That russian oligarch that allegedly gave money to trumps lawyer gave money to the Clintons

Well seeing as how there are so many threads on this Russian oligarch that supposedly gave money to Trumps lawyer cohen, I thought there would be a great deal of interest into who else he gave money to.

I would just like to point out on those threads, many people really didnt acknowledge the fact that actually it was an American company that gave money to Cohen, and it may be controlled by this oligarch (his name is Vekselberg). And they also didnt seem to want to acknowledge that Trump actually has put this man on the list of russians sanctioned.

And most importantly, they seemed to want to imply that getting money from russians was evidence of a crime that needed investigated, but for some odd reason do not feel the same way about Bill Clinton meeting Putin in sercet and getting half a million dollars from a russian state bank.

But fine,. lets just focus on Vekselberg.

Would it surprise you to find out, that just like in almost every big instance that the anti trumpers site aas to trumps teams criminality, that the people involved are connected to the Clintons?

New emails show Clinton Foundation staff pushed Hillary Clinton's State Department to approve a meeting between Bill Clinton and a powerful Russian oligarch as her agency lined up investors for a project under his purview.

The Clintons' relationship with Viktor Vekselberg, the billionaire whose name appears in the documents, has taken on new significance amid an expanding criminal investigation into his company. Last week, authorities raided the offices of Vekselberg's firm, Renova Group, following allegations of bribery from several of Renova's subsidiaries.

...

Vekselberg's Renova Group has donated between $50,000 and $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation, donor records show. Another firm associated with Vekselberg, OC Oerlikon, donated $25,000 to the Clinton Foundation.

...

The former president's travel to Russia for the speech and potential meetings with Vekselberg and others came as Hillary Clinton's State Department labored to drum up interest in a technology-sharing project, led by Vekselberg, called Skolkovo.

...

Just one day after Hillary Clinton had a private phone call with John Chambers, CEO of Cisco, Medvedev met with Cisco executives in California. That same day, Vekselberg announced that Cisco and Boeing would invest in Skolkovo.

Both Cisco and Boeing are major Clinton Foundation donors. Cisco paid Bill Clinton $256,000 for a speech in Oct. 2010, just three months after Vekselberg's announcement that the firm would invest $1 billion in Skolkovo.

...

The Clinton's relationship to Vekselberg continued throughout Hillary Clinton's time at the State Department.

In 2012, Desai approached members of Hillary Clinton's staff to determine whether they would have "concerns" about Vekselberg's attendance at an upcoming Clinton Global Initiative meeting, according to emails Citizens United obtained last year.

Vekselberg was reportedly questioned a year later during a 2013 investigation of alleged corruption within Skolkovo.

Russian security officials raided the Moscow offices of Renova last week amid "allegations that executives in firms controlled by Vekselberg had bribed regional officials," according to a Reuters report.

www.washingtonexaminer.com...

Well look at that!

Now I have been assured by many anti trump people that Vekselberg giving money to trumps lawyers seems to be evidence of a crime, because he is a corrupt russian oligarch.

Well by that standard, please explain why him giving money to the Clitnons shouldn't also be evidence of a crime.

I assume we will now see raids on the Clinton foundations office, pen registries put on their phones, and the exact same treatment cohen has received from the FBI.

Oh thats right, we wont.

Because like every other case where trumps people have been gone after, its only worth charging or investigation people when they are trump people. Hillary people and others get to do the exact same things (failing to disclose as foreign lobbyist, lie to the fbi, etc.) and not be investigated in the same manner or charged.

But seeing as how the anti trump people have made like three threads on how dastardly Vekselberg is, and how shady it is for trumps lawyer to take money from him, I assume they will be in here any minute calling for a similar investigation into hillary for taking money from him.

a reply to: Grambler

I assume they will be in here any minute calling for a similar investigation into hillary for taking money from him.

The Russian guy seems like he donates to both campaigns to make sure he always is on the winning side. Many of the big corporations used to do that. Win -Win is better than Win-Lose. This doesn't have to be anything about Putin, just a businessman trying to insure his future by bribing political parties. Oops, I mean contributing to political parties.

originally posted by: notsure1
a reply to: Grambler

I assume they will be in here any minute calling for a similar investigation into hillary for taking money from him.

You might think they would come up with a Russian target to smear Trump with that Hillary wasn't involved with in the past....

That is probably really hard to do though.

a reply to: Grambler

I gave up trying to delineate/parse/explain situations like this to people.

They have an emotional investment in a narrative and that's it. To the parapets and let lose the arrows!!! All Hail!!!

I'm not sure what to call these folks. Depending on the subject, we are all guilty of it now and then I suppose.

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: FauxMulder

originally posted by: IAMTAT

lol

Hey guys , rumor has it that Putin actually has ties with the Kremlin ...so there is that

a reply to: Grambler

So you're saying that a current sitting president, a past president and a wannabe president are all guilty of associating with crooked billionaires?

Shocking.

Capitalism, just like any other "ism" is crooked. Politicians (even if you say Trump ain't one...don't kid yourself he really is) are crooked. The higher up they go, the more crooked they seem to get. Business as usual.

Next: "If my preferred leader is bad, your preferred leader is bad too" thread please...

a reply to: Grambler

So I guess that confirms it's shady.

Crazy how anytime the Clinton's are connected to something shady the thread skyrockets with flags but with Trump being connected with the same exact people the thread peters out almost immediately.

The one thread showing Trump's lawyer took money from these people is struggling to get 10 stars/flags and has been up since last night, this thread showing the same exact connection except to the Clinton's has been up maybe an hour and will be front page pretty soon. It really shows you the demographic around here these days.

Whataboutisms being enough to make it to the front page yet at the same time they are being vilified by the very same people unless they go in Trump's favor.

But Clinton. Thread #3,384.

The Clintons doing something doesn’t absolve Trump of the consequences of the same thing. No matter how much you wish it would.

If constantly railing at the Clintons is all you guys have, you don’t really have anything. That’s the simple truth that lies beyond this Great Wall of deflection.

a reply to: luthier

Of course it's shady, but in the world of backwards thinking two wrongs make a right. "Your guy did it so that means my guy is justified in doing the same thing!" Really strange logic going around these days.

Trump's lawyer received $200,000 from AT&T right before Trump's FCC chairman repealed net neutrality. Ever since net neutrality was repealed (something AT&T has been asking for) the donations to Cohen stopped. Tell me that isn't shady as hell.

People seem to be unwilling to see the reality of things, that anyone in the oval office is a crook including Trump.

a reply to: Grambler

I would just like to point out on those threads, many people really didnt acknowledge the fact that actually it was an American company that gave money to Cohen, and it may be controlled by this oligrach (his name is Vekselberg). And they also didnt seem to want to acknwoledge that Trump actaully has put this man on the list of russians sanctioned.

Trump didn't put anyone on any list personally — the list was compiled by the Treasury Dept. Also, as I mentioned in the other thread, one of Renova Group's notable holdings is in Rusal, which until last month, Oleg Deripaska was the CEO of (CEO of Rusal and EN+ through which he controlled Rusal). The Treasury Department has given EN+/Rusal an extension based on Deripaska stepping down and pledging to reduce his holdings. It's likely that Rusal is going to also avoid any tariffs because it turns out, we need their aluminum.

Without this reprieve from the Treasury Dept, Deripaska would likely lose the bulk of his fortune.

Yes, Columbus Nova is an American company but it's literally the US investment arm of Renova Group, of which its a subsidiary, which is not. It's also run by Vekselberg's cousin Intrator.

Now I have been assured by many anti trunmp people that Vekselberg giving money to trumps lawyers seems to be evidence of a crime, because he is a corrupt russian oligarch.

Well by that standard, please explain why him giving money to the Clitnons shouldnt al;so be evidnece of a crime.

I wouldn't say that it's evidence of a crime in of itself that Cohen received $500k from Columbus Nova. It *could* be depending on what it was paid for. There's also a significant difference between paying Cohen and donating to the CF which should be self-evident.

I assume we will now see raids on the Cltinon foundations office, pen regfistries put on their phones, and the exact same treatment cohen has received from the FBI.

Why would you assume that?

The details of these transactions come from Stormy Daniels's lawyer. We don't know why the FBI is investigating Cohen or what evidence they have so it doesn't really make sense to assume that it *must* be because of this business with Columbus Nova much less that other people should be raided because Cohen was.

This is where you keep reaching too far.

a reply to: underwerks

but missing the bigger picture seems to be your specialty. The reason that was brought up, is that the same level of interest doens't seem to be paid with the Clintons for the same event. Trump is under investigation and so is everyone he has ever known, but Bill and Hillary get to call it a "matter" and it's dismissed as no intent existed. See, if this was reversed, you would be angry I'd wager.

a reply to: network dude

If the roles were reversed you'd be glad that Clinton and everyone around her was being investigated for the exact same things.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Crazy how anytime the Clinton's are connected to something shady the thread skyrockets with flags but with Trump being connected with the same exact people the thread peters out almost immediately.

The one thread showing Trump's lawyer took money from these people is struggling to get 10 stars and has been up since last night, this thread showing the same exact connection except to the Clinton's has been up maybe an hour and will be front page pretty soon. It really shows you the demographic around here these days. Whataboutisms being enough to make it to the front page yet them being vilified unless going in Trump's favor.

Here's the thing: What you dismiss as "whataboutism" is actually a long-standing legal doctrine known as "common law," "case law", "legal precedent," and "equal application of the law," among other terms. And what it all basically means is that the same laws, legal processes, penalties and rights shall apply to everyone equally. As in no one is above the law.

I don't have to be a Trump supporter to know that this is all corrupt as sin. I've watched elected and un-elected corrupt critters play fast and loose the laws and regulations to give Hillary (and God only knows how many others) a free pass, then watched those same corrupt critters again play fast and loose with the rules to absolutely persecute a duly elected president for wholly contrived transgressions. And adding insult to injury, if you ask those who voted for him, it was overwhelmingly to "drain the swamp" of exactly these corrupt critters.

It's not just "whataboutism." It's the very foundation of our rule of law.

a reply to: Boadicea

In that case since OJ wasn't convicted of murder no one should ever be convicted of murder again. That's basically the argument I'm hearing here, that since the Clinton's got away with it then so should Trump.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

because half cocked BS is carried breathlessly to press just because it carries on the narrative.