I’m pretty sure the IRS has his tax forms. I’m also fairly sure Mueller has access to them as well.
No only will that dog hunt no more, I’m not even sure you know it’s color.
The Trump Crime Family
- Thread starter Doc Holliday
- Start date
I’m pretty sure the IRS has his tax forms. I’m also fairly sure Mueller has access to them as well.
No only will that dog hunt no more, I’m not even sure you know it’s color.
Why I’m No Longer a Russiagate Skeptic
Facts are piling up, and it’s getting harder to deny what’s staring us in the face.
By Blake Hounshell, Politico
When I wrote, back in February, that I was skeptical that President Donald Trump would ever be proved to have secretly colluded with Russia to sway the 2016 election in his favor, I mistyped.
What I meant to write was that I wasn’t skeptical.
Last week’s events have nullified my previous skepticism. To recap: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein revealed indictments against 12 Russians for the hacks of the Democratic National Committee, and we learned that Russian hackers went after Hillary Clinton’s private office for the first time on the very day Trump said, “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.” At the NATO summit in Brussels, Trump attacked a close European ally—Germany—and generally questioned the value of the alliance. Next, he visited the United Kingdom and trashed Prime Minister Theresa May. Then, in Helsinki, he met with Vladimir Putin privately for two hours, with no U.S. officials present other than a translator. After this suspicious meeting, he sang the Russian strongman’s praises at a news conference at which he said he viewed Putin’s denials on a par with the unanimous and unchallenged conclusions of America’s intelligence agencies.
With every other world leader, the physically imposing Trump attempts to dominate—witness his alpha-male handshakes with French President Emanuel Macron or his flamboyant man-spreading next to German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Yet with the diminutive Putin—who is maybe 5 feet, 6 inches tall—he’s oddly submissive. During the public portion of their encounter, Trump was slumping in his chair, as if defeated. Why? Why did he insist on a one-on-one meeting with Putin in the first place?
And why does Trump inevitably return to questioning the irrefutable evidence that Russia meddled in the 2016 election? We can dispense with the explanation, conveyed anonymously by senior administration officials, that “his brain can’t process that collusion and cyberattacks are two different things.” We can also forget about the widely held theory that he views the various Russia investigations as a threat to the legitimacy of his election, and therefore a devastating blow to his sense of self-worth.
Or, at least, neither offers a sufficient explanation for why Trump consistently parrots Russian talking points on NATO, the American media, U.S. troop deployments, Ukraine and the legitimacy of the postwar liberal order. What does any of that have to do with his tender ego? Do we really think Trump has an informed position on, say, Montenegro’s history of aggression? Could Trump find Montenegro on a map?
Nor is it credible to point to actions his administration has taken that are “tough on Russia.” Trump has questioned proposals to supply the Ukrainian government with anti-tank missiles and sniped at Congress for wanting to impose fresh sanctions on Moscow.
What about my argument that Trump was constitutionally incapable of keeping a secret? That, too, is no longer operative. Since I first wrote, we’ve learned that Trump—a skinflint who once had his own charity pay a $7 fee to register his son for the Boy Scouts—was willing to shell out $130,000 of his own money to hush up a fling with a porn actress, Stormy Daniels. And he still hasn’t copped to sleeping with her, despite the discovery of their nondisclosure agreement and contemporaneous evidence that the affair really happened. None of this leaked out until well after the election, proving that Trump is indeed capable of keeping his yap shut when he wants. Not convinced? How about the fact that Brett Kavanaugh’s name didn’t leak out as Trump’s latest Supreme Court pick until minutes before the announcement?
Politically speaking, Trump’s devotion to his pro-Putin line doesn’t make sense. Yes, the GOP base is impressionable, and perhaps Republican voters would accept it if Trump came out and said, “You bet, Russia helped get me elected, and wasn’t that a good thing? We couldn’t let Crooked Hillary win!” But nobody would say his odd solicitousness toward the Kremlin leader is a political winner, and it certainly causes an unnecessary amount of friction with Republicans in Congress. He’s kept it up at great political cost to himself, and that suggest either that he is possessed by an anomalous level of conviction on this one issue, despite his extraordinary malleability on everything else—or that he’s beholden to Putin in some way.
You don’t have to buy Jonathan Chait’s sleeper agent theory of Trump to believe that something is deeply weird about all this. Nor do you need to be convinced that Putin is hanging onto a recording of something untoward that may have taken place in a certain Moscow hotel room. You don’t even have to buy the theory that Trump’s business is overly dependent on illicit flows of Russia money, giving Putin leverage. As Julia Ioffe posits, the kompromat could well be the mere fact of the Russian election meddling itself.
As for my argument that Trump’s collection of misfit toys was too incompetent, and too riven by infighting, to collaborate with Russia, this one might still be true. There were certainly sporadic, repeated attempts by some on or around the campaign to collaborate, but we don’t know if, or how, those flirtations were consummated. But certainly, the intent was there, as Donald Trump, Jr. has said publicly. They were all too happy to accept Russian help, even if they weren’t sure they would be enough to win in the end.
We might never get clear evidence that Trump made a secret deal with the Kremlin. It would be great to see his tax returns, and perhaps Mueller has evidence of private collusion that we have yet to see. These details matter. But in a larger sense, everything we need to know about Trump’s strange relationship with Russia is already out in the open. As The Donald himself might say, there’s something going on.
If Trump is indeed a tool of Putin, what might we expect him to do next? Well, I wouldn’t be sleeping too soundly in Kiev, Podgorica or Riga right now. If the Kremlin tests America’s wobbling commitment to NATO, watch how Trump responds. And pay attention, too, to what the White House says about Russia’s absurd demand that the U.S. hand over former ambassador to Moscow Mike McFaul—Wednesday’s spectacle of Sarah Huckabee Sanders refusing to immediately rule out the idea flies in the face of decades of American diplomacy. Trump may have grudgingly admitted that Russia did the deed, but nobody should be surprised if he starts shedding doubt on it all over again. Maybe, just maybe, he can’t admit that Moscow tried to put him in the Oval Office because he’s under strict instructions not to.
Confession of a former sceptic
Doc Holliday: "Very good, informative article."
Facts are piling up, and it’s getting harder to deny what’s staring us in the face.
By Blake Hounshell, Politico
When I wrote, back in February, that I was skeptical that President Donald Trump would ever be proved to have secretly colluded with Russia to sway the 2016 election in his favor, I mistyped.
What I meant to write was that I wasn’t skeptical.
Last week’s events have nullified my previous skepticism. To recap: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein revealed indictments against 12 Russians for the hacks of the Democratic National Committee, and we learned that Russian hackers went after Hillary Clinton’s private office for the first time on the very day Trump said, “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.” At the NATO summit in Brussels, Trump attacked a close European ally—Germany—and generally questioned the value of the alliance. Next, he visited the United Kingdom and trashed Prime Minister Theresa May. Then, in Helsinki, he met with Vladimir Putin privately for two hours, with no U.S. officials present other than a translator. After this suspicious meeting, he sang the Russian strongman’s praises at a news conference at which he said he viewed Putin’s denials on a par with the unanimous and unchallenged conclusions of America’s intelligence agencies.
With every other world leader, the physically imposing Trump attempts to dominate—witness his alpha-male handshakes with French President Emanuel Macron or his flamboyant man-spreading next to German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Yet with the diminutive Putin—who is maybe 5 feet, 6 inches tall—he’s oddly submissive. During the public portion of their encounter, Trump was slumping in his chair, as if defeated. Why? Why did he insist on a one-on-one meeting with Putin in the first place?
And why does Trump inevitably return to questioning the irrefutable evidence that Russia meddled in the 2016 election? We can dispense with the explanation, conveyed anonymously by senior administration officials, that “his brain can’t process that collusion and cyberattacks are two different things.” We can also forget about the widely held theory that he views the various Russia investigations as a threat to the legitimacy of his election, and therefore a devastating blow to his sense of self-worth.
Or, at least, neither offers a sufficient explanation for why Trump consistently parrots Russian talking points on NATO, the American media, U.S. troop deployments, Ukraine and the legitimacy of the postwar liberal order. What does any of that have to do with his tender ego? Do we really think Trump has an informed position on, say, Montenegro’s history of aggression? Could Trump find Montenegro on a map?
Nor is it credible to point to actions his administration has taken that are “tough on Russia.” Trump has questioned proposals to supply the Ukrainian government with anti-tank missiles and sniped at Congress for wanting to impose fresh sanctions on Moscow.
What about my argument that Trump was constitutionally incapable of keeping a secret? That, too, is no longer operative. Since I first wrote, we’ve learned that Trump—a skinflint who once had his own charity pay a $7 fee to register his son for the Boy Scouts—was willing to shell out $130,000 of his own money to hush up a fling with a porn actress, Stormy Daniels. And he still hasn’t copped to sleeping with her, despite the discovery of their nondisclosure agreement and contemporaneous evidence that the affair really happened. None of this leaked out until well after the election, proving that Trump is indeed capable of keeping his yap shut when he wants. Not convinced? How about the fact that Brett Kavanaugh’s name didn’t leak out as Trump’s latest Supreme Court pick until minutes before the announcement?
Politically speaking, Trump’s devotion to his pro-Putin line doesn’t make sense. Yes, the GOP base is impressionable, and perhaps Republican voters would accept it if Trump came out and said, “You bet, Russia helped get me elected, and wasn’t that a good thing? We couldn’t let Crooked Hillary win!” But nobody would say his odd solicitousness toward the Kremlin leader is a political winner, and it certainly causes an unnecessary amount of friction with Republicans in Congress. He’s kept it up at great political cost to himself, and that suggest either that he is possessed by an anomalous level of conviction on this one issue, despite his extraordinary malleability on everything else—or that he’s beholden to Putin in some way.
You don’t have to buy Jonathan Chait’s sleeper agent theory of Trump to believe that something is deeply weird about all this. Nor do you need to be convinced that Putin is hanging onto a recording of something untoward that may have taken place in a certain Moscow hotel room. You don’t even have to buy the theory that Trump’s business is overly dependent on illicit flows of Russia money, giving Putin leverage. As Julia Ioffe posits, the kompromat could well be the mere fact of the Russian election meddling itself.
As for my argument that Trump’s collection of misfit toys was too incompetent, and too riven by infighting, to collaborate with Russia, this one might still be true. There were certainly sporadic, repeated attempts by some on or around the campaign to collaborate, but we don’t know if, or how, those flirtations were consummated. But certainly, the intent was there, as Donald Trump, Jr. has said publicly. They were all too happy to accept Russian help, even if they weren’t sure they would be enough to win in the end.
We might never get clear evidence that Trump made a secret deal with the Kremlin. It would be great to see his tax returns, and perhaps Mueller has evidence of private collusion that we have yet to see. These details matter. But in a larger sense, everything we need to know about Trump’s strange relationship with Russia is already out in the open. As The Donald himself might say, there’s something going on.
If Trump is indeed a tool of Putin, what might we expect him to do next? Well, I wouldn’t be sleeping too soundly in Kiev, Podgorica or Riga right now. If the Kremlin tests America’s wobbling commitment to NATO, watch how Trump responds. And pay attention, too, to what the White House says about Russia’s absurd demand that the U.S. hand over former ambassador to Moscow Mike McFaul—Wednesday’s spectacle of Sarah Huckabee Sanders refusing to immediately rule out the idea flies in the face of decades of American diplomacy. Trump may have grudgingly admitted that Russia did the deed, but nobody should be surprised if he starts shedding doubt on it all over again. Maybe, just maybe, he can’t admit that Moscow tried to put him in the Oval Office because he’s under strict instructions not to.
Confession of a former sceptic
Doc Holliday: "Very good, informative article."
There is a difference between the usual politician scamming to pay back those who help them get elected then what Trump is doing right now. The lunatic arrogant bullier bastard simply wants to proves he is smarter then anyone else. All while making sure his businesses will receive financial support to thrive and not go bankrupt like usual.
No, serious now, Clinton is an evil POS. The Clinton foundation is wrong any way you look at it. People are fed up with politicians, if they find a normal Joe or Jane that is popular that they trust there would be a good chance they would win over a lifetime politician.
Doc, why post an entire opinion piece here? It’s just the same opinions that have been repeated many times. By now, people have probably made up their minds on this conjecture. Barring a Mueller investigation barnburner, people likely won’t change their mind. In fact if Mueller doesn’t find anything material, it might backfire and give cause for independents to empathize with Trump.
There’s two ways to look at the lengthy Mueller investigation based on partisan beliefs.
One is he is unfit for the job and/or in bed with Russians. The investigation must go on for as long as it takes. The other view is that with the amount of time, money and political capital that has been spent, it will be almost impossible to stop the Mueller machine. It will continue to drag every Trump associate that ever existed through a costly legal defense.
I fear Rosenstein and Mueller will never turn back. They’re all in Texas Hold’em style. We might never know shit because Rosenstein will have the records sealed for fifty years for national security reasons.
There’s two ways to look at the lengthy Mueller investigation based on partisan beliefs.
One is he is unfit for the job and/or in bed with Russians. The investigation must go on for as long as it takes. The other view is that with the amount of time, money and political capital that has been spent, it will be almost impossible to stop the Mueller machine. It will continue to drag every Trump associate that ever existed through a costly legal defense.
I fear Rosenstein and Mueller will never turn back. They’re all in Texas Hold’em style. We might never know shit because Rosenstein will have the records sealed for fifty years for national security reasons.
A House Republican's chilling warning on Trump and Russia
by Chris Cilliza
In a New York Times op-ed — headlined "Trump Is Being Manipulated by Putin. What Should We Do?" — Texas Republican Rep. Will Hurd writes of this week's summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin:
"The president's failure to defend the United States intelligence community's unanimous conclusions of Russian meddling in the 2016 election and condemn Russian covert counterinfluence campaigns and his standing idle on the world stage while a Russian dictator spouted lies confused many but should concern all Americans. By playing into Vladimir Putin's hands, the leader of the free world actively participated in a Russian disinformation campaign that legitimized Russian denial and weakened the credibility of the United States to both our friends and foes abroad."
That's a wow. Even Republicans with a long record of criticism directed at Trump — which is a near-total overlay with members who are retiring — haven't gone as far as Hurd does here, suggesting that Trump is being worked as an asset to Russia. The American president. Being actively manipulated by a foreign government with something short of altruistic goals.
Hurd's op-ed is all the more chilling because before he came to Congress in 2014, he was a CIA operative from 2002 to 2009. This isn't some random House member spouting off to get some attention and distance himself from Trump in a swing district. This is a guy who knows of what he speaks. And he is now convinced of what was totally unthinkable even a year ago. (Worth noting: Hurd is in a very swing-y district; Hillary Clinton won it by 4 points by 2016 and he is a major target for Democrats this fall.)
Writes Hurd: "Over the course of my career as an undercover officer in the C.I.A., I saw Russian intelligence manipulate many people. I never thought I would see the day when an American president would be one of them."
Don't fool yourself into thinking that Hurd's words will change Trump's approach to Russia. They won't. In fact, it's more likely that Hurd's op-ed will trigger a tweet from Trump blasting the Texas Republican as a hater and a loser.
But, Hurd's target audience for the op-ed isn't President Trump. It's his colleagues in the House Republican conference. Hurd makes this point clearly in the piece, writing:
"As a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, I strongly believe in the importance of Congress's oversight responsibilities and will work with my colleagues to ensure that the administration is taking the Russian threat seriously. Without action, we risk losing further credibility in international negotiations with both our friends and foes on critical trade deals, military alliances and nuclear arms."
Read between the lines even a little bit and Hurd's message becomes clear: Republicans, it's time for us to do more than say we disagree with Trump's fence-sitting on whether or not Russia meddled in the 2016 election. There are real consequences to sitting on the sidelines here. A possible reorganizing of geopolitics in ways that are both disadvantageous to Republicans but dangerous to the country as a whole.
Hurd's op-ed then is meant as a clanging alarm, a wake-up call for his Republican colleagues. Now is not the time to cower in political fear, Hurd is saying. Now is not the time to think of parochial concerns when we have a President in the White House who is being actively manipulated by the president of Russia.
Congressional Republicans have played the ostrich for too long, burying their heads in the sand every time Trump says or does something that concerns them. That approach is not only no longer acceptable but has the potential to do lasting damage to the country, according to Hurd.
After this week, it's hard to argue with Hurd's logic in the piece. The question is whether any Republicans will listen.
Republican congressman's chilling warning to fellow Republicans
Doc Holliday: "Very good article and i agree with the Republican congressman."
by Chris Cilliza
In a New York Times op-ed — headlined "Trump Is Being Manipulated by Putin. What Should We Do?" — Texas Republican Rep. Will Hurd writes of this week's summit between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin:
"The president's failure to defend the United States intelligence community's unanimous conclusions of Russian meddling in the 2016 election and condemn Russian covert counterinfluence campaigns and his standing idle on the world stage while a Russian dictator spouted lies confused many but should concern all Americans. By playing into Vladimir Putin's hands, the leader of the free world actively participated in a Russian disinformation campaign that legitimized Russian denial and weakened the credibility of the United States to both our friends and foes abroad."
That's a wow. Even Republicans with a long record of criticism directed at Trump — which is a near-total overlay with members who are retiring — haven't gone as far as Hurd does here, suggesting that Trump is being worked as an asset to Russia. The American president. Being actively manipulated by a foreign government with something short of altruistic goals.
Hurd's op-ed is all the more chilling because before he came to Congress in 2014, he was a CIA operative from 2002 to 2009. This isn't some random House member spouting off to get some attention and distance himself from Trump in a swing district. This is a guy who knows of what he speaks. And he is now convinced of what was totally unthinkable even a year ago. (Worth noting: Hurd is in a very swing-y district; Hillary Clinton won it by 4 points by 2016 and he is a major target for Democrats this fall.)
Writes Hurd: "Over the course of my career as an undercover officer in the C.I.A., I saw Russian intelligence manipulate many people. I never thought I would see the day when an American president would be one of them."
Don't fool yourself into thinking that Hurd's words will change Trump's approach to Russia. They won't. In fact, it's more likely that Hurd's op-ed will trigger a tweet from Trump blasting the Texas Republican as a hater and a loser.
But, Hurd's target audience for the op-ed isn't President Trump. It's his colleagues in the House Republican conference. Hurd makes this point clearly in the piece, writing:
"As a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, I strongly believe in the importance of Congress's oversight responsibilities and will work with my colleagues to ensure that the administration is taking the Russian threat seriously. Without action, we risk losing further credibility in international negotiations with both our friends and foes on critical trade deals, military alliances and nuclear arms."
Read between the lines even a little bit and Hurd's message becomes clear: Republicans, it's time for us to do more than say we disagree with Trump's fence-sitting on whether or not Russia meddled in the 2016 election. There are real consequences to sitting on the sidelines here. A possible reorganizing of geopolitics in ways that are both disadvantageous to Republicans but dangerous to the country as a whole.
Hurd's op-ed then is meant as a clanging alarm, a wake-up call for his Republican colleagues. Now is not the time to cower in political fear, Hurd is saying. Now is not the time to think of parochial concerns when we have a President in the White House who is being actively manipulated by the president of Russia.
Congressional Republicans have played the ostrich for too long, burying their heads in the sand every time Trump says or does something that concerns them. That approach is not only no longer acceptable but has the potential to do lasting damage to the country, according to Hurd.
After this week, it's hard to argue with Hurd's logic in the piece. The question is whether any Republicans will listen.
Republican congressman's chilling warning to fellow Republicans
Doc Holliday: "Very good article and i agree with the Republican congressman."
A Theory of Trump 'Kompromat'
Why the President is so nice to Putin, even when Putin might not want him to be.
By Adam Davidson, The New Yorker, July 19, 2018
"The former C.I.A. operative Jack Devine watched Donald Trump’s performance standing next to Vladimir Putin in Helsinki on Monday, and his first thought was, “There is no way Trump is a Russian agent.” The proof, he told me, was right in front of us. If Trump were truly serving as a Russian intelligence asset, there would have been an obvious move for him to make during his joint press conference with Putin. He would have publicly lambasted the Russian leader, unleashing as theatrical a denunciation as possible. He would have told Putin that he may have been able to get away with a lot of nonsense under Barack Obama, but all that would end now: America has a strong President and there will be no more meddling. Instead, Trump gave up his single best chance to permanently put to rest any suspicion that he is working to promote Russian interests.
During a three-decade career in intelligence, Devine ran the C.I.A.’s effort to get the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan, and then served as the No. 2 (and, briefly, acting head) of its clandestine service. Along the way, he tangled with, and carefully studied, Russian intelligence officers. He was involved in two major hunts for American intelligence operatives who were secretly working for the K.G.B.: Devine was the supervisor of Aldrich Ames, the C.I.A. officer who pleaded guilty to spying for Moscow in 1994, and he oversaw the investigation of Robert Hanssen, the F.B.I. counterintelligence officer who confessed to being a double agent in 2001. Hanssen, for instance, was like Trump, narcissistic, with a broad set of grievances about the many ways that his special qualities were not being recognized. But, unlike Trump, he harbored those grievances quietly and found satisfaction in secretly upending the system in which he operated. Trump shows no signs that he can be gratified by secret triumphs. He seems to need everyone, everywhere, to see whatever it is that he thinks deserves praise. His need for public attention is a trait that would likely cause most spies to avoid working with Trump.
There is no need to assume that Trump was a formal agent of Russian intelligence to make sense of Trump’s solicitousness toward Putin. Keith Darden, an international-relations professor at American University, has studied the Russian use of kompromat—compromising material—and told me that he thinks it is likely that the President believes the Russians have something on him. “He’s never said a bad word about Putin,” Darden said. “He’s exercised a degree of self-control with respect to Russia that he doesn’t with anything else.” Darden said that this is evidence that Trump isn’t uniformly reckless in his words: “He is capable of being strategic. He knows there are limits, there are bounds on what he can say and do with respect to Russia.”
Because the word kompromat is new to most Americans, and has been introduced in the context of a President whose behavior confuses many of us, it is natural to assume that it must be a big, rare, scary thing, used in extraordinary circumstances to force compliance and achieve grand aims. But, Darden explained to me, kompromat is routinely used throughout the former Soviet Union to curry favor, improve negotiated outcomes, and sway opinion. Intelligence services, businesspeople, and political figures everywhere exploit gossip and damaging information. However, Darden argues, kompromat has a uniquely powerful role in the former Soviet Union, where the practice is so pervasive, he coined the term “Blackmail State” to describe their way of governance.
Kompromat can be a single, glaring example of wrongdoing, recorded by someone close to the Kremlin and then used to control the bad actor. It can be proof of an embarrassing sex act. Darden believes it is unlikely that sexual kompromat would be effective on Trump. Allegations of sexual harassment, extramarital affairs, and the payment of hush money to hide indiscretions have failed to significantly diminish the enthusiasm of Trump’s core supporters. But another common form of kompromat—proof of financial crimes—could be more politically and personally damaging.
Trump has made a lot of money doing deals with businesspeople from the former Soviet Union, and at least some of these deals bear many of the warning signs of money laundering and other financial crimes. Deals in Toronto, Panama, New York, and Miami involved money from sources in the former Soviet Union who hid their identities through shell companies and exhibited other indications of money laundering. In the years before he became a political figure, Trump acted with impunity, conducting minimal corporate due diligence and working with people whom few other American businesspeople would consider fit partners. During that period, he may have felt protected by the fact that U.S. law-enforcement officials rarely investigate or prosecute Americans who engage in financial crimes overseas. Such cases are also maddeningly difficult to prove, and the F.B.I. has no subpoena power in other countries. If, however, someone had evidence that proved financial crimes and shared it with, say, the special counsel, Robert Mueller, other American law-enforcement officials, or the press, it could significantly damage Trump’s business, his family, and his Presidency.
Alena Ledeneva, a professor of politics at University College London and an expert on Russia’s political and business practices, describes kompromat as being more than a single powerful figure weaponizing damning evidence to blackmail a target. She explained that to make sense of kompromat it is essential to understand the weakness of formal legal institutions in Russia and other former Soviet states. Ledeneva argued that wealth and power are distributed through networks of political figures and businesspeople who follow unspoken rules, in an informal hierarchy that she calls the sistema, or system in English. Sistema has a few clear rules—do not defy Putin being the most obvious one—and a toolkit for controlling potentially errant members. It is primarily a system of ambiguity. Each person in the sistema wonders where he stands and monitors the relative positions of friends and rivals.
Gleb Pavlovsky, one of the leading political thinkers in Russia, is known to be an adviser to Putin and well connected to the power structure. In a 2016 article in Foreign Affairs, he endorsed Ledeneva’s sistema framework. Many observers imagine Putin to be some all-powerful genius, Pavlovsky wrote, but he “has never managed to build a bureaucratically successful authoritarian state. Instead, he has merely crafted his own version of sistema, a complex practice of decision-making and power management that has long defined Russian politics and society and that will outlast Putin himself. Putin has mastered sistema, but he has not replaced it with ‘Putinism’ or a ‘Putin system.’ Someday, Putin will go. But sistema will stay.”
Ledeneva said that the key to understanding Trump’s interaction with sistema is to look at the people with whom he did business. “Trump never dealt with anybody close to the Kremlin, close to Putin,” she said. “Or even many Russians.” Trump’s business deals, she told me, were with tertiary figures. Sistema is rooted in local, often familial, trust, so it is common to see networks rooted in ethnic or national identity. My own reporting has shown that Trump has worked with many ethnic Turks from Central Asia, such as the Mammadov family, in Azerbaijan; Tevfik Arif, in New York; and Aras and Emin Agalarov, in Moscow. Trump also worked with large numbers of émigrés from the former Soviet Union.
If there truly is damaging kompromat on Trump, it could well be in the hands of Trump’s business partners, or even in those of their rivals. Trump’s Georgian partners, for example, have been in direct conflict with other local business networks over a host of crucial deals involving major telecommunications projects in the country. His Azerbaijani partners were tightly linked to Iranians who were, also, senior officers in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The work of Ledeneva and Darden suggests that Trump’s partners and their rivals would likely have gathered any incriminating information they could find on him, knowing that it might, one day, provide some sort of business leverage—even with no thought that he could, one day, become the most powerful person on Earth.
Ledeneva is skeptical that Putin, years ago, ordered an effort to collect kompromat on Trump. Instead, it is possible that there is kompromat in the hands of several different business groups in the former Soviet Union. Each would have bits and pieces of damaging information and might have found subtle (or not so subtle) ways to communicate that fact to both Trump and Putin. Putin would, likely, have gathered some of that material, but he would have known that he couldn’t get everything.
Ledeneva told me that each actor in sistema faces near-constant uncertainty about his status, aware that others could well destroy him. Each actor also knows how to use kompromat to destroy rivals but fears that using such material might provoke an explosive response. While each person in the sistema feels near-constant uncertainty, the over-all sistema is remarkably robust. Kompromat is most powerful when it isn’t used, and when its targets aren’t quite clear about how much destructive information there is out there. If everyone sees potential land mines everywhere, it dramatically increases the price of anybody stepping out of line.
The scenario that, to my mind, makes the most sense of the given facts and requires the fewest fantastical leaps is that, a decade or so ago, Trump, naïve, covetous, and struggling for cash, may have laundered money for a business partner from the former Soviet Union or engaged in some other financial crime. This placed him, unawares, squarely within the sistema, where he remained, conducting business with other members of a handful of overlapping Central Asian networks. Had he never sought the Presidency, he may never have had to come to terms with these decisions. But, now, he is much like everyone else in sistema. He fears there is kompromat out there—maybe a lot of it—but he doesn’t know precisely what it is, who has it, or what might set them off.
Trump and many of his defenders have declared his businesses, including those in the former Soviet Union, to be off-limits to the Mueller investigation. They argue that the special counsel should focus only on the possibility of explicit acts of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. This neatly avoids the reality of sistema. As Pavlovsky wrote, ”Under Putin, sistema has become a method for making deals among businesses, powerful players, and the people. Business has not taken over the state, nor vice versa; the two have merged in a union of total and seamless corruption.”
Ledeneva explained to me that, in sistema, when faced with uncertainty, every member knows that the best move is to maintain whatever alliances he has, and to avoid grand steps that could antagonize powerful figures; in such times, the most one can hope for is simply to survive."
Why the President is so nice to Putin, even when Putin might not want him to be.
By Adam Davidson, The New Yorker, July 19, 2018
"The former C.I.A. operative Jack Devine watched Donald Trump’s performance standing next to Vladimir Putin in Helsinki on Monday, and his first thought was, “There is no way Trump is a Russian agent.” The proof, he told me, was right in front of us. If Trump were truly serving as a Russian intelligence asset, there would have been an obvious move for him to make during his joint press conference with Putin. He would have publicly lambasted the Russian leader, unleashing as theatrical a denunciation as possible. He would have told Putin that he may have been able to get away with a lot of nonsense under Barack Obama, but all that would end now: America has a strong President and there will be no more meddling. Instead, Trump gave up his single best chance to permanently put to rest any suspicion that he is working to promote Russian interests.
During a three-decade career in intelligence, Devine ran the C.I.A.’s effort to get the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan, and then served as the No. 2 (and, briefly, acting head) of its clandestine service. Along the way, he tangled with, and carefully studied, Russian intelligence officers. He was involved in two major hunts for American intelligence operatives who were secretly working for the K.G.B.: Devine was the supervisor of Aldrich Ames, the C.I.A. officer who pleaded guilty to spying for Moscow in 1994, and he oversaw the investigation of Robert Hanssen, the F.B.I. counterintelligence officer who confessed to being a double agent in 2001. Hanssen, for instance, was like Trump, narcissistic, with a broad set of grievances about the many ways that his special qualities were not being recognized. But, unlike Trump, he harbored those grievances quietly and found satisfaction in secretly upending the system in which he operated. Trump shows no signs that he can be gratified by secret triumphs. He seems to need everyone, everywhere, to see whatever it is that he thinks deserves praise. His need for public attention is a trait that would likely cause most spies to avoid working with Trump.
There is no need to assume that Trump was a formal agent of Russian intelligence to make sense of Trump’s solicitousness toward Putin. Keith Darden, an international-relations professor at American University, has studied the Russian use of kompromat—compromising material—and told me that he thinks it is likely that the President believes the Russians have something on him. “He’s never said a bad word about Putin,” Darden said. “He’s exercised a degree of self-control with respect to Russia that he doesn’t with anything else.” Darden said that this is evidence that Trump isn’t uniformly reckless in his words: “He is capable of being strategic. He knows there are limits, there are bounds on what he can say and do with respect to Russia.”
Because the word kompromat is new to most Americans, and has been introduced in the context of a President whose behavior confuses many of us, it is natural to assume that it must be a big, rare, scary thing, used in extraordinary circumstances to force compliance and achieve grand aims. But, Darden explained to me, kompromat is routinely used throughout the former Soviet Union to curry favor, improve negotiated outcomes, and sway opinion. Intelligence services, businesspeople, and political figures everywhere exploit gossip and damaging information. However, Darden argues, kompromat has a uniquely powerful role in the former Soviet Union, where the practice is so pervasive, he coined the term “Blackmail State” to describe their way of governance.
Kompromat can be a single, glaring example of wrongdoing, recorded by someone close to the Kremlin and then used to control the bad actor. It can be proof of an embarrassing sex act. Darden believes it is unlikely that sexual kompromat would be effective on Trump. Allegations of sexual harassment, extramarital affairs, and the payment of hush money to hide indiscretions have failed to significantly diminish the enthusiasm of Trump’s core supporters. But another common form of kompromat—proof of financial crimes—could be more politically and personally damaging.
Trump has made a lot of money doing deals with businesspeople from the former Soviet Union, and at least some of these deals bear many of the warning signs of money laundering and other financial crimes. Deals in Toronto, Panama, New York, and Miami involved money from sources in the former Soviet Union who hid their identities through shell companies and exhibited other indications of money laundering. In the years before he became a political figure, Trump acted with impunity, conducting minimal corporate due diligence and working with people whom few other American businesspeople would consider fit partners. During that period, he may have felt protected by the fact that U.S. law-enforcement officials rarely investigate or prosecute Americans who engage in financial crimes overseas. Such cases are also maddeningly difficult to prove, and the F.B.I. has no subpoena power in other countries. If, however, someone had evidence that proved financial crimes and shared it with, say, the special counsel, Robert Mueller, other American law-enforcement officials, or the press, it could significantly damage Trump’s business, his family, and his Presidency.
Alena Ledeneva, a professor of politics at University College London and an expert on Russia’s political and business practices, describes kompromat as being more than a single powerful figure weaponizing damning evidence to blackmail a target. She explained that to make sense of kompromat it is essential to understand the weakness of formal legal institutions in Russia and other former Soviet states. Ledeneva argued that wealth and power are distributed through networks of political figures and businesspeople who follow unspoken rules, in an informal hierarchy that she calls the sistema, or system in English. Sistema has a few clear rules—do not defy Putin being the most obvious one—and a toolkit for controlling potentially errant members. It is primarily a system of ambiguity. Each person in the sistema wonders where he stands and monitors the relative positions of friends and rivals.
Gleb Pavlovsky, one of the leading political thinkers in Russia, is known to be an adviser to Putin and well connected to the power structure. In a 2016 article in Foreign Affairs, he endorsed Ledeneva’s sistema framework. Many observers imagine Putin to be some all-powerful genius, Pavlovsky wrote, but he “has never managed to build a bureaucratically successful authoritarian state. Instead, he has merely crafted his own version of sistema, a complex practice of decision-making and power management that has long defined Russian politics and society and that will outlast Putin himself. Putin has mastered sistema, but he has not replaced it with ‘Putinism’ or a ‘Putin system.’ Someday, Putin will go. But sistema will stay.”
Ledeneva said that the key to understanding Trump’s interaction with sistema is to look at the people with whom he did business. “Trump never dealt with anybody close to the Kremlin, close to Putin,” she said. “Or even many Russians.” Trump’s business deals, she told me, were with tertiary figures. Sistema is rooted in local, often familial, trust, so it is common to see networks rooted in ethnic or national identity. My own reporting has shown that Trump has worked with many ethnic Turks from Central Asia, such as the Mammadov family, in Azerbaijan; Tevfik Arif, in New York; and Aras and Emin Agalarov, in Moscow. Trump also worked with large numbers of émigrés from the former Soviet Union.
If there truly is damaging kompromat on Trump, it could well be in the hands of Trump’s business partners, or even in those of their rivals. Trump’s Georgian partners, for example, have been in direct conflict with other local business networks over a host of crucial deals involving major telecommunications projects in the country. His Azerbaijani partners were tightly linked to Iranians who were, also, senior officers in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The work of Ledeneva and Darden suggests that Trump’s partners and their rivals would likely have gathered any incriminating information they could find on him, knowing that it might, one day, provide some sort of business leverage—even with no thought that he could, one day, become the most powerful person on Earth.
Ledeneva is skeptical that Putin, years ago, ordered an effort to collect kompromat on Trump. Instead, it is possible that there is kompromat in the hands of several different business groups in the former Soviet Union. Each would have bits and pieces of damaging information and might have found subtle (or not so subtle) ways to communicate that fact to both Trump and Putin. Putin would, likely, have gathered some of that material, but he would have known that he couldn’t get everything.
Ledeneva told me that each actor in sistema faces near-constant uncertainty about his status, aware that others could well destroy him. Each actor also knows how to use kompromat to destroy rivals but fears that using such material might provoke an explosive response. While each person in the sistema feels near-constant uncertainty, the over-all sistema is remarkably robust. Kompromat is most powerful when it isn’t used, and when its targets aren’t quite clear about how much destructive information there is out there. If everyone sees potential land mines everywhere, it dramatically increases the price of anybody stepping out of line.
The scenario that, to my mind, makes the most sense of the given facts and requires the fewest fantastical leaps is that, a decade or so ago, Trump, naïve, covetous, and struggling for cash, may have laundered money for a business partner from the former Soviet Union or engaged in some other financial crime. This placed him, unawares, squarely within the sistema, where he remained, conducting business with other members of a handful of overlapping Central Asian networks. Had he never sought the Presidency, he may never have had to come to terms with these decisions. But, now, he is much like everyone else in sistema. He fears there is kompromat out there—maybe a lot of it—but he doesn’t know precisely what it is, who has it, or what might set them off.
Trump and many of his defenders have declared his businesses, including those in the former Soviet Union, to be off-limits to the Mueller investigation. They argue that the special counsel should focus only on the possibility of explicit acts of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. This neatly avoids the reality of sistema. As Pavlovsky wrote, ”Under Putin, sistema has become a method for making deals among businesses, powerful players, and the people. Business has not taken over the state, nor vice versa; the two have merged in a union of total and seamless corruption.”
Ledeneva explained to me that, in sistema, when faced with uncertainty, every member knows that the best move is to maintain whatever alliances he has, and to avoid grand steps that could antagonize powerful figures; in such times, the most one can hope for is simply to survive."
Trump's Grand Daddy
I noticed some old threads about the Donald. I looked but didn't to his Grandpa. Well Grandpa Trump came to the Klondike not in search of gold in the hills and streams. He made his money first running a Brothel on the shores of lake Bennett, right on the trail to Dawson, and the in a house in Whitehorse.
I noticed some old threads about the Donald. I looked but didn't to his Grandpa. Well Grandpa Trump came to the Klondike not in search of gold in the hills and streams. He made his money first running a Brothel on the shores of lake Bennett, right on the trail to Dawson, and the in a house in Whitehorse.
And there's the opposing viewpoints:
http://thehill.com/opinion/white-ho...er-on-russia-in-18-months-than-obama-in-eight
Everything is conjecture until something definitive is demonstrated. I personally don't see any sign we have weakened our efforts to check Russia on the ground since the Obama years. Obama was all talk, little action. I don't know about Trump's soft talk, hard action strategy. He meets Kim Jong-il and starts making nice while he has been applying stringent sanctions on North Korea.
I do know the Liberal Press has blown this up more than they did when Obama and Bush were discussing rapprochement with Russia. Bush, Obama and Trump all thought that Russia should be an obvious ally in battling Islamic extremism and keeping China in check. Of course, the Russians understand this geopolitical play for the U.S. They aren't going to cooperate with us for nothing and they are not going to play the role of little brother in a relationship with the U.S. This is the dance that Presidents have been playing with Putin and this dance will go on and on for many years Trump or no Trump. History has a habit of exposing the bluster of the parties, but partisans usually just ignore the bluster of recent history and their lessons.
If you're the Liberal Press and you can't let the story of Russia interfering in Hillary's election die, everything will seem like we lost the strategic initiative to Russia. The problem is no one can tell you how that has actually happened in the last eighteen months. The Russian interference is a self-indulgent story that Hillary supporters can't hear enough. But wait, the Russians have been interfering in elections for decades all over the world. Surprise, surprise. The not-so-much news news flash has ulterior political motives.
Note: You don't have to post entire articles. You can post the web link or excerpts.
http://thehill.com/opinion/white-ho...er-on-russia-in-18-months-than-obama-in-eight
Everything is conjecture until something definitive is demonstrated. I personally don't see any sign we have weakened our efforts to check Russia on the ground since the Obama years. Obama was all talk, little action. I don't know about Trump's soft talk, hard action strategy. He meets Kim Jong-il and starts making nice while he has been applying stringent sanctions on North Korea.
I do know the Liberal Press has blown this up more than they did when Obama and Bush were discussing rapprochement with Russia. Bush, Obama and Trump all thought that Russia should be an obvious ally in battling Islamic extremism and keeping China in check. Of course, the Russians understand this geopolitical play for the U.S. They aren't going to cooperate with us for nothing and they are not going to play the role of little brother in a relationship with the U.S. This is the dance that Presidents have been playing with Putin and this dance will go on and on for many years Trump or no Trump. History has a habit of exposing the bluster of the parties, but partisans usually just ignore the bluster of recent history and their lessons.
If you're the Liberal Press and you can't let the story of Russia interfering in Hillary's election die, everything will seem like we lost the strategic initiative to Russia. The problem is no one can tell you how that has actually happened in the last eighteen months. The Russian interference is a self-indulgent story that Hillary supporters can't hear enough. But wait, the Russians have been interfering in elections for decades all over the world. Surprise, surprise. The not-so-much news news flash has ulterior political motives.
Note: You don't have to post entire articles. You can post the web link or excerpts.
Of course Russia has been interfering in elections all around the globe for several decades. Guess who else has been interfering in foreign elections? The U.S. Just ask Kirchner in Argentina, Rousef in Brazil and Maduro in Venezuela, or any other 3rd world dictator. It's called propaganda. Does anyone even remember when the NSA, under the Obama administration, secretly tapped into private communications of German Chancellor Angela Merkel? https://www.cnn.com/2015/07/03/politics/germany-media-spying-obama-administration/index.html I laughed my ass off when that came out. It showed that we not only spy on our enemies but on our friends, as well.
This whole investigation against Russia will go on for the length of Trump's presidency. It's no different from the Republican witch hunt into what happened in Bengazi. A several year investigation by several panels that went nowhere. All it showed was that Hillary lied and blamed the whole thing on a video about Muslims. https://www.gop.com/hillarys-legendary-lies-benghazi/
Having found no collusion I already see the Dems changing their narrative from one of collusion by Trump into "interference" in our election process and Trump's refusal to acknowledge that he won due to said interference. Thus, there is no foreseeable endgame. This is why I hate politics. I would love to see Trump empty the swamp, as he promised. Unfortunately I don't see him succeeding in this endeavor. But, I do see him separating his own party and pushing the Dems to the extreme left and the religious whackos to the right. Open borders!! Good luck with that. Hopefully we will see a strong viable 3rd party after all is said and done.
This whole investigation against Russia will go on for the length of Trump's presidency. It's no different from the Republican witch hunt into what happened in Bengazi. A several year investigation by several panels that went nowhere. All it showed was that Hillary lied and blamed the whole thing on a video about Muslims. https://www.gop.com/hillarys-legendary-lies-benghazi/
Having found no collusion I already see the Dems changing their narrative from one of collusion by Trump into "interference" in our election process and Trump's refusal to acknowledge that he won due to said interference. Thus, there is no foreseeable endgame. This is why I hate politics. I would love to see Trump empty the swamp, as he promised. Unfortunately I don't see him succeeding in this endeavor. But, I do see him separating his own party and pushing the Dems to the extreme left and the religious whackos to the right. Open borders!! Good luck with that. Hopefully we will see a strong viable 3rd party after all is said and done.
Last edited:
The Clinton Foundation goes WAY BEYOND the Foundation. They have multiple foundations and shell companies.
This is the biggest charity fraud in the history of mankind.
Here is the list of all 48....YES 48 "Foundations/'shell companies owned by Clintons:
A) Clinton Bush Haiti Fund registered 1/28/10 and dissolved 12/27/12
B) Clinton Climate Initiative (CCI)
C) Clinton Development Initiative (CDI)
D) Clinton Family Foundation: in NY registered in 2001
E) Clinton Foundation: in AR registered 1998
F) Clinton Foundation: in Hong Kong registered 2014
G) Clinton Foundation: in Haiti
H) Clinton Foundation: registered to this address in Sweden: Birger Jarlsgatan 55, Stockholm, SW 11145
I) Clinton Foundation HIV/AIDS Initiative (CFHAI): bogus co. run under CF
J) Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership (CGEP): in Canada (Frank Giustra) many connections here.
K) Clinton Giustra Sustainable Growth Initiative (CGSGI)
L) Clinton Global Citizens Award (CGCA)
M) Clinton Global Initiative (CGI): in AR registered 2005
N) Clinton Global Initiative Asia (CFIA)
O) Clinton Global Initiative University (CGIU)
P) Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI): total fuckery on back-dating this one, but claim to be around since 2002. Registration in MA not until 2009
Q) Clinton Health Matter Initiative (CHMI)
R) Clinton Hunter Development Initiative (CSBI)
S) Clinton Institute (CI)
T) Clinton Small Business Initiative (CSBI)
U) Ciudad Verde Amarilo Triada Frailejon III: in Bogota
S) Clinton Institute (CI)
T) Clinton Small Business Initiative (CSBI)
U) Ciudad Verde Amarilo Triada Frailejon III: in Bogota
Y) The Clinton Initiatives (TCI)
Z) The Clinton Museum Store (TCMS)
AA) William J. Clinton Foundation (Kenya) Charity Trust: in Nairobi
BB) William J. Clinton Foundation UK: in London – dissolved on 10/10/17
CC) William J. Clinton Foundation (WJCF)
DD) William J. Clinton Presidential Center (CPC)
EE) WJC Investments (William Jefferson Clinton, for profit)
FF) WJC LLC (William Jefferson Clinton, for profit)
GG) Too Small to Fail
HH) Onward Together: Hillary’s most recent scandal
II) Haiti Development Fund LLC: in NY (50% ownership)
JJ) Acceso Fund LLC: in NY (50% ownership)
KK) Acceso Ofertal Local: in Colombia (fruit/veg supply)
LL) Acacia Development CO: in NY (investment)
MM) Acceso Worldwide Fund Inc.: in NY (investment)
NN) Fondo Acceso Sas: in Colombia – subsidiary of Acceso Fund LLC
OO) Acceso Cashew Enterprise Ltd: in Maharashtra IN (cashew co)
PP) Tukula Farmin Company Ltd: operates in in Kasungu Malawi and Mchinji
QQ) Moyo Nuts and Seeds Ltd: in Limbe MI
RR) Moyo Development Company: in Africa
SS) Acceso Peanut Enterprise Corp: in Haiti (false address and doesn’t exist)
TT) Acceso Boyaca SA: in Colombia (50% ownership)
UU) Chakipi Acceso SA: in Lima PE (50% ownership)
VV) Ruaha Development Co Ltd: in Upanga Tanzania
The Clintons have been on a damn near 30 year crime spree and people think 30 years worth of criminal activity can be gone through, in absolute completion, with a fine tooth comb in less than 2 years?
The below figures are from an official copy of the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation tax return for 2014, found on the National Center for Charitable Statistics web site. You can obtain the latest tax return on any charitable organization there.
The Clinton Foundation:
Number of Employees (line 5) 486
Total revenue (line 12) $177,804,612.00
Total grants to charity (line 13) $5,160,385.00 (this is less than 3%)
Total expenses: $91,281,145.00
Expenses include:
Salaries (line 15) $34,838,106.00
Fund raising fees (line 16a) $850,803.00
Other expenses (line 17) $50,431,851.00
Travel $8,000,000.00
Meetings $12,000,000.00
Net assets/fund balances (line 22) $332,471,349.00
So it required 486 people, who were paid $34.8 million, plus $91.3 million in fees and expenses, to give away $5.1 MILLION! And they called this a CHARITY?
This is one of the greatest white-collar crimes ever committed. And just think, one of the participants was a former President and one wanted to be elected President of the United States. If justice was truly served, they would both be in prison.
No need to be detective, just follow his twitter account. He backtrack himself saying russian did interfere with the elections.
No president has ever fuck so much with the very first amendment of the united states.
Now I know you do not like the crooked political style of the democrats but in my way it's still better then the dictatorship that Trump wants to establish.
Cheers,
No president has ever fuck so much with the very first amendment of the united states.
Now I know you do not like the crooked political style of the democrats but in my way it's still better then the dictatorship that Trump wants to establish.
Cheers,
People are more concerned about Trump than Justine, the media pumps ypu full of Trump so you do not realize the shit Turdeau is doing to Canada. Right is bad, left is good for the media.
Look at how the media is now writing up the recent Toronto shooting.
I'm not sure we see it exactly the same way, but I think we're in agreement more than not.
From my perspective, the bullshit started immediately. Government officials and media sit on name of shooter forever and a day. I presumed correctly that it was a Muslim name and the name is going to be released with a whole backstory of depression, mental illness, etc. etc. Islamic State claims responsibility. Government denies it. I personally don't care if he was in contact with ISIS over the internet or simply inspired by ISIS. The media will likely spend the next few days trying to explain away these murders as being committed by a troubled young man who could've been from any background.
The noose is tightening.
Cohen investigation has now led to subpoena of Trump's longtime CFO. Unlike Cohen, CFO isn't under investigation himself but I'm sure he knows many relevant details of Trump's finances. See, no need for Detective Jalimon; he'd rather be pounding pussy instead of doing boring shit like investigating Trump's taxes anyway.
And now Cohen has revealed that Trump knew about the Trump Tower meeting with the Russians all along and is willing to tell Mueller. This will be interesting, especially since Mueller has likely figured out who was on the other end of the anonymous call Don Jr. made after the Trump Tower meeting took place.
You hear that, Mr. Anderson? That is the sound of inevitability.
Cohen investigation has now led to subpoena of Trump's longtime CFO. Unlike Cohen, CFO isn't under investigation himself but I'm sure he knows many relevant details of Trump's finances. See, no need for Detective Jalimon; he'd rather be pounding pussy instead of doing boring shit like investigating Trump's taxes anyway.
And now Cohen has revealed that Trump knew about the Trump Tower meeting with the Russians all along and is willing to tell Mueller. This will be interesting, especially since Mueller has likely figured out who was on the other end of the anonymous call Don Jr. made after the Trump Tower meeting took place.
You hear that, Mr. Anderson? That is the sound of inevitability.
Wrong thread to post anything not related to Trump and the rest of his corrupt family. Just saying.
Similar threads
