Dude you have serious selective memory. Go back and see what the company line was back then. Trump, Trump Jr. and everyone involved with the WH saying point blank it was strictly dealing with adoption policy. They lied their ***** off back then, and have been lying to the American people non-stop ever since. The simple question is, why?
You have selective memory. Adoption wasn't ONCE mentioned in the e-mail trail with DTJr. that started the meeting. Adoption is what it ended up being about and everyone in the room realized the meeting was a boat load of nothing and basically zoned out on their smart phones.
We've known about this since 2017 when the e-mails of DTJr. were released. Someone said a person might have "dirt" on Hillary (at that point, I'm not sure it was clearly "Russia" or just a "Russian"). I think that was set up by the guy in Britain that was friends with a rock star or something or other.
We know all this. We've known it from the beginning. The meeting yielding NOTHING.
And this still all goes back to a very (currently) liberal interpretation of "campaign finances" because Dirshowicz and other lawyers have adamantly claimed information is NOT a campaign donation and that interpretation of "value" could open up a completely new can of worms that not one judge has decided upon.
You keep jumping WAY ahead of the facts (which you have from the very beginning in your hopes of Trump's impeachment).
1. Information and "dirt" on a political opponent might not be relevant to "campaign donation" laws.
2. There is little evidence Trump's team "colluded" with Russian interference into our election process.
3. Russian "interference" is being used very broadly and liberally by our news media right now. The depths and type of interference really needs to be it's own topic because some of it is harmless (buying $100,000 ads on facebook, random "spam" fishing e-mails to local election boards) while others is not (coordinating or backing Julian Assange to release illegally obtained e-mails, however easy it was to get them).
4. It is a huge legal stretch by the left to pin "Obstruction of Justice" on Trump's use of Twitter as a tool in his political propaganda machine. His public attacks at the validity of Mueller's investigation (and all the subset stuff underneath that) is not "Obstruction of Justice" in my opinion. We've even heard from major lawyers that say Trump is fully within his executive branch powers to fire Mueller and fire everyone in the FBI/CIA/DOJ and not be subject to legal prosecution at all.
Again, I don't know where you think this is going. First it was "collusion", then it was "campaign finance laws", now it's "obstruction of justice" as the hot crime of the day to you and your ilk. What's it going to be when this blows over (again) in a month?
This stuff isn't going to stick. The DOJ is NEVER going to prosecute a sitting President (not even sure they can) and Congress will NEVER impeach him.
(@Brasilmagic) <a href="https://twitter.com/Brasilmagic/status/1026290492869357568?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 6, 2018</a></blockquote>
