Cont: All things Trump + Russia Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
acbytesla said:
Dershowitz is is a publicity whore and a tool. He'd sell his mother if the price was right. He certainly isn't on the top level of talking heads. He's grossly overrated as a legal mind. He was talking out his ass when he was suggesting that Amanda Knox was guilty. He didn't have a clue about the case. He backtracked on that eventually. The man is totally lacking in integrity and like Trump is far more interested in promoting himself than offering any honest legal opinion.
Click to expand...

Which is why it is a good indicator when he changes his tune that the situation has escalated.
 
From my worm's eye view, Richard Painter seems pretty credible

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli...on-donald-trump-jr-emails-russians-disturbing

I called up Painter on Tuesday night to delve deeper into why he thinks that, and if the email disclosures had changed his opinions or strengthened them. Opposition research on candidates, Painter explained to me, should never extend to working with foreign powers. “Everybody gets opposition research,” says Painter, “just like everybody gets campaign contributions. But we don't get either one from foreign nationals.”
Click to expand...

Richard Painter

Well, [we have an] understanding of the meaning of the word "treason" as betraying your own country. In the United States, our laws deal with treason in different ways depending on the circumstances. If there's a declared war, we have a separate treason statute, which allows for prosecutions of persons who give comfort to the enemy. But that statute is very rarely used outside the context of declared war.

During the Cold War, and many our most recent wars, we would deal with acts that would constitute treason, or near treason, through other statutes, such as the espionage statute, statutes prohibiting computer crimes, including computer hacking, which is what clearly happened here with the Russians, and also receipt of documents stolen from computers or otherwise, [as well as] conspiracy statutes, and statutes prohibiting false statements to the government. And then also our campaign laws, which prohibit foreign governments from giving financial or other assistance to American political campaigns.
Click to expand...
... continues
 
Hannity Blames Obama And Blackmail For Trump Jr's Meeting With The Russians
HANNITY: Apparently, the Russian lawyer that didn’t give the Trump organization any information whatsoever, according to all these reports, was allowed into the U.S. because of Barack Obama, and that the meeting was set up under false pretenses....

SEKULOW: So, here’s what we should all be asking, the meeting between Donald Trump Jr. and an individual who is a Russian lawyer is not a crime. That’s not—there’s no illegality to that, that’s number one. ...
Click to expand...

So which is it, the Russian attorney only wanted to talk about adoptions, or she was a Kremlin operative that Obama let in the country?

Hannity and Sekulow would have it both ways.
 
jimbob said:
From my worm's eye view, Richard Painter seems pretty credible

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli...on-donald-trump-jr-emails-russians-disturbing



... continues
Click to expand...

I liked this very obvious one

And then, third, we have a significant number of inconsistencies in the statements that have been made by Donald Trump Jr., and a number of other people, about their contacts with the Russians. And anyone who has made false statements to the United States government about their contacts with the Russians would be guilty of making false statements, under the false statement statute, 18, United States Code 1001.
Click to expand...
 
BobTheCoward said:
Which is why it is a good indicator when he changes his tune that the situation has escalated.
Click to expand...

Huh?


From my view. Trump is clearly guilty of obstruction. It's not even close any more. There is too much there there. That said, I don't think there is a chance in hell he is prosecuted or impeached for this as long as the GOP controls the House. This is a hell of a lot more than what they had on Nixon.

They are going to have to show Trump giving Putin a blow job before people turn against him.
 
Dershowitz is just trying to inject himself into the news cycle, like Gingrich. His position on what was or was not criminal isn't credible.

Heard a good analysis on CNN interviewing people with expertise on how Russia recruits people. It fit the Jr meeting picture perfectly.

FBI documents detail how the Russians try to recruit spies
There is no doubt that the rise of information warfare and cyberespionage has changed the spy game in the years since the Cold War. But the playbook on how to target, recruit and manipulate sources has generally stayed the same.
Click to expand...

And Jr was a perfect dupe. An ex-CIA officer: the Trump Jr. meeting shows how the Russians exploit intelligence targets
reached out by phone to Glenn Carle, a 23-year veteran of the CIA and former deputy officer on the National Intelligence Council. I asked him to walk me through the week’s revelations and to explain Russia’s actions from the perspective of an intelligence officer.

He told me that the meeting with Trump Jr., while unusually brazen, fits a broader pattern of Russian intelligence attempting to engage with the Trump family over the years. “This is how it’s done,” he said.
Click to expand...
 
skyeagle409 said:
Simply amazing that this was on Fox News. Time to dump dumb Trump, the prince of liars.
Click to expand...

Fox has probably realised that they might even look silly amongst their viewers if Don Sr accidentally tweets a confession, or lets it slip some other way.
 
acbytesla said:
Huh?


From my view. Trump is clearly guilty of obstruction. It's not even close any more. There is too much there there. That said, I don't think there is a chance in hell he is prosecuted or impeached for this as long as the GOP controls the House. This is a hell of a lot more than what they had on Nixon.

They are going to have to show Trump giving Putin a blow job before people turn against him.
Click to expand...

Which is why I think Alan jumping on the impeachment train would be a good barometer that impeachment would be possible.
 
Stacko said:
Here's an interesting tidbit in from the most recent FEC filings:
Click to expand...

And then: "The campaign is also paying the Trump Corp. for legal consulting, a new category of campaign-to-Trump company payments as best I can tell"

WTF? $89,561 paid directly to Trump's "blind trust" bank account for... "legal consulting?" Well, this is the guy who charged his own campaign $12.8 million during the election, and I guess you gotta love how that "561" makes it look so much more legitimate than a round number. Back in 2000, Trump said that he could be the first person to make money running for president, and damned if he didn't. Looks like he could be the first to make money getting impeached, too.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Which is why I think Alan jumping on the impeachment train would be a good barometer that impeachment would be possible.
Click to expand...

Yea, but you will know before Dershowitz.

My point is that Trump is unquestionably guilty.But he was guilty of crimes BEFORE he became President. Every day he is breaking the emoluments and nobody gives a damn.

I'm not sure what people expect for evidence. It's like if there's not a canceled check from Putin to Trump for a hundred million dollars with 'for election tampering' on it will his supporters care and I'm not sure even then.
 
Last edited:
logger said:
It's quite possible it could be both ways? You can't really see that can you?
Click to expand...

Usually when people throw into the basket two excuses like that, they're desperate.

"I didn't kill her! But it'd be self-defense if I did!"

Yeah, he killer her and it wasn't self-defense.
 
acbytesla said:
Yea, but you will know before Dershowitz.

My point is that Trump is unquestionably guilty.But he was guilty of crimes BEFORE he became President. Every day he is breaking the emoluments and nobody gives a damn.

I'm not sure what people expect for evidence. It's like if there's not a canceled check from Putin to Trump for a hundred million dollars with 'for election tampering' on it will his supporters care and I'm not sure even then.
Click to expand...

I'm not a trump supporter and I don't think he is unquestionably guilty.
 
logger said:
It's quite possible it could be both ways? You can't really see that can you?
Click to expand...

Yes, the Dems decided on blackmail, and then didn't act on any of the information provided to allow Trump to win the election, so they could float this Nothing Burger a year later. :rolleyes:


I'll admit it has a certain all encompassing CT charm to it. But Frankly, we're just not that good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom