Thakkar

11 minutes ago, Silurian said:

 

Why the heck does Kushner still have a security clearance? He failed to disclose any foreign contacts on his security clearance form SF-86. It isn't even known that he updated the SF-86 form since it came out that he had these foreign contacts. At a minimum his security clearance should be suspended until a full review of his background is completed. If it was anyone else, their security clearance would have been yanked. Congressmen and Senators should be demanding it be suspended.

You're asking the wrong question. The real question the failing NYTimes should be asking is, why didn't Obama protect 3 American citizens from being compromised by Russia?!

Not to mention Obama's TOTAL failure to prevent the birth of an idiot son like Don Jr.

Thanks, Obama!

T

3 hours ago, PattayaJames said:

How would they know if foreigners were involved with an anonymous tip off website. Like they would ignore something that was from foreigners.

And did not the dodgy "Trump dossier" come via a similar route? Again, the person employed to do the investigating was getting info from Russians and passing it back.

How would they know if foreigners were involved with an anonymous tip off website. Like they would ignore something that was from foreigners.

Eventually, the same way donations are vetted, many times after the fact, and then returned. In the case of info, it's source would be vetted before using, if for no other reason than the Clinton campaign were skilled political operatives who knew that hasty/wrong/mis use of info or info illegally obtained or maliciously planted could easily come back to bite them. Unlike the Trump campaign, the Clinton campaign was not run by neophytes for a neophyte candidate.

And did not the dodgy "Trump dossier" come via a similar route? Again, the person employed to do the investigating was getting info from Russians and passing it back.

The people who hired the British ex-spy were, initially, Republicans (Americans), Then the DNC (also Americans). Steele did not obtain his info through means that would be illegal in America, such as hacking.

Don Jr. Was ready to get info directly from a foreign person representing a hostile regime that was under US sanctions. Do you see the difference?

Furthermore, the encounter becomes more incriminating when Kushner fails to disclose the meeting as required by law. Especially so when you consider that high level appointees Flynn and Sessions (and Kushner, again) ALSO failed to disclose, as required, their meetings with other Russians. Not to mention numerous denials (which turned out to be lies) by Campaign chairman Manafort about meetings with Russian operatives.

Any one of these by itself, though serious, could be chalked up to forgetfulness, inexperience, excessive enthusiasm in the heat of the campaign—whatever. But ALL of them, and against the background of known Russian attempts to interfere in the elections as determined by all major American intelligence agencies? That's a pretty substantial burger—otherwise the FBI wouldn't have been investigation possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

T

On 6/27/2017 at 10:15 AM, webfact said:

Image of the United States has plunged

I'd argue that it is the image of Republicans that has plunged.

No one can credibly take any Republican moralizing seriously when they continued to support Trump after the release of the Access Hollywood tape.

No one can credibly take Republican declarations of patriotism seriously after they continue to delay and stymie investigations into Russian interference in US elections.

No one can credibly take Republican glorification of the US constitution seriously as they ignore PRESIDENT Trump's incessant attacks on the the Third Estate.

T

4 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Skip to 3:00.  Absolutely unreal...and some are supporting them on this?  Incredible.

With apologies to Coleridge:

Burgers, burgers everywhere, and yet they contend, there's not a bite to eat!

T

11 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

The most hairy part of this exchange comes on Jun3 at 10.36am from rob goldstone….where he references russian government

support…..i find it telling that Don Jr, quite appropriately,  does not reply to this so collusion from his side is not forthcoming.

 

 

Emin is a foreigner whose father is a Putin connected Oligarch. Don saying he will talk direct to Emin about info on Hillary shows an attempt to collude with a foreigner against an American presidential candidate.

If you can find a silver lining in this scenario, you are a more delusional man than me, Ganga Din!

T

2 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

or maybe just iceberg lettuce.

You continue to add ingredients to your "nothing" -> "circumstantial" -> "basis for collusion" -> "folly" to "have to go" burger.

Keep walking backwards into that kitchen where the meat is sizzling away; your actual burger is almost ready to be served.

T

Rosalind Helderman (‪@PostRoz‬)

12/7/17, 04:55

More lawyers: Rob Goldstone hires Bob Gage of New York. The Agalarovs hires Scott Balber.

--

I hear a song coming 

"?lawyers to the right of me

Lawyers to the left?

2 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

35 minutes ago, Thakkar said:

First it was a "nothing burger"

Then a "circumstantial burger"

Now "just a basis for collusion, but no actual collusion"

 

What I see is you walking backwards into a kitchen stacked high with juicy burgers.

 

T

seems more like all sizzle but no steak at this point. 

 

it was a folly on trump jr's part to take that meeting….I would have just said if you have something send it to the media .

 

now he will probably have to go….which can only be good….let him go back to taking care of trump inc in new york.

From "nothing" to "circumstantial" to "basis for collusion" to "folly" to "have to go"

Keep walking.

T

1 minute ago, janclaes47 said:

 

I'm following the story, so you say that the project the super PAC set up is not illegal then? Everyone know that super PAC's are set up by the presidential candidate, therefore represent the presidential candidate.

 

Same same but different.

Again, even if the campaign directly offered rewards for info, it would not be illegal unless foreigners were involved.

In this case, it wasn't the campaign, it was the Super PAC. By law, PACs cannot corordinate with campaigns. This Chinese Wall is flimsy and a joke, but that's the fault of the Republicans who set it up. Take up your complaints with them. The Clinton campaign was following the rules. The Trump campaign, by talking to foreigners, wasn't.

T

22 minutes ago, janclaes47 said:

So it is illegal for the Trump campaign but not for the Clinton campaign.

 

Got it now.

 

 

it was a person who contacted a Super PAC to offer rewards No it was not, it was the Super PAC creating the project

 

It is however CLEARLY illegal to work/attempt to work/work unsuccessfully with any foreigners against your American political opponent. Where did they work together? They listened to what the person had to offer, and when it waqs clear she didn't have to offer anything of value it was ended.

Is it illegal to listen to what someone has to say?

 

 

Are you even following the story? The Don Jr. emails reveal that he knew prior to the meeting that it was a meeting with a foreigner who had dirt on Clinton. Agreeing to such a meeting with a foreigner with regard to an on going American election in which you have a vested interest is attempted collusion. THAT is already illegal.

Furthermore, we only have the guilty party's say-so that nothing came of that meeting.

T

33 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

sounds to me like most of you should be on the prosecuting team…..what you have set up here is the basis for collusion….whether any actual collusion took place remains to be seen. Keep fanning the nothing burger grill.

First it was a "nothing burger"

Then a "circumstantial burger"

Now "just a basis for collusion, but no actual collusion"

What I see is you walking backwards into a kitchen stacked high with juicy burgers.

T

1 hour ago, Silurian said:

 

Oh, the defense is starting already. The spin on this is trying to move the story to be about Hillary. It will be shown that Don Jr. was trying to protect the USA from evil Hillary. Don Jr. wanted to help the US by finding out if Hillary was either a Russian spy or had illegal Russian dealings. This story will be spun several ways (as the administration always does) until the water is so muddied that nothing makes sense.

 

Don Jr. - Protector of the USA against the evil that is Hillary! Oh yeah...right.

 

It is a tried and true tactic perfected by Putin in Russia when it became clear that, in the modern connected world, news suppression wasn't enough. When you can't win an argument, simply throw dirt hither and thither until the waters become so muddied that people are turned off by the whole business of discussing the issue.

A few years ago, I read a lengthy article (maybe in The Guardian?) that detailed how the Putin propaganda machine implemented such plans.

T

50 minutes ago, PattayaJames said:

Meeting someone who says they have info on your opponent in politics is not a crime. Thus far that is all we have here, and all there looks to be.

The Clinton campaign were offering cash rewards for dirt on Trump.

1. Not illegal for a campaign to offer reward for info on your opponents. Many campaigns do so openly.
2. It wasn't the Clinton Campaign that offered the rewards, it was a person who contacted a Super PAC to offer rewards.
3. You can argue that Super PACs are a sleazy business and I agree. Please take it up with the Republicans, who, despite opposition from many Democrats, passed the laws allowing Super PACs
4. Once Super PACs were made legal, everyone had to play by the new rules, or be thrown by the wayside.

It is however CLEARLY illegal to work/attempt to work/work unsuccessfully with any foreigners against your American political opponent. There is no ambiguity.

T

1 hour ago, JHolmesJr said:

Funny thing is, I just heard MSNBC say that Donald Jr provided those emails of his own volition….if so, Im not sure why he would provide the rope to hang himself….doesnt sound like the burger we're all waiting for.

It must be noted that Don Jr. released these messages minutes before the New York Times published a report after examining the same emails. CNN’s Brian Stelter revealed that Don Jr. pulled a sneaky trick on the NY Times — he requested time “to comment … and then pre-empted us.”

http://uproxx.com/news/don-jr-trump-emails-clinton-dirt/2/

It seems appropriate to share a social media post purportedly by someone who went to college with Trump Jr.

If genuine*, it gives a bit of insight into Jr., the father and their relationship.

From twitter:

*seems to be genuine, because it's been up for a long time and, as far as I can tell, no one's credibly disputed it. Perhaps someone on TV can.

9 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

 

so now we're sentencing people on how things look, not on credible evidence…..lol

Who's sentencing him? I'm not, are you?

Does he, by his behavior make himself look guilty?

I think so.

T

5 minutes ago, JHolmesJr said:

New discovery...only guilty people appoint lawyers

Sure does look guilty when first you fail to report (as Kushner failed), then deny, then deflect, then, when that doesn't work, get a lawyer.

T

8 minutes ago, jb61 said:

A tempest in a tea pot.

yaaaaawnnnnnnnnnn

Hence the reasonable reaction of first denying, then deflecting, then quickly lawyering up.

T

4 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Don't bet the house on it. 

He's not a traditional republican or a traditional anything, but he took over the republican party in a hostile takeover. 

If he really cared about health care for the poor and sick, he wouldn't be enthusiastically supporting the pile of crapola that is being cooked up as trumpcare. 

If that fails, then we get into an unknown zone, but to think he's going to ally with Bernie Sanders (Crazy Bernie to him) is a bridge too far. 

 

It wasn't so much a hostile takeover as deftly putting on the garments the Republicans had spent decades preparing. He took their dog whistles, turned it into a vuvuzella and blew it loudly. When it worked, they had no choice but to follow like the children of Hamlin.

It is precisely because Trump doesn't care that he can say and do whatever he thinks will work for him IN THE MOMENT. He won't support universal healthcare because it's the right thing to do, but because he thinks it'll work to get him out of his current hole.

Not saying it's likely, just that I wouldn't rule it out. I certainly wouldn't bet the house on it though. I'm not averse to putting down a few hundred bucks on some pretty long odds.

T

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

I've mentioned this a number of times before. Yes, he could do that and it would turn things around. But he won't. No way. Not plausible even in trump bizarro world which is where we're at now. 

To quote the generic expert witness from a thousand courtroom dramas:

"Anything's possible. But is it plausible? Who knows?"

T

26 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

28 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

...

 

When Mr Trump starts talking about real issues and causes and real solutions then he will get respect and praise.

Never then.

I really don't understand your optimism that there will ever be a WHEN in this case. 

Here's a plausible scenario. Since Trump is all about himself, has no ideology beyond "winning" and has no qualms about turning on a dime to contradict himself or throwing whoever he needs to under the bus:

He announces he is in favor of repealing Obamacare and replacing it with single payer universal healthcare. "I've said it before: I'm gonna take care of everyone"

Boom! 65% approval ratings right away. Dems signal full support. GOP hates him, but don't know how to oppose this without risking complete bloodbath in the midterms. For this to work, Trump's timing has to be just right.

For the next few months, everyone but Mueller forgets about "that Russia thing"

In this bizzaro world we're living in, that doesn't seem so far fetched.

T

1 minute ago, sanemax said:

 

   Donald is a human and that is what people do

It was a satirical video , Youtube and face book is full of similar videos

It could be said that the POTUS should not act in such a common way

Maybe he should sit on his perch , keeping his normal self to himself and  getting his publicists  to portray himself as something that he isnt

Yes. Especially if what he is, is a vengeful, indecorous, imbecilic buffoon.

T

40 minutes ago, sanemax said:

You are suggesting that Polands first Lady was worried that Trump would sexually assault her and thats why She didnt go close to him ?

   You are suggesting it wasnt a personal snub, She was avoiding the possibility of Trump sexually assaulting her ?

    As She did offer her hand to Trump a few seconds later , its quite clear that the possibilities that you gave are very unlikely, bordering on the absurd

We've learned that, with this president, any absurdity is possible: put a large stack of contentless folders on a table and declare that they prove you've disassociated yourself from all Trump businesses. End of story and no supporter or Republican questions it.

Or, since you seem to have an eye for absurdities, how's this:

A sitting president tweeting a vid of himself bashing a prominent representative of the Third Estate to his tens of millions of followers knowing that it would be picked up by every major news outlet.*

My speculation, while absurd on the face of it, is merely a line item on a litany of absurdities when it comes to President Trump.

T

* bringing us neatly back on topic.