Mainecat Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 Donald Trump's and Vladimir Putin's Shared Agenda Should Alarm Anyone Concerned About Democracy This is all we should ask Trump about until November. By Charles P. Pierce Jul 24, 2016 In brief: In his business dealings, He, Trump seems increasingly dependent on money from Russia and from the former Soviet republics within its increasingly active sphere of influence. This is because most of the big banks on this side of the pond won't go near him without HazMat suits. (Gee, could it be that his sudden emergence as a Warren-esque crusader against the "rigged system" of the banksters is less of a principled opposition and simply pure animal vengeance? Unpossible!) As Marshall points out, this isn't exactly a deep corporate secret, as The Washington Post explained: Trump has conveyed a different view, informed in part through his business ambitions. Since the 1980s, Trump and his family members have made numerous trips to Moscow in search of business opportunities, and they have relied on Russian investors to buy their properties around the world. "Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets," Trump's son, Donald Jr., told a real estate conference in 2008, according to an account posted on the website of eTurboNews, a trade publication. "We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia." The dynamic illustrates the extent to which Trump's worldview has been formed through the lens of commerce rather than the think tanks, government deliberations and international diplomatic conferences that typically shape the foreign policy positions of presidential candidates. It also reflects Trump's willingness to see world leaders through his own personal connections. In a Republican Party in which an ability to stand up to Putin has been seen as a test of toughness, Trump's relationship with the Russian leader is instead one of mutual flattery. Putin said in December that Trump was a "colorful and talented" person, a compliment that Trump said at the time was an "honor." There is no question that Putin is more than a little supportive of the rise of right-wing authoritarian politics in Europe, much of it based in the same dynamics that are powering the Trump campaign in this country. (The latest stirrings come from Serbia, which should surprise approximately nobody. The ruling party there is currently literally hanging inconvenient journalists out to dry. In America, this would be referred to as "opening up the libel laws," I guess.) Marshall presents a judicious but comprehensive bill of indictment as regards He, Trump's relationship with Putin. He doesn't allege direct complicity, only a mutuality of interest that should alarm anyone concerned about the stability of American democracy. He also carefully traces the connections to Russia of several of He, Trump's crucial advisors. (I knew about Paul Manafort's connection to Putin's Ukrainian marionette, but the relationship that Carter Page, one of the campaign's key foreign-policy advisers, to Gazprom, the Russian energy behemoth that Putin controls, was a new one for me.) He shies away from the more baroque conspiracy theories, although I don't think the notion that Russian intelligence was behind the hack-and-release of 20,000 internal DNC e-mails at exactly the right time is that far-fetched. This should be the only story about the Trump campaign until he comes clean. It should be the only question anybody asks him. Frankly, even beyond the threat to this election, it's a measure of the pure arrogance of He, Trump. And if Trump thinks his ability to game the American real-estate market, and his success at swindling the rubes who signed up for Trump University, makes him ready to deal with a guy who managed to survive a career at the top-level of the KGB only to make himself the presiding autocrat of the world's leading kleptocracy, I'd like to be there when he finds out how wrong he is. http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a46984/donald-trump-vladimir-putin/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cold War Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 So Russia is a threat? Romney got laughed off the stage and crucified in the media for suggesting so. Is resetting relations with Russia still a power point on Hills resume? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edmo Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 Well Putin has made Obama look like a fool on a regular basis, and obviously has zero respect for the man. Im curious how you think that this gets any worse with Trump in charge? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainecat Posted July 25, 2016 Author Share Posted July 25, 2016 1 hour ago, Cold War said: So Russia is a threat? Romney got laughed off the stage and crucified in the media for suggesting so. Is resetting relations with Russia still a power point on Hills resume? Read the story Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Skidooski Posted July 25, 2016 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 25, 2016 21 minutes ago, Cold War said: So Russia is a threat? Romney got laughed off the stage and crucified in the media for suggesting so. Is resetting relations with Russia still a power point on Hills resume? Oh no...we need to become BFF's with Russia just Like we did with Iran Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainecat Posted July 25, 2016 Author Share Posted July 25, 2016 1 hour ago, Edmo said: Well Putin has made Obama look like a fool on a regular basis, and obviously has zero respect for the man. Im curious how you think that this gets any worse with Trump in charge? Read the story Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainecat Posted July 25, 2016 Author Share Posted July 25, 2016 Jesus this place is full of idiots Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 The DNC corruption is a bigger threat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racer254 Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 1 minute ago, Mainecat said: Read the story You liberals are all alike. Why don't you answer some questions about the post that you started ffs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momorider Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 1 minute ago, Sludgey said: The DNC corruption is a bigger threat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainecat Posted July 25, 2016 Author Share Posted July 25, 2016 “I love the poorly educated” Donald J Trump Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainecat Posted July 25, 2016 Author Share Posted July 25, 2016 Any one of you morons want to comment on the thread and the fact Trump supports Putin because the Russians are investing $$ is his bullshit schemes? WHY? Because US companies will not invest anymore. WHY? Well even you morons know why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Skidooski Posted July 25, 2016 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 25, 2016 8 minutes ago, Mainecat said: “I love the poorly educated” Donald J Trump "No. We just can't trust the American people to make those types of choices ... Government has to make those choices for people." - Hillary Clinton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 5 minutes ago, Mainecat said: Any one of you morons want to comment on the thread and the fact Trump supports Putin because the Russians are investing $$ is his bullshit schemes? WHY? Because US companies will not invest anymore. WHY? Well even you morons know why. Maybe you need some "taco bowl engagement" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepr2 Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 Poor McLiar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cold War Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 56 minutes ago, Mainecat said: Read the story I did. If Russia is our friend, and Hillary & Obama reset relations...............Doing business with them would be a natural progression. No? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 25, 2016 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 25, 2016 (edited) Yeah what is worse. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=0 Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal The headline on the website Pravda trumpeted President Vladimir V. Putin’s latest coup, its nationalistic fervor recalling an era when its precursor served as the official mouthpiece of the Kremlin: “Russian Nuclear Energy Conquers the World.” The article, in January 2013, detailed how the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain. But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one. At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One. At the time, both Rosatom and the United States government made promises intended to ease concerns about ceding control of the company’s assets to the Russians. Those promises have been repeatedly broken, records show. The New York Times’s examination of the Uranium One deal is based on dozens of interviews, as well as a review of public records and securities filings in Canada,Russia and the United States. Some of the connections between Uranium One and the Clinton Foundation were unearthed by Peter Schweizer, a former fellow at the right-leaning Hoover Institution and author of the forthcoming book “Clinton Cash.” Mr. Schweizer provided a preview of material in the book to The Times, which scrutinized his information and built upon it with its own reporting. Whether the donations played any role in the approval of the uranium deal is unknown. But the episode underscores the special ethical challenges presented by the Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy as secretary of state, presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation’s donors. In a statement, Brian Fallon, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign, said no one “has ever produced a shred of evidence supporting the theory that Hillary Clinton ever took action as secretary of state to support the interests of donors to the Clinton Foundation.” He emphasized that multiple United States agencies, as well as the Canadian government, had signed off on the deal and that, in general, such matters were handled at a level below the secretary. “To suggest the State Department, under then-Secretary Clinton, exerted undue influence in the U.S. government’s review of the sale of Uranium One is utterly baseless,” he added. American political campaigns are barred from accepting foreign donations. But foreigners may give to foundations in the United States. In the days since Mrs. Clinton announced her candidacy for president, the Clinton Foundation has announced changes meant to quell longstanding concerns about potential conflicts of interest in such donations; it has limited donations from foreign governments, with many, like Russia’s, barred from giving to all but its health care initiatives. That policy stops short of a more stringent agreement between Mrs. Clinton and the Obama administration that was in effect while she was secretary of state. Either way, the Uranium One deal highlights the limits of such prohibitions. The foundation will continue to accept contributions from foreign sources whose interests, like Uranium One’s, may overlap with those of foreign governments, some of which may be at odds with the United States. When the Uranium One deal was approved, the geopolitical backdrop was far different from today’s. The Obama administration was seeking to “reset” strained relations with Russia. The deal was strategically important to Mr. Putin, who shortly after the Americans gave their blessing sat down for a staged interview with Rosatom’s chief executive, Sergei Kiriyenko. “Few could have imagined in the past that we would own 20 percent of U.S. reserves,” Mr. Kiriyenko told Mr. Putin. Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the world, the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife,Hillary Rodham Clinton. As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well. And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock. Edited July 25, 2016 by Highmark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 Holy fuck... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racer254 Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 That clinton deal about uranium and russia has been brought up before, but the resident libs ignore that. It's all in the book Clinton Cash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T1R9sledder Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 MC you should quit while you were ahead. Being all in for Clinton is not good for your liver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainecat Posted July 25, 2016 Author Share Posted July 25, 2016 1 hour ago, oquossocbob said: MC you should quit while you were ahead. Being all in for Clinton is not good for your liver. Not for Clinton Bob. Trump is not the answer. Seems its OK for Trump to get his financing from the Ruskies.....and not the good ones. I dont need a commie influencing a election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted July 25, 2016 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted July 25, 2016 (edited) 1 minute ago, Mainecat said: Not for Clinton Bob. Trump is not the answer. Seems its OK for Trump to get his financing from the Ruskies.....and not the good ones. I dont need a commie influencing a election. So Clinton is the answer? If you were against her you think you would post some negative things on her. Edited July 25, 2016 by Highmark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepr2 Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 1 minute ago, Mainecat said: Not for Clinton Bob. Trump is not the answer. Seems its OK for Trump to get his financing from the Ruskies.....and not the good ones. I dont need a commie influencing a election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T1R9sledder Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 7 minutes ago, Mainecat said: Not for Clinton Bob. Trump is not the answer. Seems its OK for Trump to get his financing from the Ruskies.....and not the good ones. I dont need a commie influencing a election. It doesn't look that way to me ...MC 6 minutes ago, Highmark said: So Clinton is the answer? If you were against her you think you would post some negative things on her. One would think so..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mainecat Posted July 25, 2016 Author Share Posted July 25, 2016 1 hour ago, Highmark said: So Clinton is the answer? If you were against her you think you would post some negative things on her. Jesus Clinton is NOT the answer for the 500th dam time. All you idiots think the same way....If I post negative on Trump I must be a fuckin Clinton supporter. And you clowns worried Obama friend was Wright......yet its OK for Trump to be Putins buddy and to have Trump in Putins pocket. Fuckin idiots all of you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.