NY Times: Trump’s Son Met With Russian Lawyer, Expected Damaging Information on Clinton

Due to the deletion of another thread on this topic, presumably on T&C grounds, here is another try at airing the topic.

www.nytimes.com... n-ab-top-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

President Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., was promised damaging information about Hillary Clinton before agreeing to meet with a Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer during the 2016 campaign, according to three advisers to the White House briefed on the meeting and two others with knowledge of it.

The meeting was also attended by the president’s campaign chairman at the time, Paul J. Manafort, and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Mr. Manafort and Mr. Kushner recently disclosed the meeting, though not its content, in confidential government documents described to The New York Times.

Mr. Trump initially stated that the meeting was primarily about adoptions, but later amended his story after being presented by the NY Times with assertions from anonymous "white house advisors" that ,

President Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., was promised damaging information about Hillary Clinton before agreeing to meet with a Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer during the 2016 campaign, according to three advisers to the White House briefed on the meeting and two others with knowledge of it. . . .

It is unclear whether the Russian lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, actually produced the promised compromising information about Mrs. Clinton. But the people interviewed by The Times about the meeting said the expectation was that she would do so.

Mr. Trump's ammended characterization of the meeting includes a Trumpian reflexive reversal of the accusation in which it is the DNC and Hillary Clinton who are believed or alleged to have been colluding with the Russians.

“After pleasantries were exchanged,” he said, “the woman stated that she had information that individuals connected to Russia were funding the Democratic National Committee and supporting Mrs. Clinton. Her statements were vague, ambiguous and made no sense. No details or supporting information was provided or even offered. It quickly became clear that she had no meaningful information.”

Mr. Trump is then quoted by the NY Times as having made an incredibly damaging statement.

“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,” Mr. Trump said.

Doesn't that amount to an admission that the reason he attended the meeting was to get damaging information from a Russian source, about Hillary Clinton? I think it does.

a reply to: ipsedixit

according to three advisers to the White House briefed on the meeting and two others with knowledge of it.

Yawn.......

a reply to: ipsedixit

Doesn't that amount to an admission that the reason he attended the meeting was to get damaging information from a Russian source, about Hillary Clinton? I think it does.

Even if it did is that a crime?

So like, man. Bill Clinton sold military secrets to China. A meeting with Russia is small potatoes, especially when everyone with a brain knows the person the meeting is about should be in prison.

a reply to: stosh64

He made the statement Saturday or Sunday, if he didn't why hasn't he denied it yet? He outright admitted he went to that meeting to get dirt on HRC.

a reply to: ipsedixit

There were 2 threads started over the weekend on this Nothing Burger. Only one was deleted. Don't need 2 of them. But alas... we now have 2 threads again for this nothing-burger.


Better thread would be about Susan Rice's upcoming testimony, and why Obama ignored Russian hacking.

a reply to: Kali74

He outright admitted he went to that meeting to get dirt on HRC.

Is this a crime?

Please list the laws that were broken from having a meeting.

Also if you're going to write up any charges or hearings or special prosecutors or any other BS better include both Trump Clinton campaigns in them. Because they both met with Russia.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

a reply to: shooterbrody

This is what Meuller's investigation is all about, or rather, "is this an impeachable offense?".

People don't seem to realize that a president doesn't have to commit a crime to be impeached. In Bill Clinton's case, sticking a cigar into someone's primordial palace of pleasure, among other things, was enough to get proceedings started.

Donald Trump Jr. together with people involved in his father's election campaign met a Russian lawyer, expecting to be given information detrimental to the Clinton campaign. It is prima facie evidence that the Trump campaign were colluding with at least one Russian. When Manafort, campaign honcho, saw that the meeting was going to be about adoptions and Magnitsky and not Clinton dirt, it is asserted that he left the meeting.

a reply to: ipsedixit

Are you serious? It's common knowledge that parties who are involved in running for a high government position try to find dirt on their opponents all the time. This is nothing new or even newsworthy. I'm already curious what Schulz and Merkel will come up with to smear the other candidate. It's just politics. Lying and being ruthless is basically in the job description. Though the Leprechaun is pure evil and i hope she and her cronies get what they deserve. This also looks like another distraction from the Comey and Guccifer story that broke not long ago. They are all scared #less and rightfully so. The day of reckoning is upon them. Trump managed to rattle Podesta with only one tweet so something is definitely up.

I guess you missed the correction which said that it had to do with adoption.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Possibly. If he was trying to get his hands on stolen information, yes.

Satire:

a reply to: ipsedixit

And? Everybody knows that Hillary is shady as hell and it's a #ing miracle that she is not in jail right now. The inauguration speech still rings in the back of my head. "The forgotten will no longer be forgotten" has a far deeper meaning than the normal people are aware of. Operation Brokenheart is widly unreported for a reason.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Kali74

He outright admitted he went to that meeting to get dirt on HRC.

Is this a crime?

Is that the bar for right and wrong, crime or not a crime?

Important information regarding this meeting.

Jr. forgot yet another meeting with a Russian agent, along with Manafort and Kushner.

Sr. says he didn't know about the meeting even though the meeting was at Trump Tower and Trump was at Trump Tower during the meeting and he was tweeting about new damaging information about HRC about to be released.

a reply to: Perfectenemy

worst miracle ever

the clintons should have been in prison thirty years ago. It's no miracle, it's survival of the slimiest. They've got friends in high places, and over the years have made a lot of people a lot of money- as well as keeping a lot of dirty people out of prison.
Tit for tat...

a reply to: ipsedixit

Doesn't that amount to an admission that the reason he attended the meeting was to get damaging information from a Russian source, about Hillary Clinton? I think it does.

By all accounts this appears correct. I would have too - after all, this is American politics and the opponent was Hillary - the dodgiest bottom-feeder among all of them. Getting dirt on her, especially undeniably prison-worthy dirt, would be the equivalent of finding the holy grail.

The fact that the potential source was Russian is irrelevant - even with ties to the Kremlin.

Laws broken = zero.

a reply to: ipsedixit

Doesn't that amount to an admission that the reason he attended the meeting was to get damaging information from a Russian source, about Hillary Clinton? I think it does.

Except:

"We have learned from both our own investigation and public reports that the participants in the meeting misrepresented who they were and who they worked for," the spokesman, Mark Corallo, said.

Source: CNN

So, no. It amounts to an admission that the reason he attended the meeting was to get damaging information about Hillary Clinton... they may or may not have known the source was Russian... and even if they knew the source was Russian, they probably had no idea of any connection to the Russian government.

A spokesman for the President's legal team told CNN the meeting could have been an effort to create an appearance of inappropriate connections between Trump family members and Russia.

I don't remember the details, but another ATS member recently posted a connection between the Russian lawyer and the DNC and/or Hillary campaign. So that's actually quite possible... and reasonable.

And, of course, the proof is in the pudding: This thread. Apparently there are those who will assume the worst based on vague anonymous sources and conflate the possible into absolute proof...

originally posted by: lordcomac
a reply to: Perfectenemy

worst miracle ever

the clintons should have been in prison thirty years ago. It's no miracle, it's survival of the slimiest. They've got friends in high places, and over the years have made a lot of people a lot of money- as well as keeping a lot of dirty people out of prison.
Tit for tat...

It's more like blackmailing the right persons. I already pondered the idea that the secret server in the basement had those files on it. That would explain the reluctance of the DNC to hand it over to the FBI and instead hiring an outside security firm to "investigate" the hack. I'm still convinced that Seth Rich was murdered because he stumbled over something much more sinister then just voter fraud manipulation.