Trump associates may have coordinated with Russians, according to US officials

[iiandyiiii]

@Okrahoma

So - no one would put their money where their mouth is?

How surprising.

Why do you think anyone would make a bet worth real money with a stranger in the internet?

[Superdude]

@Okrahoma

Again: “During this busy period, Robert Goldstone contacted Don Jr. in an email and suggested that people had information concerning alleged wrongdoing by Democratic Party front-runner, Hillary Clinton, in her dealings with Russia,” he said to The Times in an email on Monday. “Don Jr.’s takeaway from this communication was that someone had information potentially helpful to the campaign and it was coming from someone he knew. Don Jr. had no knowledge as to what specific information, if any, would be discussed.””

How surprising and concerning that that information about “alleged wrongdoing by Democratic Party front-runner, Hillary Clinton, in her dealings with Russia” would come from (gasp!) Russia! Wow.

I know leftists don’t like actually putting money where their mouth is but: I will make a bet with anyone for $100 that there was nothing criminal in this affair. Come on, you’re so excited about it. Take the bet. If, within 2 years, there is no indictment of Don Jr. for this - I win. Is 2 years good 'nuff?

Oh, by the way, this explains why it might be illegal.

Why Trump Jr.'s Meeting With A Russian Lawyer Could Be Illegal

[VinylTurnip]

@Fiveyearlurker

I give you credit for your persistence and loyalty.

Better call it a gift, because you ain’t never getting it back.

[Gyrate]

@Fubaya

I haven’t seen any stories fizzle out. What you don’t seem to learn is that this is exactly how investigations play out. I said several months ago that there would be many stories over weeks and months, some big and some small, some that even turn out to be false or irrelevant, because that’s how this works.

You claim that every story is a bombshell and that it goes nowhere and is therefore untrue and everybody’s innocent, when the truth is that they are all pieces of a puzzle. What that puzzle looks like when finished is anybody’s guess, but you sure as hell don’t know.

The only thing that is clear right now is that the investigations are going deep and wide and fast. That never happens when there is nothing to find.

What you’re missing here is that snowflakes are tiny, fragile things. Just look at them - they melt when they touch you or even when you breathe on them. There’s absolutely nothing to them. It would be ridiculous to worry about them.

And that’s why avalanches are completely harmless.

[Superdude]

@Superdude

Oh, by the way, this explains why it might be illegal.

Exactly Why Donald Trump Jr.'s Meeting With A Russian Lawyer Could Be Illegal | HuffPost Latest News

Missed the edit window:

From that link:

The alleged illegal contribution would be any opposition research that Veselnitskaya purported to have about Clinton. Campaign finance law defines “contribution” broadly. In this case, the opposition research would qualify as an illegal in-kind contribution. At least one past opinion issued by the FEC found that “information” could qualify as “something of value” that would make it an in-kind contribution. According to Trump Jr., the lawyer ultimately didn’t provide any useable information.

The ban on foreign campaign contributions also defines “solicitation” broadly. Both explicit and implicit suggestions from campaign officials that a foreign national provide something of value could be classified as solicitation. Even if he did not obtain the information as a contribution, as Trump Jr. has stated, he still sought it.

[Ramira]

@Okrahoma

I know leftists

it is amusing to see how the word Leftists is being among a certain fringe of the americans used like the Communists used to use the word Bourgeois or Capitalist, without any sense of reason.

[Ravenman]

@Okrahoma

I know leftists don’t like actually putting money where their mouth is but: I will make a bet with anyone for $100 that there was nothing criminal in this affair. Come on, you’re so excited about it. Take the bet. If, within 2 years, there is no indictment of Don Jr. for this - I win. Is 2 years good 'nuff?

I’ll bet you $100 that a person affiliated with the Trump campaign or Trump Administration is indicted within the next 18 months for something related to the Russia investigations.

Do we have a bet?

[BeepKillBeep]

Nevermind.

[running_coach]

@Gyrate

What you’re missing here is that snowflakes are tiny, fragile things. Just look at them - they melt when they touch you or even when you breathe on them. There’s absolutely nothing to them. It would be ridiculous to worry about them.

And that’s why avalanches are completely harmless.

Avalanches don’t occur in the tropics. Keep applying heat.

[Johnny_Ace]

@Ramira

it is amusing to see how the word Leftists is being among a certain fringe of the americans used like the Communists used to use the word Bourgeois or Capitalist, without any sense of reason.

Bolshie is another interesting dogmatic indicator.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

@Euphonious_Polemic

It would appear then that in the real world, rather than in someone’s fevered imagination, when offered up dirt on an opponent, Democrats did NOT actually RUSH to do the same thing.

Not really surprising. I also doubt that ANY of the other campaigns in the Republican leadership race would have RUSHED to do the same thing. In fact, I think only the Trump Dumpster Fire clowns would have done it.

Gore was not offered “dirt” on an opponent. He was offered stolen material. He might have been an accessory to the crime had he accepted.

Digging up dirt on opponents is SOP these days, and all major campaigns engage in it. This would be well known to anyone who follows politics even slightly. There may be differences in this particular case (e.g. if Trump knew it was part of a Russian government campaign) but the general notion being pushed here that Gore and others nobly refuse to find out dirt about their opponents is detached from reality.

[John_Mace]

@Ravenman

I’ll bet you $100 that a person affiliated with the Trump campaign or Trump Administration is indicted within the next 18 months for something related to the Russia investigations.

Do we have a bet?

I think there is a lot of overreaction on this MB to these leaks, but I certainly would not take that bet. Once the FBI starts digging, odds are they are going to find something. These guys (person affiliated with the Trump campaign) are not the sharpest tools in the shed, and many seem to be completely unaware of the laws in this matter.

[BobLibDem]

Don Jr. will not be indicted because when it becomes imminent, daddy will just give him a pardon. But hope springs eternal that state charges could also come from this that are beyond the pardon power of the Howling Yam.

[John_Mace]

@BobLibDem

Don Jr. will not be indicted because when it becomes imminent, daddy will just give him a pardon. But hope springs eternal that state charges could also come from this that are beyond the pardon power of the Howling Yam.

Which state laws were you thinking he might have broken?

[Okrahoma]

@iiandyiiii

Why do you think anyone would make a bet worth real money with a stranger in the internet?

Do you trust Bricker? We can deposit the $ with him and he will disburse the winnings. Does that satisfy your suspicions?

So - willing to put your $ where your mouth is?

[Okrahoma]

@Ravenman

I’ll bet you $100 that a person affiliated with the Trump campaign or Trump Administration is indicted within the next 18 months for something related to the Russia investigations.

Do we have a bet?

No. I am pretty sure Flynn broke the law about foreign lobbyists.

This latest thing though - the Don Jr. thing. Everyone is so sure this is it, right? But no one is sure enough to bet. Pathetic.

[iiandyiiii]

@Okrahoma

Do you trust Bricker? We can deposit the $ with him and he will disburse the winnings. Does that satisfy your suspicions?

So - willing to put your $ where your mouth is?

Where is my mouth? What posts of mine do you dispute or think are worth betting on?

@Okrahoma

This latest thing though - the Don Jr. thing. Everyone is so sure this is it, right? But no one is sure enough to bet. Pathetic.

Who is “so sure this is it”? Who exactly are you responding to in this thread?

[Euphonious_Polemic]

Trump Jr. is going to have to change his story again.

First, he was just meeting about poor orphan children.
Then, he had no idea who he was meeting, but then this russian person offered information about Clinton.

Now:

“Before arranging a meeting with a Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer he believed would offer him compromising information about Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump Jr. was informed in an email that the material was part of a Russian government effort to aid his father’s candidacy, according to three people with knowledge of the email.”

Let’s be clear; Trump Jr. went to this meeting with the full knowledge that he was meeting with a foreign agent who was offering to help him with political information about his opponent in the campaign.

Will today’s spin be “Fake News!”? or “no crime was actually committed”?
My bet is that there is an attack on “leakers” and calls to find these people, who are the actual criminals here.

[BobLibDem]

@John_Mace

Which state laws were you thinking he might have broken?

I don’t know, but finding laws that this clan breaks is rather like shooting fish in a barrel.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@Euphonious_Polemic

Will today’s spin be “Fake News!”? or “no crime was actually committed”?
My bet is that there is an attack on “leakers” and calls to find these people, who are the actual criminals here.

Looks like this morning’s Fox News spin is:
“The person Trump Jr. spoke with has nothing to do with the Russian Government at all. It was all innocent. Nothing to see here. You can take her word for it.”