Update: Turns out Natalia Veselinitskay may have had ties to the Democrat Party. The meeting was a one time affair, and concerned itself with the block Russia imposed on the U.S. against the adoption of Russian Children.
President Trump’s eldest son briefly gathered others for the meeting,
including his brother-in-law Jared Kushner, as well as
then-presidential campaign manager Paul Manafort for the meeting at
Trump Tower in New York City with the lawyer, identified by Trump family
lawyers as Natalia Veselnitskaya.
Veselnitskaya used the meeting in June 2016 to have a
conversation about a U.S. law called the Magnitsky Act that Russia
leader Vladimir Putin reviles and has retaliated against by blocking
U.S. adoptions of Russian children.
The encounter was short and the Trump team had no further contact with the woman or the policy issue, lawyers said.
The meeting was recently disclosed to congressional
investigators by one of the attendees, according to sources directly
familiar with the disclosure. (Circa , here)
Editor: And, there was no followup meeting.
Trump Jr. now admits he met with the Kremlin during the election and had a conversation about dirt on Hillary Clinton.
ReplyDeleteDid Junior know that the Russian host had "dirt" on Hillary. Of he had dirt on Clinton. WE ALL DID. Turns outs there was no dirt, nor was that the subject of the meeting. Rather the meeting was about the block the Russian had on adopting Russian children by American families. Nothing more. Try reading all of your reference.
DeleteSo we’re supposed to believe that everyone from Donald Trump Jr to Jared Kushner to Paul Manafort had such a strong moral compunction about Russian adoption that they stopped what they were doing in the middle of the campaign to hold a meeting with a Kremlin lawyer, just to get the adoption issue cleared up?
ReplyDeleteYou want this to be about dirt on Hillary. Too bad your referenced article has not details of said dirt . . . . . not a word. In fact, the words of the article deny any dirt was discussed.
DeleteWhat's left? Talking about adoption. Take any shot at reading your article.
ReplyDeleteThis is the third meeting Kushner and Manafort failed to disclose on his security forms.
So what and have you actually seen the disclosure statement?
DeleteKushner and Manafort did include this 20 minute meeting in their disclosures.
DeleteAnonymous writes: Maybe you can answer these questions:
ReplyDeleteWhy is it they only disclosed these meetings after being caught by the press? Answer: Kushner and Manafort did reveal the meeting before the press did. Why didn't Obama do anything about this Russian meddling if the Dems cared so much about this matter?
Do you think that might have something to do with this attack on CNN? Answer: No. Why do you ask?
and the free press? Answer: Network Media is not part of the free press. It is corrupted by bias and married at the hip to globalism, and resistant to all things related to US sovereignty.
Does Trump act as if he has nothing to hide? Answer: Guilty of what?
Anonymous : "Answer: Kushner and Manafort did reveal the meeting before the press did."
ReplyDeleteLIE
Editor: You are against lying??!! Who knew.
ReplyDeleteAs any prosecutor will tell you, significantly changing ones story is evidence of consciousness of guilt.
As any non-moron will tell you, if you received no Hillary dirt or never sat in on a meeting where Hillary dirt was actually discussed by the Russians, this is nothing to investigate.
Delete
ReplyDeleteFalse, very much like obstruction, you only have to make the attempt to collude with a foreign gov't to be violating conspiracy laws. Guilty.
So, share the legal statement on "conspiracy" with the readers. I am betting a friend $50 , that you do not have such a statement, that you are just making up stuff.
DeleteTrump Jr. violated the following statute. He went to accept opposition research from a foreign national in an attempt to influence an election. Opposition research is deemed "a thing of value' as it is listed and assigned a value on campaign budget statements.
Delete52 U.S. Code § 30121 - Contributions and donations by foreign nationals
Contributions and donations by foreign nationals
(a) Prohibition: It shall be unlawful for a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make—
a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;
or
a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/52/30121
For starters, opposition research is not equal to an exchange of money. How stupid are you?
DeleteBesides, no "transaction" took place. So I decide I really need more money than I can make, and I walk into a bank with the expressed purpose of robbing the place. But I don't even try. I turn and walk away.
Now, I have not just describe a crime. Neither is opposition research a crime. Dems invented opposition research, for crying out loud.
Again, Donald Trump asked for nothing in this latest meeting, and "nothing" is exactly what happened.
You just flunked Law 101.
Hey, at least he voluntarily turned over his emails, before anyone requested those emails instead of running home to destroy 33,000 and taking a hammer to her cell phones.
ReplyDeleteUS Attorney's and Cornell Law professors cited this statute tonight on cable news as a violation. Seeking "anything of value" is information. The emails show Trump sought to violate federal election law. There doesn't have to be success in obtaining, it has to be sought or conspired to. The intent must be substantiated and it is. The statute applies.
ReplyDeleteTotal bull. Without exception, your sources are Democrat operatives bent on overthrowing the 2016 election, not just the removal of Trump.
DeleteComey has already set a precedent for "criminal" behavior. There must be intent to commit the crime. Since Junior did not intend to be criminally involved with a Russian lawyer, there is no crime.
Further, "information" is not "anything of value." Let's put some money on that. There is no monetary value to "information" unless, of course, you actually paid for that information. Stop being stupid.
Anonymous responds: Are you kidding me? The NYT already had the emails and were just about to release them. Why are people so misinformed? Answer: Brain on Breitbart / Fox
DeleteYou don't know how many of Junior's emails the Times had, for starters. Secondly, he did surrender his emails voluntarily . . . that's a fact. If not, show me the demand for those documents. Was there a planned effort to get Don Jr 's docs? Yes. Did he surrender his documents before they requested. Well, you have to be just plain stupid to argue against that point. Is Junior infinitely more open to investigation than Hillary? You tell me. She destroyed 33,000 emails AFTER she was told to keep all her documents.