Again, the context of the comment is the point, in this case it was under the context of collusion…
Louis Weeks

“ the context of the comment is the point, in this case it was under the context of collusion, you can’t understand that?”

I mean….the quote nowhere mentions collusion at all, but let’s accept for a moment that Trump Jr. was asked if he or anyone else in the campaign colluded with the Russian Government. His response is “Did I meet with people that were Russian? I’m sure, I’m sure I did,” Trump Jr. said in a March interview, according to the New York Times. “But none that were set up. None that I can think of at the moment. And certainly none that I was representing the campaign in any way, shape or form.”

So if the context is “did you collude?” Then his answer is yes, I met with people who were Russian, but as an individual not as a member of the campaign? I’m not sure that’s helpful to your argument.

I’m far from a radical leftist. My point is that the administration has repeatedly lied about it’s connections to Russia. Why? Why lie about something you see as so innocuous? I’d be far more likely to believe them if their alleged honesty wasn’t the result of being found out.

As for the Pelosi meetings; I’ll be clear. If Pelosi met with Russians to try and get dirt on Trump or otherwise get something of value for the Clinton campaign, then what she did is wrong and possibly criminal. I’d be happy to read anything you can send me which says that or something similar occurred. 
You see…I’m happy to treat her just the same I’m treating Trump Jr. So your whataboutism defense isn’t going to work.

Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated Timothy Gutwald’s story.