Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
JoyinMudville

Trump Jr Admits to Meeting With Russians in Order to Get Dirt on Hillary

899 posts in this topic

2 minutes ago, soulflower said:

It wasn't under subpoena at the time it was destroyed 

Are you talking specifically about the phones, or when she bleachbitted the server? Because the server at least was wiped after the subpoena had been issued.

P.S. One of your fellow lefties doesn't want us talking about Hillary on this thread, so be prepared to be scolded. :D:D:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, soulflower said:

A DNC staffer communicating with the Ukraine government is not the same as Trump's son and top Campaign staff meeting with people connected to the Russian government 

Close enough for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure he was just at the meeting due to his interest in adoption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, HowAreWeGoingToPay said:

Are you talking specifically about the phones, or when she bleachbitted the server? Because the server at least was wiped after the subpoena had been issued.

P.S. One of your fellow lefties doesn't want us talking about Hillary on this thread, so be prepared to be scolded. :D:D:D

If I remember correctly, wasn't the server was bleached by some low-level dude covering his arse because he hadn't yet done something that he was supposed to have done months ago with regard to her emails?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, HowAreWeGoingToPay said:

Close enough for me.

Well close enough for you isn't good enough.  They are NOT the same thing and only a dishonest hack would claim that they are

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, banner1124 said:

Well close enough for you isn't good enough.  They are NOT the same thing and only a dishonest hack would claim that they are

But he is successfully deflecting the thread away from Trump and onto Hillary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, stevez51 said:

Its still his child. Maybe not you, but there are people that refer to their children as their kids.

He's not a kid by any stretch.  And "a good boy" sounds like a kid who did well potty training. 39!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, HowAreWeGoingToPay said:

Are you talking specifically about the phones, or when she bleachbitted the server? Because the server at least was wiped after the subpoena had been issued.

P.S. One of your fellow lefties doesn't want us talking about Hillary on this thread, so be prepared to be scolded. :D:D:D

I'm talking about the phones

Clinton's lawyers turned over her server and 30,000+ emails to the Feds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, HowAreWeGoingToPay said:

Close enough for me.

Nope.   This is exactly why you outsource opposition research.   It lets them do this sort of thing precisely because they are not part of the campaign.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, banner1124 said:

Well close enough for you isn't good enough.  They are NOT the same thing and only a dishonest hack would claim that they are

Only a dishonest hack would claim they are not. (Back at you). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mrsmlh said:

But he is successfully deflecting the thread away from Trump and onto Hillary.

I am certainly having help on that. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, soulflower said:

It wasn't under subpoena at the time it was destroyed 

So why destroy it if there were questions about it .??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, HowAreWeGoingToPay said:

Only a dishonest hack would claim they are not. (Back at you). 

You can just throw words back like a child all you want.  The truth of the matter is that your close enough for me is complete bullcrap.  The two things you are trying to equate most certainly are not the same and that's an absolute FACT.  Feel free to stick with your alternative facts if you like, but just know that you are WRONG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SemiAuto said:

Nope.   This is exactly why you outsource opposition research.   It lets them do this sort of thing precisely because they are not part of the campaign.  

I believe that accepting gifts even through a third party is also illegal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, michiganjoe said:

I'm sure he was just at the meeting due to his interest in adoption.

Good one! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, HowAreWeGoingToPay said:

I believe that accepting gifts even through a third party is also illegal.

The whole point of using a 3rd party is that they vet things.  They know what to actually present to you and what not to present so as to keep your campaign within the law.  The 3rd party isn't going to give you anything that's going to get you into trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, banner1124 said:

You can just throw words back like a child all you want.  The truth of the matter is that your close enough for me is complete bullcrap.  The two things you are trying to equate most certainly are not the same and that's an absolute FACT.  Feel free to stick with your alternative facts if you like, but just know that you are WRONG.

I disagree, and you just stating I am WRONG is not going to change that. They are the same as far as I am concerned, the only difference is one done by a democrat, and the other by a trump. If it is wrong for opposition research to be gotten from a foreign government then it is wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ms maggie said:

He's not a kid by any stretch.  And "a good boy" sounds like a kid who did well potty training. 39!!!!

My oldest is 38 and still my kid .......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, banner1124 said:

The whole point of using a 3rd party is that they vet things.  They know what to actually present to you and what not to present so as to keep your campaign within the law.  The 3rd party isn't going to give you anything that's going to get you into trouble.

Well since this thread is about nothing then nothing needed to be vetted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, HowAreWeGoingToPay said:

I disagree, and you just stating I am WRONG is not going to change that. They are the same as far as I am concerned, the only difference is one done by a democrat, and the other by a trump. If it is wrong for opposition research to be gotten from a foreign government then it is wrong.

Disagree all you want but you're still WRONG. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, stevez51 said:

So why destroy it if there were questions about it .??

I already explained why destroying old devices is good security policy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 minute ago, soulflower said:

I already explained why destroying old devices is good security policy

Yes as long as there are no questions about them. There were a slew abut Clinton's ......

Edited by stevez51

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, HowAreWeGoingToPay said:

I disagree, and you just stating I am WRONG is not going to change that. They are the same as far as I am concerned, the only difference is one done by a democrat, and the other by a trump. If it is wrong for opposition research to be gotten from a foreign government then it is wrong.

He has more passion on the subject so watch out ......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, stevez51 said:

Yes as long as there are no questions about them. There were a slew abut Clinton's ......

Colin Powell used a personal email and phone for work at the State Dept too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0