Jump to content

Russian LawyerWilling to Testify that Donald Trump Jr. Offered A Quid Pro Quo


Recommended Posts

 

When President Donald Trump’s eldest son met with a Russian lawyer in June 2016 after being promised “information that would incriminate” Trump’s election opponent Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump Jr. suggested that a U.S. law the lawyer was lobbying against could be reconsidered if Trump became president, according to the lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya.

“The meeting was a failure; none of us understood what the point of it had been,” she told Bloomberg in an interview on Monday, referring to the meeting that Trump Jr. initially claimed was about the Magnitsky Act, which Congress passed in 2012 to punish Russian officials for human rights abuses.

Looking ahead, if we come to power, we can return to this issue and think what to do about it,’’ Trump Jr. said during the meeting, according to Veselnitskaya. “I understand our side may have messed up, but it’ll take a long time to get to the bottom of it.”

Veselnitskaya also claimed that he wanted “financial documents showing that money that allegedly evaded U.S. taxes had gone to Clinton’s campaign,” according to Bloomberg. But she said that she did not have them.

Alan Futerfas, Trump Jr.’s lawyer, said he had no comment on Bloomberg’s story.

The June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower, which The New York Times uncovered this summer, has drawn close scrutiny from the multiple investigations into whether Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia last year.

Trump Jr. took the meeting, which was also attended by Trump’s son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner and then-campaign chairman Paul Manafort, after being told that the information on Clinton was “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump,’’ according to emails he released in response to the Times’ reporting.

“If it is what you say, I love it,” he replied in an email to music publicist Rob Goldstone, who arranged the meeting through one of his clients, Russian pop star Emin Agalarov.

Trump Jr.’s explanation for the meeting repeatedly changed. He initially claimed that it concerned adoptions, referring to the Russian government banning Americans from adopting Russian children, in retaliation for the Magnitsky Act.

Veselnitskaya told Bloomberg that she would be willing to meet with the Senate Judiciary Committee and with special counsel Robert Mueller’s team, which are both conducting investigations into the Trump campaign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 78
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

THAT doesn't sound like any "Quid pro quo"... because words do not mean ANYTHING !!

 

NOW, if the President of Russia was trying to corner the Uranium market, and was willing to bribe people to make that happen, and THEN,  a sitting Sec. of State voted for the transfer of 20% of U.S. Uranium assets to Russia, and THEN, $150 million  of donations are made to the Clinton Foundation from the entity that benefitted from the sale... Now THAT would be a "Qui pro quo" !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Golfboy said:

lol... this moron says "we can return to this issue and think what to do about it" is a quid pro quo.

It's really amazing you can remember to breathe without someone reminding you.

 

don tried, that is the big story. maybe that is why daddy made ratso lie about everything.

oh well, Mueller will find the truth and justice will prevail.

enjoy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Golfboy said:

lol... this moron says "we can return to this issue and think what to do about it" is a quid pro quo.

It's really amazing you can remember to breathe without someone reminding you.

 

+1

 

Really dumb by Isabel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, dontlooknow said:

Oh boy we got the trump campaign on the run. 

 

If I were the Democrats... I would be MUCH more concerned about the survival of the Democrat PAERTY... because the FAKE NEWS about Trump isn't working, and the REAL FACTS relating to Hillary and Democrat CORRUPTION are beginning to FLOW !!

 

Donald Trump will be FINE !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Phoenix68 said:

 

......ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY'RE

COMIN' OUTTA TRUMPY'S MOUTH!!!!!

 

 

No, because "Quid pro quo" is a phrase used in English to mean an exchange of goods or services, in which one transfer is contingent upon the other; "a favour for a favor".

 

EVEN if the conversation happened... the conversation is NO proof of an INTENT to do it... and it CERTAINLY didn't happen relating to Trump... HOWRVER. it almost CERTAINLY DID with Hillary !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Golfboy said:

lol... this moron says "we can return to this issue and think what to do about it" is a quid pro quo.

It's really amazing you can remember to breathe without someone reminding you.

 

 

Umm...Tard?  Brainless, idiotic, empty headed and drooling Tard?

THAT IS AN ARTICLE I CITED.
Jesus Christ -  how do you remember to breathe without someone reminding you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Z09 said:

+1

 

Really dumb by Isabel

 

Umm...ZO the Whore?  Brainless, idiotic, empty headed and drooling ZO the Whore?

THAT IS AN ARTICLE I CITED.
Jesus Christ -  how do you remember to breathe without someone reminding you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 U.S. Code § 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States

prev | next

If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Golfboy said:

lol.   Please quote the "intent" law that you think he violated. 

Go ahead, I'll wait. 

 

why do you think he lied about it on orders from daddy?

when his ass is in front of a jury and they see the intent to attempt a crime, and then they see how much he lied about it, it may kinda make thm believe he is not telling the truth. you don't know much about the law do you?

yeah, it shows

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, harryramar said:

why do you think he lied about it on orders from daddy?

when his ass is in front of a jury and they see the intent to attempt a crime, and then they see how much he lied about it, it may kinda make thm believe he is not telling the truth. you don't know much about the law do you?

yeah, it shows

Politics.  Because they knew morons like you would lie, and claim something illegal happened. 

Dumbass.

 

What I know about the law, is there has to actually BE a law violated.

So, you admit they broke no law.    Interesting.   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, slideman said:

18 U.S. Code § 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States

prev | next

If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

That's Manafort, long before he had anything to do with Trump, dumbass. 

The question is what law Trump violated. 

 

Would you like to try again?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Golfboy said:

Politics.  Because they knew morons like you would lie, and claim something illegal happened. 

Dumbass.

 

So, you admit they broke no law.    Interesting.   

 

I see so now you are claiming the potus and his son lied to you and cube head Hannity because they knew morons like me would lie?

BWAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 that is the dumbest fucking thing you have said to date. god lord are you seriously making that claim?

" oh yes don and don jr would have told the truth but they knew I would lie about it so they chose to lie"

LOL

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Golfboy said:

That's Manafort, long before he had anything to do with Trump, dumbass. 

The question is what law Trump violated. 

 

Would you like to try again?

 

it doesn't matter if he broke a law at that meeting it is the totality of his dishonesty that will nail that creep and his old man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...