Is RJ implying that the media just was bored one day and said "hey let's take a shot in the dark and see if Trump has Russia ties!"

7/11/2017 3:32:49 PM

FYI the Steele dossier (Trump golden shower report) was commissioned by a private group (republicans then democrats) and not Clinton's campaign, that's why it isn't apples to apples

Also this meeting is yet another item in the Steele dossier to be corroborated

7/11/2017 4:18:59 PM

How can anyone defend these fucks anymore? Their story has gone from "We never met with any Russians, we don't know any Russians. Where the fuck is Russia even?" To now "Yeah, we colluded with Russian government agents to help defeat Hillary, so what? Deal with it.".

7/11/2017 4:53:32 PM

too bad JCE is banned

7/11/2017 5:05:34 PM

Here's how they "defend" it:

http://www.wral.com/share/page/1896337/?id=16812558&comment_order=forward

(they took a little while to chime in... must have been waiting for talking points)

7/11/2017 5:26:12 PM

What are some realistic potential outcomes of this?

Are there more emails?

7/11/2017 5:39:19 PM

Quote :

"This is not the same as contacting a political research firm to dig up dirt or contacting U.S. intelligence agencies for your opponent's intercepted communications."

It really doesn't make a difference. If a country was really up to something so egregious, they could easily set up a surrogate firm. HRC was secretary of state so many of the people she worked with would have been working for foreign powers. In your book, almost all dirt on anyone who works for state department would be off limits. They would be untouchable.

Quote :

"It's not hypocritical. Russia has been our adversary for a very long time. If you want to talk about the public narrative, you have to go back to George W. Bush for changing that when he claimed he saw Putin's "good soul." Even Mitt Romney, when campaigning against Obama, was ardently speaking about Russia as our number one threat. And if you do any reading on geopolitics or national security over that time frame you'll see that they've always been our number one threat. So, while the public posture may have been different, the Obama administration absolutely considered them a threat."

Why do you consider Russia and adversary? Kaine was even talking about treason. We aren't at war with Russia. Some people are stuck in the past.

Quote :

"we have a president who is actively trying to help Russia while lying about it"

How is he trying to "help" Russia? Refusing to demonize them doesn't count.

Quote :

"The only way our elections aren't "free" has to do with the amount of money campaigns spend. But we do have free elections. You can walk into that voting booth and choose whoever you want. You have options. You have all the information you can get from the press, from reading, etc. to make a decision. What you're really complaining about here, I suspect, is that most people are idiots and blindly vote their party, as evidenced by the results of gerrymandering and also by the fact that Congress consistently has a sub-20% approval rating but every single person rates their own representative in the 80s"

So if we have free elections, and Russia didn't make the election "not free" then what exactly is the problem? Unless you are insinuating Russia "hacked the election" which was always a lie. Russia didn't change the options.

Quote :

"It makes a huge difference as to whether a campaign gets help from multi-billion dollar corporations or a foreign adversary. For starters, one of those two options has a very high chance of leading to war."

Why is it different. You should be able to answer 5 consecutive "why" questions to really understand why you believe something.

WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY

What difference does it make? Why does it lead to war?

Recap:
Its bad because its a foreign nation which could lead to war because its bad because its a foreign nation doing it which could make it lead to war because its bad because its a foreign nation doing it.

[Edited on July 11, 2017 at 6:03 PM. Reason : state department]

7/11/2017 5:58:54 PM

how about this

MULTIBILLION DOLLAR CORPS HAVING INFLUENCE IS BAD TOO!

show me a bill that outlaws superpacs and citizens united, ill vote for it. show me publicly funded campaigns, i'm down for that too.

we dont have to focus on every bad thing at once. we can be mad about russia IN THE RUSSIA THREAD and still be mad about other things.

jesus....

7/11/2017 6:24:52 PM

Lets back up.

Is anyone defending trump?

If so, why? Why the hell would you go to bat for this guy? Someone who has proven values deception, lying in his business, family, campaign, official statements, etc.

Hes literally someone who cant be taken seriously. If America didn't own and defend so much he would be a Gaddafi.

7/11/2017 6:42:59 PM

Quote :

"Why the hell would you go to bat for this guy?"

I mutter this under my breath like 10x/day

I wonder if Manafort, Flynn, Kushner, Cohen, (hell probably his kids too) are asking themselves the same thing while sitting in interrogation rooms?

. . . . . . . .

RE: Clintons/Ukraine vs. Trump-Russia

Look at how the records were obtained:
Ukraine had previously released info on the "secret ledger" slush fund the previous administration had been running. That's all we know Clinton obtained. It could be a wait and see (doubt it).
vs
obtained by Hacks and other cyber attacks, wielded in a way to influence democratic systems

Who obtained them:
some random DNC staffer who passed them along?
vs.
I've lost count, but I think something like 5-7 of Trump's top campaign aides/surrogates/cabinet members have had questionable interactions with Russians?

Who's denying it?
That DNC staffer has already been questioned by the FBI. They could have a top secret investigation going on and we know nothing about it. But given that October NYTimes article on the previous page, I'd think the NY FBI office would have let us know long ago.
vs.
I've lost count, but What are we up to in denying ANY contact with russians, glaring omissions on security clearance forms, etc. GUILTEEEEEEEEEEEE

Who committed an act of war (arguable)???
Ukraine, I'm sure is no angel
vs.
Committed an (arguable) act of cyber war on the United States, and continues to "probe" the shit out of us as well as the rest of the world. Seriously, fuck these guys.

Finally, consider how we obtained the information. There have been multiple occasions now where one of the major papers gets confirmation on some bombshell they've been investigating, report it to us. Trump surrogate denys/spins/gives a version, only to have more info about that same individual leaked typically within another day. Sometimes the process begins again. We can't be sure whom is responsible for leaking this way, but its clearly designed to destroy Trump and the people around him's credibility. This is also pure conjecture but: I believe its a safe assumption that there could be many more DAMNING leaks to come. They just keep trickling out and they keep getting worse. You don't think it just stopped at this single meeting do you?

7/11/2017 8:05:47 PM

Quote :

"It really doesn't make a difference. If a country was really up to something so egregious, they could easily set up a surrogate firm. HRC was secretary of state so many of the people she worked with would have been working for foreign powers. In your book, almost all dirt on anyone who works for state department would be off limits. They would be untouchable. "

It absolutely makes a difference. One can be considered an act of war by a nation state which has the means to wage said war. Another is an act of domestic, internal posturing. Could that lead to civil war? I guess. But the difference absolutely matters. And if they could easily set up a surrogate firm, why didn't they?

Not sure what you're saying regarding the SecState comment. Hillary's coworkers by definition would be working for the United States, not other countries. That's why they are at the United States Department of State. Unless you mean people from other countries with which she worked. Still, point is lost on me.

Quote :

"Why do you consider Russia and adversary? Kaine was even talking about treason. We aren't at war with Russia. Some people are stuck in the past."

Because Russia seeks to gain resources and power at the expense of the United States. Geopolitics 101. Treason would only apply here (as defined) if Trump or his cronies sought to aid the other nation. It's POSSIBLE considering they were seeking to remove sanctions that were devastating Russia but I doubt he'd ever be charged with treason. As for "we aren't at war with Russia," we're at war every single day with every nation that is not aligned with us. It's a zero sum game. It doesn't have to be, from an idealistic and resource standpoint, but until human psychology and behavior evolves, it will remain a zero sum game. And since you can never know with 100% certainty the intentions and motives of your rival nations, to guarantee your own survival you have to hedge. That hedging takes shape along a spectrum from posturing, maneuvering and propaganda and on to intelligence operations and outright war.

Quote :

"How is he trying to "help" Russia? Refusing to demonize them doesn't count. "

He sought to eliminate sanctions that were put in place to punish them for invading and annexing a sovereign nation (one with which they signed agreements to guarantee said sovereignty - Budapest Memorandum (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances)). He sought to eliminate sanctions and punishments that were put in place to punish them for their actions to destabilize Europe and The United States via intelligence operations aimed at disrupting electoral processes, specifically their interference with ours this past year. Note - interfering with an election is not the same as hacking an election, though part of their interference did involve hacking in general.

Quote :

"So if we have free elections, and Russia didn't make the election "not free" then what exactly is the problem? Unless you are insinuating Russia "hacked the election" which was always a lie. Russia didn't change the options."

They didn't make the election not free - people could have been smart and pragmatic like many of us in this thread and still voted for Hillary (or anyone not named Donald Trump, really). They didn't "hack" the election. They DID influence it, likely in a significant way (although we have zero way to determine whether they swayed the opinion of one person or 10 million people). They did so by releasing information that damaged one candidate specifically (information that was TRUE, mind you) but more importantly, they initiated a massive disinformation and false news campaign which prevented many people from determining the truth of both candidates. In concert with this, they worked to turn American citizens against their own government (possibly unwittingly, though at the moment it seems very much willingly) to attempt to cause the above actions (sanctions removal, etc.).

Quote :

"Why is it different. You should be able to answer 5 consecutive "why" questions to really understand why you believe something. WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY What difference does it make? Why does it lead to war? Recap: Its bad because its a foreign nation which could lead to war because its bad because its a foreign nation doing it which could make it lead to war because its bad because its a foreign nation doing it."

I think I just answered the why's. What difference does it make? See my responses but generally speaking you have to look at this in two parts. 1) You have the government which has access to classified information, makes decisions, wages war, etc. 2) You have the population at large.

In our country, if enough people from group two demand something, group one will succumb in order to stay in power. Sometimes it takes little pressure to do the right thing, as is the case with the Pearl Harbor attack leading to an almost immediate declaration of war. Sometimes it takes a lot of pressure to do the right thing, as is the case with the Nixon Watergate scandal which took document leaks, brave reporting and public opinion to finally take down one of the worst presidents we've ever had.

From a larger picture, people in group one work with their counterparts in other nations to do everything they can to a) enrich their country and firm up their security and b) keep world peace (because war is absolutely devastating to the global economy, among other reasons). To do this, they maintain public stances that many times conflict with their actual, hidden actions. This is why intelligence is operated in the manner it is. It's a way for nations to advance their agendas while gaining as much information about the motives and intentions of their rivals in order to do so for the greatest benefit with the lowest cost. All major powers realize this which is why you'll often hear things like "gentleman's agreement among spies." In other words, yea, we know you spy here but we do it too because we have to. So as long as we can keep the public from finding out (and becoming enraged), we aren't going to get too worked up over it.

That is, unless it crosses a line. This election situation crossed that line.

Why does it lead to war? It may and it may not. If the public becomes enraged enough about it, it would absolutely lead to war. Again, in our country, the government listens to us. You can be cynical and say that's all bullshit but it's true.

Your recap is partially correct. It's bad because citizens of our country possibly conspired with intelligence and government agents of a rival/enemy to obtain power in exchange for making decisions that directly reduced America's advantage and directly increased the rival/enemy's advantage.

This is FAR different than bankers lobbying to have a regulation removed so they can make a higher bonus. They don't use that bonus to wage war against their own country.

That being said, I used to work at Credit Suisse and Och-Ziff. Now, Credit Suisse isn't an American bank so it's not quite the same, but Och-Ziff is headquartered here in NYC. Check out the below. Yes, corruption can sometimes cross that line too.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/16/business/16bank.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/04/business/dealbook/och-ziff-may-face-consequences-beyond-fine-in-bribery-case.html

Then funny coincidence about that second article: https://www.ft.com/content/d4d7ffee-e3ed-11e6-8405-9e5580d6e5fb?mhq5j=e1

Quote :

"Two former Och-Ziff executives have been charged with directing a scheme to win the hedge fund business in at least five African countries by paying “tens of millions of dollars” in bribes to government officials. The Securities and Exchange Commission on Thursday filed a civil suit accusing Michael Cohen, 45, and Vanya Baros, 44, of violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and misrepresenting their African deals to investors over a five-year period beginning in 2007."

I've seen an article or two positing that the Michael Cohen mentioned in the Steele Dossier was confused with this guy, haha.

[Edited on July 11, 2017 at 8:16 PM. Reason : a]

7/11/2017 8:11:44 PM

dont think they will be able to prosecute Jr because it wasnt intentional

7/11/2017 10:08:06 PM

Quote :

"I actually thought it was decent as far as Trumps WH goes. Heated but they both seemed to have a mutual respect for each other."

I mean if you thought that was a decent interview it just shows how numb you are to the dysfunction and deflection in this administration.

And KAK is absolutely fantastic at her job. She may be infuriating, but she does actually what she sets out to do which is to spin, dodge, deflect and pander to the people who voted for Trump.

Cuomo and Cooper are actually great at what they do. They just happened to have sold their souls to CNN.

7/11/2017 10:14:10 PM

History will not look kindly on current day republicans.

7/11/2017 10:15:32 PM

Quote :

"dont think they will be able to prosecute Jr because it wasnt intentional"

by his own admission it was entirely intentional

7/11/2017 10:27:14 PM

^^^ shouts to contradicting yourself

7/11/2017 11:23:53 PM

shout out to being a troll and a miserable person in life?

what exactly was contradictory about my post? It was cringeworthy. Did you even watch it? The whole thing? Just because she's a skilled at spewing bullshit doesn't make she isn't annoying as fuck and infuriating. The two aren't mutually exclusive, dipshit, so save your petty BS for sports talk.

7/11/2017 11:45:14 PM

I'm far from being a troll and even further from being a miserable person, but good try?

and he gave her credit for a decent interview, for which you called him out for, and then gave her credit for being good at her job, which is what he was giving her credit for

he obviously wasn't saying she was giving a good defense of anything that this administration has done or is currently doing, just that given what she was trotted out to do, she did without incriminating anyone

but keep up with the personal insults if that's what makes you feel good

[Edited on July 12, 2017 at 12:20 AM. Reason : .]

7/12/2017 12:19:36 AM

You need to work on your reading comprehension. Like a lot.

7/12/2017 12:27:58 AM

word?

care to break down how you are disagreeing with the post that you quoted?

[Edited on July 12, 2017 at 12:33 AM. Reason : .]

7/12/2017 12:30:54 AM

I don't have some personal problem with NYM like you do with me. He's a respected user and I usually agree with what he has to say. Even when I don't agree, at the very least, I'll try to engage with him without making it personal. Because that's what adults do.

I wasn't attacking him, and I wasn't contradicting myself or back tracking. I understood his point just fine. I was commenting on how a 'reasonable' KAK interview is an indictment of how fucked up of an administration Trump has been.

7/12/2017 12:44:02 AM

Quote :

"I don't have some personal problem with NYM like you do with me. He's a respected user and I usually agree with what he has to say. Even when I don't agree, at the very least, I'll try to engage with him without making it personal. Because that's what adults do. I wasn't attacking him, and I wasn't contradicting myself or back tracking. I understood his point just fine. I was commenting on how a 'reasonable' KAK interview is an indictment of how fucked up of an administration Trump has been."

I don't have a personal problem with you, as I've never met you in person

same as a few people on here. I'm merely commenting on posts, same as you. I for damn sure haven't attacked you personally.

he even qualified his post that you felt the need to comment on with an, "I actually thought it was decent as far as Trumps WH goes"

but bravo with the "that's what adults do" line

7/12/2017 12:56:13 AM

K.

7/12/2017 1:09:52 AM

exactly

I'd love for you to expand on, "You need to work on your reading comprehension. Like a lot.", though

[Edited on July 12, 2017 at 1:33 AM. Reason : since you did feel the need to post it]

7/12/2017 1:15:08 AM

You either didn't understand the actual words I wrote, OR you misused the word 'contradictory' in attempt to attack my intelligence (not really sure why though, given the nature of KAK interviews in general)

I'm guessing you may not have comprehend the context clues I provided in my post (they signaled agreement with some of what he wrote, while disagreeing with other parts)

Either that, or you don't know what the word 'contradictory' means.

[Edited on July 12, 2017 at 1:47 AM. Reason : .]

7/12/2017 1:46:41 AM

Quote :

"You either didn't understand the actual words I wrote, OR you misused the word 'contradictory' in attempt to attack my intelligence (not really sure why though, given the nature of KAK interviews in general) I'm guessing you may not have comprehend the context clues I provided in my post (they signaled agreement with some of what he wrote, while disagreeing with other parts) Either that, or you don't know what the word 'contradictory' means."

that's a big word salad that you used to take credit for a contradictory statement

kudos

also, the past tense version of comprehend is comprehended. may wanna work on your grammar before baselessly attacking someone on their reading comprehension next time, champ

7/12/2017 2:04:44 AM

Yeah, so a 'typo' isn't a knowledge error; it's a performance error, and they happen when you're typing replies on your phone at a bar. It's pretty late there and you clearly spent a ton of time editing your previous post, so sorry for triggering you so hard. You're obviously smart enough to notice a typo, but unfortunately, you're not smart enough to pick up context clues, nor intelligent enough to use the word 'contradictory' correctly in a discussion about Kellyanne Conway, of all people.

You still win for being a miserable person, but yeah, you're not a convincing troll. Keep working on your game and you can rise to JCE status bro.

[Edited on July 12, 2017 at 2:20 AM. Reason : Whoops, missed a period!]



[Edited on July 12, 2017 at 2:24 AM. Reason : and a comma too!]

7/12/2017 2:19:59 AM

kind of sad that that's what you're reverting to, but whatever. it's time for bed.

bonus points for continuing to contradict yourself, I guess?

7/12/2017 2:26:41 AM

Stop.

7/12/2017 5:38:20 AM

Quote :

"How can anyone defend these fucks anymore?"

i've seen the argument (legitimately made) that well at least Don Jr released his emails, Hillary deleted hers and then destroyed the evidence

7/12/2017 7:24:18 AM

Cherokee, there is an article on the Ukraine thing in WaPo this morning. I'm reading it on my Bloomberg so I don't have a link but it answers a lot of questions -- though falls short of explaining legal technicalities.

7/12/2017 7:53:54 AM

Lol ujust had a total breakdown. Much more entertaining than JCE nonsense.

7/12/2017 8:19:50 AM

If anyone else actually watched the entire interview and wants to discuss it, that's cool, but it sounds like nobody else actually did. I didn't heave a "breakdown," but let me break it down for you:

You and thegoodlife3 should pool your monies together and buy a dictionary to learn what words mean.

7/12/2017 9:37:59 AM

More "defenses" of the adminstration

http://www.wral.com/as-russia-scandal-touches-his-son-trump-privately-rages/16814515/

Quote :

"Michael Bawden - Only to the liberal media is this a "setback". Trump "raging" is the standard description of Trump. Yet the White House continues to get thingz done. Congress is not accomplishing anything. Tillis is even blocking one of Trumps nominees. Did Burr and Tillis not promise Obamacare REPEAL? They did not promise to "tweak" Obamacare. They led voters to believe they were going to flat out repeal Obamacare."

Quote :

" Nathaniel Lincoln - The Russians are coming the Russians are coming . Gimme a break. Hey MSM the 80s are calling , they want their headlines back. Cold War ended 30 years ago said Obama last election . Obama told the Russians on camera he would have more flexibility after the last election. If that's not collusion ??? but not a peep mentioned by the "news." Your a fraud"

Quote :

" Wayne Hill - This is just a political strategy by the Democrat left and the biased enablers, the media. If they continually gin up "fury signifying nothing," it will slow down President Trump's agenda. It is not about information or news any more, it is about making a conscious choice to be subjective to enable one political viewpoint over the other, We are a divided nation. One side does not believe anything the "old guard," media states. The other side is upset they lost the election and are willing to accept this passive aggressive coup d'état. At one point the actual results of how we are living right now will weigh in. People who work, will accept the economy is pretty good right now, and even the critics will have to admit as such. If the Democrats cannot make any of this stick. I know they will not because it lacks any substance. They will have lost even further any credibility they had. MAGA, learn it, live it, love it. Your lifestyle will be glad you did."

Quote :

"Teddy Fowler - While his son was involved in his election campaign, he has absolutely nothing to do with his Presidency... so trying to bring down his family member solely to get at Trump is sad and small. And if you are one of those people wanting that to happen, then you are sad and small."

7/12/2017 9:41:49 AM

New details emerge on Moscow real estate deal that led to the Trump-Kremlin alliance
Michael Isikoff
Chief Investigative Correspondent
https://www.yahoo.com/news/new-details-emerge-moscow-real-estate-deal-led-trump-kremlin-alliance-190126219.html

Quote :

"While in Moscow for the Miss Universe pageant in November 2013, Donald Trump entered into a formal business deal with Aras Agalarov, a Russian oligarch close to Vladimir Putin, to construct a Trump Tower in the Russian capital. He later assigned his son, Donald Trump Jr., to oversee the project, according to Rob Goldstone, the British publicist who arranged the controversial 2016 meeting between the younger Trump and a Kremlin-linked lawyer. Trump has dismissed the idea he had any business deals in Russia, saying at one point last October, “I have nothing to do with Russia.”"

Quote :

"Goldstone’s version of events implies a possible explanation for Trump’s interest in lifting sanctions on Russia — a policy move his administration quietly pursued in its first few weeks until it ran into strong opposition from members of Congress and officials within the State Department. Goldstone placed Donald Trump Jr. at the center of the Trump Tower deal, saying that his father assigned his eldest son the job of moving the project to fruition after the signing of a “letter of intent” between the Trump Organization and Agalarov’s company, the Crocus Group. It is not clear if the future president personally signed the “letter of intent,” but Michael Cohen, a longtime lawyer for Trump, told Yahoo News Tuesday that it would have been standard practice for Trump, as president of the Trump Organization, to do so."

Image to explain relationship: https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/MPx7OzcBXlLbh9d10k25ow--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjtzbT0xO3c9NzQ0O2g9OTMw/http://media.zenfs.com/en/homerun/feed_manager_auto_publish_494/0db46781fa0c08b037e95e995eb42907


Goldstone and Aras are relevant to the Trump Jr. emails and

7/12/2017 9:42:12 AM

NyM, can you link the Ukraine article? Not seeing it on the main page.

7/12/2017 9:51:00 AM

Quote :

"What are some realistic potential outcomes of this? Are there more emails?"

potential outcomes:

- nothing
- the Russians actually did provide evidence of crimes committed by Hillary to the Trump campaign.

7/12/2017 1:59:51 PM

If the Trump campaign had evidence that Clinton committed crimes, why wouldn't they have used it?

EDIT: This does seem to me like the day after the pussy-tapes were released. I doubt anything comes of it. There's republicans out there defending Trump Jr for what he did, FFS.

[Edited on July 12, 2017 at 2:26 PM. Reason : .]

7/12/2017 2:24:38 PM

Trump supporters are now trying to say that the Russian agent was a a plant by democrats to try to entrap Trump and are using photos she posted on facebook from a women's march to prove this. She posted those photos to criticize the people marching and that's clear from her comments, but Trump supporters are getting really worked up about it on Facebook.

7/12/2017 2:35:47 PM

Who cares if it was a plant? That barely changes anything after these email came out

7/12/2017 2:48:34 PM

I love the plant pivot. Let's say it was a plant? Trump Jr. still acted under the belief he was meeting with a foreign agent to receive information from an enemy government to help win an election. Whether it was a plant or not is irrelevant - his intentions are crystal clear.

7/12/2017 2:59:56 PM

yeah, but obama!

7/12/2017 3:19:47 PM

The plant angle is going to be a very serious deal if it turns out to be true and these email exchanges had anything to do with any FISA warrants.

7/12/2017 3:40:29 PM

Did anything illegal happen here?

7/12/2017 3:46:03 PM

Won't know that for quite some time. But illegal shouldn't be the minimum standard for conducting yourself at this level. Enough was done to completely eliminate any ounce of trust I'd place in any of these idiots and I entirely question their loyalty to our country.

7/12/2017 3:47:13 PM

^^^ it's obviously clearly not true, its based on nonsense.

also i'm totally not surprised you think its credible

[Edited on July 12, 2017 at 3:48 PM. Reason : ^]

7/12/2017 3:48:00 PM

Quote :

"The plant angle is going to be a very serious deal if it turns out to be true and these email exchanges had anything to do with any FISA warrants."

u serious bro?

7/12/2017 3:49:33 PM

Donald Trump held press conference promising more dirt on Clinton hours after Donald Trump Jr's Russia emails
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-jr-hillary-clinton-russia-email-press-conference-dirt-democratic-us-president-election-a7836826.html

Quote :

"Hours after Donald Trump Jr confirmed a meeting with a Russian lawyer to discuss information on Hillary Clinton, his father promised to make a speech with new information about his former rival for the US presidency. “I think you’re going to find it very informative and very very interesting,” the US leader said, adding that it would likely take place next week. "We are going to be discussing all of the things that have taken place with the Clintons," he said. His comments came after his son released emails relating to his previously undisclosed meeting last summer with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, who has been linked to the Kremlin. He said "I love it" to what he had been told was an attempt by the Russian government to undermine Hillary Clinton's presidential election campaign."

lol, okay

7/12/2017 3:51:08 PM

ROFL

7/12/2017 3:55:41 PM

It's time for another round of Cernovich tweet or eleusis post!

7/12/2017 4:01:46 PM