The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums
Trump Tower meeting is within the scope of WikiProject Espionage, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of espionage, intelligence, and related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, or contribute to the discussion.EspionageWikipedia:WikiProject EspionageTemplate:WikiProject EspionageEspionage
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
[1]And it would have been my son, Don — who’s a good young man, who’s gone through hell. And they were calls that must have been made by him before and after the meeting — three calls [...] So, of the three calls that were so horrible that he had a meeting and he called me and then he had the meeting after and he made two more calls I suppose the mainstream media will pick this up soon. starship.paint (talk)14:27, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I looked at this and thought "OMG!" But let's look at the ENTIRE quote, not cherry-pick to make it sound like an admission. What he said was,
You heard so much talk about phone calls that my son made to me from this meeting that was set up by GPS Fusion, it looks like — which is the other side, for those that don’t know. And for a year, I heard about phone calls went to a special number unauthorized. And it would have been my son, Don — who’s a good young man, who’s gone through hell. And they were calls that must have been made by him before and after the meeting — three calls. After massive study and work, they actually found who made the calls. One was a friend of ours — a real estate developer. Great guy. Most of you know him. Nice guy. He loves our country. And the other one was the head of NASCAR. Two of them. So, of the three calls that were so horrible that he had a meeting and he called me and then he had the meeting after and he made two more calls — and they were written about like this little — little lines, couple of lines. Nobody wanted to admit it.
It appears that he is saying the calls were to other people. Is there an admission in there that he called Trump Sr. before the meeting? It's always hard to figure out his syntax. In any case, this is a primary source; as you say, let's see if the media pick it up or interpret it as an admission. -- MelanieN (talk) 14:46, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not asking you to include with this primary source, but really what the hell is Trump trying to say? Trump clearly says he called me and then he had the meeting after. Obviously, me is Trump. So there's two other factors, he and meeting. The only way this wouldn't be an admission if he isn't Jr. or if meeting isn't Trump Tower meeting. starship.paint (talk)14:51, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
What is this: Trump Jr. himself admitted ... that the meeting concerned a "Russian effort to aid the (Trump) campaign."? It is cited to two sources, CNN and NYT, but the quoted part is actually a fragment of a NYT headline "Trump Jr. Was Told in Email of Russian Effort to Aid Campaign"!
What about this (same paragraph, same sources): Trump Jr. himself admitted that Goldstone had stated in an email to him that the Russian government was involvedPolitrukki (talk) 17:00, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
First one is clear: a headline cannot be (ab)used like that. Verifying the second one is a bit harder, but I cannot find such "admittance" in the source. Since nobody here has offered to verify the content or offered an alternative solution, I'm simply going to remove both statements. Politrukki (talk) 22:23, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I see zero mention of the documented fact that the Russian involved in this meeting met the day before and the day after with none other than Glenn Simpson, chief of Fusion GPS. That the Russian involved in this meeting actually brought notes into that meeting which had been crafted with the help of Fusion GPS. You know, the same Fusion GPS involved in spreading many, many of the refuted allegations about Team Trump.
Why? Why the complete absence of (to me) rather pertinent information regarding the planning, execution and even follow-up of this "event" by Team Trump's outright political enemies. The absence of such information here is strange, if not openly partisan in its exclusion.114.167.16.246 (talk) 04:58, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a suggestion for content based on RS?
Fusion GPS is mentioned three times in this article, including explanations of the business relationship between Fusion GPS and Veselnitskaya, which had nothing to do with this meeting.
This meeting was a Putin/Agalarov/Russian government attempt to discuss the lifting of the sanctions related to the Magnitsky Act and Ukraine. The acceptance of the meeting by Trump campaigners violated campaign finance laws. They never reported this meeting to the FBI, as they should have. Instead they kept it hidden for a year, lied about it, and Trump issued a false account of the purpose of the meeting.
Yes, how about a mention of the fact that, though allegedly there's supposedly "nothing connecting" the Russian that worked for Fusion GPS who also just happened to attend a Trump Tower meeting, that same Russian went to Fusion GPS offices (no longer working there, right?) both "the day before AND the day after" the meeting? Why?
Is that in this article three times? Or is that irrelevant? Because some people might find that the Russian in question visiting her "business relationship" partners (while, incidentally, said partners are in the middle of the largest frame-up in modern American political history)... Some might find that...unusual? Even if you do not? 114.167.16.246 (talk) 07:38, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
