Blackwater Founder Held Secret Seychelles Meeting to Establish Trump-Putin Back Channel

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: introvert

... but we do see a veritable RUSH to get the disinformation talking-points in, didn't we?

That's starting to be a smoke-signal.

Indeed.

One of the reasons I have stepped away from engaging in many discussions similar to this is because people seem to be pushing specific narratives and dismissing information they have been presented with, all while pushing blame/attention to Hillary and Obama.

Logically speaking, we've just dove head first in to the shallow end.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: burntheships

I'll try politeness once more: this thread is about breaking news regarding Trump Russian ties.

It's not about Clinton. Please get on topic.

Agreed, but some people do that anyway.

As for any Saudi meet, I would consider it to be of interest in any any ongoing investigation from the point of security, and as I have said before I think this investigation has been ongoing for some time, not just in the run up to Trump standing for President, and Manafort, who has an address in Trump Tower has long been of interest, for possible money laundering through Cypriot banks, amongst other interests. Prince is also under investigation for the same reason, and dealings with Chinese intel and banking with his current firm which has an intel base for customers.
Bank of China has a Trump address in NY. It is all just a bit too stinky, but it will be a while before we hear about anything.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Blackwater have done considerably well with lucrative contracts in the ME, before Trump came to the White House. Obviously Prince is a "busy man" I mean business man...who preferred not upsetting the Russians like Hillary would have.


www.breitbart.com...
12 Oct 2016

On Wednesday’s Breitbart News Daily with SiriusXM host Alex Marlow, former Navy SEAL and Blackwater CEO Erik Prince talked about how Hillary Clinton’s leaked emails “truly indicates that everything is for sale for the Democrats, that it really is pay-to-play – and if you don’t pay them, they crush you.....

“I guess we’ve always suspected that the Left and the media, or the media writ large, has always put their hand on the scale in favor of the Democrats. But the fact that the Clinton Foundation has raised $2 billion, and that 90 to 95 percent of that money was consumed in overhead – paying for salaries, paying for private jets for Bill and Hillary and Chelsea to fly around the world – 95 percent of the money is consumed by overhead, and only five percent goes to programs? That is the worst charity in the history of the world. That is truly a Ponzi scheme on par with Bernie Madoff,” Prince said. “I don’t know how the IRS could even regard that as a tax-exempt organization any more,” he marveled.

a reply to: Gryphon66

How is ColdWisdom derailing?

from your WashPo link

Though Prince had no formal role with the Trump campaign or transition team, he presented himself as an unofficial envoy for Trump to high-ranking Emiratis involved in setting up his meeting with the Putin confidant, according to the officials, who did not identify the Russian.

H's just taking a leaf out of the Clinton "Pay to Play" playbook, ensuring Blackwater gets a cut of some big fees.

There are a lot of ties between Trump operatives, and this particular connection is also part of the FBI's ongoing investigation into possible collusion between the Trump Campaign and Russian government agents.

That. We have to understand that Trump and his team would be put under a microscope since he ran and is President and his ties to a country that was sanctioned by the previous administration.

There are a lot of ties between Trump operatives, and this particular connection is also part of the FBI's ongoing investigation into possible collusion between the Trump Campaign and Russian government agents.

That. We have to understand that Trump and his team would be put under a microscope since he ran and is President and his ties to a country that was sanctioned by the previous administration.

a reply to: Gryphon66

My thoughts on using unnamed sources et al. are that the reporting is free to take certain liberties with the cite and often do. I'm not saying that particularly happened here but, that is how I tend to read any news source.

Reading Erik Prince's wiki page was fairly interesting.

Private security for the United Arab Emirates

Private equity investor in Africa

Not to mention the incredible wealth of his family already. Prince, Amway and DeVos are BIG names in my neck of the woods.

a reply to: cenpuppie

sanctioned by the previous administration.

Previous Admin? Not really...the election was over...look Thursday Dec 29. 2016

edition.cnn.com...

(CNN)President Barack Obama took unprecedented steps Thursday to retaliate against alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election, prompting vows from Russian authorities that Moscow will respond in kind. The administration described Russia's involvement as "Significant Malicious Cyber-Enabled Activities" and sanctioned four Russian individuals and five Russian entities for what it said was election interference. The administration also ordered 35 Russian diplomats to leave the country and two Russian compounds are being closed. This is the first time the names of Russian officials involved in the hacking have become public on the sanctions list. "Russia's cyberactivities were intended to influence the election, erode faith in US democratic institutions, sow doubt about the integrity of our electoral process, and undermine confidence in the institutions of the US government," a White House statement said. "These actions are unacceptable and will not be tolerated."

a reply to: smurfy

Moneylaundering ...

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Clinton is not the topic.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

More partisan BS. You don't believe it too, do you?

One "side" is good and the other "side" is evil?

a reply to: introvert

I do hear you.

in 6 weeks time I imagine these nonsense ''links'' we equal

'' The owner of a petstore Trumps family bought a puppy from in 1968 met with a Russian women in Ukraine in the early 60s when buying a chicken meal at the airport. Officials confirm that multiple sources have come forward about the meeting and the Republicans seem unwilling or unable to comment on the accusations ''

Queue Gryphon putting forward another hail mary thread about Trump and Russia!

a reply to: Agit8dChop

Really desperate to discredit this news report eh?

Interesting that your whole argument is blatantly fallacious ... straw man silliness and a side-swiping ad hom on me?

LOL. You guys really don't have anything except duck and cover left, do you?

Any thoughts about Erik Prince, or his connections to Trump, or why he would be negotiating for Trump with Russians via the IAE?

You know.... the topic?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: introvert

I do hear you.

I have no doubt that you do hear me. The problem is others that cannot address the issues without pushing a partisan, knee-jerk narrative and they do not look at the issue with a passion for truth and honesty.

It's all about sticking-up for their "team".

a reply to: Gryphon66

To be fair, i think any reasonable person is just sick and tired of your Russian connection nonsense.
Its been months now and nothing has come of it.

People are tired of it, not just your endless diatribes but others too!

We get it, you lost and you want to make as much noise as possible but eventually you'll have to go away like these silly claims!

I respond because I enjoy imagining you rocking back and forth shaking yelling out profanities against trump! It helps with my morning coffee!

I guess desperation can make one cling to anything, even if it is an unsubstantiated lie perpetrated by known liars. It is somewhere between funny and sad.

a reply to: Gryphon66

More partisan BS. You don't believe it too, do you? One "side" is good and the other "side" is evil?

No they're both bad see.....


business-humanrights.org...

On 16 September 2007, a group of Blackwater personnel providing security for a US State Department convoy in Baghdad were involved in a shooting incident in which shots were fired at civilians. As many as 17 Iraqis were killed, and over 10 injured. On 11 October 2007, a survivor and the estates of three victims of the attack filed a lawsuit under the Alien Tort Claims Act in US federal court against Blackwater, its parent company The Prince Group, and Blackwater founder and chairman Erik Prince.
The plaintiffs claim that Blackwater is liable for extrajudicial killings and war crimes because its employees opened fire on unarmed civilians. The plaintiffs’ claims also include wrongful death and negligent hiring, training and supervision by Blackwater of its personnel. In an interview, Erik Prince said the lawsuit was “politically motivated” and without basis. In July 2009, the court consolidated this case with five other lawsuits based on similar facts. On 6 January 2010, parties to five of the consolidated lawsuits announced that they had reached a settlement with the defendants, while the suit filed on behalf of the three victims of the 2007 incident continued. In December 2010, Blackwater argued that the US government, and not the company itself, should be held accountable for the shooting incident because it was providing security to State Department personnel.

In January 2011, District Judge Terrence Boyle ruled that nonresidents are unable to sue in federal court for injuries sustained outside the country and sent the case back to a North Carolina court, where the suit was first filed. The company, now known as Academi, settled this lawsuit out of court in January 2012. The terms of the settlement are confidential. On 8 December 2008, the US Department of Justice filed criminal charges against five individual Blackwater security guards with regard to the same incident. The Department of Justice did not file charges against the company. The defendants were charged with 14 counts of voluntary manslaughter and 20 counts of attempted manslaughter. A sixth guard pleaded guilty to lesser charges in return for cooperating with the government. On 31 December 2009, the judge in this case dismissed the lawsuit. The judge stated that the Department of Justice's mishandling of the case required the indictments to be dismissed.

The Justice Department appealed the decision and on 22 April 2011 a three judge panel at the federal court of appeal reversed the lower court’s decision, sending the case back for further hearings. On 6 June 2011, the defendants filed a petition asking the full court of appeal to review the panel’s decision. On 19 July 2011, the court of appeal unanimously rejected defendants’ request. The Blackwater guards petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court on 21 October 2011, but on 4 June 2012 the Court declined to hear the appeal. On 17 October 2013 the US Deptartment of Justice filed new charges against four of the individual Blackwater security guards charging them with voluntary manslaughter and other crimes. On 22 October 2014, a jury found the four guards guilty of murder and manslaughter. The jurors rejected the guards' claims that they had acted in self-defence. On 13 April 2014, the guards were each sentenced to lengthy prison terms. On 1 February 2016, the four guards appealed their convictions on the grounds that a key witness for the prosecution changed his testimony, and that the prosecutors lacked jurisdiction to bring the case under the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act, as the guards were acting under the State Department authority, not military.

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
a reply to: Gryphon66

To be fair, i think any reasonable person is just sick and tired of your Russian connection nonsense.
Its been months now and nothing has come of it.

Prove it's nonsense, also he didn't write the article, he merely shared it with this board.

So what if it's been months? You think because it's been a hundred days everyone should stop investigating?
Strange behaviour, almost as if you don't want people looking to deeply.

a reply to: introvert

What about those of us that fail to see this boogeyman nonsense?

Have you thought to question the narrative at all? We started with:

Going even further, the first recount petition filed by the Greens, in Wisconsin, primarily focused on Russian hacking, not on the more easily understood line of inquiry of different voting technologies reporting different margins of victory for Trump despite their locations.

Green Recount Effort Poised to Explore Whether Russia Hacked the Vote for Trump

Then to:

But here is something they are not: evidence that the Russians hacked voting machines or changed the Election Day count. Unsubstantiated assertions that Russia actually manipulated the vote tally are themselves dangerous.

Russia's role is shocking but there's no evidence the vote was hacked

And now we are at:

Moscow has stepped up its interference in U.S. and European elections, using social media, hacking and other tools to undermine public confidence and to raise doubts about the U.S as an ally, Russia experts told the Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday.

Russia has stepped up efforts to influence elections, experts tell Senate panel

I'm not one to hide want and hide my head in the sand but unless you are not paying attention, this thing is not escalating. It's retreating.