Why Trump Jr didn't commit a crime

originally posted by: icanteven

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: icanteven

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: icanteven

I have seen the same email as you. The difference is, I don't believe Trump Jr.'s story and you do.

What is to believe or not to believe here? Trump Jr. was told that a person had info on criminal/dirty deals that Hillary had been doing... It seems the other person was told a different story for the meeting that had nothing to do with Hillary. When they finally met after a few minutes they realized they both were duped, as to why who knows..

What more is there to see in all this? Why would it be wrong to get factual information on what would have been criminal actions? This all seems like the discovery is worst than the action discovered. Like the DNC emails, it wasn't important that they were true and correct, it spin was that the discovery was the worst part... In both cases the left makes the bad dealings information as OK, but it should never be discovered in the first place.

Ah, so you do have some hard evidence that backs up Trump Jr's story? By all means, please do post it. I would love to see it since the only thing we have to go by is the email thread. Some great evidence would be a follow up email that describes this useless meeting and what was discussed.

The interview with Trump Jr. on Hannity is just hearsay. Of course he's going to say he was innocent.

The only position I'm arguing is about Trump Jr's state of mind, and the only evidence we have of that is the email exchange.

No hard evidence is required for an assumption of innocence.
The burden of proof is on you if you want to convince someone who does not share your belief that a crime was committed.

I don't know if a crime was committed, nor do you. There is an investigation, though. At the end of all this, we will both know. If there is no crime, then Trump Jr. and the whole circus will be vindicated. If the investigation results in charges being filed against Trump, then Trump Jr.'s email shows a corrupt state of mind.

That's what I'm discussing: What may come next. I don't really care what you think about guilt or innocence. I'm seeing where the trail leads. Based on where the trail leads, the email will either sink or become part of a larger case.

That's it. It's all we know. We can try to anticipate moves of the individual players, but you nor I don't have some kind of inside track to the proceedings. Well, you might, but I sure don't.

Speculation is all fine, of course, but when it's pushed in the media it is nothing more than propaganda for the masses.
What we know today makes it obvious that nothing even unusual happened.
We could all speculate on every meeting and fantasise about criminality... but it only becomes interesting when evidence of a crime surfaces.

Think about this... if DTJ and the wider campaign was involved in some conspiracy with Russians, why would he be saying the things he did on an email trail? The email trail actually suggests no collusion at all going on - at least not that DTJ knew about.

a reply to: RickyD

Hey speaking of vehicle repair. That's a service right? One that has value for which your mechanic will bill you and which you will pay. Just making sure we can all agree that things that are not tangible like a service still have an implied value. Labor doesn't come in a box but it sure has a price tag. .

You are the one who said " in my opinion".

originally posted by: icanteven

Ah, so you do have some hard evidence that backs up Trump Jr's story? By all means, please do post it. I would love to see it since the only thing we have to go by is the email thread. Some great evidence would be a follow up email that describes this useless meeting and what was discussed.

Isn't it all hearsay anyways?

The only position I'm arguing is about Trump Jr's state of mind, and the only evidence we have of that is the email exchange.

State of mind? Like what, that someone may have offered real INCRIMINATING evidence on Hillary and Trump Jr would love to get his hands on it, him and 10,000 reporters, and millions of others too? We are not talking about fake evidence, but real credible evidence of wrong doing by Hillary. Who would not want to get that? Oh ya..the left would want to keep anything like that secret...lol

The proof is there was nothing in the end since Trump Jr, never had anything to expose, and never went down the path to even suggest he had something...once again, nothing was received or used real or fake.

a reply to: UKTruth

Keep repeating it.
There was no crime there was no crime.
Who knows maybe you can chant it into being true.

a reply to: Xtrozero

The emails are crystal clear. No need for "seems to be" in the equation.
They said we have this and trump said great. Let's meet.

originally posted by: Sillyolme

The emails are crystal clear. No need for "seems to be" in the equation.
They said we have this and trump said great. Let's meet.

Yes...we have real incriminating evidence of Hillary dirty dealings... Is that not something we all would not want to see... I'm not sure of your point, are you suggesting that Trump Jr actually got real evidence and is sitting on it?

a reply to: RickyD

How does it seem that way?

a reply to: dasman888

Hate crimes carry different penalties than regular murder so I'd say there's a difference and thought crimes are real.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: RickyD

Hey speaking of vehicle repair. That's a service right? One that has value for which your mechanic will bill you and which you will pay. Just making sure we can all agree that things that are not tangible like a service still have an implied value. Labor doesn't come in a box but it sure has a price tag. .

You are the one who said " in my opinion".

source 1 court case
source 1 person charged for this

even after it has been explained to you ; you just do not understand
it is tragic

a reply to: Xtrozero

No the emails are not hearsay. The emails are hard evidence. They can be sourced.

The email is evidence of Trump Jr's state of mind. Maybe not to you, though, but that doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

However, in the context of a case, it would be presented as evidence that Trump Jr. was corrupted as part of the conspiracy. Ergo, his actions taken while said conspiracy is happening are material to the case. Even if his meeting was not criminal in the slightest, the email could still be used to construe state of mind.

originally posted by: icanteven
The email is evidence of Trump Jr's state of mind. Maybe not to you, though, but that doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

However, in the context of a case, it would be presented as evidence that Trump Jr. was corrupted as part of the conspiracy. Ergo, his actions taken while said conspiracy is happening are material to the case. Even if his meeting was not criminal in the slightest, the email could still be used to construe state of mind.

State of mind ???
You must have watched Minority Report recently.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Right and wiki leaks never happened and the social media meme attack never happened.
Plenty happened and was released. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is out of the DNC because of it.
Let's not pretend that that whole mess last summer never happened.
It did.
That was all Russia. It was all in an effort to assist trump and trump knew they were doing it from early June of last year. And denied it at every turn insisting it was a made up story ( this RUSHER thing) when he knew for a fact that it was not a made up thing.

a reply to: Xtrozero

No you don't. Where is it? Better send it to the FBI and congress cuz they missed it.

And I think you have a comprehension issue. Where did I say trump jr has evidence he's sitting on?

originally posted by: icanteven

originally posted by: mkultra11

originally posted by: icanteven

originally posted by: allsee4eye
Trump Jr didn't know who he was meeting with. Natalia didn't know who she was meeting with. They were set up by Rod Goldstone. Rod Goldstone told Trump Jr the person he meets has info on Hillary. Rod Goldstone told Natalia to talk about adoption with the person she meets. Neither Trump Jr or Natalia communicated with each other prior to the meeting, so there cannot be a conspiracy. As for this law, Trump Jr didn't know anything about Natalia, much less she is a Russian national, so he could not have possibly been soliciting things of values from her.

Someone just pointed it out, but it's immaterial if Trump Jr. didn't know who he was meeting with or the topic of the meeting. It's not just any meeting and email exchange. The chain of events was started by an acquaintance of Jr.'s who said he knows an attorney highly connected to Russian officials, and she has some damaging intel on Hillary Clinton. Trump Jr. then shared his affection for the invitation to meet.

If criminal charges get filed, Trump Jr. will fail the mens rea test by his own admission. Mens rea means "the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime, as opposed to the action or conduct of the accused." It doesn't get any more cut and dry than a Russian-government-connected figure promising to give damaging information to an eager Trump Jr.

There is a difference. First, there's no crime. Second, the entire meeting was under false pretenses.

Now, I don't expect an honest answer but:

If he willingly solicited information to damage Hillary through a foreign national whose sources openly admit are Russian intel and other Kremlin associates - would he be guilty of something such as treason or collusion?

In my post, I said if THERE IS A CRIME then this email exchange gives insight into Trump Jr.'s mind. Any prosecutor worth his salt would bring in the email as part of a case. That's the whole idea of mens rea. In other words, an email or a meeting may not be a criminal act unto itself, and thank goodness for that. But an action taken -- in this case, the action is enthusiastically agreeing to meet to learn damaging intelligence provided from a figure connected to the Russian government -- the email becomes part of the record of an overall conspiracy.

There is a special prosecutor looking into this. It's yet to be seen if charges will get filed. But if charges do get filed, Trump Jr. just screwed the pooch with his "transparency".

So the answer to your question is "sort of". If a charge is made against the Trump campaign, then Trump Jr. could be charged as part of the conspiracy due his corrupt state of mind (as proven in black and white in email).

However, what Trump Jr. did was not against the law. His intention of obtaining damaging political information is not against the law. The entire meeting in itself raises more questions to the contrary. Such as her connection to FusionGPS and her association with Obama's Russia diplomat, seen with 8 days after trying to arrange the meeting.

Then onto FusionGPS, the Democratic opposition research firm and the debunked and unverified "Steele Dossier", which was solicited by Never Trumpers and Hillary supporting Democrats (bolstered by Hillary herself planting the collusion narrative in the debates) to bolster a false narrative for opposition research. Comey also used the dossier as a "roadmap" the FBI investigation. Steele openly admitted that his sources for the Dossier contain:

"a senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure”
“a former top level intelligence officer still active inside the Kremlin”
"a senior Kremlin official”
“senior Russian government official.”

Here we have admitted sources from the Kremlin itself and Russian intel whom have provided "info" to Steele for his dossier, used by the Hillary campaign to damage Trump, the media and the FBI (as a road map). So who is colluding with Russian with full solicitation and intent to damage another political candidate. Who is doing Russia intel's bidding and trying to subvert our democracy. Our own FBI actually used Russian intel to investigate a duly elected president.

If Trump's team did any of the above it would be an entirely different story. So we are led to believe this little Trump Jr. meeting with this attorney is somehow proof of collusion mens rea? A legal joke.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Correct because unlike a lot of people you included I try to be upfront about opinion vs fact. The term value has a common definition that we use everyday and would apply to the vehicle service. The other being the legal definition which would only apply to the statute the definition is attached to. That's where we have our disconnect...

a reply to: Sillyolme

One party reached out about adoption the other was told about opposition Intel...When they got together each had a different agenda and the meeting abruptly adjourned. That's how.

originally posted by: Sillyolme

No the emails are not hearsay. The emails are hard evidence. They can be sourced.

Hard evidence of what? That he would love to see credible evidence on Hillary's dirty dealings? Am I missing something here? I think we can all agree on the emails, what more is there after that? As I said before, Trump Jr, 10,000 news people and millions of Americans would all love to see such evidence, don't you think?

originally posted by: mkultra11

originally posted by: icanteven

originally posted by: mkultra11

originally posted by: icanteven

originally posted by: allsee4eye
Trump Jr didn't know who he was meeting with. Natalia didn't know who she was meeting with. They were set up by Rod Goldstone. Rod Goldstone told Trump Jr the person he meets has info on Hillary. Rod Goldstone told Natalia to talk about adoption with the person she meets. Neither Trump Jr or Natalia communicated with each other prior to the meeting, so there cannot be a conspiracy. As for this law, Trump Jr didn't know anything about Natalia, much less she is a Russian national, so he could not have possibly been soliciting things of values from her.

Someone just pointed it out, but it's immaterial if Trump Jr. didn't know who he was meeting with or the topic of the meeting. It's not just any meeting and email exchange. The chain of events was started by an acquaintance of Jr.'s who said he knows an attorney highly connected to Russian officials, and she has some damaging intel on Hillary Clinton. Trump Jr. then shared his affection for the invitation to meet.

If criminal charges get filed, Trump Jr. will fail the mens rea test by his own admission. Mens rea means "the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime, as opposed to the action or conduct of the accused." It doesn't get any more cut and dry than a Russian-government-connected figure promising to give damaging information to an eager Trump Jr.

There is a difference. First, there's no crime. Second, the entire meeting was under false pretenses.

Now, I don't expect an honest answer but:

If he willingly solicited information to damage Hillary through a foreign national whose sources openly admit are Russian intel and other Kremlin associates - would he be guilty of something such as treason or collusion?

In my post, I said if THERE IS A CRIME then this email exchange gives insight into Trump Jr.'s mind. Any prosecutor worth his salt would bring in the email as part of a case. That's the whole idea of mens rea. In other words, an email or a meeting may not be a criminal act unto itself, and thank goodness for that. But an action taken -- in this case, the action is enthusiastically agreeing to meet to learn damaging intelligence provided from a figure connected to the Russian government -- the email becomes part of the record of an overall conspiracy.

There is a special prosecutor looking into this. It's yet to be seen if charges will get filed. But if charges do get filed, Trump Jr. just screwed the pooch with his "transparency".

So the answer to your question is "sort of". If a charge is made against the Trump campaign, then Trump Jr. could be charged as part of the conspiracy due his corrupt state of mind (as proven in black and white in email).

However, what Trump Jr. did was not against the law. His intention of obtaining damaging political information is not against the law. The entire meeting in itself raises more questions to the contrary. Such as her connection to FusionGPS and her association with Obama's Russia diplomat, seen with 8 days after trying to arrange the meeting.

Then onto FusionGPS, the Democratic opposition research firm and the debunked and unverified "Steele Dossier", which was solicited by Never Trumpers and Hillary supporting Democrats (bolstered by Hillary herself planting the collusion narrative in the debates) to bolster a false narrative for opposition research. Comey also used the dossier as a "roadmap" the FBI investigation. Steele openly admitted that his sources for the Dossier contain:

"a senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure”
“a former top level intelligence officer still active inside the Kremlin”
"a senior Kremlin official”
“senior Russian government official.”

Here we have admitted sources from the Kremlin itself and Russian intel whom have provided "info" to Steele for his dossier, used by the Hillary campaign to damage Trump, the media and the FBI (as a road map). So who is colluding with Russian with full solicitation and intent to damage another political candidate. Who is doing Russia intel's bidding and trying to subvert our democracy. Our own FBI actually used Russian intel to investigate a duly elected president.

If Trump's team did any of the above it would be an entirely different story. So we are led to believe this little Trump Jr. meeting with this attorney is somehow proof of collusion mens rea? A legal joke.

It sounds like you have it all figured out. There's no need to discuss. Could you please share your theory with Mueller so he can get on with closing down the investigation? We're all pretty sick of hearing about politics day in and day out, so this would be a good deed by you.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: mkultra11

The meeting was to exchange information and promise action later. What false pretenses?
Please... the intent is crystal clear. Not that I believe it but it doesn't matter if they claim they got nothing. They sure intended to get something.
Personally I think the meeting produced exactly what they had hoped for.

There had to be emails following up this meeting.

Where are the emails saying WTF? Where are the emails saying HEY your Russian buddy didn't deliver the goods? Where is the email questioning the source or asking what went wrong?
If they existed (like the tapes supporting trumps version of certain conversations) we would already have them. We don't. Because there are no emails showing this. There is no email saying what the hell happened and you just know there would be. These guys didn't take a meeting get nothing and just say oh well guess goldstone was mistaken... not in this lifetime...

It was based on a false pretense. He was mislead to believe he would get some information to politically damage his opponent, which he is absolutely entitled to do. The meeting wasn't what it was introduced as. Therefore, you must question why would they lie to get the meeting? Was it a set-up or a bait and switch for this attorney to get her adoption issue noticed? Who knows, but there was nothing wrong with what he did. By the way, the story was illegally leaked to the Times as well. It could have happened anytime in the past year and never did because it's a desperate maneuver. The timing was to outshine the new revelations in the Comey memos. That's how the media operates. It's common knowledge by now.

There's no follow e-mails because it was a waste of time. A nothing burger. They are busy people and moved on to whatever else they needed to focus on.