>>>So are you under the impression that Trump has no ties to Russia and has never lied about it? There are several current examples of him violating the Emoluments Clause aren't there?
>
>He's allowed to have ties to Russia and doesn't need to lie about that, even if some people choose to interpret every reference in that fashion. What I see is sneaky verbiage manipulated to call somebody a liar- similar to those paraphrases you like.
>
>As an example, here's what KellyAnne was asked by Dickerson in December 2016:
>
>Did anybody involved in the Trump campaign have any contacts with Russians trying to meddle with the election?
>
>She was called a liar by people who paraphrased it to "ties" with Russia, willfully excluding the context and "meddling with the election" part, and again when the Trump JR thing came up.
>
>As for Trump JR who you brought up to deflect from the actual collusion with Russians by HRC/DNC: Trump JR met a Russian woman who wanted to twist his ear about adoption and didn't know she was supposed to have dirt on HRC. So: literally, how was she a Russian trying to meddle in an election? I realize it's easier to smudge it all onto a big convenient smear, but literally there's no lie if you follow the actual unparaphrased question.
>
>Gotta say "QED" that you're so dogged in pursuit of Trump JR who procured nothing and received nothing, while giving HRC/DNC a pass for procuring and using the pee pee dossier to damage Trump- both before and after the election.
>
>>>There are several current examples of him violating the Emoluments Clause aren't there?
>
>Name them.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/dc-and-marylands-lawsuit-trump-flagrantly-violating-emoluments-clause/2017/06/12/8a9806a8-4f9b-11e7-be25-3a519335381c_story.html
http://www.npr.org/2017/04/27/525749738/questions-linger-about-trumps-foreign-business-ties-and-the-emoluments-clause
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/12/emoluments-clause-trump-sued-by-maryland-and-dc-attorneys-general.html