Trump lied about having business dealings in Russia during campaign

[woolfe9998]

Trump is apoplectic with rage over Cohen spilling his guts to Mueller about his Russia dealings. Who knows what he's going to do next.

When are certain people going to understand that this is not the behavior of an innocent man? Indeed, if you asked me to describe, in the abstract, how a guilty person would behave in circumstances like these, this would pretty much be exactly it, though I'd assume a random POTUS to be smart to not look this guilty.

 

[woolfe9998]

Maddow just made a really good point. The GOP Intel Committee's "final report" from several months ago, concluding "no evidence of collusion" extensively quotes Cohen's now proven false testimony over and over again. Nunes and crew bought Cohen's lies hook, line and sinker and their report is total shite.

What an embarrassment.

 

[tweaker2]

Maddow just made a really good point. The GOP Intel Committee's "final report" from several months ago, concluding "no evidence of collusion" extensively quotes Cohen's now proven false testimony over and over again. Nunes and crew bought Cohen's lies hook, line and sinker and their report is total shite.

What an embarrassment.

The Repubs in Congress know for a fact that Trump is dirty right down to the skid marks in his skivvies but the "useful idiot" gave them big tax cuts for the wealthy that opened the door for them to start hacking away at what remains of the ACA as well as fulfilling their dreams of privatizing for profit every federal program that directly benefits the middle class and the poor. They got what they wanted from Trump and they're milking him for everything else they can get out of him. Bastards don't give a shit about what happens to the working stiffs of the nation and especially so those blue collar Repubs who voted them into office.

As to why those millions of Repub working class folks don't mind/don't care about being hurt by their Repub party's leaders favoring the wealthy at every turn will forever be a mystery to me.

 

[sactoking]

There was an interesting op/ed on Vox, I believe, that was speculating that Nunes's handling of committee testimony will potentially get people locked up. Essentially they gave off such a strong "We won't follow up" vibe that everyone felt they could come in and lie with impunity.

 

[woolfe9998]

Yes, and you can expect that Don Jr. is next. He is reportedly worried over being indicted for perjury for lying to that same committee.

Let's see, who else testified to that committee?

 

[fskimospy]

Maddow just made a really good point. The GOP Intel Committee's "final report" from several months ago, concluding "no evidence of collusion" extensively quotes Cohen's now proven false testimony over and over again. Nunes and crew bought Cohen's lies hook, line and sinker and their report is total shite.

What an embarrassment.

They did not buy his lies, they found his lies convenient.

 

[tweaker2]

Yes, and you can expect that Don Jr. is next. He is reportedly worried over being indicted for perjury for lying to that same committee.

Let's see, who else testified to that committee?

Looks like it's everyone that testified to those same lies that Jr. swore under oath was the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Those folks must be sweating blood in fear of being called back to the chambers that were once upon a time so friendly and sympathetic to them.

 

[Viper1j]

Wait, everybody knew about? During the campaign he said...

https://slate.com/news-and-politics...moscow-deal-denials-business-with-russia.html

This is news?

Trump tells lies to fish.

 

[Gazmitch]

Trump is incapable of telling the truth.
https://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/statements/byruling/false/

Great read, and very true

 

[blackangst1]

Trump did lie, explicitly, about not having any business dealings with Russia. Will you at least acknowledge this unquestionable truth?

That much is true. Whether or not collusion happened has yet to be discovered. "Doing business in Russia" is not collusion.

 

[HomerJS]

Maddow just made a really good point. The GOP Intel Committee's "final report" from several months ago, concluding "no evidence of collusion" extensively quotes Cohen's now proven false testimony over and over again. Nunes and crew bought Cohen's lies hook, line and sinker and their report is total shite.

What an embarrassment.

I'm sure they were told Cohen would cover for Trump.

Nunes needs to have his time in the barrel when Dems take over the House committees

 

[woolfe9998]

That much is true. Whether or not collusion happened has yet to be discovered. "Doing business in Russia" is not collusion.

Yes, but we keep wondering why all these lies are being told. About business dealing in Russia. About direct contact with Putin (Trump has told at least three versions about whether he met Putin in 2013), abut whether they forced a change in the RNC platform to favor Russia, about contacts with various Russian officials, and on and on. Trump & Co. are accused of something very serious here - of making a deal with a hostile foreign power to trade favorable policy for illegal help in winning an election. The fact that they constantly lie, even perjuring themselves by lying under oath, in response to almost every question asked makes them look awfully guilty.

 

[Indus]

That much is true. Whether or not collusion happened has yet to be discovered. "Doing business in Russia" is not collusion.

Doing business with the Kremlin is definitely and definitively collusion.

 

[blackangst1]

Yes, but we keep wondering why all these lies are being told. About business dealing in Russia. About direct contact with Putin (Trump has told at least three versions about whether he met Putin in 2013), abut whether they forced a change in the RNC platform to favor Russia, about contacts with various Russian officials, and on and on. Trump & Co. are accused of something very serious here - of making a deal with a hostile foreign power to trade favorable policy for illegal help in winning an election. The fact that they constantly lie, even perjuring themselves by lying under oath, in response to almost every question asked makes them look awfully guilty.

Understood.

 

[blackangst1]

Doing business with the Kremlin is definitely and definitively collusion.

Doing business in Russia is not the same as doing business with the Kremlin. Wiki's page on Trumps business ventures show its real estate dealings (duh). Nothing about the Kremlin.

 

[woolfe9998]

Doing business in Russia is not the same as doing business with the Kremlin. Wiki's page on Trumps business ventures show its real estate dealings (duh). Nothing about the Kremlin.

That is absolutely incorrect. You cannot do a major commercial real estate deal in Russia, especially for a development in Moscow, without Putin personally approving it. Trump knows this very well. In fact, he even stated it publicly in the early 2000's that this is how business is done in Russia.

 

[blackangst1]

That is absolutely incorrect. You cannot do a major commercial real estate deal in Russia, especially for a development in Moscow, without Putin personally approving it. Trump knows this very well. In fact, he even stated it publicly in the early 2000's that this is how business is done in Russia.

I dont know about that (Ill take your word for it) as Im not an expert in business in Russia, but how does a real estate venture, with Putins blessing, equal working to with Russia to deceive or defraud Americans or America? Because that what collusion would be.

 

[woolfe9998]

I dont know about that (Ill take your word for it) as Im not an expert in business in Russia, but how does a real estate venture, with Putins blessing, equal working to with Russia to deceive or defraud Americans or America? Because that what collusion would be.

No need to take my word on it. Just ask yourself why Felix Sater, Trump's business rep in Russia, said that Putin was to personally receive a $50 million penthouse from Trump as part of the deal.

You have to look at the total body of evidence, not just one thing in isolation. Trump had $1 billion+ dealings in Russia which required him to curry favor with Russia's head of state. The state run Russian bank (VTB) which was to provide all the financing on the deal is a sanctioned entity, meaning the deal could only move forward if the sanctions were removed.

Trump was praising Putin and deriding NATO and the EU throughout the entire campaign. He then goes and has the RNC remove a tough on Russia plank from its platform, and lies about doing that. And he lied about his dealings in Russia.

We also know the Russians wanted Trump elected, that they sowed propaganda in our social media, and that they hacked the DNC and Podesta, to help Trump. We also know a representative met Trump people in July, 2017 and that they talked about the Magnitsky Act, a sanctions law that Putin desperately wants removed, and them having "dirt" on Hilary Clinton in the same conversation.,

That's about 1% of it right there. I can't educate you on all of it.

 

[Commodus]

I dont know about that (Ill take your word for it) as Im not an expert in business in Russia, but how does a real estate venture, with Putins blessing, equal working to with Russia to deceive or defraud Americans or America? Because that what collusion would be.

If a presidential candidate vows to go soft on Russia if elected because he wants to land a major property deal that Putin knows of and has to approve, that's collusion. He'd be compromising national security for the sake of profit.

 

[blackangst1]

No need to take my word on it. Just ask yourself why Putin was to personally receive a $30 million penthouse from Trump as part of the deal.

You have to look at the total body of evidence, not just one thing in isolation. Trump had $1 billion+ dealings in Russia which required him to curry favor with Russia's head of state. The state run Russian bank (VTB) which was to provide all the financing on the deal is a sanctioned entity, meaning the deal could only move forward if the sanctions were removed.

Trump was praising Putin and deriding NATO and the EU throughout the entire campaign. He then goes and has the RNC remove a tough on Russia plank from its platform, and lies about doing that. And he lied about his dealings in Russia.

We also know the Russians wanted Trump elected, that they sowed propaganda in our social media, and that they hacked the DNC and Podesta, to help Trump. We also know a representative met Trump people in July, 2017 and that they talked about the Magnitsky Act, a sanctions law that Putin desperately wants removed, and them having "dirt" on Hilary Clinton in the same conversation.,

That's about 1% of it right there. I can't educate you on all of it.

I get it. But none of that is a conspiracy to defraud the United States. I think there may other laws violated...campaign related for sure, but collusion I think is just a word everyone throws around to cover multiple different laws. But collusion? No. Not even close.

 

[blackangst1]

If a presidential candidate vows to go soft on Russia if elected because he wants to land a major property deal that Putin knows of and has to approve, that's collusion. He'd be compromising national security for the sake of profit.

How the hell would that put United States security at risk? And no, thats NOT collusion.

 

[woolfe9998]

I get it. But none of that is a conspiracy to defraud the United States. I think there may other laws violated...campaign related for sure, but collusion I think is just a word everyone throws around to cover multiple different laws. But collusion? No. Not even close.

"Collusion" is in this context is a non-legal term to describe what could be any of a number of illegalities, and/or things which are unethical if not illegal. The most serious of them is if there was a quid pro quo arrangement between the two. That is classic political corruption - you take money or favors from say a monied special interest - and promise them favorable policy once in office. It's called "honest services fraud" among other things, and yes, it's a fraud on the voters. To claim you are running to support their interests when you are secretly working to support special interests instead. It's a serious felony, not just a technical violation of election laws.'

Except that here, the special interest is a hostile foreign government, not some American industry. And it's a presidential candidate who did it, not someone running from Congress. If all that doesn't make you just a little nauseous, I don't know what to say.

If this is true, and it sure looks that way right now, it's far more serious than say, breaking into a hotel room to steal some documents from your opponent. That's doing something criminal to help get elected, but it doesn't involve disloyalty to the country. It doesn't mean your President is in hawk to a hostile foreign power and may be operating in the interests of that foreign power.

 

[fskimospy]

"Collusion" is in this context is a non-legal term to describe what could be any of a number of illegalities, and/or things which are unethical if not illegal. The most serious of them is if there was a quid pro quo arrangement between the two. That is classic political corruption - you take money or favors from say a monied special interest - and promise them favorable policy once in office. It's called "honest services fraud" among other things, and yes, it's a fraud on the voters. To claim you are running to support their interests when you are secretly working to support special interests instead. It's a serious felony, not just a technical violation of election laws.'

Except that here, the special interest is a hostile foreign government, not some American industry. And it's a presidential candidate who did it, not someone running from Congress. If all that doesn't make you just a little nauseous, I don't know what to say.

If this is true, and it sure looks that way right now, it's far more serious than say, breaking into a hotel room to steal some documents from your opponent. That's doing something criminal to help get elected, but it doesn't involve disloyalty to the country. It doesn't mean your President is in hawk to a hostile foreign power and may be operating in the interests of that foreign power.

Yes, if what appears to be true is in fact true this is orders of magnitude worse than Watergate. While it might not be treason from a legal perspective it is treason in how the word is commonly thought of. It does seem like it is at least in espionage territory now though.

 

[blackangst1]

"Collusion" is in this context is a non-legal term to describe what could be any of a number of illegalities, and/or things which are unethical if not illegal. The most serious of them is if there was a quid pro quo arrangement between the two. That is classic political corruption - you take money or favors from say a monied special interest - and promise them favorable policy once in office. It's called "honest services fraud" among other things, and yes, it's a fraud on the voters. To claim you are running to support their interests when you are secretly working to support special interests instead. It's a serious felony, not just a technical violation of election laws.'

Except that here, the special interest is a hostile foreign government, not some American industry. And it's a presidential candidate who did it, not someone running from Congress. If all that doesn't make you just a little nauseous, I don't know what to say.

If this is true, and it sure looks that way right now, it's far more serious than say, breaking into a hotel room to steal some documents from your opponent. That's doing something criminal to help get elected, but it doesn't involve disloyalty to the country. It doesn't mean your President is in hawk to a hostile foreign power and may be operating in the interests of that foreign power.

OK. The whole "collusion" thing has been beaten to death around here, but THIS is probably the best article Ive found on the subject.

 

[Commodus]

How the hell would that put United States security at risk? And no, thats NOT collusion.

We've already seen how it puts US security at risk. Congress approves sanctions against Russia that Trump refuses to enforce; Trump drops efforts to counteract Russian online disinformation campaigns and attacks intelligence agencies' credibility; Trump withdraws aid efforts in Syria, supporting Putin's goal of ensuring Assad stays in power; and then there's Trump's false claim that Russia had stopped cyberattacks ahead of the 2018 midterms. Basically, you have a US President who refuses to stand up to a known hostile country, and there's a chance it's because he has an arrangement with that country's leader for the sake of a real estate deal.