FBI uncovered Russian bribery plot before Obama admin approved nuclear deal with Moscow

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
a reply to: dragonridr

When you read from the US MSM, Putin manages a personal fortune worth more than Warren Buffet. Putin personally decides of every single thing taking place in Russia, kills opponents, threathen elector at gunpoint during elections, reviews contracts, fixes prices, etc ... If you believe everything you read about Putin from western outlets, Putin must have 72 hours long days and must keeps himself more busy than Santa Claus on Christmas night.

There is no need to bash Putin for western audience, it is the Russians that are voting in Russia, and Putin's approval ratings over there are stagering in comparison to what most western leaders are having.
No I don't want to live in Putin's Russia, but if it is ok for the Russian themselves, I don't see any reason to obfuscate, it is their country.

Ha has a huge net worh hhe controls Russias or wait owns Russias energy companies to be more correct. The one he didnt own he put out of business and had the owner declared a traitor and seized his assets. Putin is everything you read in the west and more . I see you have a need to obfuscate the facts pertaining to Putin.

originally posted by: Grambler
Update.

The hill is reporting the Senate judiciary committee is opening an investigation into this.

thehill.com...

This is great news if true.

Now cue all many people on the left (many we have seen on this very thread) about about what a bad idea this investigation is.

If the investigation turns up anything it would rewrite the obama presidency and clear Ttrump.

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: Grambler
Update.

The hill is reporting the Senate judiciary committee is opening an investigation into this.

thehill.com...

This is great news if true.

Now cue all many people on the left (many we have seen on this very thread) about about what a bad idea this investigation is.

If the investigation turns up anything it would rewrite the obama presidency and clear Ttrump.

Hmm...

Perhaps that would explain some people's seeming changing of heart, where "for the good of the country" they wanted everything about 5rump and his entire campaign investigated in the name of stopping russia, but are totally against an investigation into this uranium deal.

It would be shocking, just shocking, if we found out that many of these people pushing for the trump investigation in russia were not really concerned with Russian influence, but we're just trying to bring down trump!

a reply to: Grambler

Every single statement I made in the above post is true.

But not everything you have said in this thread has been proven true. You are using small bits on info to extrapolate beyond what is reasonable and known. Your OP is a prime example of that.

You chose to ignore them because you are a partisan person. That's fine.

I'm not ignoring anything. I am not willing to jump the gun, as is your normal tendency, without clear evidence.

Was this man under investigation for extortion and bribery when the deal was signed?

The deal would have went through anyway. The bribery and extortion is long down the chain, dealing with subsidiaries of subsidiaries.

You have to connect the extortion and bribery to those that made the decision to allow this deal to go through. Can you do that? Please provide the clear evidence.

Was this info withheld from congress and the public at the time of that deal?

Of course it would be withheld from the public if they are in the middle of an investigation and perhaps congress was not told because it does not have any effect on the deal itself.

Did people involved with his company give hillary millions?

Unless you can prove the money was given in order to push the deal, that means nothing really.

Did hillary vote to allow the sale?

Along with many others.

The answer to all of this is yes.

No. The answer is not simply yes. There is a lot more context we need to come to any firm conclusions.

But to you, this apparently did not warrant an investigation.

Where did I say it did not warrant an investigation?

So what was it about trump russia collusion that warranted an investigation? Do we have proof russian state actors gave him millions? Do we have proof he voted to give them something like uranium or any other blockbuster deal?

Well, talk about false equivalencies. The two situations are not comparable.

No, we just have speculation, and the suggestion that russia is really really bad, but no proof like in Hillary's case.

I did not suggest Russia is really, really bad. Not only are you relying on false equivalencies, you're also projecting.

So if you support the investigation into trump because russia is such a serious matter, why not hillary here?

Sure. Investigate away. If there is something to it, go after them. But before you make absolute statements, let's get some proof.

So far you are putting the cart before the horse.

because you aren't interested in protecting the country from russia, you just pretend that's your reason when it's really to just be a partisan.

And now you're a hypocrite. It has nothing to do with partisanship. It has to do with not being so partisan, such as yourself, that I fall for every little morsel and blow it up to being a huge conspiracy of epic proportions.

Again, your OP is a great example. There has not been an investigation in to this issue, or there has and the FBI did not find the connections you claim, and you have already come to the conclusion the Hillary was bribed and the admin knew all about it.

Now that is pure partisan and you have no leg to stand on in trying to lecture me or anyone else on the issue.

a reply to: dragonridr

When you consider the accuracy and neutrality of the MSM reporting about US affairs ... you sure don't want to question their statement on Russia.

originally posted by: Grambler

It would be shocking, just shocking, if we found out that many of these people pushing for the trump investigation in russia were not really concerned with Russian influence, but we're just trying to bring down trump!

Is it just about Russian influence or foreign influence at large, otherwise US should start investigating the Saudis, Israelis, ...

There is no such ambition, Russia is just a convenient scapegoat.

a reply to: introvert

You are a joke.

I have been calling for an investigation the whole thread. I didn't say she was guilty.

All of the info I said is true.

You were the one that said it's all just a wild conspiracy theory and there is no case here to begin with.

Now it looks like an investigation is opening.

You wanted to disparage anyone who raised these questions and act like there was no story here.

You Have outed yourself as the partisan person we all knew.

But you have done that many times over, so no surprise there.

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
a reply to: dragonridr

When you consider the accuracy and neutrality of the MSM reporting about US affairs ... you sure don't want to question their statement on Russia.

I think you mean MSN news?? Putin is that you? Seriously back to topic i have little doubt the Rssians played in our sandbox during the election. Also say he did help Trump RT news spent alot of time destroyinh Hillary. And yes russian trolls were trying to influence the elections. These are facts and cant be debated. What can is how much effect it actually had. Me i thinkprobably a lot. Trump is a very flawed candiidate,though so was Clinton.

a reply to: dragonridr

This will be debated as long as not a single proof is shown.

Burr: Russia probe will expose erroneous reporting

Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr (R-N.C.) stopped short of endorsing Trump's Thursday morning call for a congressional investigation of the media. But Burr did predict that the final product of his panel's bipartisan inquiry into Moscow's disruption of the 2016 election would illustrate factual errors in some media reports on the issue.

"We're not going to investigate news organizations, but we will use the findings of our report to let the American people hold every news organization accountable for what they portrayed as fact, in many cases without sources — at least, no sources that would admit to it," Burr told POLITICO.

"And I think, when we finish our report, we will find that quite a few news organizations ran stories that were not factual," he added.

a reply to: introvert

Your first post on this thread says that members have blown holes in the entire story.

Then why are we seeing an investigation?

Your nest post said there is no case here to begin with, it's all just a conspricay theory.

I didn't see you saying we'll let's have an investigation and see if their was wrong doing. Nope, you had already made up your mind.

You specifically say you don't see anything but unsubstantiated conspricay theories, implying you see no reason to investigate.

You fully support an investigation into trump, and yet when I bring up why we actually have real evidence of bribery and money being given by Russians here you shrug it off as totally different without providing any reason.

It is evident to all reading that you have no interest in the truth, and are instead only interested in shilling for your side.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

I would not be surprised to start see a wave of "retractions" or "corrections" hidden in micro print somewhere around the obituaries to try and salvage some of the MSM careers.

a reply to: introvert

If the russians involved in the deal gave millions to the Clinton foundation that is a smoking gun. What becomes of it remains to be seen but yyour outrright dismissal is rather odd. Especially when i doubt Russian oligharchs decided to give away 150 million no strings attached,especially at a time the russian economy is hurting. Its possible just a llittle hard to believe.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Why do you keep repeating this? Burr made an extremely vague statement in support of Trump's anti- free press rants. There is no ongoing criminal investigation, so he is at liberty to name names. Why not single out a few egregious examples? Is it because most of the erroneous reporting out there is biased in favor of Trump? The OP here is an example of anti-Clinton bias: it jumps from "there is evidence Russians bribed American businessmen" to "Hillary Clinton approved the deal," implying she was bribed as well.

a reply to: Grambler

If the Trump-Sessions Department of vengeance Justice has not announced a new investigation of Hillary Clinton, there was never really anything to investigate. Besides, the last thing Donald Trump wants is public scrutiny of "charitable foundations."

a reply to: Grambler

Your first post on this thread says that members have blown holes in the entire story.

Indeed. AD cast a lot of doubt on the assertions many have made.

Then why are we seeing an investigation?

Because Grassley and others feel it needs to be investigated, I guess. Just because the committee is going to look in to it, does not mean there is anything to it. So that is really not proof of anything in and of itself.

Your nest post said there is no case here to begin with, it's all just a conspricay theory.

On the surface, there does not appear to be a case.

I didn't see you saying we'll let's have an investigation and see if their was wrong doing. Nope, you had already made up your mind.

I never said I was against an investigation if further info was revealed. So your assertion was incorrect.

You specifically say you don't see anything but unsubstantiated conspricay theories, implying you see no reason to investigate.

Coming from you and others, yes. You are pushing conspiracy theories without proper evidence. We need more evidence to suggest there was wrongdoing, beyond the lazy dot connecting you and others are doing.

You fully support an investigation into trump, and yet when I bring up why we actually have real evidence of bribery and money being given by Russians here you shrug it off as totally different without providing any reason.

It is different. The two situations are not comparable.

The money and bribes have not been connected to Hillary or anyone else for the specific purpose of pushing through the deal in question. Yet, you have already made up your mind that it is connected.

So again, your absolute statements are pure speculation and devoid of real evidence.

It is evident to all reading that you have no interest in the truth, and are instead only interested in shilling for your side.

Again, your a hypocrite. You have no place to point fingers when it is you that has stated as fact that Hillary was bribed and the admin knew about it when the committee approved the deal.

If an investigation is just now going to take place, by only a committee mind you, you have no place to make such statements.

I say all of this not because I am not interested in the truth or I want to shill for a particular side, which is a laughable assertion in and of itself, but because you and others continually push illogical assertions based on nutty speculation and make a mockery of yourselves by connecting dots that, in most cases, are not meant to connect.

So I will ask you to provide the evidence of your claims, including the intent of those involved, or admit that you are merely speculating without such evidence. And I will also ask for you to stop being a hypocrite.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Grambler

If the Trump-Sessions Department of vengeance Justice has not announced a new investigation of Hillary Clinton, there was never really anything to investigate. Besides, the last thing Donald Trump wants is public scrutiny of "charitable foundations."

I guess we will see about an investigation into the clinton foundation.

As far as trump not wanting his own charties looked at, I personally don't care.

If trump engaged in criminal activity, he should be held accountable.

But there is a lot of smoke with hillary and the clinton foundation, and it should be looked in to.

As for the uranium deal, it looks as if an investigation into it may be starting.

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke

originally posted by: Grambler

It would be shocking, just shocking, if we found out that many of these people pushing for the trump investigation in russia were not really concerned with Russian influence, but we're just trying to bring down trump!

Is it just about Russian influence or foreign influence at large, otherwise US should start investigating the Saudis, Israelis, ...

There is no such ambition, Russia is just a convenient scapegoat.

You keep forgetting that the Israelis and Saudis lobby legally, above board, with declaration of intent, and legal registration. The Russians are waging a poorly disguised covert war. Russian trolls are on this very thread, claiming Russian trolls do not even exist. How stupid do they think we are?

a reply to: Irishhaf

a reply to: Irishhaf

Could be ... in the meantime CNN (the epitome of Fake News) is busy pushing the tale of Vladimir Putinachu using Pokemon Go to sow discord among Amricans (As if the US was supposed to be to country of unified thinking and that it was Russia's fault it is not the case ...). And makes no mention that the COO of Facebook was working hand-in-hand with Podesta as his emails have shown.

I know this has to be taken with a grain of salt, but Project Veritas has shown that they don't care so much about the accuracy of the reporting as long as it goes against Russia and that this was because of a direct executive order from Jeff Zucker the CEO ...

That's the problem of corporate press : they serve they interest of their parent corporations. In the case of CNN, time-Warner the 7th biggest donor of the Clinton campaign hence their pro-Clinton anti-Trump stance. It is easy using critical thinking to make the difference between corporate and free press.

a reply to: introvert

Yes you want me to prove intent before you are satisfied an investigation should begin.

Funny, I don't recall you making these claims when the investigation of trump opened.

But go on, explain to me the evidence you saw that trump took money or something and intended to do russians favors.

Go on show me evidence of his intent that led you to think that was a nevcessary investigation unlike this conspiracy theory here

a reply to: DJW001

Why Not a Probe of ‘Israel-gate’?

Time For AIPAC To Abide By U.S. Law