NYT offers correction On DJT JR Russia meeting!

So the fake news NYT misquoted the poor lad. It was a actually about adoption!


mobile.nytimes.com...://www.google.com/

Quote all the way at the bottom of the article of course!

Correction: July 9, 2017 An earlier version of this article misquoted a statement by Donald Trump Jr. about a meeting with a Russian lawyer. He said the meeting mostly focused on the topic of adoption, which “was not a campaign issue.” He did not say it was a campaign issue.

These guys are slimeballs!

a reply to: Ares2493

He did not say it was a campaign issue.

Thanks for clearing that up for us. Adoption was not a campaign issue. So, what was the purpose of the meeting again? Oh yeah, they thought the Russian lawyer lady was bringing them damning information about Clinton. I guess they never figured that the Russian lawyer lady would want something in return?

Fake News caught again. Funny how all these mistakes with later footnote corrections are being made

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Ares2493

He did not say it was a campaign issue.

Thanks for clearing that up for us. Adoption was not a campaign issue. So, what was the purpose of the meeting again? Oh yeah, they thought the Russian lawyer lady was bringing them damning information about Clinton. I guess they never figured that the Russian lawyer lady would want something in return?

They did not know who she was and getting some oppo research on an opponent is no crime.
It's only dodgy when you pay an undeclared Russian agent to dig up oppo research - as Hillary's campaign did.

And , no, they did not take the meeting on the basis of damning information about Clinton - that is not what the statement was. That is just your own fake news.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Ares2493

He did not say it was a campaign issue.

Thanks for clearing that up for us. Adoption was not a campaign issue. So, what was the purpose of the meeting again? Oh yeah, they thought the Russian lawyer lady was bringing them damning information about Clinton. I guess they never figured that the Russian lawyer lady would want something in return?

The purpose was adoption.

a reply to: windword

Yeah a Russian lawyer who misrepresented herself and the reason for the meeting while working for FusionGPS. She was attempting to draw Trumps people into a situation that could then be used against them in the campaign / after he was elected.

Clinton lost because of all her issues and not because of Russia.

a reply to: Ares2493

Hahaha.
How bout looking to obtain something of value to the campaign from a foreign national?
Illegal. It is illegal to take campaign contributions from a foreign national. Now usually that's money but in bribery cases and blackmail cases that thing of value can be intangible. Information.

Certainly this is going to be of great interest to Bob Mueller and his special counsel.
Add to this the continued lies by this administration about meetings with Russians.
Pence, Flynn, Sessions, Carter Page,Jared Kushner,Paul Manifort, and Donny boy Jr.
The claims by the family that they didn't need U.S. banks when they had all this Russian cash rolling in.
Real estate deals that nearly double a properties value over a year while not doing any improvements.
Helping oligarchs to hide money from wives looking for alimony. Too cushy a relationship by far.

And this latest with the G20 summit...well if that didn't tell you who has the upper hand in the putin / trump relationship I don't know what does.
Yes let's bring this relationship right out in the open and start a joint task force on cyber security.
Could it get any stupider?

a reply to: Xcathdra

She was attempting to draw Trumps people into a situation that could then be used against them in the campaign / after he was elected.

She succeeded.

I don't believe for one minute that this Russian lawyer, whose whole mission is to undermine the Magnitsky Act, would work on behalf of Hillary Clinton, who was Secretary of State when the Magnitsky Act was enacted.

The fact of the matter is, it doesn't matter if she "misrepresented herself". What matters is that the Trump Campaign thought she had credible dirt on Hillary Clinton that they could use against her during the election. If DT Jr tells us the information wasn't good enough, or false, that doesn't help his case. The fact that they claim she went on to talk about "adoption" tells us that she wanted the Trump Campaign to promise to undermine The Act in exchange for the information, whether they took it or not.

Bad move on DT Jrs, part, but he probably had to make a statement because someone has a recoding of what happened at that meeting. He's trying to talk his way out or take the bullet for his father.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Yeah she misrepresented herself. She said she had dirt on Clinton and THAT is why they wanted to take the meeting.
Not to talk about the beautiful little babies...

a reply to: Ares2493

The correction (which always appear at the bottom of an article) does not change what the meeting was about or that Jr. didn't offer two versions. It states that Jr said Russian adoptions were a campaign issue when he in fact said Russian adoptions were NOT a campaign issue.

For those unaware... Russia has punished the US for sanctions against individual Russians for various reasons but including human rights violations, by banning all adoptions of Russian children by US citizens. Discussing this ban is essentially discussing lifting the sanctions against those Russian individuals.

a reply to: UKTruth

Really?


Oh my god...

It came from the Whitehouse .

Too funny. Yes now the Whitehouse spreads fake news.
Priceless.

a reply to: Kali74

Two versions = alternative facts.
Haven't we learned this yet.

If they ever make a coin with trump on it it will be heads on both sides.

Two faced liars all of them.

a reply to: Kali74

So even further damning info right from the horses mouth.

a reply to: windword

These defensive type leaks usually indicate something bigger coming down the pike.
(like them agreeing to go sanction for sanction for any information the campaign could use against Clinton.)

If someone has a recording that's about to emerge this preemptive discussion could be an attempt to trivialize the seriousness of that.

Watch this space...

Well, there goes this thread...again

a reply to: UKTruth

It's only dodgy when you pay an undeclared Russian agent to dig up oppo research - as Hillary's campaign did.

Nothing will ever come of this because this is fake news and a bald face lie. Even the most critical anti-Hillary sites posting this story about dodgy Fusion GPS, say that the Democratic funds came from a PAC, after the Republican's PAC ran out of money, and needed Democratic aide.

As we've been saying since Friday.. This story was just another in a long line of NOTHING BURGERS.

NYTimes/WaPo are running on fumes now.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: UKTruth

It's only dodgy when you pay an undeclared Russian agent to dig up oppo research - as Hillary's campaign did.

Nothing will ever come of this because this is fake news and a bald face lie. Even the most critical anti-Hillary sites posting this story about dodgy Fusion GPS, say that the Democratic funds came from a PAC, after the Republican's PAC ran out of money, and needed Democratic aide.

We already know Hillary's campaign broke the rules about coordinating with PACs

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Xcathdra

She was attempting to draw Trumps people into a situation that could then be used against them in the campaign / after he was elected.

What matters is that the Trump Campaign thought she had credible dirt on Hillary Clinton that they could use against her during the election.

That would only matter if it were true - alas (for you) that is fake news.
Even then - there is no law against having a Russian dish the dirt against Clinton as past of oppo research.

a reply to: carewemust

Nothing burgers with all the trimmings. And a sesame seed bun.