So the JR emails..

[basquebromance]

Wow! I just can’t believe that Donald Trump Jr’s foundation took millions and millions from foreign governments. Oh wait, that was Hillary.

The hypocrisy is breathtaking. Media in hyperventilation over Don Jr meeting don't even cover Hillary's Ukraine collusion. Dishonest scum.

 

[JoeB131]

No she didn't, fk, can't you ever get the fking story straight. He never talked to her prior to the meeting asswipe!

Go back and read the emails. He went to that meeting because Boris and Natasha had incriminating info on Hillary, and his response was "Love it".

 

[Slade3200]

This is the last time i am talking to your ass about this. You are acting as stupid as a 5 year old trying to understand physics

The Crown Prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.
This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government support for Mr Trump.
Do i need to type that in another language just in case?

The Russian Trump JR was meeting was a lead attorney who was given the "ok" to be in this country from Loretta Lunch, the DOJ under the Obama administration, to represent a Russian client over a lawsuit in the United States. She was not a member of the KGB, she has no specific ties as member of the Kremlin, she is not related or a part of Putin's inner circle, she is a Russian attorney. Her identity is very clear she is not a part of Putin's cabinet, but is an attorney who happens to live in and be Russian. To say otherwise is not being truthful to the facts.

Did you happen to read the email that was a pretext to the meeting? Whats that all about? and why in the world are you trying to tie Obama and the DOJ into this, they don't factor into this at all.

On Jun 7, 2016, at 4:20 PM, Rob Goldstone wrote:
Don
Hope all is well
Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday.
I believe you are aware of the meeting - and so wondered if 3pm or later on Thursday works for you?
I assume it would be at your office.
Best
Rob Goldstone

I brought up the Obama Administration, and Loretta Lynch surrounding the Russian woman in question because, while liberal democrats and the mainstream media have chosen to make "sensationalism" their predominant focus regarding President Trump, accurate Investigations and old fashioned credible journalism are built on an analysis of ALL the facts, particularly WHO they met and what career capacity did they serve. This particular woman in question, and her career as well as position as a Russian, means everything in this. Otherwise we would have liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who just happens to be Russian.


Let me break this down real slow and detailed so you can follow where I'm going. The focus is the RUSSIAN in question surrounding the meeting, what role did she play in all this. If you check her background you will find she is an attorney who happens to be Russian.

1) There is no evidence that she works conclusively for the Kremlin. She is not a KGB agent, she is not a member of Putin's inner circle, but an attorney who just happened to be simply Russian. This attorney was allowed by DOJ Loretta Lynch in the country to Represent a Russian Firm in a lawsuit case.

2). If she WAS some form of government spy who actually worked for the government. I know liberals are juicy for a government internal agent that the Trump administration conspired with, its obvious as their chosen hopeful candidate lost and they need excuses to find some form of vindication. HOWEVER, if that's what they hope to find with this attorney. Her visa was expired when she requested entry. So if she was this "conspiracy agent" why would Loretta Lynch, the DOJ under President Obama, ALLOW a person of interest involved in election collusion fraud INTO this country in the first place?

If the emails that spoke of this Russian Attorney was in fact really a woman representing the Kremlin government as an agent, the "CONNECTION" to this collusion, then the DOJ under President Obama wasn't doing her job to do a thorough background check in the first place and just allowed an expired visa Russian saboteur to walk in our border.

Do I need to go further into this? Do you see the real significance behind the woman, Russian attorney, involved in this meeting?

If we don't look at the FACTS of the career background of the individual involved we would find liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who is Russian, to even include a little girl simply attempting to sell something to drink at her Lemonade Stand at this point. I will even going as far (without apology) as stating liberal democrats are closely flirting with reintroducing McCarthyism in their hunger to find ANY collusion associated with this administration in their efforts to justify defeat.


As I said before, I won't entertain this liberal "sensationalism" that has taken over today's media.

First -- You show me actual FACTS that this Russian had a solid career within the Kremlin of the Russian government, documents that prove her career was more than just simply an attorney who just happens to be Russian. All this has otherwise become this boogie man paranoia joke, of someone trying to CREATE DRAMA out of something that doesn't really exist. Yet even I am able to tell a "used car salesman" who is trying to SELL me something, something that is meant to be real appealing but who is really full of crap.

The reason I say that the story behind the lady isn't the focus is because of this. say I'm a cop who goes online and poses as a little girl looking to hook up with an older man. If I find a man to agree to meet me to partake in something illegal then he is going to get busted. It happens all the time and it doesn't make a difference that a little girl did not show up

Well that's a crime, talking to a friend isn't . Got another loser post?

What do you mean talking to a friend? Are you not following this story? The lawyer was not a friend of the Trumps

 

[jc456]

No she didn't, fk, can't you ever get the fking story straight. He never talked to her prior to the meeting asswipe!

Go back and read the emails. He went to that meeting because Boris and Natasha had incriminating info on Hillary, and his response was "Love it".

That email didn't mention a lawyer. Emin was and it was his father. Oops more made up shit for the umteenth hundredth time

 

[jc456]

The Russian Trump JR was meeting was a lead attorney who was given the "ok" to be in this country from Loretta Lunch, the DOJ under the Obama administration, to represent a Russian client over a lawsuit in the United States. She was not a member of the KGB, she has no specific ties as member of the Kremlin, she is not related or a part of Putin's inner circle, she is a Russian attorney. Her identity is very clear she is not a part of Putin's cabinet, but is an attorney who happens to live in and be Russian. To say otherwise is not being truthful to the facts.

Did you happen to read the email that was a pretext to the meeting? Whats that all about? and why in the world are you trying to tie Obama and the DOJ into this, they don't factor into this at all.

On Jun 7, 2016, at 4:20 PM, Rob Goldstone wrote:
Don
Hope all is well
Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday.
I believe you are aware of the meeting - and so wondered if 3pm or later on Thursday works for you?
I assume it would be at your office.
Best
Rob Goldstone

I brought up the Obama Administration, and Loretta Lynch surrounding the Russian woman in question because, while liberal democrats and the mainstream media have chosen to make "sensationalism" their predominant focus regarding President Trump, accurate Investigations and old fashioned credible journalism are built on an analysis of ALL the facts, particularly WHO they met and what career capacity did they serve. This particular woman in question, and her career as well as position as a Russian, means everything in this. Otherwise we would have liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who just happens to be Russian.


Let me break this down real slow and detailed so you can follow where I'm going. The focus is the RUSSIAN in question surrounding the meeting, what role did she play in all this. If you check her background you will find she is an attorney who happens to be Russian.

1) There is no evidence that she works conclusively for the Kremlin. She is not a KGB agent, she is not a member of Putin's inner circle, but an attorney who just happened to be simply Russian. This attorney was allowed by DOJ Loretta Lynch in the country to Represent a Russian Firm in a lawsuit case.

2). If she WAS some form of government spy who actually worked for the government. I know liberals are juicy for a government internal agent that the Trump administration conspired with, its obvious as their chosen hopeful candidate lost and they need excuses to find some form of vindication. HOWEVER, if that's what they hope to find with this attorney. Her visa was expired when she requested entry. So if she was this "conspiracy agent" why would Loretta Lynch, the DOJ under President Obama, ALLOW a person of interest involved in election collusion fraud INTO this country in the first place?

If the emails that spoke of this Russian Attorney was in fact really a woman representing the Kremlin government as an agent, the "CONNECTION" to this collusion, then the DOJ under President Obama wasn't doing her job to do a thorough background check in the first place and just allowed an expired visa Russian saboteur to walk in our border.

Do I need to go further into this? Do you see the real significance behind the woman, Russian attorney, involved in this meeting?

If we don't look at the FACTS of the career background of the individual involved we would find liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who is Russian, to even include a little girl simply attempting to sell something to drink at her Lemonade Stand at this point. I will even going as far (without apology) as stating liberal democrats are closely flirting with reintroducing McCarthyism in their hunger to find ANY collusion associated with this administration in their efforts to justify defeat.


As I said before, I won't entertain this liberal "sensationalism" that has taken over today's media.

First -- You show me actual FACTS that this Russian had a solid career within the Kremlin of the Russian government, documents that prove her career was more than just simply an attorney who just happens to be Russian. All this has otherwise become this boogie man paranoia joke, of someone trying to CREATE DRAMA out of something that doesn't really exist. Yet even I am able to tell a "used car salesman" who is trying to SELL me something, something that is meant to be real appealing but who is really full of crap.

The reason I say that the story behind the lady isn't the focus is because of this. say I'm a cop who goes online and poses as a little girl looking to hook up with an older man. If I find a man to agree to meet me to partake in something illegal then he is going to get busted. It happens all the time and it doesn't make a difference that a little girl did not show up

Well that's a crime, talking to a friend isn't . Got another loser post?

What do you mean talking to a friend? Are you not following this story? The lawyer was not a friend of the Trumps

I know the email was

 

[JoeB131]

That email didn't mention a lawyer. Emin was and it was his father. Oops more made up shit for the umteenth hundredth time

You go with that, buddy. You tried to pretend Junior didn't get caught with his pants down.

 

[jc456]

That email didn't mention a lawyer. Emin was and it was his father. Oops more made up shit for the umteenth hundredth time

You go with that, buddy. You tried to pretend Junior didn't get caught with his pants down.

I'm sure his pants were on nice and proper

 

[Slade3200]

Did you happen to read the email that was a pretext to the meeting? Whats that all about? and why in the world are you trying to tie Obama and the DOJ into this, they don't factor into this at all.

On Jun 7, 2016, at 4:20 PM, Rob Goldstone wrote:
Don
Hope all is well
Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday.
I believe you are aware of the meeting - and so wondered if 3pm or later on Thursday works for you?
I assume it would be at your office.
Best
Rob Goldstone

I brought up the Obama Administration, and Loretta Lynch surrounding the Russian woman in question because, while liberal democrats and the mainstream media have chosen to make "sensationalism" their predominant focus regarding President Trump, accurate Investigations and old fashioned credible journalism are built on an analysis of ALL the facts, particularly WHO they met and what career capacity did they serve. This particular woman in question, and her career as well as position as a Russian, means everything in this. Otherwise we would have liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who just happens to be Russian.


Let me break this down real slow and detailed so you can follow where I'm going. The focus is the RUSSIAN in question surrounding the meeting, what role did she play in all this. If you check her background you will find she is an attorney who happens to be Russian.

1) There is no evidence that she works conclusively for the Kremlin. She is not a KGB agent, she is not a member of Putin's inner circle, but an attorney who just happened to be simply Russian. This attorney was allowed by DOJ Loretta Lynch in the country to Represent a Russian Firm in a lawsuit case.

2). If she WAS some form of government spy who actually worked for the government. I know liberals are juicy for a government internal agent that the Trump administration conspired with, its obvious as their chosen hopeful candidate lost and they need excuses to find some form of vindication. HOWEVER, if that's what they hope to find with this attorney. Her visa was expired when she requested entry. So if she was this "conspiracy agent" why would Loretta Lynch, the DOJ under President Obama, ALLOW a person of interest involved in election collusion fraud INTO this country in the first place?

If the emails that spoke of this Russian Attorney was in fact really a woman representing the Kremlin government as an agent, the "CONNECTION" to this collusion, then the DOJ under President Obama wasn't doing her job to do a thorough background check in the first place and just allowed an expired visa Russian saboteur to walk in our border.

Do I need to go further into this? Do you see the real significance behind the woman, Russian attorney, involved in this meeting?

If we don't look at the FACTS of the career background of the individual involved we would find liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who is Russian, to even include a little girl simply attempting to sell something to drink at her Lemonade Stand at this point. I will even going as far (without apology) as stating liberal democrats are closely flirting with reintroducing McCarthyism in their hunger to find ANY collusion associated with this administration in their efforts to justify defeat.


As I said before, I won't entertain this liberal "sensationalism" that has taken over today's media.

First -- You show me actual FACTS that this Russian had a solid career within the Kremlin of the Russian government, documents that prove her career was more than just simply an attorney who just happens to be Russian. All this has otherwise become this boogie man paranoia joke, of someone trying to CREATE DRAMA out of something that doesn't really exist. Yet even I am able to tell a "used car salesman" who is trying to SELL me something, something that is meant to be real appealing but who is really full of crap.

The reason I say that the story behind the lady isn't the focus is because of this. say I'm a cop who goes online and poses as a little girl looking to hook up with an older man. If I find a man to agree to meet me to partake in something illegal then he is going to get busted. It happens all the time and it doesn't make a difference that a little girl did not show up

Well that's a crime, talking to a friend isn't . Got another loser post?

What do you mean talking to a friend? Are you not following this story? The lawyer was not a friend of the Trumps

I know the email was

Huh?

 

[JoeB131]

I'm sure his pants were on nice and proper

You tell yourself that.

 

[jc456]

I'm sure his pants were on nice and proper

You tell yourself that.

no worries, I do.

 

[edthecynic]

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

what he knew was that his friend knew someone that had info
dude you are altering the content of the email he received. I quoted you what Goldstone's email was after you sent the thread. Nowhere in that email does it state that the russian government was giving him material. It said Emin had material received from her father from a meeting with someone. Not sure who, since a Crown Prosecutor does not exist. And he, jr., would meet with Emin to hear what she had. ewwwww evil shit right there. I know that's worse than four americans dying in Benghazi, and deleting 33k worth of emails to avoid any investigation. I have to tell you.

This is the last time i am talking to your ass about this. You are acting as stupid as a 5 year old trying to understand physics

The Crown Prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.
This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government support for Mr Trump.
Do i need to type that in another language just in case?

The Russian Trump JR was meeting was a lead attorney who was given the "ok" to be in this country from Loretta Lunch, the DOJ under the Obama administration, to represent a Russian client over a lawsuit in the United States. She was not a member of the KGB, she has no specific ties as member of the Kremlin, she is not related or a part of Putin's inner circle, she is a Russian attorney. Her identity is very clear she is not a part of Putin's cabinet, but is an attorney who happens to live in and be Russian. To say otherwise is not being truthful to the facts.

Did you happen to read the email that was a pretext to the meeting? Whats that all about? and why in the world are you trying to tie Obama and the DOJ into this, they don't factor into this at all.

On Jun 7, 2016, at 4:20 PM, Rob Goldstone wrote:
Don
Hope all is well
Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday.
I believe you are aware of the meeting - and so wondered if 3pm or later on Thursday works for you?
I assume it would be at your office.
Best
Rob Goldstone

I brought up the Obama Administration, and Loretta Lynch surrounding the Russian woman in question because, while liberal democrats and the mainstream media have chosen to make "sensationalism" their predominant focus regarding President Trump, accurate Investigations and old fashioned credible journalism are built on an analysis of ALL the facts, particularly WHO they met and what career capacity did they serve. This particular woman in question, and her career as well as position as a Russian, means everything in this. Otherwise we would have liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who just happens to be Russian.


Let me break this down real slow and detailed so you can follow where I'm going. The focus is the RUSSIAN in question surrounding the meeting, what role did she play in all this. If you check her background you will find she is an attorney who happens to be Russian.

1) There is no evidence that she works conclusively for the Kremlin. She is not a KGB agent, she is not a member of Putin's inner circle, but an attorney who just happened to be simply Russian. This attorney was allowed by DOJ Loretta Lynch in the country to Represent a Russian Firm in a lawsuit case.

2). If she WAS some form of government spy who actually worked for the government. I know liberals are juicy for a government internal agent that the Trump administration conspired with, its obvious as their chosen hopeful candidate lost and they need excuses to find some form of vindication. HOWEVER, if that's what they hope to find with this attorney. Her visa was expired when she requested entry. So if she was this "conspiracy agent" why would Loretta Lynch, the DOJ under President Obama, ALLOW a person of interest involved in election collusion fraud INTO this country in the first place?

If the emails that spoke of this Russian Attorney was in fact really a woman representing the Kremlin government as an agent, the "CONNECTION" to this collusion, then the DOJ under President Obama wasn't doing her job to do a thorough background check in the first place and just allowed an expired visa Russian saboteur to walk in our border.

Do I need to go further into this? Do you see the real significance behind the woman, Russian attorney, involved in this meeting?

If we don't look at the FACTS of the career background of the individual involved we would find liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who is Russian, to even include a little girl simply attempting to sell something to drink at her Lemonade Stand at this point. I will even going as far (without apology) as stating liberal democrats are closely flirting with reintroducing McCarthyism in their hunger to find ANY collusion associated with this administration in their efforts to justify defeat.


As I said before, I won't entertain this liberal "sensationalism" that has taken over today's media.

First -- You show me actual FACTS that this Russian had a solid career within the Kremlin of the Russian government, documents that prove her career was more than just simply an attorney who just happens to be Russian. All this has otherwise become this boogie man paranoia joke, of someone trying to CREATE DRAMA out of something that doesn't really exist. Yet even I am able to tell a "used car salesman" who is trying to SELL me something, something that is meant to be real appealing but who is really full of crap.

The reason I say that the story behind the lady isn't the focus is because of this. say I'm a cop who goes online and poses as a little girl looking to hook up with an older man. If I find a man to agree to meet me to partake in something illegal then he is going to get busted. It happens all the time and it doesn't make a difference that a little girl did not show up

However if the democrats are looking for impeachment ... assumptions, "l thought that it appeared to ME" without solid evidence to back it up .. such as the background of the woman involved being actually working exclusively and directly with the Kremlin or in Putin's inner circle, does not clearly bring a case for removal.

Based on your point of view argument you just stated, a case of obstruction against Hillary for bleaching a server and HER husbands private tarmac encounter with Loretta Lynch would prove (in itself) obstruction and Loretta Lynch with interference with an investigation. So based on your reasoning we have two individuals that are likewise revealed damning evidence (without the need to go into details) worthy of removal from political office all based on a meeting or based on assumed behavior in itself. Your hopes of finding collusion comes with likemanner flaws.

 

[Slade3200]

This is the last time i am talking to your ass about this. You are acting as stupid as a 5 year old trying to understand physics

The Crown Prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.
This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government support for Mr Trump.
Do i need to type that in another language just in case?

The Russian Trump JR was meeting was a lead attorney who was given the "ok" to be in this country from Loretta Lunch, the DOJ under the Obama administration, to represent a Russian client over a lawsuit in the United States. She was not a member of the KGB, she has no specific ties as member of the Kremlin, she is not related or a part of Putin's inner circle, she is a Russian attorney. Her identity is very clear she is not a part of Putin's cabinet, but is an attorney who happens to live in and be Russian. To say otherwise is not being truthful to the facts.

Did you happen to read the email that was a pretext to the meeting? Whats that all about? and why in the world are you trying to tie Obama and the DOJ into this, they don't factor into this at all.

On Jun 7, 2016, at 4:20 PM, Rob Goldstone wrote:
Don
Hope all is well
Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday.
I believe you are aware of the meeting - and so wondered if 3pm or later on Thursday works for you?
I assume it would be at your office.
Best
Rob Goldstone

I brought up the Obama Administration, and Loretta Lynch surrounding the Russian woman in question because, while liberal democrats and the mainstream media have chosen to make "sensationalism" their predominant focus regarding President Trump, accurate Investigations and old fashioned credible journalism are built on an analysis of ALL the facts, particularly WHO they met and what career capacity did they serve. This particular woman in question, and her career as well as position as a Russian, means everything in this. Otherwise we would have liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who just happens to be Russian.


Let me break this down real slow and detailed so you can follow where I'm going. The focus is the RUSSIAN in question surrounding the meeting, what role did she play in all this. If you check her background you will find she is an attorney who happens to be Russian.

1) There is no evidence that she works conclusively for the Kremlin. She is not a KGB agent, she is not a member of Putin's inner circle, but an attorney who just happened to be simply Russian. This attorney was allowed by DOJ Loretta Lynch in the country to Represent a Russian Firm in a lawsuit case.

2). If she WAS some form of government spy who actually worked for the government. I know liberals are juicy for a government internal agent that the Trump administration conspired with, its obvious as their chosen hopeful candidate lost and they need excuses to find some form of vindication. HOWEVER, if that's what they hope to find with this attorney. Her visa was expired when she requested entry. So if she was this "conspiracy agent" why would Loretta Lynch, the DOJ under President Obama, ALLOW a person of interest involved in election collusion fraud INTO this country in the first place?

If the emails that spoke of this Russian Attorney was in fact really a woman representing the Kremlin government as an agent, the "CONNECTION" to this collusion, then the DOJ under President Obama wasn't doing her job to do a thorough background check in the first place and just allowed an expired visa Russian saboteur to walk in our border.

Do I need to go further into this? Do you see the real significance behind the woman, Russian attorney, involved in this meeting?

If we don't look at the FACTS of the career background of the individual involved we would find liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who is Russian, to even include a little girl simply attempting to sell something to drink at her Lemonade Stand at this point. I will even going as far (without apology) as stating liberal democrats are closely flirting with reintroducing McCarthyism in their hunger to find ANY collusion associated with this administration in their efforts to justify defeat.


As I said before, I won't entertain this liberal "sensationalism" that has taken over today's media.

First -- You show me actual FACTS that this Russian had a solid career within the Kremlin of the Russian government, documents that prove her career was more than just simply an attorney who just happens to be Russian. All this has otherwise become this boogie man paranoia joke, of someone trying to CREATE DRAMA out of something that doesn't really exist. Yet even I am able to tell a "used car salesman" who is trying to SELL me something, something that is meant to be real appealing but who is really full of crap.

The reason I say that the story behind the lady isn't the focus is because of this. say I'm a cop who goes online and poses as a little girl looking to hook up with an older man. If I find a man to agree to meet me to partake in something illegal then he is going to get busted. It happens all the time and it doesn't make a difference that a little girl did not show up

However if the democrats are looking for impeachment ... assumptions, "l thought that it appeared to ME" without solid evidence to back it up .. such as the background of the woman involved being actually working exclusively and directly with the Kremlin or in Putin's inner circle, does not clearly bring a case for removal.

Based on your point of view argument you just stated, a case of obstruction against Hillary for bleaching a server and HER husbands private tarmac encounter with Loretta Lynch would prove (in itself) obstruction and Loretta Lynch with interference with an investigation. So based on your reasoning we have two individuals that are likewise revealed damning evidence (without the need to go into details) worthy of removal from political office all based on a meeting or based on assumed behavior in itself. Your hopes of finding collusion comes with likemanner flaws.

First of all, I'm not hoping for evidence of collusion to pop up nor am I hoping for impeachment. That would be a sad day for America. I simply want honesty from our leadership. I'm sick of the lies.

The clintons were deemed criminals all election. Does the phrase "lock her up" ring a bell? She most likely lost the election because of it. If you think charges should be charged then, like with Trump, you need evidence. A meeting isn't illegal, you'd have to prove they spoke about the investigation. Deleting emails isn't illegal unless she was deleting evidence. You'd need proof of these to press charges. The FBI did investigate and Comey recommended no charges. They are investigating Trump now. Considering all the lies that are being exposed I'd say they have good reason to investigate. We shall see what they find

 

[jc456]

This is the last time i am talking to your ass about this. You are acting as stupid as a 5 year old trying to understand physics

The Crown Prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.
This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government support for Mr Trump.
Do i need to type that in another language just in case?

The Russian Trump JR was meeting was a lead attorney who was given the "ok" to be in this country from Loretta Lunch, the DOJ under the Obama administration, to represent a Russian client over a lawsuit in the United States. She was not a member of the KGB, she has no specific ties as member of the Kremlin, she is not related or a part of Putin's inner circle, she is a Russian attorney. Her identity is very clear she is not a part of Putin's cabinet, but is an attorney who happens to live in and be Russian. To say otherwise is not being truthful to the facts.

Did you happen to read the email that was a pretext to the meeting? Whats that all about? and why in the world are you trying to tie Obama and the DOJ into this, they don't factor into this at all.

On Jun 7, 2016, at 4:20 PM, Rob Goldstone wrote:
Don
Hope all is well
Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday.
I believe you are aware of the meeting - and so wondered if 3pm or later on Thursday works for you?
I assume it would be at your office.
Best
Rob Goldstone

I brought up the Obama Administration, and Loretta Lynch surrounding the Russian woman in question because, while liberal democrats and the mainstream media have chosen to make "sensationalism" their predominant focus regarding President Trump, accurate Investigations and old fashioned credible journalism are built on an analysis of ALL the facts, particularly WHO they met and what career capacity did they serve. This particular woman in question, and her career as well as position as a Russian, means everything in this. Otherwise we would have liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who just happens to be Russian.


Let me break this down real slow and detailed so you can follow where I'm going. The focus is the RUSSIAN in question surrounding the meeting, what role did she play in all this. If you check her background you will find she is an attorney who happens to be Russian.

1) There is no evidence that she works conclusively for the Kremlin. She is not a KGB agent, she is not a member of Putin's inner circle, but an attorney who just happened to be simply Russian. This attorney was allowed by DOJ Loretta Lynch in the country to Represent a Russian Firm in a lawsuit case.

2). If she WAS some form of government spy who actually worked for the government. I know liberals are juicy for a government internal agent that the Trump administration conspired with, its obvious as their chosen hopeful candidate lost and they need excuses to find some form of vindication. HOWEVER, if that's what they hope to find with this attorney. Her visa was expired when she requested entry. So if she was this "conspiracy agent" why would Loretta Lynch, the DOJ under President Obama, ALLOW a person of interest involved in election collusion fraud INTO this country in the first place?

If the emails that spoke of this Russian Attorney was in fact really a woman representing the Kremlin government as an agent, the "CONNECTION" to this collusion, then the DOJ under President Obama wasn't doing her job to do a thorough background check in the first place and just allowed an expired visa Russian saboteur to walk in our border.

Do I need to go further into this? Do you see the real significance behind the woman, Russian attorney, involved in this meeting?

If we don't look at the FACTS of the career background of the individual involved we would find liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who is Russian, to even include a little girl simply attempting to sell something to drink at her Lemonade Stand at this point. I will even going as far (without apology) as stating liberal democrats are closely flirting with reintroducing McCarthyism in their hunger to find ANY collusion associated with this administration in their efforts to justify defeat.


As I said before, I won't entertain this liberal "sensationalism" that has taken over today's media.

First -- You show me actual FACTS that this Russian had a solid career within the Kremlin of the Russian government, documents that prove her career was more than just simply an attorney who just happens to be Russian. All this has otherwise become this boogie man paranoia joke, of someone trying to CREATE DRAMA out of something that doesn't really exist. Yet even I am able to tell a "used car salesman" who is trying to SELL me something, something that is meant to be real appealing but who is really full of crap.

The reason I say that the story behind the lady isn't the focus is because of this. say I'm a cop who goes online and poses as a little girl looking to hook up with an older man. If I find a man to agree to meet me to partake in something illegal then he is going to get busted. It happens all the time and it doesn't make a difference that a little girl did not show up

However if the democrats are looking for impeachment ... assumptions, "l thought that it appeared to ME" without solid evidence to back it up .. such as the background of the woman involved being actually working exclusively and directly with the Kremlin or in Putin's inner circle, does not clearly bring a case for removal.

Based on your point of view argument you just stated, a case of obstruction against Hillary for bleaching a server and HER husbands private tarmac encounter with Loretta Lynch would prove (in itself) obstruction and Loretta Lynch with interference with an investigation. So based on your reasoning we have two individuals that are likewise revealed damning evidence (without the need to go into details) worthy of removal from political office all based on a meeting or based on assumed behavior in itself. Your hopes of finding collusion comes with likemanner flaws.

It's called hypocrisy . It is a staple point of libturds

 

[Slade3200]

The Russian Trump JR was meeting was a lead attorney who was given the "ok" to be in this country from Loretta Lunch, the DOJ under the Obama administration, to represent a Russian client over a lawsuit in the United States. She was not a member of the KGB, she has no specific ties as member of the Kremlin, she is not related or a part of Putin's inner circle, she is a Russian attorney. Her identity is very clear she is not a part of Putin's cabinet, but is an attorney who happens to live in and be Russian. To say otherwise is not being truthful to the facts.

Did you happen to read the email that was a pretext to the meeting? Whats that all about? and why in the world are you trying to tie Obama and the DOJ into this, they don't factor into this at all.

On Jun 7, 2016, at 4:20 PM, Rob Goldstone wrote:
Don
Hope all is well
Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday.
I believe you are aware of the meeting - and so wondered if 3pm or later on Thursday works for you?
I assume it would be at your office.
Best
Rob Goldstone

I brought up the Obama Administration, and Loretta Lynch surrounding the Russian woman in question because, while liberal democrats and the mainstream media have chosen to make "sensationalism" their predominant focus regarding President Trump, accurate Investigations and old fashioned credible journalism are built on an analysis of ALL the facts, particularly WHO they met and what career capacity did they serve. This particular woman in question, and her career as well as position as a Russian, means everything in this. Otherwise we would have liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who just happens to be Russian.


Let me break this down real slow and detailed so you can follow where I'm going. The focus is the RUSSIAN in question surrounding the meeting, what role did she play in all this. If you check her background you will find she is an attorney who happens to be Russian.

1) There is no evidence that she works conclusively for the Kremlin. She is not a KGB agent, she is not a member of Putin's inner circle, but an attorney who just happened to be simply Russian. This attorney was allowed by DOJ Loretta Lynch in the country to Represent a Russian Firm in a lawsuit case.

2). If she WAS some form of government spy who actually worked for the government. I know liberals are juicy for a government internal agent that the Trump administration conspired with, its obvious as their chosen hopeful candidate lost and they need excuses to find some form of vindication. HOWEVER, if that's what they hope to find with this attorney. Her visa was expired when she requested entry. So if she was this "conspiracy agent" why would Loretta Lynch, the DOJ under President Obama, ALLOW a person of interest involved in election collusion fraud INTO this country in the first place?

If the emails that spoke of this Russian Attorney was in fact really a woman representing the Kremlin government as an agent, the "CONNECTION" to this collusion, then the DOJ under President Obama wasn't doing her job to do a thorough background check in the first place and just allowed an expired visa Russian saboteur to walk in our border.

Do I need to go further into this? Do you see the real significance behind the woman, Russian attorney, involved in this meeting?

If we don't look at the FACTS of the career background of the individual involved we would find liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who is Russian, to even include a little girl simply attempting to sell something to drink at her Lemonade Stand at this point. I will even going as far (without apology) as stating liberal democrats are closely flirting with reintroducing McCarthyism in their hunger to find ANY collusion associated with this administration in their efforts to justify defeat.


As I said before, I won't entertain this liberal "sensationalism" that has taken over today's media.

First -- You show me actual FACTS that this Russian had a solid career within the Kremlin of the Russian government, documents that prove her career was more than just simply an attorney who just happens to be Russian. All this has otherwise become this boogie man paranoia joke, of someone trying to CREATE DRAMA out of something that doesn't really exist. Yet even I am able to tell a "used car salesman" who is trying to SELL me something, something that is meant to be real appealing but who is really full of crap.

The reason I say that the story behind the lady isn't the focus is because of this. say I'm a cop who goes online and poses as a little girl looking to hook up with an older man. If I find a man to agree to meet me to partake in something illegal then he is going to get busted. It happens all the time and it doesn't make a difference that a little girl did not show up

However if the democrats are looking for impeachment ... assumptions, "l thought that it appeared to ME" without solid evidence to back it up .. such as the background of the woman involved being actually working exclusively and directly with the Kremlin or in Putin's inner circle, does not clearly bring a case for removal.

Based on your point of view argument you just stated, a case of obstruction against Hillary for bleaching a server and HER husbands private tarmac encounter with Loretta Lynch would prove (in itself) obstruction and Loretta Lynch with interference with an investigation. So based on your reasoning we have two individuals that are likewise revealed damning evidence (without the need to go into details) worthy of removal from political office all based on a meeting or based on assumed behavior in itself. Your hopes of finding collusion comes with likemanner flaws.

It's called hypocrisy . It is a staple point of libturds

Put your money where your mouth is smart guy. What have I said that makes me a hypocrite?

 

[jc456]

Did you happen to read the email that was a pretext to the meeting? Whats that all about? and why in the world are you trying to tie Obama and the DOJ into this, they don't factor into this at all.

On Jun 7, 2016, at 4:20 PM, Rob Goldstone wrote:
Don
Hope all is well
Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday.
I believe you are aware of the meeting - and so wondered if 3pm or later on Thursday works for you?
I assume it would be at your office.
Best
Rob Goldstone

I brought up the Obama Administration, and Loretta Lynch surrounding the Russian woman in question because, while liberal democrats and the mainstream media have chosen to make "sensationalism" their predominant focus regarding President Trump, accurate Investigations and old fashioned credible journalism are built on an analysis of ALL the facts, particularly WHO they met and what career capacity did they serve. This particular woman in question, and her career as well as position as a Russian, means everything in this. Otherwise we would have liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who just happens to be Russian.


Let me break this down real slow and detailed so you can follow where I'm going. The focus is the RUSSIAN in question surrounding the meeting, what role did she play in all this. If you check her background you will find she is an attorney who happens to be Russian.

1) There is no evidence that she works conclusively for the Kremlin. She is not a KGB agent, she is not a member of Putin's inner circle, but an attorney who just happened to be simply Russian. This attorney was allowed by DOJ Loretta Lynch in the country to Represent a Russian Firm in a lawsuit case.

2). If she WAS some form of government spy who actually worked for the government. I know liberals are juicy for a government internal agent that the Trump administration conspired with, its obvious as their chosen hopeful candidate lost and they need excuses to find some form of vindication. HOWEVER, if that's what they hope to find with this attorney. Her visa was expired when she requested entry. So if she was this "conspiracy agent" why would Loretta Lynch, the DOJ under President Obama, ALLOW a person of interest involved in election collusion fraud INTO this country in the first place?

If the emails that spoke of this Russian Attorney was in fact really a woman representing the Kremlin government as an agent, the "CONNECTION" to this collusion, then the DOJ under President Obama wasn't doing her job to do a thorough background check in the first place and just allowed an expired visa Russian saboteur to walk in our border.

Do I need to go further into this? Do you see the real significance behind the woman, Russian attorney, involved in this meeting?

If we don't look at the FACTS of the career background of the individual involved we would find liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who is Russian, to even include a little girl simply attempting to sell something to drink at her Lemonade Stand at this point. I will even going as far (without apology) as stating liberal democrats are closely flirting with reintroducing McCarthyism in their hunger to find ANY collusion associated with this administration in their efforts to justify defeat.


As I said before, I won't entertain this liberal "sensationalism" that has taken over today's media.

First -- You show me actual FACTS that this Russian had a solid career within the Kremlin of the Russian government, documents that prove her career was more than just simply an attorney who just happens to be Russian. All this has otherwise become this boogie man paranoia joke, of someone trying to CREATE DRAMA out of something that doesn't really exist. Yet even I am able to tell a "used car salesman" who is trying to SELL me something, something that is meant to be real appealing but who is really full of crap.

The reason I say that the story behind the lady isn't the focus is because of this. say I'm a cop who goes online and poses as a little girl looking to hook up with an older man. If I find a man to agree to meet me to partake in something illegal then he is going to get busted. It happens all the time and it doesn't make a difference that a little girl did not show up

However if the democrats are looking for impeachment ... assumptions, "l thought that it appeared to ME" without solid evidence to back it up .. such as the background of the woman involved being actually working exclusively and directly with the Kremlin or in Putin's inner circle, does not clearly bring a case for removal.

Based on your point of view argument you just stated, a case of obstruction against Hillary for bleaching a server and HER husbands private tarmac encounter with Loretta Lynch would prove (in itself) obstruction and Loretta Lynch with interference with an investigation. So based on your reasoning we have two individuals that are likewise revealed damning evidence (without the need to go into details) worthy of removal from political office all based on a meeting or based on assumed behavior in itself. Your hopes of finding collusion comes with likemanner flaws.

It's called hypocrisy . It is a staple point of libturds

Put your money where your mouth is smart guy. What have I said that makes me a hypocrite?

Are you a libturd?

 

[Slade3200]

I brought up the Obama Administration, and Loretta Lynch surrounding the Russian woman in question because, while liberal democrats and the mainstream media have chosen to make "sensationalism" their predominant focus regarding President Trump, accurate Investigations and old fashioned credible journalism are built on an analysis of ALL the facts, particularly WHO they met and what career capacity did they serve. This particular woman in question, and her career as well as position as a Russian, means everything in this. Otherwise we would have liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who just happens to be Russian.


Let me break this down real slow and detailed so you can follow where I'm going. The focus is the RUSSIAN in question surrounding the meeting, what role did she play in all this. If you check her background you will find she is an attorney who happens to be Russian.

1) There is no evidence that she works conclusively for the Kremlin. She is not a KGB agent, she is not a member of Putin's inner circle, but an attorney who just happened to be simply Russian. This attorney was allowed by DOJ Loretta Lynch in the country to Represent a Russian Firm in a lawsuit case.

2). If she WAS some form of government spy who actually worked for the government. I know liberals are juicy for a government internal agent that the Trump administration conspired with, its obvious as their chosen hopeful candidate lost and they need excuses to find some form of vindication. HOWEVER, if that's what they hope to find with this attorney. Her visa was expired when she requested entry. So if she was this "conspiracy agent" why would Loretta Lynch, the DOJ under President Obama, ALLOW a person of interest involved in election collusion fraud INTO this country in the first place?

If the emails that spoke of this Russian Attorney was in fact really a woman representing the Kremlin government as an agent, the "CONNECTION" to this collusion, then the DOJ under President Obama wasn't doing her job to do a thorough background check in the first place and just allowed an expired visa Russian saboteur to walk in our border.

Do I need to go further into this? Do you see the real significance behind the woman, Russian attorney, involved in this meeting?

If we don't look at the FACTS of the career background of the individual involved we would find liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who is Russian, to even include a little girl simply attempting to sell something to drink at her Lemonade Stand at this point. I will even going as far (without apology) as stating liberal democrats are closely flirting with reintroducing McCarthyism in their hunger to find ANY collusion associated with this administration in their efforts to justify defeat.


As I said before, I won't entertain this liberal "sensationalism" that has taken over today's media.

First -- You show me actual FACTS that this Russian had a solid career within the Kremlin of the Russian government, documents that prove her career was more than just simply an attorney who just happens to be Russian. All this has otherwise become this boogie man paranoia joke, of someone trying to CREATE DRAMA out of something that doesn't really exist. Yet even I am able to tell a "used car salesman" who is trying to SELL me something, something that is meant to be real appealing but who is really full of crap.

The reason I say that the story behind the lady isn't the focus is because of this. say I'm a cop who goes online and poses as a little girl looking to hook up with an older man. If I find a man to agree to meet me to partake in something illegal then he is going to get busted. It happens all the time and it doesn't make a difference that a little girl did not show up

However if the democrats are looking for impeachment ... assumptions, "l thought that it appeared to ME" without solid evidence to back it up .. such as the background of the woman involved being actually working exclusively and directly with the Kremlin or in Putin's inner circle, does not clearly bring a case for removal.

Based on your point of view argument you just stated, a case of obstruction against Hillary for bleaching a server and HER husbands private tarmac encounter with Loretta Lynch would prove (in itself) obstruction and Loretta Lynch with interference with an investigation. So based on your reasoning we have two individuals that are likewise revealed damning evidence (without the need to go into details) worthy of removal from political office all based on a meeting or based on assumed behavior in itself. Your hopes of finding collusion comes with likemanner flaws.

It's called hypocrisy . It is a staple point of libturds

Put your money where your mouth is smart guy. What have I said that makes me a hypocrite?

Are you a libturd?

You've called me one plenty of times. So go ahead and back up your bullshit. Where is my hypocrisy?

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

The Russian Trump JR was meeting was a lead attorney who was given the "ok" to be in this country from Loretta Lunch, the DOJ under the Obama administration, to represent a Russian client over a lawsuit in the United States. She was not a member of the KGB, she has no specific ties as member of the Kremlin, she is not related or a part of Putin's inner circle, she is a Russian attorney. Her identity is very clear she is not a part of Putin's cabinet, but is an attorney who happens to live in and be Russian. To say otherwise is not being truthful to the facts.

Did you happen to read the email that was a pretext to the meeting? Whats that all about? and why in the world are you trying to tie Obama and the DOJ into this, they don't factor into this at all.

On Jun 7, 2016, at 4:20 PM, Rob Goldstone wrote:
Don
Hope all is well
Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday.
I believe you are aware of the meeting - and so wondered if 3pm or later on Thursday works for you?
I assume it would be at your office.
Best
Rob Goldstone

I brought up the Obama Administration, and Loretta Lynch surrounding the Russian woman in question because, while liberal democrats and the mainstream media have chosen to make "sensationalism" their predominant focus regarding President Trump, accurate Investigations and old fashioned credible journalism are built on an analysis of ALL the facts, particularly WHO they met and what career capacity did they serve. This particular woman in question, and her career as well as position as a Russian, means everything in this. Otherwise we would have liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who just happens to be Russian.


Let me break this down real slow and detailed so you can follow where I'm going. The focus is the RUSSIAN in question surrounding the meeting, what role did she play in all this. If you check her background you will find she is an attorney who happens to be Russian.

1) There is no evidence that she works conclusively for the Kremlin. She is not a KGB agent, she is not a member of Putin's inner circle, but an attorney who just happened to be simply Russian. This attorney was allowed by DOJ Loretta Lynch in the country to Represent a Russian Firm in a lawsuit case.

2). If she WAS some form of government spy who actually worked for the government. I know liberals are juicy for a government internal agent that the Trump administration conspired with, its obvious as their chosen hopeful candidate lost and they need excuses to find some form of vindication. HOWEVER, if that's what they hope to find with this attorney. Her visa was expired when she requested entry. So if she was this "conspiracy agent" why would Loretta Lynch, the DOJ under President Obama, ALLOW a person of interest involved in election collusion fraud INTO this country in the first place?

If the emails that spoke of this Russian Attorney was in fact really a woman representing the Kremlin government as an agent, the "CONNECTION" to this collusion, then the DOJ under President Obama wasn't doing her job to do a thorough background check in the first place and just allowed an expired visa Russian saboteur to walk in our border.

Do I need to go further into this? Do you see the real significance behind the woman, Russian attorney, involved in this meeting?

If we don't look at the FACTS of the career background of the individual involved we would find liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who is Russian, to even include a little girl simply attempting to sell something to drink at her Lemonade Stand at this point. I will even going as far (without apology) as stating liberal democrats are closely flirting with reintroducing McCarthyism in their hunger to find ANY collusion associated with this administration in their efforts to justify defeat.


As I said before, I won't entertain this liberal "sensationalism" that has taken over today's media.

First -- You show me actual FACTS that this Russian had a solid career within the Kremlin of the Russian government, documents that prove her career was more than just simply an attorney who just happens to be Russian. All this has otherwise become this boogie man paranoia joke, of someone trying to CREATE DRAMA out of something that doesn't really exist. Yet even I am able to tell a "used car salesman" who is trying to SELL me something, something that is meant to be real appealing but who is really full of crap.

The reason I say that the story behind the lady isn't the focus is because of this. say I'm a cop who goes online and poses as a little girl looking to hook up with an older man. If I find a man to agree to meet me to partake in something illegal then he is going to get busted. It happens all the time and it doesn't make a difference that a little girl did not show up

However if the democrats are looking for impeachment ... assumptions, "l thought that it appeared to ME" without solid evidence to back it up .. such as the background of the woman involved being actually working exclusively and directly with the Kremlin or in Putin's inner circle, does not clearly bring a case for removal.

Based on your point of view argument you just stated, a case of obstruction against Hillary for bleaching a server and HER husbands private tarmac encounter with Loretta Lynch would prove (in itself) obstruction and Loretta Lynch with interference with an investigation. So based on your reasoning we have two individuals that are likewise revealed damning evidence (without the need to go into details) worthy of removal from political office all based on a meeting or based on assumed behavior in itself. Your hopes of finding collusion comes with likemanner flaws.

First of all, I'm not hoping for evidence of collusion to pop up nor am I hoping for impeachment. That would be a sad day for America. I simply want honesty from our leadership. I'm sick of the lies.

The clintons were deemed criminals all election. Does the phrase "lock her up" ring a bell? She most likely lost the election because of it. If you think charges should be charged then, like with Trump, you need evidence. A meeting isn't illegal, you'd have to prove they spoke about the investigation. Deleting emails isn't illegal unless she was deleting evidence. You'd need proof of these to press charges. The FBI did investigate and Comey recommended no charges. They are investigating Trump now. Considering all the lies that are being exposed I'd say they have good reason to investigate. We shall see what they find

Going by the timeline of events, Coney recommended no charges against Hillary following the meeting with Loretta Lynch in which there was a push to change it from the term "investigation" when associated with Hillary. Other than that I agree you need further evidence, and this belief that politicians (especially surrounding the time of an election and "digging up dirt") needs to be honest just is not associated with that arena. In fact I challenge you to find a politician who can be honest when it comes to getting themselves in office.

 

[Slade3200]

Did you happen to read the email that was a pretext to the meeting? Whats that all about? and why in the world are you trying to tie Obama and the DOJ into this, they don't factor into this at all.

On Jun 7, 2016, at 4:20 PM, Rob Goldstone wrote:
Don
Hope all is well
Emin asked that I schedule a meeting with you and The Russian government attorney who is flying over from Moscow for this Thursday.
I believe you are aware of the meeting - and so wondered if 3pm or later on Thursday works for you?
I assume it would be at your office.
Best
Rob Goldstone

I brought up the Obama Administration, and Loretta Lynch surrounding the Russian woman in question because, while liberal democrats and the mainstream media have chosen to make "sensationalism" their predominant focus regarding President Trump, accurate Investigations and old fashioned credible journalism are built on an analysis of ALL the facts, particularly WHO they met and what career capacity did they serve. This particular woman in question, and her career as well as position as a Russian, means everything in this. Otherwise we would have liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who just happens to be Russian.


Let me break this down real slow and detailed so you can follow where I'm going. The focus is the RUSSIAN in question surrounding the meeting, what role did she play in all this. If you check her background you will find she is an attorney who happens to be Russian.

1) There is no evidence that she works conclusively for the Kremlin. She is not a KGB agent, she is not a member of Putin's inner circle, but an attorney who just happened to be simply Russian. This attorney was allowed by DOJ Loretta Lynch in the country to Represent a Russian Firm in a lawsuit case.

2). If she WAS some form of government spy who actually worked for the government. I know liberals are juicy for a government internal agent that the Trump administration conspired with, its obvious as their chosen hopeful candidate lost and they need excuses to find some form of vindication. HOWEVER, if that's what they hope to find with this attorney. Her visa was expired when she requested entry. So if she was this "conspiracy agent" why would Loretta Lynch, the DOJ under President Obama, ALLOW a person of interest involved in election collusion fraud INTO this country in the first place?

If the emails that spoke of this Russian Attorney was in fact really a woman representing the Kremlin government as an agent, the "CONNECTION" to this collusion, then the DOJ under President Obama wasn't doing her job to do a thorough background check in the first place and just allowed an expired visa Russian saboteur to walk in our border.

Do I need to go further into this? Do you see the real significance behind the woman, Russian attorney, involved in this meeting?

If we don't look at the FACTS of the career background of the individual involved we would find liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who is Russian, to even include a little girl simply attempting to sell something to drink at her Lemonade Stand at this point. I will even going as far (without apology) as stating liberal democrats are closely flirting with reintroducing McCarthyism in their hunger to find ANY collusion associated with this administration in their efforts to justify defeat.


As I said before, I won't entertain this liberal "sensationalism" that has taken over today's media.

First -- You show me actual FACTS that this Russian had a solid career within the Kremlin of the Russian government, documents that prove her career was more than just simply an attorney who just happens to be Russian. All this has otherwise become this boogie man paranoia joke, of someone trying to CREATE DRAMA out of something that doesn't really exist. Yet even I am able to tell a "used car salesman" who is trying to SELL me something, something that is meant to be real appealing but who is really full of crap.

The reason I say that the story behind the lady isn't the focus is because of this. say I'm a cop who goes online and poses as a little girl looking to hook up with an older man. If I find a man to agree to meet me to partake in something illegal then he is going to get busted. It happens all the time and it doesn't make a difference that a little girl did not show up

However if the democrats are looking for impeachment ... assumptions, "l thought that it appeared to ME" without solid evidence to back it up .. such as the background of the woman involved being actually working exclusively and directly with the Kremlin or in Putin's inner circle, does not clearly bring a case for removal.

Based on your point of view argument you just stated, a case of obstruction against Hillary for bleaching a server and HER husbands private tarmac encounter with Loretta Lynch would prove (in itself) obstruction and Loretta Lynch with interference with an investigation. So based on your reasoning we have two individuals that are likewise revealed damning evidence (without the need to go into details) worthy of removal from political office all based on a meeting or based on assumed behavior in itself. Your hopes of finding collusion comes with likemanner flaws.

First of all, I'm not hoping for evidence of collusion to pop up nor am I hoping for impeachment. That would be a sad day for America. I simply want honesty from our leadership. I'm sick of the lies.

The clintons were deemed criminals all election. Does the phrase "lock her up" ring a bell? She most likely lost the election because of it. If you think charges should be charged then, like with Trump, you need evidence. A meeting isn't illegal, you'd have to prove they spoke about the investigation. Deleting emails isn't illegal unless she was deleting evidence. You'd need proof of these to press charges. The FBI did investigate and Comey recommended no charges. They are investigating Trump now. Considering all the lies that are being exposed I'd say they have good reason to investigate. We shall see what they find

Going by the timeline of events, Coney recommended no charges against Hillary following the meeting with Loretta Lynch in which there was a push to change it from the term "investigation" when associated with Hillary. Other than that I agree you need further evidence, and this belief that politicians (especially surrounding the time of an election and "digging up dirt") needs to be honest just is not associated with that arena. In fact I challenge you to find a politician who can be honest when it comes to getting themselves in office.

Over promising on agenda items is one thing. It is annoying when they fluff it up and make promises about things that they can't necessarily control, but thats campaigning. The lies that Trump and his crew are telling are a completely different thing. For myself it is pretty simple. I think the President of our country needs to act with honesty, integrity and character. It is entertaining to see Trump go off on his twitter rants but in the big picture it is embarrassing for our country and it is damaging our system by furthering divide and hatred. We need unity, inspiration, productiveness, cooperation, and healthy debate. These things are all being lost.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

I brought up the Obama Administration, and Loretta Lynch surrounding the Russian woman in question because, while liberal democrats and the mainstream media have chosen to make "sensationalism" their predominant focus regarding President Trump, accurate Investigations and old fashioned credible journalism are built on an analysis of ALL the facts, particularly WHO they met and what career capacity did they serve. This particular woman in question, and her career as well as position as a Russian, means everything in this. Otherwise we would have liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who just happens to be Russian.


Let me break this down real slow and detailed so you can follow where I'm going. The focus is the RUSSIAN in question surrounding the meeting, what role did she play in all this. If you check her background you will find she is an attorney who happens to be Russian.

1) There is no evidence that she works conclusively for the Kremlin. She is not a KGB agent, she is not a member of Putin's inner circle, but an attorney who just happened to be simply Russian. This attorney was allowed by DOJ Loretta Lynch in the country to Represent a Russian Firm in a lawsuit case.

2). If she WAS some form of government spy who actually worked for the government. I know liberals are juicy for a government internal agent that the Trump administration conspired with, its obvious as their chosen hopeful candidate lost and they need excuses to find some form of vindication. HOWEVER, if that's what they hope to find with this attorney. Her visa was expired when she requested entry. So if she was this "conspiracy agent" why would Loretta Lynch, the DOJ under President Obama, ALLOW a person of interest involved in election collusion fraud INTO this country in the first place?

If the emails that spoke of this Russian Attorney was in fact really a woman representing the Kremlin government as an agent, the "CONNECTION" to this collusion, then the DOJ under President Obama wasn't doing her job to do a thorough background check in the first place and just allowed an expired visa Russian saboteur to walk in our border.

Do I need to go further into this? Do you see the real significance behind the woman, Russian attorney, involved in this meeting?

If we don't look at the FACTS of the career background of the individual involved we would find liberals freaking out and trying to make a government connection in everything and every citizen who is Russian, to even include a little girl simply attempting to sell something to drink at her Lemonade Stand at this point. I will even going as far (without apology) as stating liberal democrats are closely flirting with reintroducing McCarthyism in their hunger to find ANY collusion associated with this administration in their efforts to justify defeat.


As I said before, I won't entertain this liberal "sensationalism" that has taken over today's media.

First -- You show me actual FACTS that this Russian had a solid career within the Kremlin of the Russian government, documents that prove her career was more than just simply an attorney who just happens to be Russian. All this has otherwise become this boogie man paranoia joke, of someone trying to CREATE DRAMA out of something that doesn't really exist. Yet even I am able to tell a "used car salesman" who is trying to SELL me something, something that is meant to be real appealing but who is really full of crap.

The reason I say that the story behind the lady isn't the focus is because of this. say I'm a cop who goes online and poses as a little girl looking to hook up with an older man. If I find a man to agree to meet me to partake in something illegal then he is going to get busted. It happens all the time and it doesn't make a difference that a little girl did not show up

However if the democrats are looking for impeachment ... assumptions, "l thought that it appeared to ME" without solid evidence to back it up .. such as the background of the woman involved being actually working exclusively and directly with the Kremlin or in Putin's inner circle, does not clearly bring a case for removal.

Based on your point of view argument you just stated, a case of obstruction against Hillary for bleaching a server and HER husbands private tarmac encounter with Loretta Lynch would prove (in itself) obstruction and Loretta Lynch with interference with an investigation. So based on your reasoning we have two individuals that are likewise revealed damning evidence (without the need to go into details) worthy of removal from political office all based on a meeting or based on assumed behavior in itself. Your hopes of finding collusion comes with likemanner flaws.

First of all, I'm not hoping for evidence of collusion to pop up nor am I hoping for impeachment. That would be a sad day for America. I simply want honesty from our leadership. I'm sick of the lies.

The clintons were deemed criminals all election. Does the phrase "lock her up" ring a bell? She most likely lost the election because of it. If you think charges should be charged then, like with Trump, you need evidence. A meeting isn't illegal, you'd have to prove they spoke about the investigation. Deleting emails isn't illegal unless she was deleting evidence. You'd need proof of these to press charges. The FBI did investigate and Comey recommended no charges. They are investigating Trump now. Considering all the lies that are being exposed I'd say they have good reason to investigate. We shall see what they find

Going by the timeline of events, Coney recommended no charges against Hillary following the meeting with Loretta Lynch in which there was a push to change it from the term "investigation" when associated with Hillary. Other than that I agree you need further evidence, and this belief that politicians (especially surrounding the time of an election and "digging up dirt") needs to be honest just is not associated with that arena. In fact I challenge you to find a politician who can be honest when it comes to getting themselves in office.

Over promising on agenda items is one thing. It is annoying when they fluff it up and make promises about things that they can't necessarily control, but thats campaigning. The lies that Trump and his crew are telling are a completely different thing. For myself it is pretty simple. I think the President of our country needs to act with honesty, integrity and character. It is entertaining to see Trump go off on his twitter rants but in the big picture it is embarrassing for our country and it is damaging our system by furthering divide and hatred. We need unity, inspiration, productiveness, cooperation, and healthy debate. These things are all being lost.

Our country hasn't known unity since following the Bush / Gore election, it's too polarized over what one ideology wants and what another won't dare support. We had obstruction under Obama, and while the democrats attempted to classify it as racism, such "beliefs" were short lived with the calls to RESIST by a candidate who lost her chance at election. Quite frankly even mitt Romney had better grace and acceptance when being faced with voter defeat. It's the left with the push towards greater socialized medicine that has taken greater shape and hostility towards the opposition sense Hillary made an attempt at it. It's also the attack on the welfare system to which the conservatives find very little justifiable reasoning to multiple generations of taxpayer government support to those unwilling to work, while able bodied individuals work and establish their own strides towards a better life for their family. It's an attack on planned parenthood, another target of ideological views and perception. One claiming women's choice while providing additional funding through Obamacare, one seeing the organization as a cover for their true nature in advocating abortion while claiming the opponent's need for health and a respect for life as a "right" which should be sanctioned by the government as simply contradictory (at the very least). It's the view of illegal immigrants, another issue of opposing terms. One sees the need to keep generations of families together while the other cites the left's inability to support federal government LAW through the structuring of sactuary cities. These are but a few, but with each presidency the class and war of ideology grows. This is also the reason behind the media obsession to attack Trump, which is based on the liberal media's ideological platforms they support as being threatened. Don't perceive in also trying to suggest to me that CNN, CNBC and the New York Times aren't bias (as some on the left still claim), Trump's decisions have caused these news outlets to show their true bias colors now more than ever.