It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Don Jr. Proved Correct About Meeting With Russian Lawyer, Memo Obtained.

page: 7
38
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 09:18 AM
link   
a reply to: RickyD

Its not necessary to show that he DID receive a thing of value. It is only necessary to show that he intended to receive that thing of value, the thing of value being the dirt he expected to get on Hillary.




posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

So, in your hypothesis, TrumpJr. thought Russia was going to hand over proof of illegal Clinton stuff, a once in a lifetime world-shaking political bombshell, in exchange for rule changes on Russian/American adoptions?

Would you agree, hypothetically, that if the Russians were going to hand over Clinton stuff for free it would then be legal?

For the record, I believe Seth Rich leaked the data to Wikileaks.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 09:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: darkbake
From what I can gather, there were legitimate points being discussed at the meeting, but Trump Jr. was interested in picking up damaging intel on Clinton on the side, although nothing came of it.


Exactly. It was a sting. The Russians set Don Junior up to look like he was conspiring with them. What matters is not what they actually discussed, it is his willingness to commit treason for political gain. The Russians are old hands at these psychological games.


Treason? Is that what you call looking for opponents dirt? Jesus, if we enforced that like in the old days, there would't be a politician left in DC without holes in them from the firing squad. I take it you don't know how the political adds work these days?


Hiring a private detective to find dirt on an opponent is the American Way. Hooking up with the KGB is treason. Sorry, but the Russians have set both sides up. If Clinton had won, the Steele Dossier would be the cause celebre proving that Hilary was a "communist stooge."


Is this the official word on that? I'm just trying to be sure I understand the current narrative I'm supposed to believe. Russia is still the enemy, and if we solicit information from a Britt, who happened to get his info from Russia, it's cool due to the middle man, but meeting directly, is treason. have I got that about right?


Reading comprehension issues. I explicitly stated that both campaigns were set up. Treason is difficult to prosecute because you must prove intent. Don Jr. is naive; the Russians duped him into demonstrating intent. The Clintons are wilier. They would never have dealt with the Russians directly; they knew it would eventually be used against them. Instead, the Russians went through a third party... but the dossier could easily be shown to be of Russian origin if that card needed to be played.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 10:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Gryphon66

You're perspective is clear. How you got there from what I said is beyond me, as per your MO.


And now, having been called on your typical crap, you try to spin it onto me. LOL.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 10:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Sillyolme

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: fiverx313

originally posted by: network dude
But this is exactly as was described by Trump Jr. Yes, he met her hoping for some dirt on Hillary (something that is not a crime, it's done by all in politics, all)


that is, in fact, a crime in this situation.


Then why isn't he in jail? He admitted to everything, and turned over all the documents. Plus there is the nagging issue of the Democrats doing essentially the same thing with the Steele Dossier. They just didn't buy it directly from the Russians, they had a middle man. (perhaps that is the key here?)


He will be in jail. As soon as the Mueller investigation wraps up and trials begin. He didn't turn over all the documents. He turned over what he thought they already had. And continued to lie about who was there until it was revealed.

If there is any justice, someone will be going to jail.... Hillary, Bill, Barack and a list of others... The real big story.


Citing a discussion on ATS, the thesis of which is proven false, does nothing for your imagined case.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

A promise is not a thing of value. If I promise you 1 million dollars. That's not a thing of value. The thing itself may not even exist.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Sillyolme

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: fiverx313

originally posted by: network dude
But this is exactly as was described by Trump Jr. Yes, he met her hoping for some dirt on Hillary (something that is not a crime, it's done by all in politics, all)


that is, in fact, a crime in this situation.


Then why isn't he in jail? He admitted to everything, and turned over all the documents. Plus there is the nagging issue of the Democrats doing essentially the same thing with the Steele Dossier. They just didn't buy it directly from the Russians, they had a middle man. (perhaps that is the key here?)


He will be in jail. As soon as the Mueller investigation wraps up and trials begin. He didn't turn over all the documents. He turned over what he thought they already had. And continued to lie about who was there until it was revealed.

If there is any justice, someone will be going to jail.... Hillary, Bill, Barack and a list of others... The real big story.


Citing a discussion on ATS, the thesis of which is proven false, does nothing for your imagined case.

See you over there.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Sillyolme

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: fiverx313

originally posted by: network dude
But this is exactly as was described by Trump Jr. Yes, he met her hoping for some dirt on Hillary (something that is not a crime, it's done by all in politics, all)


that is, in fact, a crime in this situation.


Then why isn't he in jail? He admitted to everything, and turned over all the documents. Plus there is the nagging issue of the Democrats doing essentially the same thing with the Steele Dossier. They just didn't buy it directly from the Russians, they had a middle man. (perhaps that is the key here?)


He will be in jail. As soon as the Mueller investigation wraps up and trials begin. He didn't turn over all the documents. He turned over what he thought they already had. And continued to lie about who was there until it was revealed.

If there is any justice, someone will be going to jail.... Hillary, Bill, Barack and a list of others... The real big story.


Citing a discussion on ATS, the thesis of which is proven false, does nothing for your imagined case.

See you over there.


Been there, done that.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Sillyolme

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: fiverx313

originally posted by: network dude
But this is exactly as was described by Trump Jr. Yes, he met her hoping for some dirt on Hillary (something that is not a crime, it's done by all in politics, all)


that is, in fact, a crime in this situation.


Then why isn't he in jail? He admitted to everything, and turned over all the documents. Plus there is the nagging issue of the Democrats doing essentially the same thing with the Steele Dossier. They just didn't buy it directly from the Russians, they had a middle man. (perhaps that is the key here?)


He will be in jail. As soon as the Mueller investigation wraps up and trials begin. He didn't turn over all the documents. He turned over what he thought they already had. And continued to lie about who was there until it was revealed.

If there is any justice, someone will be going to jail.... Hillary, Bill, Barack and a list of others... The real big story.


Citing a discussion on ATS, the thesis of which is proven false, does nothing for your imagined case.

See you over there.


Been there, done that.


lol



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66
Oh?
I must have missed your post where you debunked everything.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Sillyolme

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: fiverx313

originally posted by: network dude
But this is exactly as was described by Trump Jr. Yes, he met her hoping for some dirt on Hillary (something that is not a crime, it's done by all in politics, all)


that is, in fact, a crime in this situation.


Then why isn't he in jail? He admitted to everything, and turned over all the documents. Plus there is the nagging issue of the Democrats doing essentially the same thing with the Steele Dossier. They just didn't buy it directly from the Russians, they had a middle man. (perhaps that is the key here?)


He will be in jail. As soon as the Mueller investigation wraps up and trials begin. He didn't turn over all the documents. He turned over what he thought they already had. And continued to lie about who was there until it was revealed.

If there is any justice, someone will be going to jail.... Hillary, Bill, Barack and a list of others... The real big story.


Citing a discussion on ATS, the thesis of which is proven false, does nothing for your imagined case.

See you over there.


Been there, done that.


lol


Amazingly succinct comment. Anything valid or related to the topic?



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Gryphon66
Oh?
I must have missed your post where you debunked everything.



You probably did, but I know that you and I have reviewed the "Obama/Clinton sold uranium to Russia" fallacy a dozen times or so.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Gryphon66
Oh?
I must have missed your post where you debunked everything.



You probably did, but I know that you and I have reviewed the "Obama/Clinton sold uranium to Russia" fallacy a dozen times or so.

Well, I didn't miss it, because you haven't posted in it.
The FBI is implicated now.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Sillyolme

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: fiverx313

originally posted by: network dude
But this is exactly as was described by Trump Jr. Yes, he met her hoping for some dirt on Hillary (something that is not a crime, it's done by all in politics, all)


that is, in fact, a crime in this situation.


Then why isn't he in jail? He admitted to everything, and turned over all the documents. Plus there is the nagging issue of the Democrats doing essentially the same thing with the Steele Dossier. They just didn't buy it directly from the Russians, they had a middle man. (perhaps that is the key here?)


He will be in jail. As soon as the Mueller investigation wraps up and trials begin. He didn't turn over all the documents. He turned over what he thought they already had. And continued to lie about who was there until it was revealed.

If there is any justice, someone will be going to jail.... Hillary, Bill, Barack and a list of others... The real big story.


Citing a discussion on ATS, the thesis of which is proven false, does nothing for your imagined case.


Proven false How? From my older thread on the matter and straight from a Uranium One Spokesperson:


Asked about that, the commission confirmed that Uranium One has, in fact, shipped yellowcake to Canada even though it does not have an export license. Instead, the transport company doing the shipping, RSB Logistic Services, has the license. A commission spokesman said that “to the best of our knowledge” most of the uranium sent to Canada for processing was returned for use in the United States. A Uranium One spokeswoman, Donna Wichers, said 25 percent had gone to Western Europe and Japan. At the moment, with the uranium market in a downturn, nothing is being shipped from the Wyoming mines.


source

So, Canada, Western Europe and Japan....sounds like 2 named countries and possibly a dozen more with the Western Europe inclusion....



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Gryphon66
Oh?
I must have missed your post where you debunked everything.



You probably did, but I know that you and I have reviewed the "Obama/Clinton sold uranium to Russia" fallacy a dozen times or so.

Well, I didn't miss it, because you haven't posted in it.
The FBI is implicated now.


Really, did I miss that one in the unending cavalcade of anti-Clinton, anti-Obama tripe?

Well, truth to tell, they are all very similar.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:22 AM
link   
a reply to: themold

Actually, it most certainly is a thing of value. Verbal contracts, being enforceable from a legal standpoint (with a few exceptions, which, in case you are wondering, do not cover this situation in the least), means that promising someone something is as important from a legal perspective, as handing them a cheque, or for that matter, a container of currency.

That means that if someone promises someone else some information, one can treat that promise as if the thing it refers to were real, whether it was or not, from a legal standpoint.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

You probably did, but I know that you and I have reviewed the "Obama/Clinton sold uranium to Russia" fallacy a dozen times or so.


If it's a fallacy, you should go over and tell everyone that they are wasting their time.
They seem pretty convinced.
There's sources and everything.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Gryphon66
Oh?
I must have missed your post where you debunked everything.



You probably did, but I know that you and I have reviewed the "Obama/Clinton sold uranium to Russia" fallacy a dozen times or so.

Well, I didn't miss it, because you haven't posted in it.
The FBI is implicated now.


Really, did I miss that one in the unending cavalcade of anti-Clinton, anti-Obama tripe?

Well, truth to tell, they are all very similar.

Here is the link again....
New Thread



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

LOL ... still mining a NYT article from 2015?

So you progressed beyond your excitement that there was yellowcake in Canada (as anyone has known who followed the matter) for processing and you've moved on to one statement in one article from one "spokesperson."

Any corroboration on Wichers' statement from any other source?



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Vasa Croe

LOL ... still mining a NYT article from 2015?

So you progressed beyond your excitement that there was yellowcake in Canada (as anyone has known who followed the matter) for processing and you've moved on to one statement in one article from one "spokesperson."

Any corroboration on Wichers' statement from any other source?





Don't need it. It was proven it left the US. Still ha e yet to see anything from you about it being part of the deal you claim.

But really...youre asking for a second source? I guess at least it isn't the typical unnamed sources cited for Trump stories and fake news.

So...tell me...how far back do we go for a story oh great one? Do we drop it because it didn't happen yesterday? Well surprise...this one just came back to bite TODAY.



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join