Snoslinger Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 (edited) By MAGGIE HABERMAN and MATT APUZZOSEPT. 7, 2017 WASHINGTON — Donald Trump Jr. told Senate investigators on Thursday that he set up a June 2016 meeting with a Russian lawyer because he was intrigued that she might have damaging information about Hillary Clinton, saying it was important to learn about Mrs. Clinton’s “fitness” to be president. But nothing came of the Trump Tower meeting, he said, and he was adamant that he never colluded with the Russian government’s campaign to disrupt last year’s presidential election. In a prepared statement during an interview with Senate Judiciary Committee investigators, the younger Mr. Trump said he was initially conflicted when he heard that the lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, might have damaging information about Mrs. Clinton. Despite his interest, he said, he always intended to consult with his own lawyers about the propriety of using any information that Ms. Veselnitskaya, who has ties to the Kremlin, gave him at the meeting. A copy of Mr. Trump’s statement was obtained by The New York Times. The acknowledgment by the president’s eldest son that he intended to seek legal counsel after the meeting suggests that he knew, or at least suspected, that accepting potentially damaging information about a rival campaign from a foreign country raised thorny legal issues. Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/07/us/politics/trump-russia-investigation.html?referer=https://t.co/Ib4QKWtdD6?amp=1 Edited September 7, 2017 by Snoslinger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiSledder Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKIQPilot Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 Intent to collude is now collusion? I'll wait for Meullers conclusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momorider Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 So trying to find out about dirt on your opponent in a election is collusion so every candidate ever in the history of elections is guilty of collusion now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Skidooski Posted September 7, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted September 7, 2017 27 minutes ago, Momorider said: So trying to find out about dirt on your opponent in a election is collusion so every candidate ever in the history of elections is guilty of collusion now Someone once said stuff like that is Politics 101... zzzzzzzzzzzz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICEMAN! Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Snoslinger said: But nothing came of the Trump Tower meeting, he said, Nothing came of the meeting that Jr told us never happened....and then told us only Jarhead and Manafort attended, and then oh yea some other guy too, and whoops forgot about that Russian Kremlin connected lawyer, oh and that Russian Oligarch's son and that other guy....and... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted September 7, 2017 Author Share Posted September 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Momorider said: So trying to find out about dirt on your opponent in a election is collusion so every candidate ever in the history of elections is guilty of collusion now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted September 7, 2017 Author Share Posted September 7, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, MiSledder said: find any of those posts of yours yet? what was that comment? "what a selfish thing to say" go back to team butt plug and talk about your new carhartts or something. Edited September 7, 2017 by Snoslinger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainecat Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 He was colluding until no one colluded...okaaayyy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 This the same lawyer tied to the DNC through a third party? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racer254 Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 2 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said: This the same lawyer tied to the DNC through a third party? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted September 7, 2017 Author Share Posted September 7, 2017 6 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said: This the same lawyer tied to the DNC through a third party? no, a friend of his second cousin's maid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKIQPilot Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 Hahahaha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Danger Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 Does it worry you at all that Mueller's crew has not leaked you something better than this as of yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted September 7, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted September 7, 2017 How is there collusion if there was no agreement put in place? How is there collusion when nothing was exchanged? Without some quid pro quo that they receive in return there is no collusion. Care to explain how Hillary was defrauded or her rights? Collusion An agreement between two or more people to defraud a person of his or her rights or to obtain something that is prohibitedby law. A secret arrangement wherein two or more people whose legal interests seemingly conflict conspire to commit Fraud uponanother person; a pact between two people to deceive a court with the purpose of obtaining something that they would notbe able to get through legitimate judicial channels. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/collusion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snoslinger Posted September 7, 2017 Author Share Posted September 7, 2017 6 minutes ago, Highmark said: How is there collusion if there was no agreement put in place? How is there collusion when nothing was exchanged? Without some quid pro quo that they receive in return there is no collusion. Care to explain how Hillary was defrauded or her rights? Collusion An agreement between two or more people to defraud a person of his or her rights or to obtain something that is prohibitedby law. A secret arrangement wherein two or more people whose legal interests seemingly conflict conspire to commit Fraud uponanother person; a pact between two people to deceive a court with the purpose of obtaining something that they would notbe able to get through legitimate judicial channels. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/collusion I'd like to ask you an honest question, and you provide an honest answer.... back when we made our bet, were you thinking...... a) no one in the trump admin met with Russians to help trump win the election b) they may have met but would not meet my definition of collusion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEFF Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 31 minutes ago, Carlos Danger said: This the same lawyer tied to the DNC through a third party? That's the one. No new news, so just start rehashing old shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainecat Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 Just a little collusion that's all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racer254 Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 28 minutes ago, Snoslinger said: I'd like to ask you an honest question, and you provide an honest answer.... back when we made our bet, were you thinking...... a) no one in the trump admin met with Russians to help trump win the election b) they may have met but would not meet my definition of collusion Making demands over a fabrication....classic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted September 7, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted September 7, 2017 (edited) 31 minutes ago, Snoslinger said: I'd like to ask you an honest question, and you provide an honest answer.... back when we made our bet, were you thinking...... a) no one in the trump admin met with Russians to help trump win the election b) they may have met but would not meet my definition of collusion Honest answer is A but I'm not sure how that answer proves actual collusion took place. I will honestly tell you that when I made the bet my idea of collusion was the same as it is now an agreement between 2 or more parties to defraud another. If you really feel you've won the bet I'll pay your charity but its not an admission that collusion occurred. If I pay now and Mueller says no collusion occurred will you then pay my charity of choice? That's a fair deal Sno. Edited September 7, 2017 by Highmark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiSledder Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 2 hours ago, Snoslinger said: find any of those posts of yours yet? what was that comment? "what a selfish thing to say" go back to team butt plug and talk about your new carhartts or something. Donate to a charity or still holding out fir your own selfish needs? Nevermind I already know the liberal ways 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiSledder Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Highmark said: Honest answer is A but I'm not sure how that answer proves actual collusion took place. I will honestly tell you that when I made the bet my idea of collusion was the same as it is now an agreement between 2 or more parties to defraud another. If you really feel you've won the bet I'll pay your charity but its not an admission that collusion occurred. If I pay now and Mueller says no collusion occurred will you then pay my charity of choice? That's a fair deal Sno. like any liberal he'll spin it anyway necessary to not pay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriftBusta Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 Jesus Slinger is one big dumb bastard...... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member SnowRider Posted September 7, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted September 7, 2017 Just now, DriftBusta said: Jesus Slinger is one big dumb bastard...... How many times did Dump tell us there was no interaction from him or his team with Russia? Do you still believe Dump or did he lie? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriftBusta Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 42 minutes ago, SnowRider said: How many times did Dump tell us there was no interaction from him or his team with Russia? Do you still believe Dump or did he lie? stfu. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.