NYT Bombsell: Papadopoulos not Dossier Behind FBI Launching Investigation

a reply to: darkbake

scandalous

Such a understatement. Collusion to murder, Bill Clintons drug running out of Mena Airport

en.wikipedia.org...,_Arkansas

Mena, Arkansas[edit] A number of allegations have been written about and several local, state, and federal investigations have taken place related to the alleged use of the Mena Intermountain Municipal Airport as a CIA drop point in large scale coc aine trafficking beginning in the early 1980s.[13]

Some conspiracy theories regarding the airport extend to alleging the involvement of figures such as Oliver North and former presidents George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton.[14] An investigation by the CIA's inspector general concluded that the CIA had no involvement in or knowledge of any illegal activities that may have occurred in Mena.

The report said that the agency had conducted a training exercise at the airport in partnership with another Federal agency and that companies located at the airport had performed "routine aviation-related services on equipment owned by the CIA".[15]

As if the CIA wouldn't be involved in drug running for their "off books" black projects - whilst Clinton was Governer

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
As if the CIA wouldn't be involved in drug running for their "off books" black projects - whilst Clinton was Governer

It goes back before that. Prior to becoming Governor of Arkansas Bill Clinton was the Attorney General of Arkansas.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Thanks - I remember reading of the Clintons shenanigans in a Magazine called Nexus - LOL and Darkbake thinks we get all our info from the net.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Well, I am listening to you guys - I can see how Hillary was a risky candidate to run.

a reply to: face23785

Did you even read your own article?

From YOUR article:

The ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, Democrat Maxine Waters of California, is leading a group of four House members that’s pressed Deutsche Bank to disclose the results of an internal review of its business relationship with Trump and his family. The Waters-led group wants to determine whether loans made to Trump and members of his family were backed by guarantees from the Russian government or were in any way connected to Russia. Deutsche Bank DB, -0.37% has so far declined to cooperate with congressional inquiries into its Trump-linked business.



Deutsche bank is fighting a congressional investigation why?

The rest of those "lenders" were

A) Not banks, but middle men firms. Where is Chase, Wells Fargo, UBS, etc. - Real banks? Only one is Duetsche and Duetsche refuses to cooperate.

B) Everything used as an example in the article is backed up by collateral, meaning "mortgages" which is certainly different than a line of credit that isn't secured, AND, the collateral would be tied in LLCs (which are how he bankrupts things and yet still personally retains assets). That is 100% different than a personal unsecured loan to Trump.

C) Deutsche is the one real bank, direct lending, the question posed is are those loans guaranteed by the Russian government or Russian oligarchs/banks.

D) He continues to refuse to release his tax returns, whether for him personally or all those LLCs, which would be much stronger evidence than a self-crafted "financial disclosure" bc the tax returns are signed with criminal penalties for lying, thus are much more likely to be complete and honest.

E) His excuse for not releasing his taxes is the audit, is simply a false excuse. There's no penalty or rule about releasing them if audited. So, why use a false excuse?

F) Right here is pretty damn strong evidence indicative of (not absolute proof) that Trump is "on the russian payroll" - these are transcripts (not denied) secretly taped in which Cong McCarthy says "Swear to God" he thinks Russians pay Trump, and Ryan et. al. laugh saying that's how they know they're among family. www.newyorker.com...


Let's say you're right. Let's just for the sake of argument say that Trump CAN get U.S. funding from U.S. banks, as opposed to the middle men pass throughs, please tell me why Eric Trump would say: www.wbur.org...

He said, 'Well, we don’t rely on American banks. We have all the funding we need out of Russia.' I said, 'Really?' And he said, 'Oh, yeah. We’ve got some guys that really, really love golf, and they’re really invested in our programs. We just go there all the time.' Now that was [a little more than] three years ago, so it was pretty interesting.

Why would Eric say that? Is that guy ALSO lying?

Do you deny that Trump sold a Florida property for twice the market value to a Russian billionaire? Why would a Russian billionaire buy a property at 2x market rate? To get Trump some money? To pay Trump to DO something while having a fraction of deniability? www.washingtonpost.com... tml?utm_term=.1052b7f9c89d Trump has admitted that fact.

Going back to the point, even if you're correct, it sure as h*** doesn't explain all these ties to Russians. Did Bush have ties? McCain? Romney? Why does Trump have Manafort, Flynn, Page, Tillerson ALL tied to Russia? Why does Trump admit he fired Comey over Russia? Why does Trump not have such ties with India? Saudi? China?

Isn't that odd? Combine it with Trump simply will NOT say a thing against Russia, it's just rather odd, is it not? Isn't it something that an American who will not support any candidate at all costs wants to see investigated?

But the investigator is already getting eviscerated. Why? Isn't that odd? An investigation report could clear Trump, easily, yet the investigator is already being said to be plotting a coup, some saying he should be fired. Why? Isn't that odd?

On and on and on it goes, and the Republicans and 33% of the country supports Trump at any cost whatsoever.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

And the Clintons have exactly what to do with the dossier and an investigation into Trump?

Let's just say you're right. Just to get it out of the way.

What does this have to do with whether Trump colluded with Russians?

Other than divert attention and say "Well, someone else is a bad guy, look at ...." which is a false argument to a question.

originally posted by: Scrubdog
a reply to: face23785

Did you even read your own article?

From YOUR article:

The ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, Democrat Maxine Waters of California, is leading a group of four House members that’s pressed Deutsche Bank to disclose the results of an internal review of its business relationship with Trump and his family. The Waters-led group wants to determine whether loans made to Trump and members of his family were backed by guarantees from the Russian government or were in any way connected to Russia. Deutsche Bank DB, -0.37% has so far declined to cooperate with congressional inquiries into its Trump-linked business.



Deutsche bank is fighting a congressional investigation why?

The rest of those "lenders" were

A) Not banks, but middle men firms. Where is Chase, Wells Fargo, UBS, etc. - Real banks? Only one is Duetsche and Duetsche refuses to cooperate.

B) Everything used as an example in the article is backed up by collateral, meaning "mortgages" which is certainly different than a line of credit that isn't secured, AND, the collateral would be tied in LLCs (which are how he bankrupts things and yet still personally retains assets). That is 100% different than a personal unsecured loan to Trump.

C) Deutsche is the one real bank, direct lending, the question posed is are those loans guaranteed by the Russian government or Russian oligarchs/banks.

D) He continues to refuse to release his tax returns, whether for him personally or all those LLCs, which would be much stronger evidence than a self-crafted "financial disclosure" bc the tax returns are signed with criminal penalties for lying, thus are much more likely to be complete and honest.

E) His excuse for not releasing his taxes is the audit, is simply a false excuse. There's no penalty or rule about releasing them if audited. So, why use a false excuse?

F) Right here is pretty damn strong evidence indicative of (not absolute proof) that Trump is "on the russian payroll" - these are transcripts (not denied) secretly taped in which Cong McCarthy says "Swear to God" he thinks Russians pay Trump, and Ryan et. al. laugh saying that's how they know they're among family. www.newyorker.com...


Let's say you're right. Let's just for the sake of argument say that Trump CAN get U.S. funding from U.S. banks, as opposed to the middle men pass throughs, please tell me why Eric Trump would say: www.wbur.org...

He said, 'Well, we don’t rely on American banks. We have all the funding we need out of Russia.' I said, 'Really?' And he said, 'Oh, yeah. We’ve got some guys that really, really love golf, and they’re really invested in our programs. We just go there all the time.' Now that was [a little more than] three years ago, so it was pretty interesting.

Why would Eric say that? Is that guy ALSO lying?

Do you deny that Trump sold a Florida property for twice the market value to a Russian billionaire? Why would a Russian billionaire buy a property at 2x market rate? To get Trump some money? To pay Trump to DO something while having a fraction of deniability? www.washingtonpost.com... tml?utm_term=.1052b7f9c89d Trump has admitted that fact.

Going back to the point, even if you're correct, it sure as h*** doesn't explain all these ties to Russians. Did Bush have ties? McCain? Romney? Why does Trump have Manafort, Flynn, Page, Tillerson ALL tied to Russia? Why does Trump admit he fired Comey over Russia? Why does Trump not have such ties with India? Saudi? China?

Isn't that odd? Combine it with Trump simply will NOT say a thing against Russia, it's just rather odd, is it not? Isn't it something that an American who will not support any candidate at all costs wants to see investigated?

But the investigator is already getting eviscerated. Why? Isn't that odd? An investigation report could clear Trump, easily, yet the investigator is already being said to be plotting a coup, some saying he should be fired. Why? Isn't that odd?

On and on and on it goes, and the Republicans and 33% of the country supports Trump at any cost whatsoever.

Trump is a good hearted man. Trump would not diss any country or any person without reason to do so.

Hey all, I got to this party late.

We're not all pretending this story is new and groundbreaking news, right? Because it's not.

But the idiots will lap it up like a dog will to puke. Sickening.

twitter.com... padopoulos-bombshell-completely-unravels-within-hours-publication%2F


So, I have to ask, has anyone brought up the fact that is 100% FAKE NEWS and that the author was already called out on it mere HOURS after the story was posted?

Wait, wait, wait...

THIS Maggie Haberman?

Of Podesta email- HRC campaign fame?

We have has [sic] a very good relationship with Maggie Haberman of Politico over the last year. We have had her tee up stories for us before and have never been disappointed. While we should have a larger conversation in the near future about a broader strategy for reengageing [sic] the beat press that covers HRC, for this we think our objective and do the most shaping by going to Maggie.

Timeline seems suspect, too...

But hey, it's in the New York Times and confirms my deeply-seated personal biases, so it must be true. That's how this works, right?

a reply to: Tempter

Thanks for posting that.
Poinr after point made there.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Many have fallen.

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: 3daysgone
a reply to: Scrubdog

The fact that Trump is sending munitions to Ukraine would seem to indicate that Putin does not have as much influence on Trump than the left thinks.

Now the left are believers in 4D chess to explain this. This is part of Putin and Trump's master plan to throw us off!

Or they could just admit they were wrong.

Who am I kidding?

Oh this is quiet chess the political chess match. The left and right. Both vying for the for control over the most powerful nation on earth.

originally posted by: darkbake

originally posted by: Christosterone
Jesus atlantean....

Y’all are all in on the Russia scandal....

So again, please explain how the Russians caused my wife, parents and I to vote trump...

Newsflash:
Hillary sucks

-Chris

So what gives you the idea that Hillary sucks, exactly? Did you read that online? Were you influenced by what you read online? The Russians propagated many false news stories about Hillary leading up to the election, and allegedly even hacked the DNC and released their e-mails in an attempt to discredit her more. Chances are, even if they didn't influence or amplify your anti-Hillary sentiments, it happened to some people.

Even if you read anti-Hillary stuff online that did not originate from Russia, it easily could have been influenced by disinformation or propoganda campaigns that started in Russia.

Understand this. Hillary lost in 2008. You can stop pretending she is a viable candidate now. Face it. Dems didn't want her in 2008, and they didn't want her in 2016. Their candidate, Bernie, got shafted to allow her holy highness to wreck the integrity, what little they had, of the DNC.
But you blinded sheep only want to see what narrative your Militarized Media Complex wants you to see. Truth be told, Hillary IS the reason I registered Republican. To vote against her. And this didn't STEM from her 2016 bid. I didn't vote for her '08. My turning point for her was her NY Senate speech. Up till that point, I would have voted for her. It was that Yankees comment she made. I was able to see right through her.

a reply to: rollanotherone

How do you feel about the laws the republicans are promoting and passing?

a reply to: theantediluvian

I thought this was already common knowledge, just like Trump associates popping up on surveillance of Russian agents and mobsters.

a reply to: rollanotherone

What gave you the impressions n that Clinton would not make a good president? Please be specific.

a reply to: theantediluvian
actually it was obama and lynch because trump won election so they tried making it look like trump stole election with ultimate goal trying to make congress and people overturn election but there was no truth to any of it otherwise there would have been something done by obama before trump took office when he could actually blocked it. the whole investigation is currently being run to defame the president because even if they found pictures of trump in shortpants holding a smoking rifle overlooking jfk's motorcade there is not jack they can do about it.

all of above is proven just by the fact that like every story about trump is from anon sources. anon sources= madeup ,fake.

a reply to: proteus33

Guys, ignore this. Drumpf will be impeached and perp walked any day now! Along with his entire family, Melania and Barron included! /s

a reply to: theantediluvian

all these anon sources but the one thing that sticks with me WHY HAS DEMOCRATS NEVER DENIED THE VERACITY OF THE STOLEN EMAILS AND WHY HAS THE CRIMES DISCLOSED BY THE STOLEN EMAILS NOT BEEN INVESTIGATED.

a reply to: butcherguy

These were the DNC emails. No one has ANY Hillary emails. So sorry charlie.