THE TRIGGERING: Donald Trump Jr Destroys the "Russian Narrative" Narrative, Triggers Trumpkins

How did Sexton know about these emails a year ago?

Sexton whining about chasing this story for a year seems like strong evidence that Obama unmasked these communications a year ago and colluded with the press in a conspiracy to help Hillary.

a reply to: Perfectenemy

Yeah that's why Hillary is peacefully enjoying retirement and not in jail.
Idiotic ideas.
She's been investigated every way but inside out and nine ways to Sunday.
So has her husband. So has her organization.
Talk about a yawn situation. It couldn't get any more boring.

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: UKTruth

But but but Clinton!!.
Address the lies from the presidents son.

No, I am too busy laughing at the hypocrisy and faux outrage because liberals lost an election

a reply to: UKTruth

Why do you keep making this frankly moronic assumption that if Clinton was also colluding with foreign states then that means it was ok for Trump to do the same?

Do you not see the massive flaw in your logic hear.

Trump is the one who is POTUS, his administration is the one that is being discussed, his is the administration that is being accused of breaking the US Code though its actions. All this stuff about Clinton is bollocks, if she does wrong, she should be punished under the law, but so should those in the Trump camp who have done the same.

Please stop with this stupid argument that because Clinton might have done it then its ok for Trump to do it to.

Thats like saying its ok to go stealing because other people do it, utterly stupid.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Sillyolme

Here's the big event that did her the most harm:

Now THAT was funny.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

So then you're saying Hillary should be locked up over that China meeting?

a reply to: FauxMulder

Yeah so?

originally posted by: UKTruth
Lol just watched CNN and even their legal expert had to almost laugh at the suggestions a crime was committed... whilst the anchor was musing over the death penalty

So true. The news articles are quoting the Clintons' former lawyer, presumably because that's the only guy with legal credentials who was willing to say there might be something to this. Others are saying Trump Jr. probably didn't break any law. Because trying to spin information into "something of value" is a stretch, and any real lawyer knows this.

A nonpartisan watch group has filed an ethics complaint with the FEC, which is fair enough.

Of course there's also Tim Kaine, who apparently stopped taking his meds long enough to give one of his trademark histrionic over-the-top comments: "This is a TREASON investigation" (No, it's not. Now, let the nice gentlemen slip this straitjacket on you and take you back to your padded cell.)

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: UKTruth

If the Clinton camp is also guilty of this then they should be subject to the same scrutiny as Trump, only differences is that with Trump as POTUS the political ramifications are much more severe.

You seem to have this idea that those of us who oppose Trump are pro-hillary, nothing could be further from the truth.

Neither are guilty of anything in these cases other than using non American sources for opposition research - a common practice.
I guess the closest to a real issue is the Democrats actually paying a Russian agent to do their opposition research.

so why has trump spent over a year denying any russian collusion and why have his supporters spent over a year denying russian collusion?

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: UKTruth

Why do you keep making this frankly moronic assumption that if Clinton was also colluding with foreign states then that means it was ok for Trump to do the same?

Do you not see the massive flaw in your logic hear.

Trump is the one who is POTUS, his administration is the one that is being discussed, his is the administration that is being accused of breaking the US Code though its actions. All this stuff about Clinton is bollocks, if she does wrong, she should be punished under the law, but so should those in the Trump camp who have done the same.

Please stop with this stupid argument that because Clinton might have done it then its ok for Trump to do it to.

Thats like saying its ok to go stealing because other people do it, utterly stupid.

You missed the point - there are no laws broken in the foreign discussions had by either party (at least the ones we know about). It's fun to highlight the hypocrisy.
If and when there is any information on any crime or anything unusual happening, do let me know.

originally posted by: growler

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: UKTruth

If the Clinton camp is also guilty of this then they should be subject to the same scrutiny as Trump, only differences is that with Trump as POTUS the political ramifications are much more severe.

You seem to have this idea that those of us who oppose Trump are pro-hillary, nothing could be further from the truth.

Neither are guilty of anything in these cases other than using non American sources for opposition research - a common practice.
I guess the closest to a real issue is the Democrats actually paying a Russian agent to do their opposition research.

so why has trump spent over a year denying any russian collusion and why have his supporters spent over a year denying russian collusion?

Because there is no collusion. Having a meeting about opposition research is not colluding. "Collusion" is the new liberal buzzword and label they hope to use to make a meeting seem somehow underhand.

What collusion do you think happened here?

All deflection, redirection
and genuflection to King Drump the 1st aside

can you guys not get back to the facts

Fact:

Rob Goldstone
told Trump the Younger that
“the crown prosecutor of Russia” had 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”.

“This is obviously very high level and sensitive information
but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr Trump.”

Seventeen minutes later,
Trump the Younger welcomes this with the reply:
“If it’s what you say, I love it, especially later in the summer.”

Thus setting the scene for the june 2016 meeting

Is that clear ? any questions ?

a reply to: UKTruth

Hey when you thanked Russia the day Trump won you were right they needed thanking lol.

a reply to: RickyD

Can you please show the class the definition of contribution and value in a legal sense so we can actually determine if this even counts?

ATS is not a prosecutor, nor a grand jury. We are only operating as influencers of public opinion. In the realm of public opinion, I offer this:

Anything of Value Law and Legal Definition

Anything of value refers to any goods that have a certain utility to the recipient that is real and that is ordinarily not given away free but is purchased.

In the realm of common sense(as available to most people), certain utility would include the ability to totally smear and/or embarrass hugely and/or blackmail, a political opponent (such as Hillary Clinton).

ordinarily not given away free but is purchased, I have never hired Opposition research companies, however, common sense would indicate that it would be well beyond my means to do so, that's quite a bit of money $10,000s.

The woman in question was not looking for money, but rather, a hint that the sanctions which named her specifically be lifted, should Trump win. Plus, as lobbyist for the lifting of those sanctions, she would probably receive bigtime commission from her clients(Russian state and oligarchs).

a reply to: RazorV66

Nope it's called campaign contributions by a foreign nation from a foreign government which also proves they all knew Russia was trying to help them very very early in the game. Before the wiki leaks release. And they've been denying it since last year.

Mr trump sure has a hard time getting mad at them or being stern with them.
He almost seems...dare I say it...afraid of Putin.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

So then you're saying Hillary should be locked up over that China meeting?

It is my understanding that under the Bipartisan Campaign reform act it is illegal for a campaign to enter into public office to receive anything of value from a foreign state. If Hilary has done that then she should be punished.

If the Russian government or the Chinese for that matter in the case of Clinton spent money to obtain information that was then passed onto and benefited any presidential candidate then I think that would meet the criteria of being of "value" and as such if it can then also be proven the candidate knew of this then that candidate should be punished under the law.

I think this is another part of the problem, its going to be very difficult to prove that collusion if it took place was illegal however its not so much a case of legality but rather Trust. If it is proven that Trump colluded with the Russians then it will be bigger than the Lewinsky affair in my view and as such it paves the path to impeachment.

originally posted by: Damiel
All deflection, redirection
and genuflection to King Drump the 1st aside

can you guys not get back to the facts

Fact:

Rob Goldstone
told Trump the Younger that
“the crown prosecutor of Russia” had 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”.

“This is obviously very high level and sensitive information
but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr Trump.”

Seventeen minutes later,
Trump the Younger welcomes this with the reply:
“If it’s what you say, I love it, especially later in the summer.”

Thus setting the scene for the june 2016 meeting

Is that clear ? any questions ?

Yes perfectly.

"crown prosecutor of Russia"

who is that? So what?

“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”.

So what?

“If it’s what you say, I love it, especially later in the summer.”

yeah.. so? I'd love it too if I was getting some useful information on an opponent.

Anything strange or startling you want us to understand?

a reply to: Perfectenemy

Bloop bloop bloop

The sinking ship.

Turn on your tv.

Or you know what ever mothership you connect with.

originally posted by: growler

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: UKTruth

If the Clinton camp is also guilty of this then they should be subject to the same scrutiny as Trump, only differences is that with Trump as POTUS the political ramifications are much more severe.

You seem to have this idea that those of us who oppose Trump are pro-hillary, nothing could be further from the truth.

Neither are guilty of anything in these cases other than using non American sources for opposition research - a common practice.
I guess the closest to a real issue is the Democrats actually paying a Russian agent to do their opposition research.

so why has trump spent over a year denying any russian collusion and why have his supporters spent over a year denying russian collusion?

Because there is no Russian collusion. A Russian said she had evidence of criminal wrongdoing by the DNC. Trump Jr. met with her, and it turned out to be a bait-and-switch, with no such evidence being offered. The meeting ended.

That's not collusion.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Opposition research is worse than lying under oath? Wow, interesting concept.

I guess Washington will have to change completely from the last 50+ years. Face up to the reality that the Trump campaign dug the dirt on Hillary, beat her at her own game, and wiped the floor with her in the election.