(08-05-2018 06:15 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Trump Jr’s actions that we know of (meeting with a representative of the Russian government offering information on Clinton) were not a crime - and I don’t think I’ve seen a lot of people say that the meeting itself was.

You weren't watching CNN (Tapper) and ABC (Stephanouolous) this morning thenThe claim I see most frequently is that it’s evidence as to why the ongoing investigation into potential collusion is warranted. . The consensus was the Trump was worried about Junior's exposure, and rightfully so.

Quote:Because we know that Trump and Trump Jr. have been willing to lie about the meeting and it’s purposes,

HOW do you know that? becasuse the MSM keeps saying so?

Quote:To me, the big difference between the two situations is who each person represented. Steele did not represent a foreign government - he was a hired hand who only had his client’s interests (eventually, the DNC) in mind when researching Trump.

He was hired to dig up dirt on Trump, by the people that Clinton hired to dig up dirt on Trump. he went to Russia for the dirt. He was paid with Clinton money.

Quote:There’s no evidence of ulterior motive.

So you are under the impression he was there to write an op-ed article? sight-see? What was the motive, if not to get dirt on Trump?

Quote: For Trump Jr, the Russian lawyer was representing the interests of Russia, and there was definitely an ulterior motive.

Irrational and illogical. So you think Trump Jr. said to himself, this is a Russian agent, representing the Kremlin, purporting to sell me dirt. Great!! Russian agents have the best info.
That is why Hillary is sending a guy to Russia!

What crap. Either he knew he was an Russian agent (not proved yet, BTW) or he didn't Then when the russian agent he is so keen to see comers in, he shows her the door? Wonderfully logical.

Quote:Furthermore, we eventually found out that the material Russia ended up having (and using through Wikileaks) was stolen material - which means a crime was committed to get the information, and it was not provided to Russian hackers willfully. That aspect is pretty much just like Watergate, when information about the DNC was stolen during a break in.

what does this have to do with the TT meeting? What is your source that tells you the material Junior rejected was the emails? Or is that just another opinion presented as fact? In any case, whatever she was selling was rejected and no money changed hands.



OTOH, the information that the Clinton campaign paid for, through their agent Steele, was supposedly obtained with wiretaps and hidden cameras. Oh, very morally superior!!!!

let me be clear, I know the Russians stole emails. Crime. I have seen nothing to suggest they did it in collusion with the Trump campaign, or Trump. Might as well claim he changed one of the villagers into a newt. Accusations are not proof.

We know both parties wanted dirt on the other's candidate. BFD. No crime there. We know one party spent a ton of money to send an agent to Russia to get dirt. The other wasted 15 minutes in a useless meeting.

If your goal was to explain why the TT meeting is a problem, but financing an agent's trip to Russia for the same purposes is not, you have failed.