Russian Natalia met with Fusion GPS before and after Don Jr meeting

WeToddDid2

WeToddDid2

hmmmm....That is just a coinkydink me tinks.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/23287/shock-report-fusion-gps-met-russian-operative-and-ryan-saavedra

SHOCK REPORT: Democrat Funded Fusion GPS Met With Russian Operative Before And After Trump Jr. Meeting

Hours before her meeting with Trump Jr. on June 9, 2016, Veselnitskaya was with Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson in a Manhattan courtroom; Veselnitskaya met with Simpson again after the meeting:

The contacts shed new light on how closely tied the firm was to Russian interests, at a time when it was financing research to discredit then-candidate Donald Trump.

The June 2016 Trump Tower meeting involving Donald Trump Jr. and Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya occurred during a critical period. At that time, Fox News has learned that bank records show Fusion GPS was paid by a law firm for work on behalf of a Kremlin-linked oligarch while paying a former British spy Christopher Steele to dig up dirt on Trump through his Russian contacts.

Simpson’s presence with Veselnitskaya during this critical week in June -- together with revelations about Fusion’s simultaneous financial ties to the DNC, Clinton campaign and Russian interests -- raise new questions about the company’s role in the 2016 election.
 
Does that mean trump junior met with Hillary's russian operatives?
What does that make Hillary... a Russian spy master
What does that make here law firm.
is there anyway this could be a crime for Trump junior but not the people paying for the spys services?

Now in terms of criminal law...

If the meeting was paid for by hillary and they were obviously not going to be able to pass on any real dirt.. can it be crime.

Its a law school hypothetical.

Is it a crime to buy fake cocaine?
 
Killary's crimes all appear to require intent. And how do you prove that? Oh, with Killary, you just can't. Even if you beat the living shit out of the damn phone. You can't prove she intended to kill it. You just can't.
 
elderado said:
Killary's crimes all appear to require intent. And how do you prove that? Oh, with Killary, you just can't. Even if you beat the living shit out of the damn phone. You can't prove she intended to kill it. You just can't.
More...

Yep. But even when she clearly committed a crime where the statute clearly does not require intent she skates. "Gross negligence" in the handling of documents does not require a proof of intent. That is why Comey's first draft accused her of "gross negligence" but suddenly through the magic of Comeyism it became "excessive carelessness." Note that the very definition of gross negligence is excessive carelessness.

Tarmac Doctrine incarnate.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/...accused-clinton-of-gross-negligence-on-emails
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top