Boy, this man can lie:

The Trump team's story about the Trump Tower meeting keeps changing

On June 9, 2016, Trump Jr., Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner took a meeting with a Russian lawyer and four other people with Russian ties in Trump Tower. The meeting remained secret for more than a year, until the New York Times in July 2017 began to report about its occurrence.
Initially, the Trump team brushed the meeting aside, saying it had been about Russian adoptions in a statement reportedly crafted largely by the president himself. But as more information continued to dribble out, including a Times reportthat the purpose had been to get damaging information about Clinton, the initial story unraveled, and Trump Jr. himself preemptively tweeted out a statement and the email chain setting up the meeting. In the emails, Trump Jr. responds to the offer of dirt on Clinton with, "If it's what you say I love it."

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/8/5/17653136/trump-tower-meeting-tweet-trump-jr

Apparently, Rudy advised him that it's OK to admit collusion (it's not).

So now Trump admits that the meeting was about colluding with the Russians to get info for the campaign.

For months, he has said repeatedly there was no collusion. Now we know from his own admission that he was lying for all those months.

He repeated Don Jr's claim that the meeting was about adoption.
Now we know he lied about that.

He denied that he dictated the statement to be issued saying Don Jr. said it was all about adoptions.
His own attorneys admitted that this was false; Trump did dictate the statement (Jay Sekulow says he didn't know at the time that it was false.)

Trump has maintained from the beginning that he didn't know about the meeting ahead of time. Michael Cohen says otherwise. Are we going to find out that Trump was lying about that, too? Based on the pattern here, you would have to expect so.

Rudy is an idiot for getting him to admit to being part of the conspiracy and implicating his son.

bubbadog said:

---

Apparently, Rudy advised him that it's OK to admit collusion (it's not).

So now Trump admits that the meeting was about colluding with the Russians to get info for the campaign.

For months, he has said repeatedly there was no collusion. Now we know from his own admission that he was lying for all those months.

He repeated Don Jr's claim that the meeting was about adoption.
Now we know he lied about that.

He denied that he dictated the statement to be issued saying Don Jr. said it was all about adoptions.
His own attorneys admitted that this was false; Trump did dictate the statement (Jay Sekulow says he didn't know at the time that it was false.)

Trump has maintained from the beginning that he didn't know about the meeting ahead of time. Michael Cohen says otherwise. Are we going to find out that Trump was lying about that, too? Based on the pattern here, you would have to expect so.

---

Your chosen one, Hillary Clinton. spent the last $12 million of the Democratic Party's money on the False Piss Dossier indirectly from the Russians yet you have no problem with this. Perhaps your Libertarian friend or the angry black woman can respond if you are not up to it.

Loaded4Bear said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Apparently, Rudy advised him that it's OK to admit collusion (it's not).

So now Trump admits that the meeting was about colluding with the Russians to get info for the campaign.

For months, he has said repeatedly there was no collusion. Now we know from his own admission that he was lying for all those months.

He repeated Don Jr's claim that the meeting was about adoption.
Now we know he lied about that.

He denied that he dictated the statement to be issued saying Don Jr. said it was all about adoptions.
His own attorneys admitted that this was false; Trump did dictate the statement (Jay Sekulow says he didn't know at the time that it was false.)

Trump has maintained from the beginning that he didn't know about the meeting ahead of time. Michael Cohen says otherwise. Are we going to find out that Trump was lying about that, too? Based on the pattern here, you would have to expect so.

---

Your chosen one, Hillary Clinton. spent the last $12 million of the Democratic Party's money on the False Piss Dossier indirectly from the Russians yet you have no problem with this. Perhaps your Libertarian friend or the angry black woman can respond if you are not up to it.

---

What would you like to see Hillary investigated for? Being beaten by the Russians?

Conveniently missing from all the stories about Don Jr.'s Trump Tower meeting the desperado MSM are dredging back up is that the Russian lawyer who set it up (unsolicited) had just met before the meeting with Glenn Simpson of FusionGPS and met with Simpson again right after the meeting. Oops!

MSM are so over invested in/blinded by their "collusion" conspiracy theory they can't see that the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting they're re-flogging actually hurts their theory: If Trump were in bed with Kremlin,why did a Russian lawyer have to solicit a meeting to sell them dirt?

Loaded4Bear said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Apparently, Rudy advised him that it's OK to admit collusion (it's not).

So now Trump admits that the meeting was about colluding with the Russians to get info for the campaign.

For months, he has said repeatedly there was no collusion. Now we know from his own admission that he was lying for all those months.

He repeated Don Jr's claim that the meeting was about adoption.
Now we know he lied about that.

He denied that he dictated the statement to be issued saying Don Jr. said it was all about adoptions.
His own attorneys admitted that this was false; Trump did dictate the statement (Jay Sekulow says he didn't know at the time that it was false.)

Trump has maintained from the beginning that he didn't know about the meeting ahead of time. Michael Cohen says otherwise. Are we going to find out that Trump was lying about that, too? Based on the pattern here, you would have to expect so.

---

Your chosen one, Hillary Clinton. spent the last $12 million of the Democratic Party's money on the False Piss Dossier indirectly from the Russians yet you have no problem with this. Perhaps your Libertarian friend or the angry black woman can respond if you are not up to it.

---

If you want to start a separate thread on the Steele dossier, I'll be happy to discuss it there. I'm sure people will want to join in, as the topic hasn't been discussed here yet.

Meanwhile, the president insisted for months that there was no collusion, and now he's admitting that he lied to you. And that's OK with you?

bubbadog said:

---

Loaded4Bear said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Apparently, Rudy advised him that it's OK to admit collusion (it's not).

So now Trump admits that the meeting was about colluding with the Russians to get info for the campaign.

For months, he has said repeatedly there was no collusion. Now we know from his own admission that he was lying for all those months.

He repeated Don Jr's claim that the meeting was about adoption.
Now we know he lied about that.

He denied that he dictated the statement to be issued saying Don Jr. said it was all about adoptions.
His own attorneys admitted that this was false; Trump did dictate the statement (Jay Sekulow says he didn't know at the time that it was false.)

Trump has maintained from the beginning that he didn't know about the meeting ahead of time. Michael Cohen says otherwise. Are we going to find out that Trump was lying about that, too? Based on the pattern here, you would have to expect so.

---

Your chosen one, Hillary Clinton. spent the last $12 million of the Democratic Party's money on the False Piss Dossier indirectly from the Russians yet you have no problem with this. Perhaps your Libertarian friend or the angry black woman can respond if you are not up to it.

---

If you want to start a separate thread on the Steele dossier, I'll be happy to discuss it there. I'm sure people will want to join in, as the topic hasn't been discussed here yet.

Meanwhile, the president insisted for months that there was no collusion, and now he's admitting that he lied to you. And that's OK with you?

---

There was no collusion. The president is not admitting that he lied to us.

You LIE.

This looks like one of the biggest stories of the year. Specifically, the year 2017.

Their justification for the Hillary spying was that she used government to do it. Like that somehow makes it okay. They are idiots.

Doc Holliday said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Loaded4Bear said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Apparently, Rudy advised him that it's OK to admit collusion (it's not).

So now Trump admits that the meeting was about colluding with the Russians to get info for the campaign.

For months, he has said repeatedly there was no collusion. Now we know from his own admission that he was lying for all those months.

He repeated Don Jr's claim that the meeting was about adoption.
Now we know he lied about that.

He denied that he dictated the statement to be issued saying Don Jr. said it was all about adoptions.
His own attorneys admitted that this was false; Trump did dictate the statement (Jay Sekulow says he didn't know at the time that it was false.)

Trump has maintained from the beginning that he didn't know about the meeting ahead of time. Michael Cohen says otherwise. Are we going to find out that Trump was lying about that, too? Based on the pattern here, you would have to expect so.

---

Your chosen one, Hillary Clinton. spent the last $12 million of the Democratic Party's money on the False Piss Dossier indirectly from the Russians yet you have no problem with this. Perhaps your Libertarian friend or the angry black woman can respond if you are not up to it.

---

If you want to start a separate thread on the Steele dossier, I'll be happy to discuss it there. I'm sure people will want to join in, as the topic hasn't been discussed here yet.

Meanwhile, the president insisted for months that there was no collusion, and now he's admitting that he lied to you. And that's OK with you?

---

There was no collusion. The president is not admitting that he lied to us.

You LIE.

---

Which version of his meeting story is true?

Who's in greater legal peril? Trump or Junior? They both lied about this meeting.

cinque said:

---

Who's in greater legal peril? Trump or Junior? They both lied about this meeting.

---

They didn't get any dirt...so yeah no one is getting in trouble here.

And speaking of legal peril revolving around this meeting; explain why the Russian lawyer met with Glen Simpson of FusionGPS before and directly after the meeting?

Doc Holliday said:

---

cinque said:

---

Who's in greater legal peril? Trump or Junior? They both lied about this meeting.

---

They didn't get any dirt...so yeah no one is getting in trouble here.

And speaking of legal peril revolving around this meeting; explain why the Russian lawyer met with Glen Simpson of FusionGPS before and directly after the meeting?

---

How do you know what they got? An implied promise was the predicate for arranging the meeting. Here's the law:

It shall be unlawful for
(1)a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make
(A)
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;

Loaded4Bear said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Apparently, Rudy advised him that it's OK to admit collusion (it's not).

So now Trump admits that the meeting was about colluding with the Russians to get info for the campaign.

For months, he has said repeatedly there was no collusion. Now we know from his own admission that he was lying for all those months.

He repeated Don Jr's claim that the meeting was about adoption.
Now we know he lied about that.

He denied that he dictated the statement to be issued saying Don Jr. said it was all about adoptions.
His own attorneys admitted that this was false; Trump did dictate the statement (Jay Sekulow says he didn't know at the time that it was false.)

Trump has maintained from the beginning that he didn't know about the meeting ahead of time. Michael Cohen says otherwise. Are we going to find out that Trump was lying about that, too? Based on the pattern here, you would have to expect so.

---

Your chosen one, Hillary Clinton. spent the last $12 million of the Democratic Party's money on the False Piss Dossier indirectly from the Russians yet you have no problem with this. Perhaps your Libertarian friend or the angry black woman can respond if you are not up to it.

---

Hillary is not president.

Doc Holliday said:

---

---

I'm happy to see your evolution. Two weeks ago, there was no collusion. This week collision ain't illegal.

What's the over under on going back to no collusion?

September 1st?

I'll take the under.

bubbadog said:

---

Loaded4Bear said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Apparently, Rudy advised him that it's OK to admit collusion (it's not).

So now Trump admits that the meeting was about colluding with the Russians to get info for the campaign.

For months, he has said repeatedly there was no collusion. Now we know from his own admission that he was lying for all those months.

He repeated Don Jr's claim that the meeting was about adoption.
Now we know he lied about that.

He denied that he dictated the statement to be issued saying Don Jr. said it was all about adoptions.
His own attorneys admitted that this was false; Trump did dictate the statement (Jay Sekulow says he didn't know at the time that it was false.)

Trump has maintained from the beginning that he didn't know about the meeting ahead of time. Michael Cohen says otherwise. Are we going to find out that Trump was lying about that, too? Based on the pattern here, you would have to expect so.

---

Your chosen one, Hillary Clinton. spent the last $12 million of the Democratic Party's money on the False Piss Dossier indirectly from the Russians yet you have no problem with this. Perhaps your Libertarian friend or the angry black woman can respond if you are not up to it.

---

If you want to start a separate thread on the Steele dossier, I'll be happy to discuss it there. I'm sure people will want to join in, as the topic hasn't been discussed here yet.

Meanwhile, the president insisted for months that there was no collusion, and now he's admitting that he lied to you. And that's OK with you?

---

I'm not saying there was collusion or there wasn't, because all of the facts aren't out yet, but meeting with a Russian civilian on the pretense that she has some dirt on HRC is not collusion with the Russian government. But you know that.

Now if there is evidence that she met as a representative of the Russian government in an attempt the get Trump to collude with the Russian government, then you are onto something. But no evidence has been provided to suggest that, only "Kat Sung" level conspiracy theories. Being the moderate and honest man of journalism that you claim to be, I'm surprised you would jump to such conclusions without evidence.

The evidence we have right now is that JR met with a Russian lawyer to discuss dirt on HRC. We don't know if any dirt was exchanged, if any promises were made or anything. In the real world, in order to make the leap from common opposition research (similar to the Dossier) to high crimes and treason, one needs evidence, not a bunch of unsupported accusations.

contrario said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

Loaded4Bear said:

---

bubbadog said:

---

OApparently, Rudy advised him that it's OK to admit collusion (it's not).

So now Trump admits that the meeting was about colluding with the Russians to get info for the campaign.

For months, he has said repeatedly there was no collusion. Now we know from his own admission that he was lying for all those months.

He repeated Don Jr's claim that the meeting was about adoption.
Now we know he lied about that.

He denied that he dictated the statement to be issued saying Don Jr. said it was all about adoptions.
His own attorneys admitted that this was false; Trump did dictate the statement (Jay Sekulow says he didn't know at the time that it was false.)

Trump has maintained from the beginning that he didn't know about the meeting ahead of time. Michael Cohen says otherwise. Are we going to find out that Trump was lying about that, too? Based on the pattern here, you would have to expect so.

---

Your chosen one, Hillary Clinton. spent the last $12 million of the Democratic Party's money on the False Piss Dossier indirectly from the Russians yet you have no problem with this. Perhaps your Libertarian friend or the angry black woman can respond if you are not up to it.

---

If you want to start a separate thread on the Steele dossier, I'll be happy to discuss it there. I'm sure people will want to join in, as the topic hasn't been discussed here yet.

Meanwhile, the president insisted for months that there was no collusion, and now he's admitting that he lied to you. And that's OK with you?

---

I'm not saying there was collusion or there wasn't, because all of the facts aren't out yet, but meeting with a Russian civilian on the pretense that she has some dirt on HRC is not collusion with the Russian government. But you know that.

Now if there is evidence that she met as a representative of the Russian government in an attempt the get Trump to collude with the Russian government, then you are onto something. But no evidence has been provided to suggest that, only "Kat Sung" level conspiracy theories. Being the moderate and honest man of journalism that you claim to be, I'm surprised you would jump to such conclusions without evidence.

The evidence we have right now is that JR met with a Russian lawyer to discuss dirt on HRC. We don't know if any dirt was exchanged, if any promises were made or anything. In the real world, in order to make the leap from common opposition research (similar to the Dossier) to high crimes and treason, one needs evidence, not a bunch of unsupported accusations.

---

To what was Junior referring about the Russia meeting when he responded, "I love it"?

contrario said:

---

Now if there is evidence that she met as a representative of the Russian government in an attempt the get Trump to collude with the Russian government, then you are onto something. But no evidence has been provided to suggest that, only "Kat Sung" level conspiracy theories.

---

Don't take my word for it, Bona Fide. Go do some more reading.

And she did not have to be serving as a representative of the Russian government (formal or otherwise) in order for campaign finance laws to have been broken. The more relevant question is whether Trump's people received or solicited something of value from a foreign citizen. There is also a question, with some valid arguments either way, about whether opposition research counts as something "of value" under the law.

And, no, the Steele dossier is not comparable. In that case, the law firm representing the Clinton campaign paid for the value it received. That makes it a legal campaign expenditure rather than an illegal campaign contribution. Moreover, the Clinton law firm paid a US company, Fusion GPS.

But as I say, don't take my word for it. The NYT has a good, objective analysis this morning about the question of whether Donald Jr. may have broken the law. Both sides will come away from reading the piece with reason for concern.

I thought the meeting was about adopting Russian orphans? Why are yall spreading lies about Trump and his son? Where did this latest round of crap come from? Fake news?

Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:

---

I thought the meeting was about adopting Russian orphans? Why are yall spreading lies about Trump and his son? Where did this latest round of crap come from? Fake news?

---

That's what Don Jr. said last July...but that's not the kicker. The real bombshell is that the president just spoke out on Twitter and said basically the same thing.