Poll of the Day > Donald Trump Jr. was stupid enough to post proof of himself committing a felony.

(+) Yeah! (+)

i see nothing wrong with him meeting with someone for information. someone possibly has information, doesn't matter who it is. you should find out what it is and then verify the info.
---

Krazy_Kirby posted...

i see nothing wrong with him meeting with someone for information. someone possibly has information, doesn't matter who it is. you should find out what it is and then verify the info.

It's against the law to meet with a foreign entity if you're running an election campaign.
---

Krazy_Kirby posted...

i see nothing wrong with him meeting with someone for information. someone possibly has information, doesn't matter who it is. you should find out what it is and then verify the info.

Seriously, wtf?

"If it gives you an edge, what's wrong about it?" Genuinely fucking disgusting attitude to have.

Krazy_Kirby posted...

I see nothing wrong with him meeting with someone for information. someone possibly has information, doesn't matter who it is. you should find out what it is and then verify the info.

The law doesn't give a shit what you see fam. You're a nobody.
---

I just wanted to toss this in the topic

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-resolution/456/text

It might not go anywhere but what a read
---

Doctor Foxx posted...

I just wanted to toss this in the topic

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-resolution/456/text

It might not go anywhere but what a read

Mmm that's good

Now he's talking to advisors about possibly firing Jeff Sessions because Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation (after lying to Congress) instead of taking it over and shutting it down. How long do you think Sessions has left? A month? A week?

SushiSquid posted...

Now he's talking to advisors about possibly firing Jeff Sessions because Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation (after lying to Congress) instead of taking it over and shutting it down. How long do you think Sessions has left? A month? A week?

Maybe a day?

https://www.axios.com/trump-in-phone-call-what-would-happen-if-i-fired-sessions-2465113665.html

Less than a month.
---

streamofthesky posted...

OhhhJa posted...

darkknight109 posted...

You - and Trump, for that matter - seem confused as to why the media isn't talking about Clinton (or keeping a running tally of her lies - and, yes, they did that during the election i.e. the last time it was at all relevant to do so). It's because she's not a candidate anymore - Trump already beat her. You can stop talking about her now.

Both sides do this constantly. The funny part is people like yourself will bring this up and then, completely missing the irony, directly follow it up with... "b-b-but trump!"

Yeah, after 2012, the media was constantly reporting on Mitt Romney. They couldn't get enough of digging into his every statement and public appearance to mine for dirt. It was a constant media blitz on Mitt Romney in 2013, it sure was!

What does this have to do with anything? I was talking about regular people... not the media.

@streamofthesky

OhhhJa posted...

streamofthesky posted...

OhhhJa posted...

darkknight109 posted...

You - and Trump, for that matter - seem confused as to why the media isn't talking about Clinton (or keeping a running tally of her lies - and, yes, they did that during the election i.e. the last time it was at all relevant to do so). It's because she's not a candidate anymore - Trump already beat her. You can stop talking about her now.

Both sides do this constantly. The funny part is people like yourself will bring this up and then, completely missing the irony, directly follow it up with... "b-b-but trump!"

Yeah, after 2012, the media was constantly reporting on Mitt Romney. They couldn't get enough of digging into his every statement and public appearance to mine for dirt. It was a constant media blitz on Mitt Romney in 2013, it sure was!

What does this have to do with anything? I was talking about regular people... not the media.

@streamofthesky

The person you replied to was talking about the media. Then you said "both sides" do it. it's clear to conclude from that, that you were also talking about the media. If not, then likewise... what the fuck does the fact that both sides always had and always will have opinionated people have anything to do with darkknight's explaining why the media isn't talking about Clinton?
What a completely empty statement. I guess you knew you were losing the argument so you tried to deflect.

Doctor Foxx posted...

SushiSquid posted...

Now he's talking to advisors about possibly firing Jeff Sessions because Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation (after lying to Congress) instead of taking it over and shutting it down. How long do you think Sessions has left? A month? A week?

Maybe a day?

https://www.axios.com/trump-in-phone-call-what-would-happen-if-i-fired-sessions-2465113665.html

Less than a month.

Don't forget bout Trump wanting to pardon his whole gaggle.
---

FrndNhbrHdCEman posted...

Don't forget bout Trump wanting to pardon his whole gaggle.

his gaggle? he also wants to pardon himself. lmao
---

IN AMERICA WE DON'T WORSHIP GOVERNMENT - WE WORSHIP GOD!

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/890260758050856961

oh lawd
---

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world-0/us-politics/trump-putin-meeting-russia-us-g20-undisclosed-white-house-confirms-a7848061.html

Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin held a second, previously undisclosed meeting at the G20 summit earlier this month in Germany, a White House official has confirmed.

The meeting followed the two leaders’ formal two-hour meeting on 7 July in which Mr Trump said Mr Putin denied allegations that he directed efforts to meddle in the 2016 US presidential election.

The second meeting, which took place some hours later, was only attended by Mr Putin, Mr Trump and Mr Putin’s translator. It had not previously been disclosed by the White House.

The White House official did not say how long the second meeting took place or what was discussed.

The second meeting between Mr Putin and Mr Trump was first reported by Ian Bremmer, president of the Eurasia Group.

Mr Bremmer said the meeting, which went ahead without Mr Trump’s own translator present, was a breach of national security protocol, though he added that it was one the president likely would not know about.

---

Doctor Foxx posted...

FrndNhbrHdCEman posted...

Don't forget bout Trump wanting to pardon his whole gaggle.

his gaggle? he also wants to pardon himself. lmao

Meanin his kiddos.
---

Doctor Foxx posted...

IN AMERICA WE DON'T WORSHIP GOVERNMENT - WE WORSHIP GOD!

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/890260758050856961

oh lawd

Truest words ever spoken by the pussy grabber

More updates on our nation's insanity.

- In addition to Sessions, Reince Priebus may be getting pushed out. The new communications director hates the guy (thinks he's a leaker) and has had some interesting things to say about him, which I cannot post here.

- Trump has been asking about the logistics of a recess appointment after getting rid of Sessions. This would probably require the Attorney General resigning, which Sessions says he will not be doing. Republican senators have said they will not let this happen.

So, how long before right wing radio and Fox "News" begin to call Sessions and Priebus "liberals"?
And how long from that point before Republican Congressmen do so as well?

I'm going with 4 months for Sessions, 2 months for Priebus, and 6 months after each of those dates, respectively, for the Republican politicians to follow suit.

I don't know. I am already seeing my mom and her Facebook friends calling Republicans RINOs for opposing Trump. Like, you guys realize Trump isn't an ideologue and isn't Republican, right? He's not even really conservative. He just hates immigrants and the poor. Those aren't the parts of conservativism you should be defending.

SushiSquid posted...

- In addition to Sessions, Reince Priebus may be getting pushed out. The new communications director hates the guy (thinks he's a leaker) and has had some interesting things to say about him, which I cannot post here.

You know, it's interesting, there were a bunch of conservative commentators who were all up in arms about Stephen Colbert calling Trump "Putin's ****-holster" and saying how appalling and homophobic it was, yet seem curiously quiet about Scaramucci's comments about Bannon.
---

I can't fucking wait til ten years from now when we get a TV show about this administration.

Scaramucci will definitely be a season finale.
---

Blighboy posted...

I can't fucking wait til ten years from now when we get a TV show about this administration.

Scaramucci will definitely be a season finale.

He looks like the sleaziest scumbag to ever rip somebody off on a used car lot. He's perfect.
---

SushiSquid posted...

I don't know. I am already seeing my mom and her Facebook friends calling Republicans RINOs for opposing Trump. Like, you guys realize Trump isn't an ideologue and isn't Republican, right? He's not even really conservative. He just hates immigrants and the poor. Those aren't the parts of conservativism you should be defending.

Oh, RINO is nothing. That's like the moment you take political office. The guy who gets off to Atlas Shrugged himself, Paul Ryan, has been called a RINO.
It's another step in the de-evolutionary process entirely to jump from that to outright labeling (extremely, stupidly, oppressively, illogically) far-right politicians as "liberal," but a step that's certain to happen.

darkknight109 posted...

You know, it's interesting, there were a bunch of conservative commentators who were all up in arms about Stephen Colbert calling Trump "Putin's ****-holster" and saying how appalling and homophobic it was, yet seem curiously quiet about Scaramucci's comments about Bannon.

I don't know what he said about Bannon, but I can guarantee whatever it was, he was being too nice.

streamofthesky posted...

I don't know what he said about Bannon, but I can guarantee whatever it was, he was being too nice.

I don't honestly know if I can actually post the direct quote because it's borderline TOS-violating.

I'm still kind of amazed by that. The White House Communications Director - the guy hired to be in charge of official communications of the President of the United States - in his first days on the job managed to say, unprompted, to a reporter, something so vulgar it can't be posted on GameFAQs.
---

darkknight109 posted...

streamofthesky posted...

I don't know what he said about Bannon, but I can guarantee whatever it was, he was being too nice.

I don't honestly know if I can actually post the direct quote because it's borderline TOS-violating.

I'm still kind of amazed by that. The White House Communications Director - the guy hired to be in charge of official communications of the President of the United States - in his first days on the job managed to say, unprompted, to a reporter, something so vulgar it can't be posted on GameFAQs.

Not only that, but he actually thought the reporter wouldn't report it.
---

Ok, I found this. Warning: Dude swears a lot, don't read if that bothers you. http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/07/27/anthony_scaramucci_disses_steve_bannon_with_expletive_laden_rant_leak.html

After seeing this, I like this guy! I think you guys who dislike Trump are mistaken, you're not seeing what really going on here.

Recall, this is a guy who disagreed with Trump on pretty much everything on social issues and the environment and criticized him a lot before getting put on the payroll and changing his tune. Or so he wants people to think.

When Lizza declined the invitation to hang his source out to dry, Scaramucci moved on to Plan B. Leak on the leakers!

“Is it an assistant to the President?” [Scaramucci] asked [about the leak]... “O.K., I’m going to fire every one of them, and then you haven’t protected anybody, so the entire place will be fired over the next two weeks.”
“What I’m going to do is, I will eliminate everyone in the comms team and we’ll start over..."

Destroy the enemy from the inside! It's brilliant! The more that's leaked, the more justification he has to push Trump to shit can beacons of the right like Sessions and Priebus and tear it all up.

What we're witnessing here is masterful manipulation, and I for one applaud this man. His work borders on high performance art at times in fact; could his obsession with referencing male genitalia and other men doing various acts with it be a subtle dig at the Trump administration's recent attack on the LGBT community? I think it just may be!

Aaaaand Reince Priebus is now officially fired. That didn't take long at all.

omfg

Honestly, I didn't believe Trump would ever be impeached, I thought people calling for that were just being naive.

But he's actively shitting on the GoP establishment now. He's going to have no friends.

This is amazing.
---

People are saying he's like the Boneitis guy from Futurama.
This timeline is ridiculous.
---

SushiSquid posted...

Aaaaand Reince Priebus is now officially fired. That didn't take long at all.

I mean...

“They’ll all be fired by me,” he said. “I fired one guy the other day. I have three to four people I’ll fire tomorrow. I’ll get to the person who leaked that to you. Reince Priebus—if you want to leak something—he’ll be asked to resign very shortly.” The issue, he said, was that he believed Priebus had been worried about the dinner because he hadn’t been invited. “Reince is a fucking paranoid schizophrenic, a paranoiac,” Scaramucci said. He channelled Priebus as he spoke: “ ‘Oh, Bill Shine is coming in. Let me leak the fucking thing and see if I can ****-block these people the way I ****-blocked Scaramucci for six months.’ ” (Priebus did not respond to a request for comment.)

That's OK, Scaramucci can have his white house position. His wife in turn has filed for divorce.

http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/344395-scaramuccis-wife-files-for-divorce
---

SushiSquid posted...

Those aren't the parts of conservativism you should be defending.

What parts should we be defending?
---

Lightning Bolt posted...

People are saying he's like the Boneitis guy from Futurama.
This timeline is ridiculous.

Oh god, I thought I was the only one thinking this. ^^^
---

Jesus what a mess

C-Span has some more info about the lawyer Trump Jr. was meeting

https://www.c-span.org/video/?431852-1/william-browder-overturning-magnitsky-act-putins-top-priority

Foreign Agents Registration Act Financier and former Russia investor William Browder testified at a hearing on the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). This law requires those representing the political interests of foreign powers to disclose their relationship. Mr. Browder told committee members that the Kremlin-linked lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, who met with Donald Trump Jr. was heading Russian efforts to get sanctions under the Magnitsky Act repealed. The act blocked Russian government officials and businessmen associated with the death of Russian lawyer Sergei Magnitsky from entering the U.S., froze assets in U.S. banks, and banned the use of American banking systems.

why this is relevant: http://www.newsweek.com/forget-jeff-bezos-putin-worlds-richest-man-senate-told-643208

In 2012, the U.S. imposed sanctions on officials it held responsible for Magnitsky’s death, known as the Magnitsky Act, and during his testimony on Capitol Hill, Browder said Putin had a personal interest in lifting such sanctions, because not only does he believe Putin gains money from oligarchs that may be affected but also "they hold his money for him."

"The purpose of the Putin regime has been to commit terrible crimes in order to get that money, and he doesn't want to lose that money by having it frozen,” Browder said, according to Voice of America. “So he is personally at risk of the Magnitsky Act."

Browder alleged some of Putin's multibillion dollar fortune was in American banks and claimed the Russian campaign to repeal the Magnitsky Act was aimed at untangling this cash flow. Among the legal teams pushing for the repeal of the Magnitsky Act is Natalia Veselnitskaya, the lawyer Donald Trump Jr. met to discuss last year’s presidential election, during his father’s campaign.

It could have been something like offering up the leaked info in exchange for cooperation in altering or repealing the Magnitsky Act. Something that would have been HUGE for Putin. That's a pretty serious connection that indicates Trump's fortune (and so Trump himself) may be controlled by Putin.
---

I thought Jr. straight up said it was about the Magnitsky Act from the beginning?
It's nice to get more details I guess, but that seems somewhere between known and obvious.
---

That information would explain a lot, actually.
---

Lightning Bolt posted...

I thought Jr. straight up said it was about the Magnitsky Act from the beginning?
It's nice to get more details I guess, but that seems somewhere between known and obvious.

Jr. stated when this started had stated that he went into the meetings not knowing they were about the Magnitsky act, and that the meetings became a waste of time. Then he turned to saying it was about the adoption angle of Magnitsky--nothing to do about the sanctions on wealth.

I find that very difficult to believe. It would mean he and the administation's team were completely unfamiliar with the lawyer Veselnitskaya, her background, and what she has been working for. What high level of incompetency would lead someone to hold meetings with someone they know nothing about in 2017? That information is everywhere and it seems unsafe to not screen people you meet with when you can.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/449419/donald-trump-jr-meets-magnitsky-act-propaganda

Even this conservative publication called him out on that

Anyway, the C-Span stuff is much more recent and ongoing and ties into why the ignorance angle doesn't work.

(and for what it's worth, Magnitsky has not been mentioned one time in this thread until now)
---

and why bring this up now: http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/28/trump-signs-russia-sanctions-bill-into-law-241110

That's quite the bill POTUS would sign, giving up powers. at this point it's going to happen whether or not he signs or vetoes it.

Under the law, Congress is granted the right to review any changes to Russia sanctions policy proposed by the president and can block them from taking effect.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson warned that the bill would eliminate the administration’s “flexibility” to adjust its Russia policy.
---

Doctor Foxx posted...

(and for what it's worth, Magnitsky has not been mentioned one time in this thread until now)

Oh jeebus.
You made me realize that there's probably at least a couple people getting their news about this from PotD.
---

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/07/bill-browders-testimony-to-the-senate-judiciary-committee/534864/

A really in depth article about, well...

“I hope that my story will help you understand the methods of Russian operatives in Washington and how they use U.S. enablers to achieve major foreign policy goals without disclosing those interests,” Browder writes.

The financier Bill Browder has emerged as an unlikely central player in the ongoing investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 elections. Sergei Magnitsky, an attorney Browder hired to investigate official corruption, died in Russian custody in 2009. Congress subsequently imposed sanctions on the officials it held responsible for his death, passing the Magnitsky Act in 2012. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s government retaliated, among other ways, by suspending American adoptions of Russian children.

Natalia Veselnitskaya, the Russian lawyer who secured a meeting with Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort, was engaged in a campaign for the repeal of the Magnitsky Act, and raised the subject of adoptions in that meeting. That’s put the spotlight back on Browder’s long campaign for Kremlin accountability, and against corruption—a campaign whose success has irritated Putin and those around him.

Browder will testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday in a hearing about Foreign Agents Registration Act enforcement; what follows are the prepared remarks he submitted to the committee. The committee also called as witnesses former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Donald Trump Jr., and Glenn Simpson, the co-founder of the Fusion GPS research firm that commissioned the Trump dossier. As of Tuesday evening, only Browder is definitely scheduled to appear during that panel.

The C-SPAN link posted earlier deals with the testimony.
---

Wow. Now Scaramucci is out after 10 days. This is just crazy.

Damn it, Scaramucci had only just started cleaning house!

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40795122

President Trump himself personally dictated the statement his son issued about the meeting with lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya.

The president was flying home last month aboard Air Force One from the G8 summit in Germany when he told his son what to say, according to the newspaper.

Mr Trump Jr's statement said he and Ms Veselnitskaya "primarily discussed a programme about the adoption of Russian children".

Why is POTUS dictating a statement on a meeting he didn't know existed?

I like the timeline the BBC provides

How Trump team changed their story
I had no meetings with Russia as a campaign representative - Trump Jr (March 2017)
It was a short meeting but we only talked about adoption - Trump Jr (8 July)
I was promised dirt on Clinton but her statements were vague - Trump Jr (9 July)
It was standard opposition research - Trump Jr (10 July)
The president was "not involved in the drafting" of the statement - President Trump's lawyer (16 July)
The president "weighed in" on the statement - White House spokeswoman (1 August)

---

Trump just helped his son cover up some light treason as any father would. Witch hunt!
---

Foxx, thank you for taking over for a bit. Honestly just listing all of this craziness is getting tiring.

SushiSquid posted...

Foxx, thank you for taking over for a bit. Honestly just listing all of this craziness is getting tiring.

No problem. I'm interested in keeping this active because we've got a time-stamped thread here going over the changes in what has been said and witnessing the denial and diversion tactics change over time. It's all tiring and absurd but it should not be ignored or accepted as normal.
---

Transcripts have been leaked of Trump's conversations with the leaders of Mexico and Australia



highlight
---

Blighboy posted...

Transcripts have been leaked of Trump's conversations with the leaders of Mexico and Australia



highlight

Lmao
---

The Mexico one was pathetic. He's practically begging the guy to say "I'll think about paying for the wall" in public so he doesn't look stupid.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/politics/australia-mexico-transcripts/

Peña Nieto

But my position has been and will continue to be very firm saying that Mexico cannot pay for that wall.

Trump

But you cannot say that to the press. The press is going to go with that and I cannot live with that. You cannot say that to the press because I cannot negotiate under those circumstances.

Also, just wtf:

Trump

It is you and I against the world, Enrique, do not forget.

---

I personally liked this one:

I am the world’s greatest person that does not want to let people into the country.

Maybe there's some greater context here that I'm missing, but this one really seems to encapsulate Trump in a single sentence.
---