Connecting the Trump-Russia Dots

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by adoo, Mar 8, 2017.

  1. pgabriel

    pgabriel Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    32,608
    Likes Received:
    425
    What question

    Im laughing at you with no proof

    I don't to have to hope for laughs

    Former Republicans like you are the real laugh

    Dude won and you stil cant pick winners
     
    #1361 pgabriel, Jul 16, 2017 at 9:34 PM
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2017 at 7:45 AM
  2. dandorotik

    dandorotik Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Messages:
    9,068
    Likes Received:
    1,529
    #Teetotalism
     
  3. dandorotik

    dandorotik Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Messages:
    9,068
    Likes Received:
    1,529
    Possibly. I'm not going to provide a qualified opinion on this b/c I don't know enough about the details to do so. If I research this more in detail, I can give a better response.
     
  4. NewRoxFan

    NewRoxFan Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,853
    Likes Received:
    1,341
    Trump returns to the "meeting with Russian agents to get political dirt on an opponent and helping the Russians influence American elections" is "just politics" alibi.

     
  5. pgabriel

    pgabriel Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    32,608
    Likes Received:
    425

    Donald Trump Jr doesn't need an alibi he didn't commit a crime

    Trump Sr is making a legitimate point about trying to win elections

    GWB made sure people knew about McCain's supposed illegitimate black kid
     
  6. No Worries

    No Worries Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1999
    Messages:
    17,524
    Likes Received:
    713
    A guy walks into a bank, pulls out a gun and says give me all of your money.

    Teller says that unfortunately that they are fresh out of money.

    Guy puts the gun away and says nevermind.

    No harm, no foul, right?
     
    B-Bob likes this.
  7. JuanValdez

    JuanValdez Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    26,311
    Likes Received:
    1,486
    Politicians engage in plenty of dirty tricks to win. Many fall in the immoral but legal category. But that's all in the family. When you let people outside the family come and mess with us, it's different.
     
    pgabriel likes this.
  8. MexAmercnMoose

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2006
    Messages:
    697
    Likes Received:
    31
    have you read the Steele dossier? (assuming its true) i know you probably already have, but go back and re-read it....the answers to your questions are in their....now all we have to do is for more details to come out, and they will confirm Trump's lies...this is all soooo juicy, "i love it"
     
    #1368 MexAmercnMoose, Jul 17, 2017 at 10:31 AM
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2017 at 10:42 AM
  9. dobro1229

    dobro1229 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Messages:
    13,268
    Likes Received:
    1,726
    A. You aren't a lawyer, and plenty of lawyers have said this is a clear violation of campaign laws that prohibit a foreign country from soliciting themselves to a campaign. The Don Jr. email presents a case in clear black and white that the Russian government was presenting an opportunity for the Trump campaign to utilize Russian provided assets to assist in his campaign, and we have it clear as day that Don Jr. was receptive to this proposal.
    There is also a legal case for conspiracy which uses Trump Jr.s own words against him. He clearly stated that the meeting was about adoptions and has later clarified that the Magnitsky act was what this lawyer was interested in. In the email it states about dirt on Hillary Clinton being the campaign asset he was looking to get in return. This is a clear Quid Pro Quo where the intent is understood with public statements from Don Jr. and the email that the Russian government would supply opposition research on Hillary Clinton if they work with them to remove sanctions ALA Magnitsky Act.

    Point being.... the line you are fed that there was no laws broken is complete BS. At best, your line needs to be that "Campaign finance laws aren't that big of a deal, and no one will go to jail over it". But outright acting like a lawyer and dismissing clear evidence to a crime being committed just shows you have no idea what you are talking about in terms of "Crimes" or are just a sucker for Trump's propaganda machine.

    B. Trump won your vote on "Draining the Swamp" yet he's admitting to being a politician himself doing supposed dirty politician back alley deals. If you voted for him because he was going to "Drain the Swamp" yet you are okay with him doing this as a politician himself you are a major hypocrite. Or when you said "Drain the Swamp" were you just referring to Democrats?
     
  10. B-Bob

    B-Bob Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    21,250
    Likes Received:
    2,542
    nm
     
    #1370 B-Bob, Jul 17, 2017 at 10:49 AM
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2017 at 4:35 PM
  11. NewRoxFan

    NewRoxFan Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,853
    Likes Received:
    1,341
    You have made this claim a number of times. I don't know your legal background, but I do know that a number of legal experts have already addressed Trump Junior's actions (see link). Unless you have some legal expertise you haven't shared to date, I would defer to the legal experts cited in the link I provided. I would also wait for the three investigations to rule.

    http://bbs.clutchfans.net/index.php...rump-russia-dots.281170/page-62#post-11210855

    I'd also pose the same challenge to Trump Senior... I don't know his legal expertise, but considering the constant changing of stories to try to cover up what happened and who participated (and a question remains of Trump Senior's participation, again, given all the changes in stories by the Trump team), I think again I will defer to the legal experts that have already addressed this... and wait for the results of the three investigations already underway.

    As to the comment about Bush and McCain... no clue how that defends Trump Junior or Trump Senior. Perhaps you can start a thread about GWB?
     
  12. pgabriel

    pgabriel Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    32,608
    Likes Received:
    425

    Nothing to you wrote says taking the meeting is illegal if he didn't use the information

    Gu
     
  13. DaDakota

    DaDakota Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 1999
    Messages:
    102,622
    Likes Received:
    4,191
    That is treason dumbass.

    Most US Citizens would report it to the FBI.

    There is no excuse if you try to make one you are full of ****.

    DD
     
  14. dandorotik

    dandorotik Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Messages:
    9,068
    Likes Received:
    1,529
    I clearly don't understand how absolutely dumb you've become. Do your research.
     
    txtony likes this.
  15. Astrodome

    Astrodome Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2015
    Messages:
    1,327
    Likes Received:
    803
    So death penalty or nah?
     
  16. NewRoxFan

    NewRoxFan Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2002
    Messages:
    9,853
    Likes Received:
    1,341
    Hmm... hard to respond to this incomplete thought or post. But it appears that your alibi has changed... or at least evolved. So it appears you now accept that Junior and other members of Trump's team (and possibly Trump Senior) met with the Russians to get dirt of their opponent and allow the Russians to influence the election, but you now claim it wasn't illegal because "Trump and team did not use the information".

    Again, I don't know your legal background and expertise, but again, if you read the legal opinions presented by legal experts in the post and article I cited, it doesn't even matter if Trump Junior is honest (something one has ample reason to question based on the constant lies he has made about this meeting, who attended, and what happened) and accept the premise that they didn't use the info, he has still broken the law and is guilty of collusion and/or conspiracy. So moving the goal posts again hasn't helped your argument at all.

    Furthermore, Trump Junior lied when he said "nothing came out of the meeting." One of the attendees of the meeting (the former Russian spy, who Trump lied by not saying was in the meeting btw) said that the Russian lawyer handed over a folder of materials described as harmful to the Clinto campaign. And just minutes after the meeting, Trump Senior tweeted the first of numerous tweets about Clinton emails.

    Lastly, If Trump Junior approached someone for stolen goods, met with them to look at the stolen goods, and then decided he didn't want them... did Trump Junior break the law?


    [​IMG]
     
  17. Cohete Rojo

    Cohete Rojo Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2009
    Messages:
    7,872
    Likes Received:
    561
    The meeting does not come close to being an act of treason.
     
  18. Aceshigh7

    Aceshigh7 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2003
    Messages:
    3,603
    Likes Received:
    123
    Why would you assume the dossier is true? Because you want it to be? It has already been proven to be bogus and even the FBI agreed on that point. And Buzzfeed and John McCain are both facing libel & defamation lawsuits because of it.
     
  19. Cohete Rojo

    Cohete Rojo Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2009
    Messages:
    7,872
    Likes Received:
    561
    The DNC emails had nothing to do with Hillary Clinton's emails - which all but 30,000 were ever released.




    [​IMG]
     
  20. dobro1229

    dobro1229 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Messages:
    13,268
    Likes Received:
    1,726
    Are you just F-ing with people or do you just not understand? Again... the law is clear. You don't have to use the information for it to be a crime. The Trump campaign was given an Asset from a foreign power, and its been used in cases before where it doesn't necessarily have to be money. That's a crime. To the extent and what the indictment, if any, will be, we have to wait and see.

    People use the analogy all the time about it doesn't matter if you stole money when you broke into the bank with the intent of stealing the money.

    And again... you aren't an attorney, and if you are one I sure as heck wouldn't hire you to represent me.
     
    #1380 dobro1229, Jul 17, 2017 at 11:59 AM
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2017 at 12:04 PM
Loading...

Share This Page