The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

by **JFLNYC** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 17:11:07

Let's just say Manafort and Kushner didn't show up to hear about adoptions.

by **drsmooth** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 17:20:14

JFLNYC wrote:Let's just say Manafort and Kushner didn't show up to hear about adoptions.

According to the latest NYT reporting, we can ALL say that: Uday (or is it Qusay?) was promised dope on the Clinton campaign by that Russky lawyer for showing at that mtg, according to (at least) three WH staff advisers.

There's cover-up, there's crime, all we're lacking is the sentencing.

Elected Rs had better get on board; the backlash for complicity in this will make the health repeal uproar feel like your best-ever birthday party

by **jerseyhoya** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 17:23:04

I have been a Trump-Russia collusion skeptic, and think I remain so for the Lindsey Graham he didn't even collude with his own campaign reason, but less strongly than I have been. Certainly more open to the idea that central figures in the campaign worked more actively with Russia rather than working separately toward mutually shared goals.

Let's unpack a few things here:

1) Don Jr. gets a lead from a 'friend' that a prominent Russian lawyer has some good dirt on Hillary.
2) He thinks this is credible and important enough that he asks both Jared and Manafort - the two most important people in the campaign at the time - to attend the meeting.
3) While Don Jr. can maybe plead ignorance as to this woman being a Putin front, that's a lot less credible coming from Manafort.
4) Even if nothing actionable came from this meeting in particular, as the Times story points out this shows some within the campaign were actively willing to accept Russian help.
5) It's yet another meeting with Russian affiliated people Kushner has had to update his security clearance shit with having 'remembered' it belatedly.
6) At this point they cannot get their stories straight, at all. Speculation, but I'm guessing they know Manafort feels he's in a bad spot for other reasons, so he'll tell the full truth about this meeting that doesn't seem illegal when he talks to investigators to avoid digging his hole any deeper. But just yesterday Don Jr. is saying it had nothing to do with the campaign and was all about adoption. And in the NYT article the Russian lawyer seems to be sticking to that and wasn't told the story has been updated.

I don't think this is a story that breaks anything on its own, but makes me think it's more likely something exists out there with the power to cause serious legal and political jeopardy for the inner circle - not just Page/Manafort/Flynn.

by **azrider** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 17:27:03

pacino wrote:
azrider wrote:Seriously, the Russian narrative is the story of the boy who cried wolf. It is losing the America people not only on what may or probably happened but ultimately the message from the left. After eight years of obstruction, the republicans have ZERO plan. Jobs, healthcare, environment... the issues and a straight forward plan will win. Time to focus on that.

I can multi-task, sorry you cant.

I've preached on here multiple times about concentrating on things...but certain bit of news are hard to be denied. There's a segment that willingly blinds themselves to it because of whatever reason. I'm not about that bs.

Or maybe I can multitask and just don't want to show my hand until I know I can win. You have to capture and hold the attention of the average American and this is something the DNC has been awful at.

by **pacino** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 17:30:38

The DNC is fairly unimportant right now and really not that important for campaigns outside of money allocation. Who gives a shit what they think?

by **drsmooth** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 17:36:04

jerseyhoya wrote:it's more likely something exists out there with the power to cause serious legal and political jeopardy for the inner circle - not just Page/Manafort/Flynn.

"More likely"? Moeller hasn't even cleared his throat yet.

drumpf's mob is fucked. And mob members will go to jail - it's a matter of how soon, & which ones, & for how long. With luck, a lot of that will be up to their willingness to turn on one another.

Elected Rs need to be thinking about how they get themselves separated from this tar pit, soon.

by **Youseff** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 18:25:33

*mountains of evidence that a foreign government actively tried to influence our democratic process, with a full propaganda press for one candidate, attempting to hack voting systems in nearly every state, concurrent to the candidate they backed having several verifiable connections to that foreign government, & majority of Americans believe some sort of malfeasance occured*

"this is a boy who cried wolf issue"

by **drsmooth** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 18:53:56

Noted socialist & probable terrorist, former Bush White House ethics lawyer Richard Painter's only question about the Drumpf Jr news is "how soon will people be in custody?"

by **CalvinBall** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 19:17:48

Is him trying to get dirt on another candidate from a foreign agent illegal in and of itself?

by **drsmooth** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 19:18:47

Lindsey Graham noted today he's eager "to get [Russia] sanctions on his (drumpf's) death" - Freudian slip, Lindsey?

by **thephan** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 19:41:01

Well, President Dumpsterfire seems to have converted AZ (just yanking your chain a little) in that Russia is in the past, forget about it. There's no there there, and nothing to see here. Let play a round of golf, er, make America Great and pay my lazy ass.

by **drsmooth** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 19:41:28

CalvinBall wrote:Is him trying to get dirt on another candidate from a foreign agent illegal in and of itself?

Well, Matlock, I can't tell you, but Richard Painter's got these tweets to say:

Richard W. Painter‏ @RWPUSA 32m32 minutes ago
In the Bush Administration we would have had him in custody for questioning by now

Richard W. Painter‏ @RWPUSA 1h1 hour ago
This is treason. He must have known that the only way Russia would get such information was by spying.

Richard W. Painter‏ @RWPUSA 7m7 minutes ago
Going to a known fence to buy a TV can get you charged with attempting to buy stolen goods. Going to the Russians for info. on Clinton....

Painter really, really, really dislikes the drumpf mob

by **JFLNYC** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 19:43:19

CalvinBall wrote:Is him trying to get dirt on another candidate from a foreign agent illegal in and of itself?

Good question. Whether it is or not, we now know that:

(1) the Russians cyber-meddled in our Presidential election to favor one candidate;

(2) Putin authorized the meddling;

(3) that candidate's campaign manager, his son and his son-in-law (and arguably now his chief advisor) were willing to attend a meeting in which they were told they'd receive -- from a Russian lawyer with ties to Putin -- information which could hurt the other candidate's campaign; and

(4) Trump now wants to create a joint cyber security body with Putin.

We now have either our first President whose campaign colluded with a foreign adversary to win the Presidency or a President who is so stupid he wants to give the fox access to the hen house. Or both.

Pick your poison.

by **jerseyhoya** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 20:05:08

CalvinBall wrote:Is him trying to get dirt on another candidate from a foreign agent illegal in and of itself?

I too would be interested in a legal explainer on this and related issues. Here's something on how it may be a violation of election law depending on whether 'value' is info or just $$ - http://electionlawblog.org/?p=93701

Having read the statute on treason, I think Richard Painter should maybe take a second look at it and/or tweet less after drinking all day.

by **thephan** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 20:09:27

It does not meet any standard of treason, but it certainly is suspect in about every way, and clearly points to a willingness to play мяч (ball if you are scoring at home). As Clapper said repeatedly, this is how recruiting works.

by **pacino** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 21:10:37

@realDonaldTrump 17m17 minutes ago
More
The fact that President Putin and I discussed a Cyber Security unit doesn't mean I think it can happen. It can't-but a ceasefire can,& did!

by **thephan** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 21:40:14

Trump whisperer

@realDonaldTrump 17m17 minutes ago

The fact that President Putin and I discussed the peepee tape doesn't mean It exists, it does!

by **drsmooth** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 22:23:42

jerseyhoya wrote:
CalvinBall wrote:Is him trying to get dirt on another candidate from a foreign agent illegal in and of itself?

I too would be interested in a legal explainer on this and related issues. Here's something on how it may be a violation of election law depending on whether 'value' is info or just $$ - http://electionlawblog.org/?p=93701

Having read the statute on treason, I think Richard Painter should maybe take a second look at it and/or tweet less after drinking all day.

Painter, ethics lawyer for Bush, would have drumpf's hellspawn taken into custody for questioning. You, a not-lawyer guy who's just read "the statute on treason" this one time, would tell him how to do.

by **jerseyhoya** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 22:27:49

And yet I'm the one who is right.

HOW ABOUT THAT

by **JFLNYC** » Sun Jul 09, 2017 22:29:02

Lock him up.

Archived

The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics

Re: The Last Thread was a Pre-Existing Condition - Politics