The REAL Russia scandal

Bill Clinton meets Putin shortly before Uranium One is signed.

Probably just to discuss their yoga classes of course.
 
Jaw said:
CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asked Panetta how it was possible that neither “the chair of the DNC and the Clinton campaign” knew about payments for the dossier.

“Well, it’s obviously something that the Intelligence Committee is going to have to look at,” Panetta said. “You know, knowing presidential campaigns, they’re big operations and somehow the left hand may not know what the right hand is doing. And that could be the case here.”

Panetta continued, “I really do think that the committee is going to have to get into this, determine just exactly what happened. Who knew what and when?”

Blitzer followed up by asking Panetta why Clinton campaign attorney Marc Elias didn’t tell Clinton campaign chair, John Podesta, they had paid for the dossier.

Elias was the lawyer was represented the Clinton campaign and DNC, during the election and is alleged to have paid Fusion GPS for the Trump dossier.

“Well, it certainly makes the situation very awkward,” Panetta said. “If you’re testifying and saying you have no knowledge, and the attorney sitting next to you is one of those that knew what was involved here, I think it does raise an issue that the committee is going to have to look at and determine just exactly who knew what.”

Click to expand...

Don't want this to be buried on the bottom of the previous page.
 
thethe said:
Bill Clinton meets Putin shortly before Uranium One is signed.

Probably just to discuss their yoga classes of course.
Click to expand...

Can you briefly sketch out for me exactly what horrors are supposed to have been perpetrated in this whole thing?
 
Julio3000 said:
Can you briefly sketch out for me exactly what horrors are supposed to have been perpetrated in this whole thing?
Click to expand...

I'm confused. Russia is now evil incarnate. So its fine we sold them uranium?

Its just a coincidence that the CGI got 140+ Million around the time of the sale.
 
Jaw said:
CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asked Panetta how it was possible that neither “the chair of the DNC and the Clinton campaign” knew about payments for the dossier.

“Well, it’s obviously something that the Intelligence Committee is going to have to look at,” Panetta said. “You know, knowing presidential campaigns, they’re big operations and somehow the left hand may not know what the right hand is doing. And that could be the case here.”

Panetta continued, “I really do think that the committee is going to have to get into this, determine just exactly what happened. Who knew what and when?”

Blitzer followed up by asking Panetta why Clinton campaign attorney Marc Elias didn’t tell Clinton campaign chair, John Podesta, they had paid for the dossier.

Elias was the lawyer was represented the Clinton campaign and DNC, during the election and is alleged to have paid Fusion GPS for the Trump dossier.

“Well, it certainly makes the situation very awkward,” Panetta said. “If you’re testifying and saying you have no knowledge, and the attorney sitting next to you is one of those that knew what was involved here, I think it does raise an issue that the committee is going to have to look at and determine just exactly who knew what.”

Click to expand...

The one thing that I have seen that is hinky about this is that reportedly some parties with knowledge of the funding may have not accurately disclosed to Congress that knowledge. We'll see, I'm sure, if there is a Congressional inquiry. I assume that's what Panetta is getting at here.

It is is noteworthy, on that score, that the current Attorney General gave an untruthful answer to Congress during his confirmation hearing, and that his subsequent explanation (that his meetings with the Russian ambassador were in his capacity as a Senator on the FR committee) were, by his own admission, false. It seems rather hypocritical to be potentially measuring a DNC lawyer for the noose while giving the head of the damn Justice Department a pass.
 
thethe said:
I'm confused. Russia is now evil incarnate. So its fine we sold them uranium?

Its just a coincidence that the CGI got 140+ Million around the time of the sale.
Click to expand...

Ok. So, first, we didn't sell them any uranium. The fact that you're alleging that is a pretty clear indication that you're not really concerned with the facts.

Second, the timeline of the "$140M donations" to the CGI don't match up with the Uranium One sale. Almost all of that dollar figure was made up by a donor who divested from the company years before its later sale to a Russian company.
 
Julio3000 said:
Ok. So, first, we didn't sell them any uranium. The fact that you're alleging that is a pretty clear indication that you're not really concerned with the facts.

Second, the timeline of the "$140M donations" to the CGI don't match up with the Uranium One sale. Almost all of that dollar figure was made up by a donor who divested from the company years before its later sale to a Russian company.
Click to expand...

You are being deceitful by using a technicality. It is absolutely Russia that is the ultimate benefactor of this agreement.
 
Julio3000 said:
The one thing that I have seen that is hinky about this is that reportedly some parties with knowledge of the funding may have not accurately disclosed to Congress that knowledge. We'll see, I'm sure, if there is a Congressional inquiry. I assume that's what Panetta is getting at here.

It is is noteworthy, on that score, that the current Attorney General gave an untruthful answer to Congress during his confirmation hearing, and that his subsequent explanation (that his meetings with the Russian ambassador were in his capacity as a Senator on the FR committee) were, by his own admission, false. It seems rather hypocritical to be potentially measuring a DNC lawyer for the noose while giving the head of the damn Justice Department a pass.
Click to expand...

Sessions is an enigma to me. Trump doesn't like him, Trump's opponents don't like him, Trump's voters don't like him. He must either be an olive branch to establishment Republicans or be in possession of some incriminating photos to still have his job.
 
thethe said:
Bill Clinton meets Putin shortly before Uranium One is signed.

Probably just to discuss their yoga classes of course.
Click to expand...

No way man. Haven't you seen those ads for hot Russian girls looking for an American to bring them over here?
 
Jaw said:
Sessions is an enigma to me. Trump doesn't like him, Trump's opponents don't like him, Trump's voters don't like him. He must either be an olive branch to establishment Republicans or be in possession of some incriminating photos to still have his job.
Click to expand...

Sessions was, for ages, the only prominent Republican elected official to endorse Trump. I'm pretty sure he was the only senator to endorse him until after Trump was the nominee. Stephen Miller, who is still very influential in Trump-land, came from Sessions's office. He was in no way an olive branch to establishment Republicans--he was isolated within his own caucus and attached himself to Trump because he was an anti-immigration extremist. If Trump's voters don't like him, that's only because Trump publicly attacked him in the wake of Mueller's appointment.

Trump only subsequently turned on him because he would not shut down the Russia investigation...likely because he realized that he'd be exposed to obstruction of justice charges if he had.
 
just for the record republicans began the funding for the dossier and abandoned it when it wasn't politically beneficial to them anymore. regardless, it's meaningless who paid for it.

as far as uranium: it wasn't fully in russia's control and posed no national security threat, and clinton may well have not even known about the whole thing.
 
Julio3000 said:
Ok. So, first, we didn't sell them any uranium. The fact that you're alleging that is a pretty clear indication that you're not really concerned with the facts.

Second, the timeline of the "$140M donations" to the CGI don't match up with the Uranium One sale. Almost all of that dollar figure was made up by a donor who divested from the company years before its later sale to a Russian company.
Click to expand...

not concerned with the facts, or doesn't understand the facts? when all your info comes from fox news and trump himself, you won't really know or understand detail and nuance. yeah, the $145M mostly came from 1 guy who wasn't even part of this anymore. that leaves about $4M.

more and more examples of how listening to fox news and other POTUS mouthpieces leads to incorrect information.
 
I think that another question worth asking is why the DNC didn't publicize the dossier before the election.

The first whiff of it the public got was within a week of the election, and that was based on Steele talking anonymously to an American reporter because he was concerned about what he had learned. If the whole thing was a nefarious Clinton op, why did they not publicize it before the election?
 
Julio3000 said:
I think that another question worth asking is why the DNC didn't publicize the dossier before the election.

The first whiff of it the public got was within a week of the election, and that was based on Steele talking anonymously to an American reporter because he was concerned about what he had learned. If the whole thing was a nefarious Clinton op, why did they not publicize it before the election?
Click to expand...

It was John McCain that gave it to BuzzFeed in January
 
Julio3000 said:
I think that another question worth asking is why the DNC didn't publicize the dossier before the election.

The first whiff of it the public got was within a week of the election, and that was based on Steele talking anonymously to an American reporter because he was concerned about what he had learned. If the whole thing was a nefarious Clinton op, why did they not publicize it before the election?
Click to expand...

For really bro?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top