• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Indictments coming...

Page 49 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
werepossum said:
No, no! We all know it's simply coincidence that the Clinton Foundation received ~$150 million in donations from the owners of the companies standing to profit from the uranium acquisition, Russians included. They're just a swell bunch of guys who recognized another swell lady who - purely coincidentally - was one of the people who had to sign off on the deal. Just like it's simply coincidence that the Clinton Foundation forgot to disclose those donations as promised until they were finally outed by an investigative reporter. And of course, it's equally (at least!) coincidental that Bill Clinton picks up a half mil from a Russian company with close ties to the Russian government while that is going on. And of course, the money that Fusion GPS received from the Russian government was also purely coincidental - that was for a completely unrelated matter that just happened to be cotemporal.

No, I was referring to the tens of millions in other Russian donations. Although clearly these too are pure coincidental. The Russian government, like the Saudis and other dictators, are just a bunch of really great folks interested in making the world a better place and purely by coincidence, happened to choose another swell family to make that happen. The fact that Mrs. Clinton had an enormous amount of power with the US government was - wait for it! - purely coincidental. We can tell by the way donations plummeted after Mrs. Clinton lost that power - since it was purely coincidental that donations plummeted after Mrs. Clinton could no longer do favors with government policy, it's obviously purely coincidental that hundreds of millions in donations came to her foundation when she could do favors with government policy.
Click to expand...
werepossum said:
Yep. Clearly this was purely coincidental. Why, Hillary can't possibly be expected to know what the department she leads is actually doing. She's too busy counting the money rolling into the Clinton Foundation.
Click to expand...

We've been over that many times & yet you shotgun the same falsehoods & innuendo whenever you want to create a diversion. Just in case anybody else forgot-

Among the ways these accusations stray from the facts is in attributing a power of veto or approval to Secretary Clinton that she simply did not have. Clinton was one of nine cabinet members and department heads that sit on the CFIUS, and the secretary of the treasury is its chairperson. CFIUS members are collectively charged with evaluating the transaction for potential national security issues, then turning their findings over to the president. By law, the committee can’t veto a transaction; only the president can. According to The New York Times, Clinton may not have even directly participated in the Uranium One decision. Then-Assistant Secretary of State Jose Fernandez, whose job it was to represent the State Dept. on CFIUS, said Clinton herself “never intervened” in committee matters
Click to expand...

http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/

They cover the rest of it, as well.

How dare the Clintons wrangle money out of rich people to help some of the world's poorest people! How dare they donate 10% of their own incomes! How dare they reveal decades of tax returns, pay 30% in federal income tax & never complain!

How could they be so inhuman? What are they hiding?
 
werepossum said:
No, no! We all know it's simply coincidence that the Clinton Foundation received ~$150 million in donations from the owners of the companies standing to profit from the uranium acquisition, Russians included. They're just a swell bunch of guys who recognized another swell lady who - purely coincidentally - was one of the people who had to sign off on the deal. Just like it's simply coincidence that the Clinton Foundation forgot to disclose those donations as promised until they were finally outed by an investigative reporter. And of course, it's equally (at least!) coincidental that Bill Clinton picks up a half mil from a Russian company with close ties to the Russian government while that is going on. And of course, the money that Fusion GPS received from the Russian government was also purely coincidental - that was for a completely unrelated matter that just happened to be cotemporal.

No, I was referring to the tens of millions in other Russian donations. Although clearly these too are pure coincidental. The Russian government, like the Saudis and other dictators, are just a bunch of really great folks interested in making the world a better place and purely by coincidence, happened to choose another swell family to make that happen. The fact that Mrs. Clinton had an enormous amount of power with the US government was - wait for it! - purely coincidental. We can tell by the way donations plummeted after Mrs. Clinton lost that power - since it was purely coincidental that donations plummeted after Mrs. Clinton could no longer do favors with government policy, it's obviously purely coincidental that hundreds of millions in donations came to her foundation when she could do favors with government policy.
Click to expand...


It took you a week and a half to repeat Republican talking points? Are you receiving chain emails via actual snail mail?

Maybe in a month your "buddies" will send you the info on how donations led to corruption and then you can go from innuendo to facts. I suggest you wait patiently by your mailbox, that info will come any day now.
 
ivwshane said:
It took you a week and a half to repeat Republican talking points? Are you receiving chain emails via actual snail mail?

Maybe in a month your "buddies" will send you the info on how donations led to corruption and then you can go from innuendo to facts. I suggest you wait patiently by your mailbox, that info will come any day now.
Click to expand...
Nope, just worked half to death. Damn this Trump economy!
 
Jhhnn said:
We've been over that many times & yet you shotgun the same falsehoods & innuendo whenever you want to create a diversion. Just in case anybody else forgot-

http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/

They cover the rest of it, as well.

How dare the Clintons wrangle money out of rich people to help some of the world's poorest people! How dare they donate 10% of their own incomes! How dare they reveal decades of tax returns, pay 30% in federal income tax & never complain!

How could they be so inhuman? What are they hiding?
Click to expand...
lol I would ask you not to act stupid if I didn't know you weren't acting. Nine committee members had to sign off on the deal. ANY one of the nine could have disallowed it, or rather flagged it and forced Obama to decide whether to override their recommendations. Her defense is that (A) she wasn't actually doing her job at all, so she had nothing to do with the decision, and (B) most of those donations were in the year before this deal was presented. Apparently it's not corruption to buy a politician on an installment plan.
 
werepossum said:
lol I would ask you not to act stupid if I didn't know you weren't acting. Nine committee members had to sign off on the deal. ANY one of the nine could have disallowed it, or rather flagged it and forced Obama to decide whether to override their recommendations. Her defense is that (A) she wasn't actually doing her job at all, so she had nothing to do with the decision, and (B) most of those donations were in the year before this deal was presented. Apparently it's not corruption to buy a politician on an installment plan.
Click to expand...

Did they buy off everyone else who had to sign off on it as well? If not, then it was a pretty big gamble. If you need a bunch of people to sign off on something, you'd better buy them all or there isn't much point in buying any of them.
 
woolfe9998 said:
Did they buy off everyone else who had to sign off on it as well? If not, then it was a pretty big gamble. If you need a bunch of people to sign off on something, you'd better buy them all or there isn't much point in buying any of them.
Click to expand...
Do you really have to buy off everyone, or just the one who refuses to even meet with you without a juicy donation? Or is that too a coincidence?

In any case, regardless of whether one believes that the Clintons are pure as the driven snow, they have made a lot of money from well-connected Russians and now they're trying to make those same Russians into the Devil. To whatever degree that characterization is accurate, I suggest they were materially the same people a couple years ago when the Clintons were making bank from them. You guys on the left are attempting to have a huge double standard where the Clintons are admirable for dealing with them whereas Team Trump are traitors for doing the same to a lesser degree.
 
werepossum said:
lol I would ask you not to act stupid if I didn't know you weren't acting. Nine committee members had to sign off on the deal. ANY one of the nine could have disallowed it, or rather flagged it and forced Obama to decide whether to override their recommendations. Her defense is that (A) she wasn't actually doing her job at all, so she had nothing to do with the decision, and (B) most of those donations were in the year before this deal was presented. Apparently it's not corruption to buy a politician on an installment plan.
Click to expand...

So what? I'll take the judgement of 9 cabinet members over the scurrilous bullshit from the right wing noise machine every time. They determined that the deal doesn't undermine national security & you sure as Hell haven't shown how it did.

From the article-

Of the $145 million allegedly contributed to the Clinton Foundation by Uranium One investors, the lion’s share — $131.3 million — came from a single donor, Frank Giustra, the company’s founder. But Giustra sold off his entire stake in the company in 2007, three years before the Russia deal and at least 18 months before Clinton became secretary of state.
Click to expand...

What really happened is that Bill Clinton helped Giustra pull a business coup in the original deal with the leader of Kazakhstan. It was enormously profitable to Giustra who was then persuaded to give part of that to the Clinton foundation. The Russians buying it back only happened later.

You know all this anyway from previous discussions of the matter & yet persist in the scurrilous innuendo that has become your trademark.
 
werepossum said:
Do you really have to buy off everyone, or just the one who refuses to even meet with you without a juicy donation? Or is that too a coincidence?

In any case, regardless of whether one believes that the Clintons are pure as the driven snow, they have made a lot of money from well-connected Russians and now they're trying to make those same Russians into the Devil. To whatever degree that characterization is accurate, I suggest they were materially the same people a couple years ago when the Clintons were making bank from them. You guys on the left are attempting to have a huge double standard where the Clintons are admirable for dealing with them whereas Team Trump are traitors for doing the same to a lesser degree.
Click to expand...

hey Alex Jones, i've got news for you, absolutely no one thinks the Clinton`s are "pure as the driven snow"
 
alien42 said:
hey Alex Jones, i've got news for you, absolutely no one thinks the Clinton`s are "pure as the driven snow"
Click to expand...

OTOH, they didn't turn $915M of investor losses into personal tax credits or stiff the Freedom Kids for a lousy $2500...

The 2016 election was an exhibition of an astounding double standard. Everybody knows Trump is dirty, even the people who voted for him.
 
Jhhnn said:
or stiff the Freedom Kids for a lousy $2500...
Click to expand...
Hey now, Trump was a savvy businessman in that deal. Those kids learned a valuable lesson from a pro. In fact, Trump U students paid up to $35k for that lesson. When you think about it that way, these kids owe Trump a lot of money.
 
Jhhnn said:
OTOH, they didn't turn $915M of investor losses into personal tax credits or stiff the Freedom Kids for a lousy $2500...

The 2016 election was an exhibition of an astounding double standard. Everybody knows Trump is dirty, even the people who voted for him.
Click to expand...
That's fake dirt, alt-dirt, if you will.
 
werepossum said:
Do you really have to buy off everyone, or just the one who refuses to even meet with you without a juicy donation? Or is that too a coincidence?

In any case, regardless of whether one believes that the Clintons are pure as the driven snow, they have made a lot of money from well-connected Russians and now they're trying to make those same Russians into the Devil. To whatever degree that characterization is accurate, I suggest they were materially the same people a couple years ago when the Clintons were making bank from them. You guys on the left are attempting to have a huge double standard where the Clintons are admirable for dealing with them whereas Team Trump are traitors for doing the same to a lesser degree.
Click to expand...

What same russians is that? Even going the distance and accepting that those are the same "russians" how can you arrive at the conclusion that wrongdoing today equals wrongdoing yesterday. You can have a perfectly legit business relationship with your mechanic and yet that doesent mean he keeps his shop closed "after hours". You are so willing to jump to these conclusions without any evidence at all. Even if and even if, two wrongs dont make a right, does it? If Clinton did a bad thing in the past does that mean that Trump gets a pass today? Wake the f up man.
 
ch33zw1z said:
That's fake dirt, alt-dirt, if you will.
Click to expand...

There's nothing fake about it. Trump didn't have $900M to lose at the time, but his investors did, and that's what happened. Not only did they lose but Trump's accountants turned that loss into tax credits for Donald.

The thing with the Freedom kids is well documented. Like Ironwing said, it was a lesson to them that they can't trust Trump.
 
Hmmm...Manafort and Flynn on the clock.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/...-paul-manafort-richard-blumenthal-says-243158

Got 99% certainty that they are going to be indicted per Blumenthal.

sloth-soon-meme.jpg
 
vi edit said:
Hmmm...Manafort and Flynn on the clock.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/...-paul-manafort-richard-blumenthal-says-243158

Got 99% certainty that they are going to be indicted per Blumenthal.
Click to expand...

To me it's been pretty clear that Flynn and Manafort have been in deep, deep shit for awhile now. It's one of the reasons I never understood why people kept going on about how no indictments had happened yet.

I mean when the FBI no-knock raids someone's house at 6AM they MIGHT not end up being indicted, but you've got to think the chances are pretty high.
 
fskimospy said:
To me it's been pretty clear that Flynn and Manafort have been in deep, deep shit for awhile now. It's one of the reasons I never understood why people kept going on about how no indictments had happened yet.

I mean when the FBI no-knock raids someone's house at 6AM they MIGHT not end up being indicted, but you've got to think the chances are pretty high.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree. I don't think it's a matter of "if" but when and how many. I'm sure they are trying to rack up that prison sentence to a couple lifetimes for each of them to encourage a flip on the big kahuna.
 
Also, while things are pulling on, Mueller will start interviewing current and former WH staffers within the week...and supposedly his office is ready to cut deals.
 
vi edit said:
Absolutely agree. I don't think it's a matter of "if" but when and how many. I'm sure they are trying to rack up that prison sentence to a couple lifetimes for each of them to encourage a flip on the big kahuna.
Click to expand...

You mean "how many" pardons will Trump have to issue?

No need for them to flip on the Big Kahuna because he'll give them a get out jail free card. It's obvious that's what he's going to do.
 
woolfe9998 said:
You mean "how many" pardons will Trump have to issue?

No need for them to flip on the Big Kahuna because he'll give them a get out jail free card. It's obvious that's what he's going to do.
Click to expand...

It does seem that we are at substantial risk for a constitutional crisis if this investigation is as bad as I think it might be. If Mueller uncovers criminal activity that these people undertook in service of getting Trump elected and he pardons them all, what do you do? What does congress do?

Arpaio is already a huge threat to the constitutional order but this would be undermining how we even elect the person giving the pardons, meaning you can commit whatever crimes you want to win, so long as you win.
 
fskimospy said:
It does seem that we are at substantial risk for a constitutional crisis if this investigation is as bad as I think it might be. If Mueller uncovers criminal activity that these people undertook in service of getting Trump elected and he pardons them all, what do you do? What does congress do?

Arpaio is already a huge threat to the constitutional order but this would be undermining how we even elect the person giving the pardons, meaning you can commit whatever crimes you want to win, so long as you win.
Click to expand...

You don't need to convince me. If he pardons Flynn and Manafort and/or other possible co-conspirators, it will be a huge crisis for the country. Ideally, Congress should impeach him then convict him if he does that, but with the GOP in charge, who knows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top