Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Don Jr releases email admitting he met with Russian govt official to get dirt on HRC

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Trump admits he may have been tipped off about the meeting. Like I said yesterday, he knew about the meeting



    Kushner has a bad memory


    The other man in the room said the Russian lawyer did bring documents. He's the former russian intelligence agent. This nothingburger keeps getting bigger and bigger.
    1bad65 ComicDon krazyn8tive GhostofDempsey BrushMyHair. JimRaynor jaded [MENTION]DoubleLeftH00k
    [/MENTION]
    New Report Claims Russian Lawyer Actually Did Bring Clinton Dirt Docs to Trump Jr. Meeting

    submit to reddit
    You’ve heard the word bombshell tossed around throughout the news surrounding the Russia probe, but a new report in the Associated Press is certain to raise even more eyebrows. Reporters for the outlet tracked down Rinat Akmestshin, a Russian American lobbyist who reportedly once was a Russian spy (he denies it). He confirmed his participation in the June 2016 meeting with Donald Trump, Jr., Jared Kushner, Paul Manafort and Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya. But, here’s the shocking part. Despite Trump Jr. claiming she provided no supporting information, the lobbyist told them that the Russian attorney actually did bring with her a plastic folder with “printed-out” documents detailing illicit funds allegedly being funneled to the DNC.

    Here’s the bombshell that was actually buried pretty far down in the AP article:

    During the meeting, Akhmetshin said Veselnitskaya brought with her a plastic folder with printed-out documents that detailed what she believed was the flow of illicit funds to the Democratic National Committee. Veselnitskaya presented the contents of the documents to the Trump associates and suggested that making the information public could help the Trump campaign, he said.



    Akhmetshin said he does not know if Veselnitskaya’s documents were provided by the Russian government. He said he thinks she left the materials with the Trump associates. It was unclear if she handed the documents to anyone in the room or simply left them behind, he said.

    Earlier this week, Donald Trump Jr. said he never received anything of substance from the Russian lawyer. He claims she provided no “supporting information” about the claims.

    Akmestshin told the AP that during the meeting Trump Jr. did ask her if she had all of the evidence to back up her claims, and Veselnitskaya said the Trump campaign would need to research it more.

    —> LAWNEWZ PREDICTS: TRUMP FIRES SPECIAL COUNSEL MUELLER WITHIN 100 DAYS <—-

    “No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information. She then changed subjects and began discussing the adoption of Russian children and mentioned the Magnitsky Act. It became clear to me that this was the true agenda all along and that the claims of potentially helpful information were a pretext for the meeting,” Trump Jr. said in a statement issued earlier this week. Trump Jr. has not yet responded to these most recent claims.

    As we reported earlier this week, the law makes it a crime for someone to solicit a foreign national for “anything of value … in connection with” an election.

    “When the Federal Election Commission (FEC) promulgated this ban on ‘substantial assistance, it said little about its scope. It did make clear that the term was to be broadly construed,” wrote Bob Bauer, a professor at NYU in a recent blog post.

    So, would this count as providing substantial assistance or “anything of substance”?

    “If it’s accurate, it obviously adds considerably to the already strong case that Don Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort violated a number of federal criminal prohibitions through soliciting illegal foreign assistance to a U.S. presidential campaign (and, in Jared’s case, through falsely and incompletely filling in SF86 in obtaining security clearance) and, again on the premise that this report is accurate, this information shows that they not only solicited but indeed received such assistance,” Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe told LawNewz.com “It’s already beyond dispute that much of what Don Jr. has said about the June 2016 meeting with Natalia Veselnitskaya and Rinat Akhmetshin (and perhaps others in addition to Jared and Paul) was plainly false, but this added layer of obviously deliberate deception makes the case for treacherous collusion with a hostile foreign power to help Trump defeat Clinton and to subvert our democracy all the stronger.”

    Election law expert Rick Hasen told us earlier that this doesn’t bode well for the first son saying it “considerably strengthens the solicitation/coordination claims.” It would also of course depend on what exactly was in the documents.

    http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/bomb...mp-jr-meeting/

    You know what time it is?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Motorcity Cobra View Post
      Trump admits he may have been tipped off about the meeting. Like I said yesterday, he knew about the meeting.....


      You've got that dastardly roadrunner this time dammit!!!

      Comment




      • But what does this rube know?? He's obviously some deplorable Trump supporter just sticking with his guy.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by 1bad65 View Post


          But what does this rube know?? He's obviously some deplorable Trump supporter just sticking with his guy.
          Pretty sure you are. You gotta find your echo chamber. Did you stick with Dershowitz on the OJ Simpson trial?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Motorcity Cobra View Post
            Pretty sure you are. You gotta find your echo chamber. Did you stick with Dershowitz on the OJ Simpson trial?
            Non sequiturs.

            What's your take on what the professor of Constitutional law had to say?

            Comment


            • Originally posted by 1bad65 View Post
              Non sequiturs.

              What's your take on what the professor of Constitutional law had to say?
              My take is that there are 9 expert constitutional lawyers who can't even agree on the constitution . The constitution, like the bible, can be interpreted however you want it

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Motorcity Cobra View Post
                My take is that there are 9 expert constitutional lawyers who can't even agree on the constitution . The constitution, like the bible, can be interpreted however you want it
                True, but you can still address what he said.

                You just don't want to.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by 1bad65 View Post
                  True, but you can still address what he said.

                  You just don't want to.
                  That's his opinion. Others have opinions. The only opinion that matters is the opinions of the ones doing the investigation

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Motorcity Cobra View Post
                    There are a lot of different types of welfare. Subsidies are welfare. That's the government paying you for doing nothing. Farmers get paid subsidies to NOT GROW CROPS!

                    Some people are stuck in generation after generation on welfare but for you to make the broad statement that no one has ever risen out of welfare is just wrong. There are a lot of people who had to take welfare for a short period of time.

                    Short periods are fine. That's called unemployment


                    Farmers get a subsidy to have a floor price for crops, but I have never heard of them getting paid not to grow.. and at least farmers work n produce


                    The welfare that goes to ghetto trailer park trash is what I have an issue with... it does not help them at all.. they just build lifestyle around those handouts and don't do anything to help themselves because why try when you already getting a check..

                    Literally the taxpayersgive these people
                    Food stamps
                    Welfare checks
                    Public housing
                    Free medical
                    Free phones
                    Etc

                    Yet, with all basic needs taken care of,they can't better themselves
                    So we get stuck with generations of families on assistance and it continually grows, because they reproduce and get more money for each kid, and none works because why be productive when everything is paid for.


                    They get stuck in that cycle because there is no self accountability..

                    These government programs sound good but in reality creates a population of unproductive leeches living on handouts from taxpayers...

                    And this isn't just a black ghetto thing, white trashy and Asian and Latino trash all are included
                    Last edited by Sugar Adam Ali; 07-14-2017, 05:03 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Motorcity Cobra View Post
                      My take is that there are 9 expert constitutional lawyers who can't even agree on the constitution . The constitution, like the bible, can be interpreted however you want it
                      I kinda agree and kinda don't


                      Can you give examples of what is up for interpretation

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP