Options

The Russian/Trump Investigation - Sessions' stonewalling session

12728303233100

Posts

  • Options
    TubeTube Registered User admin
    Tube wrote: »
    Am I reading this wrong or did Sessions just unambiguously admit to perjury

    What specifically are you reading? Because re: Senate confirmation, yes he admitted to not admitting to two known contacts with Kislyak.

    This would be a third that was not known of at the time, and I've not seen a comment from him on it.

    This is what I was reading. It sounds pretty serious to me, but I don't know the rules around those hearings.

  • Options
    GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    Tube wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    Am I reading this wrong or did Sessions just unambiguously admit to perjury

    What specifically are you reading? Because re: Senate confirmation, yes he admitted to not admitting to two known contacts with Kislyak.

    This would be a third that was not known of at the time, and I've not seen a comment from him on it.

    This is what I was reading. It sounds pretty serious to me, but I don't know the rules around those hearings.

    It is quite serious but who is going to prosecute him?

    wbBv3fj.png
  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    Am I reading this wrong or did Sessions just unambiguously admit to perjury

    What specifically are you reading? Because re: Senate confirmation, yes he admitted to not admitting to two known contacts with Kislyak.

    This would be a third that was not known of at the time, and I've not seen a comment from him on it.

    This is what I was reading. It sounds pretty serious to me, but I don't know the rules around those hearings.

    It is quite serious but who is going to prosecute him?

    Pretty sure it's within Mueller's mandate, so him presumably.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    ArbitraryDescriptorArbitraryDescriptor changed Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Tube wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    Am I reading this wrong or did Sessions just unambiguously admit to perjury

    What specifically are you reading? Because re: Senate confirmation, yes he admitted to not admitting to two known contacts with Kislyak.

    This would be a third that was not known of at the time, and I've not seen a comment from him on it.

    This is what I was reading. It sounds pretty serious to me, but I don't know the rules around those hearings.

    Recent events could actually add a charge, or form the basis for a more concrete one, and two senators have asked the FBI to investigate.

    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/democratic-senators-asked-fbi-investigate-jeff-sessions-perjury/story?id=47770340
    Franken asked Sessions during his confirmation hearing "if there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of this campaign."


    Sessions said he was "not aware of any of those activities."

    So that's even more of a direct lie, since this Mayflower business was absolutely a campaign event, involving Kislyak, which Sessions attended.

    ArbitraryDescriptor on
  • Options
    ArbitraryDescriptorArbitraryDescriptor changed Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    Am I reading this wrong or did Sessions just unambiguously admit to perjury

    What specifically are you reading? Because re: Senate confirmation, yes he admitted to not admitting to two known contacts with Kislyak.

    This would be a third that was not known of at the time, and I've not seen a comment from him on it.

    This is what I was reading. It sounds pretty serious to me, but I don't know the rules around those hearings.

    It is quite serious but who is going to prosecute him?

    Pretty sure it's within Mueller's mandate, so him presumably.

    Mueller oversees the FBI in this matter, I believe, so the Leahy/Franken request is essentially for him to do something.

    His mandate, IIRC, allows him to pursue any illegal activity resultant from the investigation, whether or not it relates to the Russians at all. So I would think this is within his purview to act on.

    ArbitraryDescriptor on
  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    Am I reading this wrong or did Sessions just unambiguously admit to perjury

    What specifically are you reading? Because re: Senate confirmation, yes he admitted to not admitting to two known contacts with Kislyak.

    This would be a third that was not known of at the time, and I've not seen a comment from him on it.

    This is what I was reading. It sounds pretty serious to me, but I don't know the rules around those hearings.

    It is quite serious but who is going to prosecute him?

    Pretty sure it's within Mueller's mandate, so him presumably.

    Mueller oversees the FBI in this matter, I believe, so the Leahy/Franken request is essentially for him to do something.

    His mandate, IIRC, allows him to pursue any illegal activity resultant from the investigation, whether or not it relates to the Russians at all. So I would think this is within his purview to act on.

    It's more parallel with authority to draw on FBI resources than overseeing FBI. But otherwise this is my understanding as well. The letter says "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation." I think perjury to avoid being investigated should fit.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    SiliconStewSiliconStew Registered User regular
    Selner wrote: »
    Atomika wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Wait I'm out of the loop mayflower conspiracy?

    it's not anything really weird

    Basically the scuttlebutt is this:

    - Trump and his team held a private gathering/fundraiser paid for by a Russian-linked PAC; this is true and not disputed
    - Trump, Kushner, Sessions, and others are rumored to have met privately with Kislyak and ambassadors from countries who were part of the Rosneft oil deal
    - After the deal went through, Trump stood to make millions from liquidated shares in Rosneft


    nothing about it seems to far-fetched

    The actual kicker of the story is the claim that Russia "sold" Trump 0.5% of the oil/gas company in exchange for lifting sanctions.
    If that's true, and anyone ever finds proof of it... but it could also just be a made up accusation.

    The current story link is that Sessions did not disclose to Congress that he met with Kislyak at the Mayflower.

    Everything about the Mayflower thing just looks suspicious and sketchy.

    The thing with the Rosneft deal is that no one knows shit about it.

    So I am extra dubious of any claim that actually tries to put a number on it.

    This is a good article, and at least makes it clear that a deal of the sort described is possible if currently not provable due to financial paperwork shenanigans. Also possible it's completely unrelated, I'm sure there are many things worth hiding in international oil deals with countries under sanctions.

    My shot in the dark is that some Kushner LLC (fun fact from his financial disclosure: he's technically the president/head of hundreds of LLCs) owns, through god knows how many layers of remove, some portion of Rosneft stock that was acquired within the past year. No backing for that beyond suspicion and ongoing news, but it would fit with what we do know. Of course, lots of things would.

    Whether Trump knows about any of this somehow remains an open question.

    Edit: My wife and I decided to put together a crazy conspiracy board about all this for a laugh, so forgive me if that kind of thinking is getting to be a little too natural. I blame it on reality.

    It definitely brings up questions that Mueller should be asking.
    If it was just a business deal, and not political, why have multiple campaign staff there?
    Why would a person in real estate suddenly want such a large chunk of oil assets, or why would the sellers bring a face-to-face offer directly to such a person, rather than any number of other investors?
    If it was a legal deal, why repeatedly claim you have no business dealings with the Russian government?
    If Trump himself wasn't getting in on the deal, why involve a US presidential presumptive nominee in a business deal that doesn't involve the US?

    Even ignoring the serious tit-for-tat dropping sanctions espionage/collusion claim, if such a deal happened, you have a presidential candidate making large payments directly to a foreign government, that they failed to disclose and subsequently repeatedly lied about. And violated international sanctions in the process.

    Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
  • Options
    Styrofoam SammichStyrofoam Sammich WANT. normal (not weird)Registered User regular
    Tube wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    Am I reading this wrong or did Sessions just unambiguously admit to perjury

    What specifically are you reading? Because re: Senate confirmation, yes he admitted to not admitting to two known contacts with Kislyak.

    This would be a third that was not known of at the time, and I've not seen a comment from him on it.

    This is what I was reading. It sounds pretty serious to me, but I don't know the rules around those hearings.

    Laws are only as serious as the people enforcing them want them to be

    wq09t4opzrlc.jpg
  • Options
    ArbitraryDescriptorArbitraryDescriptor changed Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Selner wrote: »
    Atomika wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Wait I'm out of the loop mayflower conspiracy?

    it's not anything really weird

    Basically the scuttlebutt is this:

    - Trump and his team held a private gathering/fundraiser paid for by a Russian-linked PAC; this is true and not disputed
    - Trump, Kushner, Sessions, and others are rumored to have met privately with Kislyak and ambassadors from countries who were part of the Rosneft oil deal
    - After the deal went through, Trump stood to make millions from liquidated shares in Rosneft


    nothing about it seems to far-fetched

    The actual kicker of the story is the claim that Russia "sold" Trump 0.5% of the oil/gas company in exchange for lifting sanctions.
    If that's true, and anyone ever finds proof of it... but it could also just be a made up accusation.

    The current story link is that Sessions did not disclose to Congress that he met with Kislyak at the Mayflower.

    Everything about the Mayflower thing just looks suspicious and sketchy.

    The thing with the Rosneft deal is that no one knows shit about it.

    So I am extra dubious of any claim that actually tries to put a number on it.

    This is a good article, and at least makes it clear that a deal of the sort described is possible if currently not provable due to financial paperwork shenanigans. Also possible it's completely unrelated, I'm sure there are many things worth hiding in international oil deals with countries under sanctions.

    My shot in the dark is that some Kushner LLC (fun fact from his financial disclosure: he's technically the president/head of hundreds of LLCs) owns, through god knows how many layers of remove, some portion of Rosneft stock that was acquired within the past year. No backing for that beyond suspicion and ongoing news, but it would fit with what we do know. Of course, lots of things would.

    Whether Trump knows about any of this somehow remains an open question.

    Edit: My wife and I decided to put together a crazy conspiracy board about all this for a laugh, so forgive me if that kind of thinking is getting to be a little too natural. I blame it on reality.

    It definitely brings up questions that Mueller should be asking.
    If it was just a business deal, and not political, why have multiple campaign staff there?
    Why would a person in real estate suddenly want such a large chunk of oil assets, or why would the sellers bring a face-to-face offer directly to such a person, rather than any number of other investors?
    If it was a legal deal, why repeatedly claim you have no business dealings with the Russian government?
    If Trump himself wasn't getting in on the deal, why involve a US presidential presumptive nominee in a business deal that doesn't involve the US?

    Even ignoring the serious tit-for-tat dropping sanctions espionage/collusion claim, if such a deal happened, you have a presidential candidate making large payments directly to a foreign government, that they failed to disclose and subsequently repeatedly lied about. And violated international sanctions in the process.

    There is no evidence the meeting at the Mayflower was a business deal, or that Rosneft came up at all. Your questions all seem to stem from the assumption that it was.

    It could have been, but no one has presented evidence of this.

    I urge everyone to tread carefully and remain critical of these theories, least we become the Benghazi trolls we despise.

    ArbitraryDescriptor on
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Caution is always welcome, but there is way more smoke and actual wrong doing here than ever was in the 8 million hearings on benghazi.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    SavantSavant Simply Barbaric Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Tube wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    Am I reading this wrong or did Sessions just unambiguously admit to perjury

    What specifically are you reading? Because re: Senate confirmation, yes he admitted to not admitting to two known contacts with Kislyak.

    This would be a third that was not known of at the time, and I've not seen a comment from him on it.

    This is what I was reading. It sounds pretty serious to me, but I don't know the rules around those hearings.

    I'm not sure if he admitted to perjury, but it's been known for awhile that he committed perjury at that confirmation hearing. He's obfuscated and lied and changed his story several times since then, and realistically he should be at very least disbarred if not prosecuted, but this process has been moving slowly and the Republicans have a vested interest in not making it move too much faster.

    Savant on
  • Options
    ArbitraryDescriptorArbitraryDescriptor changed Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    Caution is always welcome, but there is way more smoke and actual wrong doing here than ever was in the 8 million hearings on benghazi.

    There is, but the leap from "these people were in a room" to "these people agreed to do a specific thing 9 months later because some of them are tangientially related to it" is right up there with some of imagined Benghazi links that people still refuse to let go of.

    "People in the same room once" is the basis for all manner of Bilderberg/Illuminatti/BohemianGrove bullshit. It's a classic because it works.

  • Options
    SiliconStewSiliconStew Registered User regular
    There is no evidence the meeting at the Mayflower was a business deal, or that Rosneft came up at all. Your questions all seem to stem from the assumption that it was.

    It could have been, but no one has presented evidence of this.

    I urge everyone to tread carefully and remain critical of these theories, least we become the Benghazi trolls we despise.

    Yes, being speculation is why I included all those "if X's".

    Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
  • Options
    LabelLabel Registered User regular
    Tube wrote: »
    Am I reading this wrong or did Sessions just unambiguously admit to perjury

    ...What are you reading?

    Also, are you a Republican in Congress?

  • Options
    So It GoesSo It Goes We keep moving...Registered User regular
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    Because "the Mayflower Affair" sounds like an indy romantic dramedy film.

    Insufferable indie band.

    Can we cut down on the chatty joke stuff a bit, this thread is moving fast enough and needs to stay on topic.

    Thanks.

  • Options
    VeeveeVeevee WisconsinRegistered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    Tube wrote: »
    Am I reading this wrong or did Sessions just unambiguously admit to perjury

    What specifically are you reading? Because re: Senate confirmation, yes he admitted to not admitting to two known contacts with Kislyak.

    This would be a third that was not known of at the time, and I've not seen a comment from him on it.

    This is what I was reading. It sounds pretty serious to me, but I don't know the rules around those hearings.

    It is quite serious but who is going to prosecute him?

    Pretty sure it's within Mueller's mandate, so him presumably.

    Mueller oversees the FBI in this matter, I believe, so the Leahy/Franken request is essentially for him to do something.

    His mandate, IIRC, allows him to pursue any illegal activity resultant from the investigation, whether or not it relates to the Russians at all. So I would think this is within his purview to act on.

    It's more parallel with authority to draw on FBI resources than overseeing FBI. But otherwise this is my understanding as well. The letter says "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation." I think perjury to avoid being investigated should fit.

    Most importantly though, Mueller was given direct authority to prosecute anyone as he sees fit so we don't have to hope someone in authority will act on Mueller's findings.
    If the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate, the Special Counsel is
    authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters.

    Veevee on
  • Options
    DouglasDangerDouglasDanger PennsylvaniaRegistered User regular
    Between Sessions basically admitting on live TV that he committed perjury and Trump bragging in live TV that he's obstructing justice better than any other leader, ever, and its very successful and everyone loves him for it

    I'm wondering what the goddamned hold up is, Mueller

  • Options
    HevachHevach Registered User regular
    Between Sessions basically admitting on live TV that he committed perjury and Trump bragging in live TV that he's obstructing justice better than any other leader, ever, and its very successful and everyone loves him for it

    I'm wondering what the goddamned hold up is, Mueller

    No matter how much rope you give a weasel, always tie your own noose to be sure.

  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Between Sessions basically admitting on live TV that he committed perjury and Trump bragging in live TV that he's obstructing justice better than any other leader, ever, and its very successful and everyone loves him for it

    I'm wondering what the goddamned hold up is, Mueller

    Good police work is Lester Freamon not Herc.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    ArbitraryDescriptorArbitraryDescriptor changed Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Hevach wrote: »
    Between Sessions basically admitting on live TV that he committed perjury and Trump bragging in live TV that he's obstructing justice better than any other leader, ever, and its very successful and everyone loves him for it

    I'm wondering what the goddamned hold up is, Mueller

    No matter how much rope you give a weasel, always tie your own noose to be sure.

    Agonizingly, if this is just the low hanging fruit, it behooves him/us/justice-in-general to hold his cards and keep digging.

    That is a unfortunate string of idioms, but it has been a trying day, and I am too low on fucks to think of a more concise phrasing.

    E: Oh, sure, Ebum, just say it in one line and beat me to it. Referencing The Wire is always the right answer.

    ArbitraryDescriptor on
  • Options
    ChillyWillyChillyWilly Registered User regular
    Between Sessions basically admitting on live TV that he committed perjury and Trump bragging in live TV that he's obstructing justice better than any other leader, ever, and its very successful and everyone loves him for it

    I'm wondering what the goddamned hold up is, Mueller

    Good police work is Lester Freamon not Herc.
    CaptainAmerica1_zps8c295f96.JPG

    And yes...we don't want anyone running this investigation going off half-cocked on any of this.

    I know we all want Trump and/or his administration to be hit and hit hard ASAP so they can possibly be removed from power, but it's better to dot every possible i and cross every possible t before throwing out accusations at this level.

    In other words: You come at the king, you best not miss.

    PAFC Top 10 Finisher in Seasons 1 and 3. 2nd in Seasons 4 and 5. Final 4 in Season 6.
  • Options
    Marty81Marty81 Registered User regular
    Selner wrote: »
    Atomika wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Wait I'm out of the loop mayflower conspiracy?

    it's not anything really weird

    Basically the scuttlebutt is this:

    - Trump and his team held a private gathering/fundraiser paid for by a Russian-linked PAC; this is true and not disputed
    - Trump, Kushner, Sessions, and others are rumored to have met privately with Kislyak and ambassadors from countries who were part of the Rosneft oil deal
    - After the deal went through, Trump stood to make millions from liquidated shares in Rosneft


    nothing about it seems to far-fetched

    The actual kicker of the story is the claim that Russia "sold" Trump 0.5% of the oil/gas company in exchange for lifting sanctions.
    If that's true, and anyone ever finds proof of it... but it could also just be a made up accusation.

    The current story link is that Sessions did not disclose to Congress that he met with Kislyak at the Mayflower.

    Everything about the Mayflower thing just looks suspicious and sketchy.

    The thing with the Rosneft deal is that no one knows shit about it.

    So I am extra dubious of any claim that actually tries to put a number on it.

    This is a good article, and at least makes it clear that a deal of the sort described is possible if currently not provable due to financial paperwork shenanigans. Also possible it's completely unrelated, I'm sure there are many things worth hiding in international oil deals with countries under sanctions.

    My shot in the dark is that some Kushner LLC (fun fact from his financial disclosure: he's technically the president/head of hundreds of LLCs) owns, through god knows how many layers of remove, some portion of Rosneft stock that was acquired within the past year. No backing for that beyond suspicion and ongoing news, but it would fit with what we do know. Of course, lots of things would.

    Whether Trump knows about any of this somehow remains an open question.

    Edit: My wife and I decided to put together a crazy conspiracy board about all this for a laugh, so forgive me if that kind of thinking is getting to be a little too natural. I blame it on reality.

    It definitely brings up questions that Mueller should be asking.
    If it was just a business deal, and not political, why have multiple campaign staff there?
    Why would a person in real estate suddenly want such a large chunk of oil assets, or why would the sellers bring a face-to-face offer directly to such a person, rather than any number of other investors?
    If it was a legal deal, why repeatedly claim you have no business dealings with the Russian government?
    If Trump himself wasn't getting in on the deal, why involve a US presidential presumptive nominee in a business deal that doesn't involve the US?

    Even ignoring the serious tit-for-tat dropping sanctions espionage/collusion claim, if such a deal happened, you have a presidential candidate making large payments directly to a foreign government, that they failed to disclose and subsequently repeatedly lied about. And violated international sanctions in the process.

    There is no evidence the meeting at the Mayflower was a business deal, or that Rosneft came up at all. Your questions all seem to stem from the assumption that it was.

    It could have been, but no one has presented evidence of this.

    I urge everyone to tread carefully and remain critical of these theories, least we become the Benghazi trolls we despise.

    I don't remember the timeline exactly, but didn't the Steele dossier mention the Rosneft deal, with percentages and everything, before the Rosneft sale actually happened?

  • Options
    ArbitraryDescriptorArbitraryDescriptor changed Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Marty81 wrote: »
    Selner wrote: »
    Atomika wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Wait I'm out of the loop mayflower conspiracy?

    it's not anything really weird

    Basically the scuttlebutt is this:

    - Trump and his team held a private gathering/fundraiser paid for by a Russian-linked PAC; this is true and not disputed
    - Trump, Kushner, Sessions, and others are rumored to have met privately with Kislyak and ambassadors from countries who were part of the Rosneft oil deal
    - After the deal went through, Trump stood to make millions from liquidated shares in Rosneft


    nothing about it seems to far-fetched

    The actual kicker of the story is the claim that Russia "sold" Trump 0.5% of the oil/gas company in exchange for lifting sanctions.
    If that's true, and anyone ever finds proof of it... but it could also just be a made up accusation.

    The current story link is that Sessions did not disclose to Congress that he met with Kislyak at the Mayflower.

    Everything about the Mayflower thing just looks suspicious and sketchy.

    The thing with the Rosneft deal is that no one knows shit about it.

    So I am extra dubious of any claim that actually tries to put a number on it.

    This is a good article, and at least makes it clear that a deal of the sort described is possible if currently not provable due to financial paperwork shenanigans. Also possible it's completely unrelated, I'm sure there are many things worth hiding in international oil deals with countries under sanctions.

    My shot in the dark is that some Kushner LLC (fun fact from his financial disclosure: he's technically the president/head of hundreds of LLCs) owns, through god knows how many layers of remove, some portion of Rosneft stock that was acquired within the past year. No backing for that beyond suspicion and ongoing news, but it would fit with what we do know. Of course, lots of things would.

    Whether Trump knows about any of this somehow remains an open question.

    Edit: My wife and I decided to put together a crazy conspiracy board about all this for a laugh, so forgive me if that kind of thinking is getting to be a little too natural. I blame it on reality.

    It definitely brings up questions that Mueller should be asking.
    If it was just a business deal, and not political, why have multiple campaign staff there?
    Why would a person in real estate suddenly want such a large chunk of oil assets, or why would the sellers bring a face-to-face offer directly to such a person, rather than any number of other investors?
    If it was a legal deal, why repeatedly claim you have no business dealings with the Russian government?
    If Trump himself wasn't getting in on the deal, why involve a US presidential presumptive nominee in a business deal that doesn't involve the US?

    Even ignoring the serious tit-for-tat dropping sanctions espionage/collusion claim, if such a deal happened, you have a presidential candidate making large payments directly to a foreign government, that they failed to disclose and subsequently repeatedly lied about. And violated international sanctions in the process.

    There is no evidence the meeting at the Mayflower was a business deal, or that Rosneft came up at all. Your questions all seem to stem from the assumption that it was.

    It could have been, but no one has presented evidence of this.

    I urge everyone to tread carefully and remain critical of these theories, least we become the Benghazi trolls we despise.

    I don't remember the timeline exactly, but didn't the Steele dossier mention the Rosneft deal, with percentages and everything, before the Rosneft sale actually happened?

    It mentioned it as a brokerage fee incidental to the sale:
    A dossier with unverified claims about President Donald Trump's ties to Russia contained allegations that Igor Sechin, the CEO of Russia's state oil company, offered former Trump ally Carter Page and his associates the brokerage of a 19% stake in the company in exchange for the lifting of US sanctions on Russia.

    The dossier says the offer was made in July, when Page was in Moscow giving a speech at the Higher Economic School. The claim was sourced to "a trusted compatriot and close associate" of Sechin, according to the dossier's author, former British spy Christopher Steele.

    E: http://www.businessinsider.com/carter-page-trump-russia-igor-sechin-dossier-2017-1

    ArbitraryDescriptor on
  • Options
    CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/explanations-for-kushners-meeting-with-head-of-kremlin-linked-bank-dont-match-up/2017/06/01/dd1bdbb0-460a-11e7-bcde-624ad94170ab_story.html
    The White House and a Russian state-owned bank have very different explanations for why the bank’s chief executive and Jared Kushner held a secret meeting during the presidential transition in December.

    The bank maintained this week that the session was held as part of a new business strategy and was conducted with Kushner in his role as the head of his family’s real estate business. The White House says the meeting was unrelated to business and was one of many diplomatic encounters the soon-to-be presidential adviser was holding ahead of Donald Trump’s inauguration.
    The bank and the White House have declined to provide the exact date or location of the Kushner-Gorkov meeting, which was first reported in March by the New York Times.

    Flight data reviewed by The Washington Post suggests the meeting may have taken place on Dec. 13 or 14, about two weeks after Kushner’s encounter with Kislyak.


    A 19-seat twin-engine jet owned by a company linked to VEB flew from Moscow to the United States on Dec. 13 and departed from the Newark airport, outside New York City, at 5:01 p.m. Dec. 14, according to positional flight information provided by FlightAware, a company that tracks airplanes.

    The Post could not confirm whether Gorkov was on the flight, but the plane’s previous flights closely mirror Gorkov’s publicly known travels in recent months, including his trip to St. Petersburg this week.

    After leaving Newark on Dec. 14, the jet headed to Japan, where Putin was visiting on Dec. 15 and 16. The news media had reported that Gorkov would join the Russian president there.
    Gorkov was named to head VEB in February 2016, after eight years as a senior manager at Russia’s largest state-owned bank, Sberbank. While Gorkov was a deputy head of Sberbank, it was one of the sponsors of the 2013 Miss Universe Pageant in Moscow produced by Trump, who owned the pageant.
    Should I trust the Russian state-owned bank or the White House?

    That really shouldn't be hard, but I could see both being true.

    Couscous on
  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    It's not really a conspiracy until people are making conclusions based on flight records. It's a particular highlight of college football coaching searches.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    It's not really a conspiracy until people are making conclusions based on flight records. It's a particular highlight of college football coaching searches.

    The Oligarch who bought that home from Trump for 100 million? His private plane was in LA at the same time and place as Trump, coincidence? Sure. Then it was in NY at the same time and place as Trump? Also coincidence? Maybe?

    But then it was also in the middle of fucking nowhere North Carolina in a tiny place with a one runway airport same time as Trump. During the campaign.

    It was also in Miami after the election the same time Trump was at Maralago.

  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    It's not really a conspiracy until people are making conclusions based on flight records. It's a particular highlight of college football coaching searches.

    The Oligarch who bought that home from Trump for 100 million? His private plane was in LA at the same time and place as Trump, coincidence? Sure. Then it was in NY at the same time and place as Trump? Also coincidence? Maybe?

    But then it was also in the middle of fucking nowhere North Carolina in a tiny place with a one runway airport same time as Trump. During the campaign.

    It was also in Miami after the election the same time Trump was at Maralago.

    I have personally tracked the Domino's plane because their former CEO was our athletic director, so I'm not denigrating it too much. Just think it's funny.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    JuggernutJuggernut Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Edit: nevermind. Not relevant.

    Juggernut on
  • Options
    CaedwyrCaedwyr Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    .. Off Topic

    Caedwyr on
  • Options
    BlackDragon480BlackDragon480 Bluster Kerfuffle Master of Windy ImportRegistered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Couscous wrote: »
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/explanations-for-kushners-meeting-with-head-of-kremlin-linked-bank-dont-match-up/2017/06/01/dd1bdbb0-460a-11e7-bcde-624ad94170ab_story.html
    The White House and a Russian state-owned bank have very different explanations for why the bank’s chief executive and Jared Kushner held a secret meeting during the presidential transition in December.

    The bank maintained this week that the session was held as part of a new business strategy and was conducted with Kushner in his role as the head of his family’s real estate business. The White House says the meeting was unrelated to business and was one of many diplomatic encounters the soon-to-be presidential adviser was holding ahead of Donald Trump’s inauguration.
    The bank and the White House have declined to provide the exact date or location of the Kushner-Gorkov meeting, which was first reported in March by the New York Times.

    Flight data reviewed by The Washington Post suggests the meeting may have taken place on Dec. 13 or 14, about two weeks after Kushner’s encounter with Kislyak.


    A 19-seat twin-engine jet owned by a company linked to VEB flew from Moscow to the United States on Dec. 13 and departed from the Newark airport, outside New York City, at 5:01 p.m. Dec. 14, according to positional flight information provided by FlightAware, a company that tracks airplanes.

    The Post could not confirm whether Gorkov was on the flight, but the plane’s previous flights closely mirror Gorkov’s publicly known travels in recent months, including his trip to St. Petersburg this week.

    After leaving Newark on Dec. 14, the jet headed to Japan, where Putin was visiting on Dec. 15 and 16. The news media had reported that Gorkov would join the Russian president there.
    Gorkov was named to head VEB in February 2016, after eight years as a senior manager at Russia’s largest state-owned bank, Sberbank. While Gorkov was a deputy head of Sberbank, it was one of the sponsors of the 2013 Miss Universe Pageant in Moscow produced by Trump, who owned the pageant.
    Should I trust the Russian state-owned bank or the White House?

    That really shouldn't be hard, but I could see both being true.

    I'd say both cleave close to the truth, with the possibility of both being equally true and yet still not covering the entirety of the meeting and it's results.

    The telling thing is that this is not the first time that the WH and a Russian actor have admitted to an incident happening and not agreeing on the details or true purpose of said meetings, which could indicate a particular overall strategy to muddy the waters as much as possible and keep investigation teams trying to follow multiple simultaneous leads that are all varying degrees of removed from the true scent they should be driving on.

    BlackDragon480 on
    No matter where you go...there you are.
    ~ Buckaroo Banzai
  • Options
    Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    Remember when Putin said Russia didn't have anything to do with fucking around in the election? Well, oopsie!



    New York Magazine/GQ/Mother Jones/HuffPost Contributing Writer
    Shifting from his previous blanket denials, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia suggested on Thursday that “patriotically minded” private Russian hackers could have been involved in cyberattacks last year that meddled in the United States presidential election.

    Comey testifying is scaring somebody.

  • Options
    MvrckMvrck Dwarven MountainhomeRegistered User regular
    Viskod wrote: »
    It's not really a conspiracy until people are making conclusions based on flight records. It's a particular highlight of college football coaching searches.

    The Oligarch who bought that home from Trump for 100 million? His private plane was in LA at the same time and place as Trump, coincidence? Sure. Then it was in NY at the same time and place as Trump? Also coincidence? Maybe?

    But then it was also in the middle of fucking nowhere North Carolina in a tiny place with a one runway airport same time as Trump. During the campaign.

    It was also in Miami after the election the same time Trump was at Maralago.

    I have personally tracked the Domino's plane because their former CEO was our athletic director, so I'm not denigrating it too much. Just think it's funny.

    Now I want to see the Russian recruiting big board of which potential campaign and administration members would make the best assets and double agents.

  • Options
    Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    Remember when Putin said Russia didn't have anything to do with fucking around in the election? Well, oopsie!



    New York Magazine/GQ/Mother Jones/HuffPost Contributing Writer
    Shifting from his previous blanket denials, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia suggested on Thursday that “patriotically minded” private Russian hackers could have been involved in cyberattacks last year that meddled in the United States presidential election.

    Comey testifying is scaring somebody.

    As has been reported before, the way things work in Putin's Russia is that he doesn't have to personally order that things be done; he makes heavy use of organized crime and others wanting to trade "favors", with the result that it's all completely deniable.

  • Options
    GaddezGaddez Registered User regular
    Remember when Putin said Russia didn't have anything to do with fucking around in the election? Well, oopsie!



    New York Magazine/GQ/Mother Jones/HuffPost Contributing Writer
    Shifting from his previous blanket denials, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia suggested on Thursday that “patriotically minded” private Russian hackers could have been involved in cyberattacks last year that meddled in the United States presidential election.

    Comey testifying is scaring somebody.

    I would be honest to god shocked if this was him trying to cover his ass instead of deliberately stirring the pot to fuck with the US.

  • Options
    Mr RayMr Ray Sarcasm sphereRegistered User regular
    So what he's saying is that the hackers were also on vacation?

  • Options
    GoodKingJayIIIGoodKingJayIII They wanna get my gold on the ceilingRegistered User regular
    Between Sessions basically admitting on live TV that he committed perjury and Trump bragging in live TV that he's obstructing justice better than any other leader, ever, and its very successful and everyone loves him for it

    I'm wondering what the goddamned hold up is, Mueller

    Good police work is Lester Freamon not Herc.

    For this reference, I will always love you.

    Battletag: Threeve#1501; PSN: Threeve703; Steam: 3eeve
  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Marshall has a 21 tweet thing up that's interesting. I'll briefly summarize.

    Before Flynn was fired, a pro-Russian Ukrainian parliamentarian met with Michael Cohen, one of the various targets of the investigations at this point and Trump's lawyer/friend/confidante (to the extent he has those last two)/surrogate. Ukrainian dude gave Cohen documents with instructions to hand deliver them to Flynn. Supposedly it was a "peace plan" but that never made sense because of the simplicity of the Russian desired peace. Cohen initially said he did, but then changed his story and never did. The only reason to hand deliver such a thing is to keep it secure. Especially from the American government. So what's in that document and where is it?

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    SavantSavant Simply Barbaric Registered User regular
    edited June 2017
    Marshall has a 21 tweet thing up that's interesting. I'll briefly summarize.

    Before Flynn was fired, a pro-Russian Ukrainian parliamentarian met with Michael Cohen, one of the various targets of the investigations at this point and Trump's lawyer/friend/confidante (to the extent he has those last two)/surrogate. Ukrainian dude gave Cohen documents with instructions to hand deliver them to Flynn. Supposedly it was a "peace plan" but that never made sense because of the simplicity of the Russian desired peace. Cohen initially said he did, but then changed his story and never did. The only reason to hand deliver such a thing is to keep it secure. Especially from the American government. So what's in that document and where is it?

    There was a story about that the came out in roughly the same timeframe that Flynn was going down, and it was one of the earliest of the outrageous Russia connection stories that leaked. The details of the "peace deal" was to basically give Russia most of what it wanted in Ukraine with a very thin veneer of plausibility. It was to have them blackmail the current Ukrainian leader to force him out, install the pro-Russian Ukrainian leader as a new Russian puppet a la Yanukovych, and then he would "lease" Crimea to the Russians to resolve the crisis and give cover for dropping the sanctions against Russia.

    I'm not sure how seriously we've taken this on this side of the pond, but the Ukrainian guy involved got charged with treason in Ukraine.

    Edit: I remember being shocked how fast it fell down the memory hole at the time. Because roping Flynn into a plot to overthrow the Ukrainian government and install a Russian puppet was so outrageous. Maybe less shocking now that we know that the compromise and corruption of Trump's crew runs very deep.

    Savant on
  • Options
    ElJeffeElJeffe Roaming the streets, waving his mod gun around.Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    So regarding the Mayflower conspiracy, is it accurate to assert the following things as fact?

    - Trump, Sessions, various other "persons of interest", and a handful of foreign ambassadors were at the Mayflower during this campaign event.
    - Each of the ambassadors in question represent countries known to be involved in the Rosneft deal.
    - The Trump campaign changed the venue of this campaign event from a larger, more secure place with no private meeting rooms to a smaller, less secure place WITH private meeting rooms, but cited "we need a bigger place" as the justification for the change.
    - Immediately after the alleged meeting, trump laid out his plan to build a stronger, friendlier alliance with Russia.

    Anything in that list that isn't verified fact? I'm just trying to establish a baseline here.

    I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
  • Options
    ViskodViskod Registered User regular
    No that's pretty much it.

This discussion has been closed.