet with him in Moscow.

    Meanwhile, Rep. Joaquin Castro of Texas, another Democrat on the House committee, lauded Mr. Steele’s Kremlin sourcing.

    “I want to take a moment to turn to the Christopher Steele dossier, which was first mentioned in the media just before the election and published in full by media outlets in January,” Mr. Castro said. “My focus today is to explore how many claims within Steele’s dossier are looking more and more likely, as though they are accurate.

    “This is not someone who doesn’t know how to run a source and not someone without contacts. The allegations it raises about President Trump’s campaign aides’ connections to Russians, when overlaid with known established facts and timelines from the 2016 campaign, are very revealing,” he said.”
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/11/democrats-spread-false-russian-information-on-trum/

  5. Peggy says:

    Hummmmm? The plot thickens and it involves Loretta Lynch.

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

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

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

    Later, a series of events between an intermediary for the attorney and the Trump campaign ultimately led to the controversy surrounding the president’s eldest son.
    Just five days after meeting in June 2016 at Trump Tower with Donald Trump Jr., presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner and then Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Moscow attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya showed up in Washington in the front row of a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on Russia policy, video footage of the hearing shows.”
    http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/341788-exclusive-doj-let-russian-lawyer-into-us-before-she-met-with-trump?amp

  6. Tina says:

    You know Peggy, when Trump first assumed office a lot of people were disappointed that it seemed Trump was willing to let the scandals go and just move forward. The irony is astounding…the Democrats are doing their thing, following their training with a full frontal Alinsky attack on Trump and his people and all it’s done is bring back into the spotlight all of the old Democrat corruption and MORE!

    Should have let sleeping dogs lie. It’s beginning to look like we only scratched the surface.

    I have a feeling that the money that was to be made was the real attraction. They sure didn’t give a fig about the American people.

    • Peggy says:

      The democrats, republican establishment in DC and the press are all working together in a silent coup to take out Trump. They will never accept him, because he was never one of them and won in part because he wasn’t. His win can be compared to an organization where everyone expected that certain individual to become their new boss. He/she had been a loyal employee for years and everyone liked him/her. Instead, they’re told that some unknown outside was given the job and would be there on Monday. His first assignment will be to reorganize each and every department to make it more profitable.

      The daily attacks leave no doubt that a silent coup is taking place. The supply of ammo has been gathered and continues to be resupplied even if it took place ten years ago on a bus or last year when someone in England was paid to hire a Russian informant to write about a fabricated stay in hotel rooms.

      Trump will be under a death by a thousand scratches to have him removed from office. The coup I believe is coordinated by Obama, former community organizer, who has decided to stay in DC and has been traveling around the world shadowing Trump by holding private meetings with world leaders. Obama began his coup before the election in November to assist Hillary and continues to today.

      Mark Levin to Congress: Investigate Obama’s ‘Silent Coup’ vs. Trump:

      “Radio host Mark Levin used his Thursday evening show to outline the known steps taken by President Barack Obama’s administration in its last months to undermine Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and, later, his new administration.

      Levin called Obama’s effort “police state” tactics, and suggested that Obama’s actions, rather than conspiracy theories about alleged Russian interference in the presidential election to help Trump, should be the target of congressional investigation.

      Drawing on sources including the New York Times and the Washington Post, Levin described the case against Obama so far, based on what is already publicly known. The following is an expanded version of that case, including events that Levin did not mention specifically but are important to the overall timeline.”

      http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/03/03/mark-levin-obama-used-police-state-tactics-undermine-trump/

  7. Pete says:

    Don Jr.
    The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. He and his father are idiots. Their stories change, they point fingers, they blame the media, and blame the leaker. Am I the only one that is saddened by this whole display?

    Legal or illegal, moral or immoral, right or wrong the incompetency of our executive and legislative branches is quite shameful.
    Pete

    • Libby says:

      Yeah, Pete … remember back when we thought all the crazy talk (I mean, really crazy talk, tweets, what-have-you) was some kind of diabolical plot, a nefarious scheme … a shell game to distract us from our ultimate doom?

      It is a relief to have it pretty much determined, and confirmed, that poor old Fred Trump spawned two generations of wealthy imbeciles.

  8. Chris says:

    Hm. I posted a comment yesterday that apparently didn’t go through.

    The gist was that even if Gateway Pundit and Breitbart are right about this (and that’s a big if, given their track record), then Don Jr. still fell for the trap, and we still have proof that the Trump campaign was willing to work with Russia to influence the election. Now, it seems the extent of that from what we know so far wasn’t illegal. But anyone who thinks this is anything but the tip of the iceberg should know better by now. If the pattern holds, the media will continue investigating and will likely find more secret meetings, more times the administration did not tell the truth about those meetings…and, eventually, maybe, a reason WHY they did not tell the truth about those meetings.

    And it isn’t just the left that has a problem with this. Andrew C. McCarthy, who defended Trump’s travel ban, wrote in the National Review yesterday that the meeting, while probably not illegal, still constitutes collusion and could be a factor in a possible impeachment. I never thought I’d see the National Review entertain the idea of impeaching a Republican president and write about it positively, but here we are.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/449401/trump-jr-emails-high-crimes-misdemeanors

    • Libby says:

      While the left wing conspiracy theorists are convinced that it was Kushner who hung little Donny, Jr., out to dry.

      My sister, who is fervent, calls the White House regularly to make her displeasure known. So, she’s being excitable at the poor old lady who is taking it all down … and then she calms down a bit and apologizes … but the operator is not at all fussed: “oh … dear … , she says, “it hasn’t been this much fun since Nixon.”

    • Tina says:

      Don Jr. “fell for the trap”?

      I think he did quite well given his lack of political experience. He was gracious and polite and exactly nothing came of the short meeting. How was he trapped, at least by his own hand?

      By this logic no Republican can ever take a meeting because the left will find a way to exploit it through their corrupt media and judicial allies!

      He took a meeting with Natalia Veselnitskaya who, he was told, might have damaging information regarding his fathers opponent. Is anyone going to claim with a straight face that Hillary, or any of her team, would not at least meet with someone claiming to have the goods on Trump or Bernie? NO!!!

      The meeting was attended by two others who were part of the Trump team. It lasted all of 20 minutes. The two (Jared and Kushner) left as soon as it became obvious that the woman had nothing to share. That’s the gist of the meeting. Zip.

      The Hill further reports:

      …in an interview with NBC News earlier this week, Veselnitskaya acknowledged her contacts with Trump Jr. and in Washington were part of a lobbying campaign to get members of Congress and American political figures to see “the real circumstances behind the Magnitsky Act.”

      That work was a far cry from the narrow reason the U.S. government initially gave for allowing Veselnitskaya into the U.S. in late 2015, according to federal court records.

      The Moscow lawyer had been turned down for a visa to enter the U.S. lawfully but then was granted special immigration parole by then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch for the limited purpose of helping a company owned by Russian businessman Denis Katsyv, her client, defend itself against a Justice Department asset forfeiture case in federal court in New York City.

      “…anyone who thinks this is anything but the tip of the iceberg should know better by now.”

      I think just the opposite is true. All of the opposition research so far, which has been extensive, has resulted in nothing of substance. Big media organizations and Hillary’s own organizations and supporters were working overtime before the election, and continue to this day, to find something really damaging on Trump. Nothing they have found even begins to match the baggage Hillary drags around with her or the baggage Obama’s two terms produced for him and several people under him. Worse yet, the Obama justice department did nothing but instead worked as a political ally to thwart investigations. Weigh all of that, including the fact that the Democrats backed Hillary for president, against the specious and often petty accusations blown out of proportion against Trump and you look completely ridiculous.

      Your party is lost, totally lost and mired down in corruption and malfeasance, and this mission to manufacture equivalent wrongdoing is obvious and pathetic.

      Regarding the McCarthy article, you seem to think that McCarthy saying this, “…could be a factor in a possible impeachment” is a big deal. I suppose from your perspective it is but it requires the context of the entire article to put it in perspective. He also wrote:

      We are a good distance from being able to assess whether President Trump should be impeached….

      …It is an easy thing to condemn President Trump’s canoodling with Putin’s regime. It will be more difficult to weigh it against other political dalliances with anti-American regimes that we have tolerated. There was no move to impeach President Obama over the Iran deal and all the chicanery attendant to it. Democrats had no qualms about nominating Hillary Clinton despite the Clinton Foundation’s shameful acceptance of millions in foreign funding and her consequent green-lighting, as secretary of state, of Russia’s acquisition of major American uranium reserves.

      We are indeed a good distance, not just from impeachment but, from “being able to assess whether President Trump should be impeached.”

      I don’t know why you are so surprised by McCarthy’s article. I have posted his articles regarding Hillary’s and Obama’s legal and moral problems many times and he was equally honest and forthright in his legal and constitutional assessment.

      All of us become emotional at times and strike out with verbiage that is over the top. Despite that, and perhaps because we have Watergate in our past, the main driving force for the Republicans I know and respect are the Constitution, the rule of law, and equal and honest treatment by the media. It wasn’t politics or vengeance that drove us over the last eight (16) years…it was these core driving forces. Our free and just nation hangs in the balance.

      • Chris says:

        By this logic no Republican can ever take a meeting because the left will find a way to exploit it through their corrupt media and judicial allies!

        He took a meeting with Natalia Veselnitskaya who, he was told, might have damaging information regarding his fathers opponent. Is anyone going to claim with a straight face that Hillary, or any of her team, would not at least meet with someone claiming to have the goods on Trump or Bernie? NO!!!

        You are…still…leaving out the entire reason the meeting is being condemned: because Don Jr. was told the information he’d recieve at the meeting was from the Russian government.

        Why do you keep doing this? Do you think I won’t point this out every time? Do you think I’ll forget?

        I don’t know what Hillary would have done. I do know Al Gore rejected an oppo research file that was given to him anonymously, and went straight to the FBI. I know people who’ve worked on Republican campaigns have said that’s exactly what Don Jr. should have done. But you’ve decided to refuse to hold your side to any moral standards.

        • Tina says:

          Do we KNOW that Don Jr was told it was from the Russian government or do we have false information on that?

          The Atlantic:

          The New York Times reported over the weekend that the president’s eldest son met with a Russian lawyer who promised damaging information about Hillary Clinton. On Monday, the Times reported that Donald Jr. received an email before that meeting that “indicates that the Russian government was the source of the potentially damaging information.” The article attributed its sourcing to “three people with knowledge of the emails.”

          At face value, the Times report is the most significant development so far in the constellation of Russia-related scandals. It is the first indication that someone in Trump’s inner circle was informed the Russian government wanted to pass along damaging information to undermine one American presidential candidate and favor another, and that he responded by signaling his willingness to receive it. And it will likely complicate efforts by the Trump administration to dispel accusations the president’s campaign may have colluded with Moscow to damage Clinton’s candidacy.

          Some details about the email still remain uncertain. The precise contents of the email are not offered. Its exact tone and phrasing could produce different interpretations than what the sources told the Times; the report claims the email “indicates” that the source was the Russian government, but does not explain the nature of that indication. The Times report also says there is no evidence so far that Donald Jr. was informed the information could have been illegally obtained, or that he was offered the contents of hacked emails from either the Democratic National Committee or the Clinton campaign. If either of those things turned out to be the case, it would place the president’s eldest son in significant legal peril.

          According to the Times, the email was sent by Rob Goldstone, a British publicist who helped arrange the June 9, 2016, meeting between Donald Jr. and Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya. Goldstone represents Emin Agalarov, a Russian pop singer and a former Trump business partner. Donald Jr. said in a statement over the weekend that he and Goldstone became acquainted during the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow that his father organized. In earlier reports by the Times, Donald Jr. said Veselnitskaya’s promises of information had come to naught. Instead, according to his account, she focused on the Magnitsky Act, a bipartisan act of Congress from 2012 sanctioning top Russian officials allegedly involved in human-rights abuses there.

          There’s a lot of speculation in there. But the evidence, the damning email (witnessed by 3 people?) was withheld. Why?

          Also, the NYT has been caught printing false accusations.

          So you want me to condemn this guy on what exactly, the say so of the NYT?

          • Tina says:

            And what do we do about the Hillary campaign and Ukraine?

            How many months should we spend on that?

            Or how about this?

            Fusion is the same firm that commissioned a dossier of explosive but unverified allegations about Trump’s ties with Russia from the former MI6 agent Christopher Steele. It has been widely reported that Fusion was first hired by a Republican client to research Trump during the Republican primary in late 2015 and continued the Trump research for a Democratic client in 2016, when it commissioned the Steele dossier.

            Both parties engaged in opposition research involving people associated with Russian people that may or may not have been representing the Russian government. Surely we can make time in the press to hound people in both parties.

            Or how about we begin to focus on upping our intelligence so this interference game can be quashed?

            “you’ve decided to refuse to hold your side to any moral standards.”

            That’s a damned LIE!

            Show me the evidence!

            Turn your vile anger on those creating chaos by reporting allegations rather than information!

            Turn your anger on your party whose current platform is “resist.” What the he77 is that? Where is the morality, the decency, the dedication to the people. Democrats are hurting from high premiums and deductibles too. They are suffering from a poor economy over eight years too! Your party put them in this place and refuses to take even an ounce of responsibility.

            The lecture is uncalled for, Chris. It would be unnecessary to point all of what I harp on endlessly if just one Democrat would have the moral fortitude to say…”…boy did we screw up! What can we do to help fix it”

            I’m tired of the games Chris.

          • Libby says:

            Tina, this all makes no sense. Or maybe your source is old … but Donny released the actual emails. We know exactly what they said.

            Now, it is a shame that he did. The poor guy either receives pitiful legal advice … or good legal advice and, like Dad, ignores it. But if he hadn’t decided to beat the NYT to the punch, and you had ONLY the NYT report to go on … you could continue to play this silly game.

            But that’s just not how it worked out. Bummer.

          • Chris says:

            Do we KNOW that Don Jr was told it was from the Russian government or do we have false information on that?

            My god.

            Tina, the only possible way you couldn’t know that Don Jr. published the e-mails himself three days ago, confirming that he was told the information came from the Russian government,, is if you have intentionally chosen to remain ignorant of this.

            The New York Times was about to print the story reporting on the contents of the e-mail when Don Jr. released the e-mails in an attempt to get ahead of the story.

            Every subsequent story over the past three days has been based on Don Jr.’s own release of the e-mails, not the original NYT story.

            Read the e-mails Don Jr. provided. They explicitly say the info came from the Russian government.

            So…yes…the lecture was not only justified, it was even more justified than I originally thought. You live in a bubble, and you’re commenting on things you know absolutely nothing about.

  9. Joe says:

    Dang, this blog has one bad liberal infestation.

  10. Libby says:

    Oooh, they is all cracking up ….

    https://www.propublica.org/article/marc-kasowitz-trump-lawyer-threat-emails-maddow

    Spooky-doodle. How could a man with his breadth of experience go near the damned email when drunk? … which he certainly was.

    Give The Donald that … all his … inappropriatenesses come right out of a stone cold sober brain.

    Spooky-doodle.

    • Tina says:

      All kinds of people have gone off the rails, like this guy in Maine.

      At least neither of these actually shot anyone…or was “glad” when someone was.

      Scalise just underwent yet another surgery but at least his condition has been up graded to “fair” now. The damage to his body was extensive with multiple fractured bones, internal bleeding, and extensive damage to his internal organs. He’s since been fighting deep tissue infection and faced more surgeries.

      Somehow this craziness must stop but here’s a question I must ask. How differently did the media treat this shooting and the Giffords shooting?

      • Libby says:

        Tina, what’s this got to do with anything in my post? Is the Maine shooter an adviser to our President? You’re going to have to explain how the two incidents are related, in any way, shape of form. Are you suggesting that the Maine shooter has somehow driven Mr. Kasowitz to this indiscretion? You’re going to have to be more explicitly factual is supporting this assertion, cause I’m just not seeing it.

        All the data ProPublica has developed indicate that Kasowitz is being driven round the bend by one of his clients. Guess.

        • Tina says:

          Oh, so only “advisors” to the president should be held accountable?

          I’m suggesting that all of this kind of crap are examples of the populace being “off the rails” in terms of civility and the state of our nation.

          Speculation as to the state of mind of Kasowitz, and the attending gossip you slurped up like a snow cone on a hot day, isa fabrication of the desperate left.

          As I said before, you’d be wiser to wait until you have something of real substance in your resist (and destroy) campaign.

          • Chris says:

            Tina, all you did was change the subject. Libby brought up that Trump’s new lawyer, like his old lawyers, is a hostile lunatic…and instead of responding to that, wrote about random shooters. Then you have the nerve to call others “desperate.” This is really embarrassing. Your entire philosophy now is “Accountability is for the other side.”

          • Libby says:

            “Oh, so only “advisors” to the president should be held accountable?”

            Tina, the Maine shooter is dead. That’s all the accountability you are going to get. And, again, this has nothing to do with Kasowitz’s indiscretion.

            Bringing is up was just that much more nonsense, in your decidedly ineffective campaign of dismissal, denial, and obfuscation of the piling up of evidence of YOUR President’s dismal performance.

            I will grant you one thing, one tiny smidgen of seeming persecution. Notwithstanding that every OTHER President we’ve ever had has had the sense NOT to comment on the physique of the wives of world leaders (and inspire most of the females on this planet to go “Eeewww, what a pig!”) … if CNN has still got it on their face page at the end of next week, well, that is kinda rubbing it in.

            But Tina … he did do it. He REALLY has to stop doing that sort of thing, and if he REALLY cannot learn … it’s going to be an uproarious three years and six months, … and we don’t want you going round the bend.

  11. Libby says:

    Tina, I’m wondering if I could get you to read this:

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/07/14/jared-kushner-donald-trump-jr-nepotism-often-ends-badly-jonathan-turley-column/477008001/

    … and admit that it’s a fairly even-handed assessment of the situation.

    • Tina says:

      I agree that nepotism can lead to problems, however, the USA Today article contained a glaring error…no mention of the Clintons.

      Remember how they bragged about us getting two for the price of one, as if they were elected as co-presidents? Hillary got a big office right across from Bill rather than the usual First lady office. She immediately set to work on healthcare. She held an inappropriate private meeting with healthcare related businesses. She was not held up as a criminal to ignorant to hold her position. Nobody brought up nepotism. In fact, the Clintons were being featured in the media as the next Camelot couple!

      The decades old mega-meme is that the left can do no wrong, therefore the complaints you have now ring hollow, even when there is something of some concern going on. The exaggerated and fake news stories, the specious accusation only make it worse.

      What is the remedy for this situation?

      If your side is smart, you in the populace, you’ll start taking your own representative (including the media) to task and you’ll stop treating us like something vile on the bottom of your very important and expensive shoes. WE might have something interesting and important to say…start treating us with the level of respect you would appreciate yourself.

      Look, it’s up to the people to hold our representatives accountable. When we allow healthy political competition to become unhealthy, one sided, do anything for power contests (war) we ultimately work against our own best interests…the preservation of freedom and rights…of America!

      By the way, I worked successfully with my husband in our small business for over thirty years. It can be done.

      • Libby says:

        “I agree that nepotism can lead to problems, however, the USA Today article contained a glaring error…no mention of the Clintons.”

        Oh, Tina, you didn’t read very far, did you? … because the Clintons were mentioned, along with Ulysses S. Grant !

        So, your performance in this little exercise was not really very satisfactory. Why couldn’t you stick it until the Clinton part? Or did an attack of hyperpartisanism cause you to bleep over it.

        We are going to do some more work on this. It is important.

  12. Tina says:

    Chris: “… is if you have intentionally chosen to remain ignorant of this.”

    I have not “chosen to remain ignorant. The emails I read didn’t include language about the “Russian government” but instead referred to the Crown prosecutor of Russia” who “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.”

    “Official documents” could mean anything. It could be a contract with a private company. Now the next bit is more incriminating: ““This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.””

    Is “part” of Russia? What the he77 does that mean? The entir sentence sounds bogus.

    No you can make the case that Don Jr should have informed the FBI but is that something someone outside of government would think to do?

    If it tuns out that he broke the law then of course he will have to pay the price but I’d like to see the justice department that would see intent in what he did after not seeing intent in what Hillary, a woman well versed in her responsibilities, did.

    At this point I think this meeting, which resulted in nothing that was suggested in the emails was exchanged, is being blown out of proportion. In some ways it suggests a set up and if so was it Hillary’s team that did that?

    I still think you have a lot of nerve preaching to ad scolding me over this when you were not at all interested in the information that should have led to indictment of Hillary, or the corruption in the investigation at the FBI and Justice Departments, or the many other scandals over the last eight years.

    • Chris says:

      I have not “chosen to remain ignorant. The emails I read didn’t include language about the “Russian government”

      …And then right after writing this, you directly quoted the part of the email which said the information was from the Russian government.

      I don’t know how to respond to you at this point, Tina. You’re not making any sense.

  13. Tina says:

    Libby will you return the favor and read Don Serber.

    • Libby says:

      Oh, Lordy … I am going to read it all, I promise … but I feel an unconquerable urge to immediately point out this “commentary” is in fact an advertisement for his books. You did realize that, didn’t you? This sort of thing will take the sheen right off any pretensions to integrity on the part of your author, just so you know.

  14. Johnny says:

    We are getting played by the republicans and trump…wake up people. Conservatives please wake up and stop letting these creatures not only take advantage of you but take us all for a ride we might not come back from. Real conservatives knows when we are being played for a fool.

  15. Peggy says:

    Heartbreaking. A call from the forgotten man.

    WMAL Caller: We Don’t Care About Russia; ‘We’re Out Here Struggling And These People Don’t Get It’:

    https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/07/13/wmal-caller-we-dont-care-about-russia-were-out-here-struggling-and-these-people-dont-get-it-n2354306

  16. Tina says:

    Libby: “Tina, the Maine shooter is dead. That’s all the accountability you are going to get.”

    I was referring to this guy who went on a rant and threatened trump and like most arrogant lefties assumes anyone with brains HAS To think as he does.

    “Oh, Tina, you didn’t read very far, did you? … because the Clintons were mentioned, along with Ulysses S. Grant ! … Or did an attack of hyperpartisanism cause you to bleep over it.”

    Sorry I missed it…Ill go back and read again.

    Okay. I usually like Jonathan Turley but honestly i just got bored. He makes a case for nepotism being a problem. He also brings a lot of history forward that may demonstrate the difficult position Trump was placed in. But what is the point in hindsight other than some advice worth considering.

    I presume you are referring to Trump complimenting France’s first lady on being “in good shape.” You lefties really have a sensitivity problem when a nice compliment sounds yucky to you. It’s positively silly…therapy might be required for some of your kind, IMHO.

    “I feel an unconquerable urge to immediately point out this “commentary” is in fact an advertisement for his books.”

    And that’s relevant because?

    “This sort of thing will take the sheen right off any pretensions to integrity on the part of your author, just so you know.”

    So Woodward and Bernstein were full of $#*%?

    Lordy, you people on the left are arrogant!

    • Tina says:

      Good article, RHT447. The evidence against the Obama/Hillary gang keeps piling up.

      The sting operation was put in place via a Russian attorney/operative named Natalia Veselnitskaya whose social media history marks her as an adamant anti-Trumper and who was granted a special exemption to travel into the United States by the Obama Department of Justice. The sting was further facilitated by a Russian-born American citizen named Rinat Akhmetshin who was granted citizenship during the Obama era and who as as D.C. lobbyist is well-connected to the D.C. political establishment and is said to have been instrumental in the creation of an anti-Trump dossier Trump’s political opponents were preparing to use against him during the campaign. … It appears that once Veselnitskaya received confirmation she would be granted an audience with Donald Trump Jr. and other members of the Trump campaign, Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch ordered an illegal recording of that meeting…

      The tap dancing around this reminds me of the aftermath in the Fast and Furious scandal when the plan was to blame the gun sellers to push for more gun laws.

      How many instances of corruption and illegal activity does it take?

      We’re all scratching our heads as the elites of both parties and their loyal tools continue to wage misdirection campaigns.

      I’m still blown away by elites on the right who do not get we’re in the fight of our lives and need rough MacArthur types to lead us in this battle.

      We are not retreating – we are advancing in another direction – Gen. Douglas MacArthur

      Can they not see that if we fail to stand and fight this time we lose the country? Do they not get the people feel betrayed and undone by our leaders?

      Stodgy erudite speech may sound good to the ears but it sure won’t win this gut wrenching battle. In point of fact it hasn’t for over seventy years!!!!! All of their noodling has not won power vested in the people or a strong healthy nation with well educated kids and plenty of work. Erudite speech on the right hasn’t enlightened or educated.

  17. Libby says:

    “Okay. I usually like Jonathan Turley but honestly i just got bored. He makes a case for nepotism being a problem. He also brings a lot of history forward that may demonstrate the difficult position Trump was placed in. But what is the point in hindsight other than some advice worth considering.”

    So, you did read it. Why did you pretend not to … as far as the Clintons were concerned? You weren’t bored … your even-minded anxiety meter went “Kerplooee”. You could not admit the relevance of all this to the TA. Why ever not? Unless it’s because you know that there can be no TA without the kids … which means that the next three years and six months are going to be uproarious. Buckle Up.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.