The Totalitarian Leftist Tactics against the Right

Just out of curiosity, were you saying the same thing 20 years ago during the Whitewater investigations against the Clintons? 'Cause it took several years before Starr's investigation produced any indictments.Oh, and the perjury and obstruction of justice charges against Clinton himself only resulted after the investigation moved well beyond the initial investigation of real estate fraud. (I only mention this part in case this investigation turns up something unrelated to the Russians and looks into that, and the Republicans then scream "foul!")

Is that relevant? Your post on which I commented said: I assumed you were talking about the investigations by the FBI, the special prosecutor, and congressional committees since these are the ones who doing the investigating and will be the ones who "find" anything. Assuming that I correctly read your meaning, my question is whether or not your patience with these investigations are perhaps shorter than your patience was with the Starr investigation which took years to produce actionable results.Was I wrong? Are you actually talking about the media? Because the media is reporting on the current state of the investigations by the official bodies; why do you think the media should find anything before the official investigators do?I think you might have to clarify what you meant.Edited by Chiroptera, : Typo.

Fair enough.I may eventually want to get back to a discussion on the media, but I'm going to wait a bit.

Legally, there may not be much here. According to the only one talking about the meeting itself (namely, Donald Jr), it turned out that the whole meeting was to talk about the Magnitsky Act.I doubt that "intent to received hacked emails" rises to the same level of prosecutability as "conspiracy to murder", but I may be wrong.More evidence may come to alight about what actually took place in the meeting itself that may lead to an indictment, but right now I'm thinking this is going to be a legal "nothing burger".Far more important, of course, is the moral and ethical implications of going into this meeting. Imagine the Republicans' reaction if it was the Democrats that were meeting with a foreign representative (not that anyone can accuse US conservatives of moral consistency).And this may end up being relevant to other parts of the Russia investigations going on now.But I may be wrong; I don't spend my entire day glued to news sources, so it would be easy for relevant information to slip by me.

To test it, there has to be a prosecutor willing to press charges. I admit this is only a guess, but unless something more comes up, I doubt that will happen.'Course something more might come up as this is investigated further, but right now I'm seeing the main value of this as part of the bigger picture of how involved together the Trump campaign and the Russians were.- I thought Donald Jr was the one designated to stay out of government to look after the businesses? Am I confusing him with Eric?

Or at least consult with the campaign's legal advisors. That's what I would have done if I were in that situation.

As they say in Red State America: You can never investigate Benghazi too many times!

Say what? If they really did have evidence of this kind of illegal activity, then it would have been a crime to not turn it over to the appropriate law enforcement agencies.