SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
President Donald Trump appears to have changed his story about a 2016 meeting at Trump Tower that is pivotal to the special counsel's investigation, tweeting that his son met with a Kremlin-connected lawyer to collect information about his political opponent.
[...] That is a far different explanation than Trump gave 13 months ago, when a statement dictated by the president but released under the name of Donald Trump Jr., read: "We primarily discussed a program about the adoption of Russian children that was active and popular with American families years ago."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
President Trump Changed His Story on Son's Meeting with Russian Lawyer
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 221 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Is that really YOU that is reading this?
(Score: 1, Troll) by Pav on Tuesday August 07 2018, @11:52PM
Complete horseshit?! Are you serious? Did you read through that article, especially to the "update" portion on Vadim Mikerin being investigated for both corruption and connection to the Clinton foundation?
This is the same Clinton foundation which (despite billions in donations) channelled the vast majority of Haiti relief to... elsewhere. Bill and Hillary gained a quarter billion in the last 15 years alone. What's the old saw about those who gain wealth in public office? We even SAW IN THEIR OWN WORDS how Hillary and her campaign subverted US democracy by cheating Bernie in the primaries, and colluded with the media to "elevate" Trump. Oh, but ignore that... because the DNC is a corporation and are allowed to do that (BTW, a judge specifically threw this argument out in court during the DNC fraud lawsuit). Oh, and ignore cheating Bernie because the emails proving this weren't leaked... it was a RUSSIAN HACK, Russia, Russia, Russia, and we're at war (or something). Machiavelli would be pround - blame your opponent for your own weaknesses. Brilliant!
I'm sure if I had that much money I could arrange to get a big fat FALSE instead of an UNPROVEN on Snopes. I mean... Clinton wasn't SOLELY responsible for making the Uranium One decision... oh, and the guy who owned the company before payed EVEN MORE in s/bribes/donations to the Clinton Foundation anyway. And some time had passed between the payment and the decision. And the Vadim Mikerin corruption investigations links to the Clinton foundation are still being investigated... I'm sure there's nothing to that at all, so of course the whole Uranium One scandal deserves a nice red FALSE at Snopes!