TrumPutinGate

#12,606
#12,606
Question 1. Why aren't Trump, Jr., and Manafort willing to testify under oath?

Question 2. Why have they not been subpoenaed to force them to do so?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#12,609
#12,609
BigOrangeTrain said:
Russia has meddled in our elections for decades. As we have theirs as well. Why has your outrage been silent until now? Could it have something to do with Trump winning and your side losing? You can say NO all ypu want, but we all know that's exactly what it is.

Had this same situation happened in oh lets say 2008, you would be singing a much different tune. Keep on keeping on liberal. You continue to show your allegiance to the party of ignorant hypocrites.
Click to expand...


meddled in previous U.S. elections by hacking into political party servers and planting fake news all over the web? Show it to us, man! Where are the links?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#12,614
#12,614
BigOrangeTrain said:
Had this same situation happened in oh lets say 2008, you would be singing a much different tune. Keep on keeping on liberal. You continue to show your allegiance to the party of ignorant hypocrites.
Click to expand...

it was definitely a partisan job by the last administration. they had all the proof yet didn't want to disclose if Hilary won as projected. Why is that even a thought process? Seems like if you care now you should have cared then
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#12,615
#12,615
It's increasingly clear, gents, that the Trumps and Kushner have been involved in money-laundering deals involving Russian oligarchs investing in real estate in New York and other places. Dirty Russian money has propped up Trump's empire--and let's remember that Trump was in pretty dire financial shape for years; most U.S. and European banks would not deal with him. The one bank that would, Deutsch Bank, is embroiled in major money-laundering investigations. Trump has also associated with unsavory types for most of his career, starting with mob lawyer Roy Cohn, a good friend and mentor of Trump. Trump is shady--he's always been shady.

Kushner got a sweetheart deal on the old New York Times building, owned by a Russian magnate whose firm had a variety of deals with Prevezon--a Russian company that had been indicted in the U.S. for money-laundering. He paid below market value for the part of the building he bought. If you are dealing with stolen money, money being laundered, you don't worry so much about market value--and you deal with people whom you've dealt with before, in this case Kushner.

The Russian accountant who uncovered that Prevezon's principles had used some scam to steal millions from the Russian government was arrrested and put in prison and was killed in prison. The U.S. put sanctions on Russia related to the money-laundering and the death of the whistle blower--whose name was Magnitsky. The meeting in Trump Tower between the Russian lawyer and Trump Jr. and Kushner and Manafort was interested in getting the so-called Magnitsky sanctions lifted.

There is almost no doubt that the Trumpsters passed along the word to Putin--a man with a long record of murdering those (politicians, businessmen, journalists) who expose his corrupt government-- during the campaign that various sanctions would be lifted if Trump were elected, and in return Russian hacked U.S. social media website and the DNC, etc.

And let's recall the many meetings between Trump campaign people and Russians, both during the campaign and immediately after the election, that they conveniently forget about when questioned, under oath, during confirmation hearings--starting with our own Attorney General.

So we have a president who has been compromised by dirty Russian money. And please know that Trump cares FAR more about his business than he does about being president--that is why he has violated the emoluments clause in the constitution and has ignored conflict of interest rules. So what, eh? What's a little presidential corruption, right--Obama MUST have done the same thing, right? We have an Attorney General who has lied under oath about meetings with Russians--and about the content of his conversation with the Russian ambassador. We have a former National Security Advisor who, according to the former acting attorney general, was compromised by Russia. Flynn had been paid for appearances by Russian organizations and lied about the content of his conversations with the Russian ambassador, etc.

So here we have a very real scandal as opposed to the very fake scandals that the Republicans and their rural tribe promoted--Benghazi! Yea, it's a shame we don't have a video of Putin telling Trump in a secret meeting, "I vill help you win, comrade." We just have a stream of accumulating facts. But no biggie, yea? It's ok to have a president who wants to tailor American foreign policy to the wishes of a murderous Russian dictator--longtime enemy of American--because he wants and needs dirty Russian money for his business. This is about a president whose first priority is building and protecting his real estate business, and covering up his past associations with Russians, not in doing the rights things for this country.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/24/jared-kushner-new-york-russia-money-laundering
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 people
#12,617
#12,617
LouderVol said:
it was definitely a partisan job by the last administration. they had all the proof yet didn't want to disclose if Hilary won as projected. Why is that even a thought process? Seems like if you care now you should have cared then
Click to expand...


but wanted to be circumspect because the YAHOOS--and I think you know who they are--would have gone hysterical with conspiracy theories about Obama trying to help Clinton win the election. Obama didn't want to be perceived as interfering in the election, knowing the outcry that would come from the rubes if he did anything perceived to be detrimental to Trump. But you'd have to have some smarts to recognize that....Mass hysteria by the older country folk over fake conspiracies peddled by right-wing propaganda traffickers is, sadly, a new political reality. We saw that in spades in the last election. Trump is certainly the most immoral weasel ever to run for president--but the rubes were beet red with anger over phony Clinton transgressions--a woman whose credentials and intelligence and experience and, yes, moral standards dwarf those of the corrupt, dishonest, power-hungry child-man who now occupies the White House.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#12,619
#12,619
1. Have the Russian sanctions been lifted?
WASHINGTON — The White House indicated on Sunday that President Trump would accept new legislation curtailing his authority to lift sanctions on Russia on his own,
Click to expand...
hasn't been signed yet but all signs point to it that it will. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/23/us/politics/trump-russia-sanctions.html?mcubz=0 the Russian stooge is limiting his ability to help the Russians, hmm...
2. What he did as a private citizen, Russian money, has no implications on him being president now.
3. If you look into that deal with the Russian magnate and Kushner you would quickly see why it came in under value. Russian was losing money hand over fist and I am pretty sure there was a clause saying they had to sell of bits of it by a certain time frame. again this is pretty irrelevant considering it happened pre-election.
4. Hilary and Bill have both been paid for speaking appearances by the Russians. Don't know about Obama but most politicians won't say no to a dollar. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/18/hillary-clinton-sided-with-russia-on-sanctions-as-bill-made-500g-on-moscow-speech.html
According to Mrs. Clinton’s ethics disclosure form filed while she was secretary of State, Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 by the Russia-based finance company Renaissance Capital for his June 29, 2010, speech in Moscow to its employees and guests attending the company's annual conference.

The speech is now coming back to haunt the Clintons, considering the company that cut the check was allegedly tied to the scandal that spurred the Global Magnitsky Act, a bill that imposed sanctions on Russians designated as human-rights abusers and eventually would become law in 2012.
Click to expand...
4. Not concerned with what other past presidents might have done, but the other candidate was in with the Russians too. so preaching any type of holier-than-thou or Americaner-than-thou comes off extremely hollow.
 
#12,621
#12,621
armchair said:
but wanted to be circumspect because the YAHOOS--and I think you know who they are--would have gone hysterical with conspiracy theories about Obama trying to help Clinton win the election. Obama didn't want to be perceived as interfering in the election, knowing the outcry that would come from the rubes if he did anything perceived to be detrimental to Trump. But you'd have to have some smarts to recognize that....Mass hysteria by the older country folk over fake conspiracies peddled by right-wing propaganda traffickers is, sadly, a new political reality. We saw that in spades in the last election. Trump is certainly the most immoral weasel ever to run for president--but the rubes were beet red with anger over phony dudeClinton transgressions--a woman whose credentials SoS who couldn't remember security briefings?and intelligence the one who keeps hot sauce in her purse?and experience two years and, yes, moral standards she's a politician. you are arguing that a dwarf is taller than a midgetdwarf those of the corrupt,yet to see the corruption while in office dishonest, power-hungry child-man who now occupies the White House.
Click to expand...
the rest of the Trump bashing I agree with.

he wanted to be circumspect about the biggest political wrong doing that has ever happened to this country? I would agree announcing it too late would have come across as political hackery. But depending on which source you want to use they knew back in late May. I would say June would have been acceptable. Especially since Trump didn't get the nomination until June 7th or so. At that time it would have be hard to sell it as hackery. The fact that this didn't become an issue until AFTER the election is inexcusable.
 
#12,622
#12,622
Velo Vol said:
Has Trump been in New York once since he was inaugurated?
Click to expand...


because there would be big protests at Trump tower if he did. Most New Yorkers have never liked Trump and he is extremely unpopular now. He does have support on Staten Island, which is the red-headed stepchild of New York City boroughs. He pretty much needs to go to state fairs in middle America to get a warm welcome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#12,624
#12,624
It's interesting that Kush is just going to meet with committee staff. The Dems won't even have a chance to ask questions.

#obviousset-upbullshotmeeting
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#12,625
#12,625
lawgator1 said:
It's interesting that Kush is just going to meet with committee staff. The Dems won't even have a chance to ask questions.

#obviousset-upbullshotmeeting
Click to expand...

Interesting that Comey met with Clinton, but never recorded or took notes to recount meeting, yet wrote a diary of his interactions with Trump.

#obviousset-upbullshotmeeting
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top