Summations Only

Interesting indeed. At least that jibes with Jr's claim that they didn't get any dirt. However, it is pretty obvious Don Sr. knew about the meeting which he then later lied about when he said no one was meeting with the Russians. Trumps reflexive need to cover up everything is what is driving this entire scandal.John Oliver's description of the scandal as "Stupid Watergate" is my favorite because it sums it up rather neatly. It is their stupidity in covering up a crime that never happened that will lead them to committing actual crimes, like obstruction of justice.

Taq writes:

quote:

---

It is their stupidity in covering up a crime that never happened

---

Except Trump, Jr. just admitted to the crime. It is a violation of the FEC to accept "anything of value" from a foreign source with regard to the campaign: The courts have determined that "anything of value" is not limited to money.Said source does not need to be an official member of the government but merely any person. By being told that a Russian source wishes to talk to you in order to give you information regarding your political opponent (specifically, "part of Russia and its government support for Mr. Trump"), that is "something of value" that you have agreed to take. That you are claiming that you didn't find it valuable is irrelevant, for that is conspiracy. As many have pointed out, if you go to a bank to rob it only to find that there isn't any money there, you're not off the hook. Trump, Jr. actively and enthusiastically sought assistance from a foreign source with regard to the campaign. That's a violation of FEC regulations and against the law.And, of course, since every time the Trumps have talked about this particular meeting, they have lied about it (first, there was no meeting, then there was but it wasn't about the Clinton campaign, then it was but it quickly shifted to the Magnitsky Act, then it was a meeting that anybody would have taken), why should we believe the claim that there wasn't anything of substance given and that Trump only found out about it a couple days ago (that last one has already been proven a lie)? About the only thing that suggests there wasn't anything of substance was the fact that right at that time, Trump gave a speech where he said he was about to drop some dirt on Clinton...and then never did.But now we find out that Sessions just settled with the very same Russian lawyer regarding a money laundering lawsuit for pennies...a lawsuit brought on by Preet Bharara who was fired by the Trump administration...just two days before it was to go to trial. The scheme was to launder money through the purchase of Manhattan real estate. Now, Trump has significant real estate holdings and I am certainly not suggesting that this scheme directly involved him. If it had, the DoJ would certainly have known about it by now considering that they were about to go to trial and they would have said something. But we cannot overlook the fact that this fraud scheme was uncovered by a Russian lawyer, Sergei Magnitsky, who has conveniently died in prison, and it is because of this fraud scheme that the Magnitsky Act was put into place to begin with...which, again, was being fought by the very same lawyer that Trump, Jr. met with and was the lawyer fighting the fraud scheme. In fact, she had to step out of the Trump, Jr. meeting in order to make a court appearance regarding this case. So this certainly lends some credence to the idea that Trump is in bed with Russian oligarchs and has engaged in money laundering for them (I think it was Eric Trump who pretty much admitted it in his previous statements about how much business they have done with the Russians) and thus while this case may not have directly involved Trump, pursuing it may have eventually included him.And by the way, this is precisely the modus operandi of how Russians recruit people: First, you send someone who isn't directly connected with the government (deniability) in order to feel out the asset and see if they are amenable to being exploited. You don't give away the farm right away because if the asset isn't going to play, you've exposed yourself. And let us not forget that right after this meeting is when the Trump campaign started setting up the back channel lines of communication with the Russians.So in the end, Trump, Jr. has directly admitted to a crime while Trump, Sr. has said it is "standard politics" to engage in this crime and that he would have done it if he were told about it. The question is just how far people are willing to go in pursuit of consequences. Remember, Paul Ryan insists that Trump is "new to this" and thus doesn't know what he's doing.

That is a bit of a stretch, and I suspect it won't be pursued in court.

It appears to this non-lawyer that he did not receive anything of value. A lawyer could certainly argue that attending the meeting was soliciting something of value.

Does not matter if he got anything of value, he made a deal to accept something of value from a foreign government. Its like robbing the bank, and walking out with no money.And it would be still hard to convince a jury that he did not get anything. It's just a new adjustment to the lies, remember we started out with we had no contact with Russians. And now we are at we had contact and planned to collude but we dint get anything and trump knew nothing of it.

That may depend on how many fundy Christians are on the jury.

Exactly. Apparently, a fundy Christian would understand that some lefty set up Donald Jr. without hearing a shred of evidence or seeing any indication that anybody to the left of Atilla the Hun was even involved.You simply don't have the proper mindset. Try asking yourself, "What would Alex Jones say?" Imagine a jury filled with people doing that.

Yea i have the persistent problem of believing people are rational. But the american legal system even discourages rational people.Edited by frako, : No reason given.

And now it turns out that there were more people in the meeting than Trump, Jr. originally claimed (yet another lie). It appears that an actual Russian hacker was there. A hacker with ties to Putin who was involved in a hacking of a mine company. And it seems that they had actual names to give to the Trumps.The conspiracy nut inside me is wondering if this is all just a ploy by Mueller to get them involved in an accessory-after-the-fact charge.

Tom Price admits that the new Trumpcare is only repeal, no replace

quote:

---

But despite claims by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) that his latest version of Trumpcare would provide stability while improving affordability, Secretary of Health and Human Services Tom Price made a major admission about the bill Sunday: that the legislation to repeal and replace Obamacare would simply permit insurers return to the ways they used to operate.

​

On ABC’s This Week, the longtime Obamacare critic was pressed by Jon Karl about a provision in the bill pushed by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), which would allow insurance companies to offer sub-standard plans. Karl noted that not only do more than 10 medical groups and 32 cancer organizations oppose the Trumpcare bill, a rare joint statement by the biggest insurance companies in the country called the Cruz amendment ‘unworkable in any form’ [as] ‘it would lead to, ‘widespread terminations of coverage.

​

Price responded that he found that wall of opposition really perplexing, especially from the insurance companies, cause all they have to do is dust off how they did business before Obamacare.

​

...

​

But while much of this bill would return things to the bad old days, it would also hurt consumers in a novel way. Under the Trumpcare bill,customers who purchase a cheapo Cruz substandard plans would not be considered to have had continuous coverage. And a provision of the bill states that anyone without continuous coverage would be subject to a six-month waiting period before they could buy any real plan. In other words, it could be even worse than the pre-Obamacare system for people who suddenly become sick.

---

They really; do care... about hurting the American people as much as they possibly can.

How do you get Trump to change a light bulb?You don't. He will lie that he changed it and all the Republicans will sit in the dark and agree.

And the darkness will be the brightest light in the history of the world.

That's what struck me about this provision: People will be able to choose (and remember, under free market libertarianism not being able to afford something is the same thing as making a choice) to essentially go without insurance...as long as the pay a fee to a private corporation.

Donald’s Pravda: Trump and his apologists spookily echo Vladimir PutinI'd say that the opening paragraphs rather obviously apply to the supporters of autocrats, too

The New York Times: Reluctantly, Trump Recertifies Iran’s Compliance With Nuclear AgreementThe US President has to certify to Congress every 90 days whether Iran is complying with the "Nuclear Deal". For the second time, the Trump Administration has certified Iran's compliance.One of Trump's campaign promises was to scrap the deal and negotiate a better one. Unfortunately, this agreement involves the international community, especially the US' European allies. Trump is learning that negotiating deals is much more difficult in real life than on TV.