Trump Jr.’s “Russia Meeting” Wasn’t Illegal. Here’s Cold Hard PROOF.

The Trump-Russia “collusion” theory resurfaced again this week, but this time focused on President Trump’s oldest son, Donald Trump Jr. Rumors began circulating that Trump Jr.’s meeting with a Russian lawyer was proof of collusion after documents were revealed that Trump Jr. met with the lawyer in an attempt to gain information about Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election.

As the left makes claims that Trump Jr.’s meeting is proof of their Trump-Russia conspiracies, the proof is out that the meeting wasn’t illegal, and there’s nothing to see. (via Daily Wire)

The Donald Trump Jr. meeting with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya has been a central point of the liberal narrative that Trump stole the election with Russia’s help. Despite Trump Jr. revealing the futility of the meeting in obtaining incriminating evidence against Hillary Clinton, liberals remain adamant it is proof of their accusations.

According to Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA), the meeting has motivated investigators into the Russia-Trump ties to consider the entire matter an act of “treason.” “Nothing is proven yet, but we’re beyond obstruction of justice in terms of what’s being investigated. This is moving into perjury, false statements, and even into potentially treason.” (via Washington Examiner)

Yet the fact remains that nothing illegal occurred in the meeting, and a well-respected university professor specializing in law agrees.

Jonathan Turley, a professor at George Washington University School of Law, pointed out the legality of the meeting, saying, “There is no crime in listening to people who say that they have incriminating information on a political opponent, even a foreigner.” He even suggested that making claims that such a meeting is illegal causes, “major free speech and association issues.”

It’s also been noted that the meeting had nothing to do with the cause for the investigation of Russia-Trump relations: Russia hacking the DNC servers to help Trump’s campaign. The meeting with Trump Jr. had nothing to do with the hack, meaning the meeting cannot be considered a crime.

According to Sen. Tim Kaine, getting information from an “adversary” of the U.S. that could be used to win the election is an illegal act comparable to treason.“To meet with an adversary to try to get information to hijack democracy. The investigation is now more than just obstruction of justice in investigation. It’s more than just a perjury investigation. It’s a treason investigation,” he said. (via Washington Examiner)

That’s a very interesting theory, especially when you consider that evidence exists of Democrats doing exactly that on two separate occasions.

The first was when Alexandra Chalupa, a member of the DNC, set up a meeting with officials from the Ukraine to obtain dirt on Paul Manafort with the DNC’s full support and encouragment. An official at the Ukrainian embassy confirmed that attempts were made at a meeting, saying, “they were coordinating an investigation with the Hillary team on Paul Manafort with Alexandra Chalupa.”

The other example is the case of the Christopher Steele dossier used as the foundation of the Democrats’ claims of Trump-Russia ties. The document contained unverified information and was funded by the DNC through the research group Fusion GPS.

Liberals and the media keep digging for evidence of “collusion,” but so far, it doesn’t exist. Is their entire narrative a total farce? Let your voice be heard in the poll below!

Both cases are examples of the Democrats’ hypocrisy when they claim Trump Jr.’s meeting was illegal. The first is an attempted meeting for dirt on a political opponent that resulted in nothing, and the second is actual use of unverified claims provided by Russian sources meant to rig the election in Hillary’s favor.

Democrats would do well to back off the Trump-Russia “collusion” theory. At some point the American people will grow tired of their fruitless efforts, and Democrats might find themselves an even smaller minority after the next mid-term elections.