Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

Stallingrad

If Kavanagh is innocent as claimed he won't object to a polygraph then?

pixelburp

On a totally unrelated note: it's borderline obscene how old some of these senators are; Chuck Grassley & Diane Feinstein are both 85, Orin Hatch a mere 84. Mitch McConnell is a spring chicken at 76.

That a bunch of octogenarians are in a position to make decisions that'll (most definitely) outlive them all by a bare handful of years is insane. There really should be some kind of term limit for senators & congressional members, but 'snouts in the trough' and all that jazz.

Zubeneschamali

Stallingrad wrote: »

If Kavanagh is innocent as claimed he won't object to a polygraph then?

No reason why he should even if he's guilty - polygraphs are as scientific as astrology.

everlast75

pixelburp wrote: »

On a totally unrelated note: it's borderline obscene how old some of these senators are; Chuck Grassley & Diane Feinstein are both 85, Orin Hatch a mere 84. Mitch McConnell is a spring chicken at 76.

That a bunch of octogenarians are in a position to make decisions that'll (most definitely) outlive them all by a bare handful of years is insane. There really should be some kind of term limit for senators & congressional members, but 'snouts in the trough' and all that jazz.

Stats:

Race: 100% White
Gender: 100% Men
Avg. Age: 68 Years Old

Democrat Representation on Senate Judiciary Committee

Stats:

Race: 70% White, 30% AA/Asian
Gender: 60% Men, 40% Women
Avg. Age: 55 Years Old

Penn

pixelburp wrote: »

On a totally unrelated note: it's borderline obscene how old some of these senators are; Chuck Grassley & Diane Feinstein are both 85, Orin Hatch a mere 84. Mitch McConnell is a spring chicken at 76.

That a bunch of octogenarians are in a position to make decisions that'll (most definitely) outlive them all by a bare handful of years is insane. There really should be some kind of term limit for senators & congressional members, but 'snouts in the trough' and all that jazz.

John Oliver had a section a few weeks ago in Last Week Tonight about how America is one of the only countries (if not, the only country, I can't remember exactly), where being on the Supreme Court is a lifetime appointment. Everywhere else has term limits of around 20 years, meaning nominations to the Supreme Court are cyclical and don't depend on if one of them dies or retires. It means there's generally a greater balance of conservative v liberal (eg if it was introduced in America, each President would get two nominations to the SCOTUS during each term).

Whatever about Senators or Congressmen, at least there are chances to elect them out of office every few years. It is crazy that it's a lifetime appointment for the Supreme Court.

Penn

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No reason why he should even if he's guilty - polygraphs are as scientific as astrology.

Agreed, however no reason he shouldn't want the FBI to investigate the incident as that would almost certainly prove his innocence, if indeed he is.

As a Judge and potential Supreme Court Judge, he hardly has no faith in the Justice System to find the truth.

mcmoustache

The New York Times has an interesting read today titled The Plot to Subvert an Election: Unravelling the Russia Story So Far. I haven't read it all as yet but it did contain the following piece of information about the speech at the Mayflower that I was unaware of.

In late April, Mr. Trump gave his first major foreign policy address in the ballroom of a historic Washington hotel. Some of the speech was a familiar litany of Republican policy positions — hawkish warnings to Iran and pledges to be tough on terrorism. But midway through the speech, as Russia’s ambassador to the United States watched from the front seats, Mr. Trump pivoted and said the United States and Russia should look for areas of mutual interest.

“Common sense says this cycle, this horrible cycle of hostility, must end, and ideally will end soon,” he said.



“That’s the signal to meet,” Mr. Papadopoulos wrote in an email to his Russian foreign ministry contact that evening, meaning that Mr. Trump’s favorable comments about Russia suggested he might be interested in meeting Mr. Putin.

Just one day earlier, Professor Mifsud had told the campaign aide about a possible gift from Moscow: thousands of hacked emails that might damage Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy.

If events happened as described in the article, this is starting to look like a quid-pro-quo. It would also demonstrate that Trump was aware of this and that it wasn't just others in his campaign who may have worked with the Russians unknown to him. For anyone not familiar with the RNC 2016 convention at the Mayflower, this is where the words "lethal defensive weapons" inexplicably got removed from the party platform on Ukraine. It's also where Sessions had one of those hard to recall meetings with Kislyak. Mueller had already been investigating this event.

Oddly enough, Paul Manafort was the chairman of the campaign at this time and is currently singing like a bird in a pardon-proof arrangement.

RIGOLO

mcmoustache wrote: »

The New York Times has an interesting read today titled The Plot to Subvert an Election: Unravelling the Russia Story So Far. I haven't read it all as yet but it did contain the following piece of information about the speech at the Mayflower that I was unaware of.




If events happened as described in the article, this is starting to look like a quid-pro-quo. It would also demonstrate that Trump was aware of this and that it wasn't just others in his campaign who may have worked with the Russians unknown to him. For anyone not familiar with the RNC 2016 convention at the Mayflower, this is where the words "lethal defensive weapons" inexplicably got removed from the party platform on Ukraine. It's also where Sessions had one of those hard to recall meetings with Kislyak. Mueller had already been investigating this event.

Oddly enough, Paul Manafort was the chairman of the campaign at this time and is currently singing like a bird in a pardon-proof arrangement.

Another NY Times non-story about a possible wink and a nod and Russian collusion.

The REAL Russia collusion story this week (and probably for the last 12-24 months as Ive mentioned it before) was the resignation of DANSKE Bank Chairman after his Danske bank Estonia branch was found to have laundered 200Billion in Russian money ... yes folks $200billion thru its most profitable branch in Estonia , where 7,000 of its 15,000 customers are thought to be 'suspect' .

Danske Bank chief resigns over €200bn money-laundering scandal
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/sep/19/danske-bank-chief-resigns-over-money-laundering-scandal

Also the US Treasury, SEC and Justice deparments are initiating probes.
Personally Im of the opinion these probes are well under way and are already flushed out the culprits..


And yes you guessed under whos watch did all this take place, when did 200billion flow out of Russia thru major Intl banks.. Obama, HRC etc ...
And under whos watch is this being investigated and sorted out ... POTUS 45 Administration

US probing possible Russian money laundering through Denmark’s largest bank: report

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/406840-us-probing-possible-russian-money-laundering-through-denmarks?amp=1


All this fluff about some NYTimes clickbait headline containing alot of supposition and what ifs and if things happened this way ...

Once again the anti-Trumpers showing how little the care about the actual crime and are really only interested in getting Trump out of office, even if its some article written on a slow news day with Trump and russia in the headline.

The sooner the neo-left anti-Trump liberals stopped clicking on that rubbish, and started reading and clicking on real articles about real RUSSIA collusion the sooner that mess could be cleaned up.

And if your so concerned about Russian collusion head up to the Swedish and now Danish embassys and ask wtf their banks were playing at...

Penn

RIGOLO wrote: »

And yes you guessed under whos watch did all this take place, when did 200billion flow out of Russia thru major Intl banks.. Obama, HRC etc ...

Danish bank laundering Russian money through Estonian branch... I can't believe Hilary let this happen...

swampgas

RIGOLO wrote: »

The REAL Russia collusion story this week (and probably for the last 12-24 months as Ive mentioned it before) was the resignation of DANSKE Bank Chairman after his Danske bank Estonia branch was found to have laundered 200Billion in Russian money ... yes folks $200billion thru its most profitable branch in Estonia , where 7,000 of its 15,000 customers are thought to be 'suspect' .

Amateurs. Everyone knows the best way to launder Russian money is through Trump Tower.

everlast75

RIGOLO wrote: »

.......

No comment on the SCOTUS issue then?

RIGOLO

everlast75 wrote: »

No comment on the SCOTUS issue then?

what do you mean no comment ?
I said what I thought last week... has there been a material change to the situation ... I dont think so.

RIGOLO wrote: »

Kavanaugh will fight this all the way.
I dont see him stepping aside. He wont taint a distinguished career by letting this accusation go unchallenged.

In his hearings he came across as someone who had admired the Supreme Court, understood its significance and was more than happy to take all the barbs and even verbal attacks on his family to take his seat on it . With all that he aint going to let this alleged attack destroy his one and only chance to get a SCOTUS seat for life.

And Im expecting another masterclass from Chuck Grassley and the other senior and experienced GOP Senate Judicial Committee members to navigate thru this . Trump will lap this up, use it as ammo for his tweets and fight for his guy to get appointed. It sure will be interesting.

Diane Feinstein has done what she does best, enabling the opposition, this has back fired on her completely . Similar to how she led the DNC to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in the 2016 Presidential election, she has blown it again. She comes out looking really bad for having withheld this info and the timing of its release, she will get slaughtered by her constituents in an already tight California senate race.

If she had really wanted to derail the appointment , I think the best time to launch this bombshell would have been during the hearings, disrupt them then, it would have forced a postponement , thrown it into disarray and would even have given the Dems time to read the 42,000 pages they were dumped with (by the way did they ever get through them)


Either way Feinsten has shown once again shes not cut out for modern political landscape. Heres hoping she maintains her top spot within they DNC, they aint going anywhere fast with her at the helm.

Stallingrad

RIGOLO wrote: »

And yes you guessed under whos watch did all this take place, when did 200billion flow out of Russia thru major Intl banks.. Obama, HRC etc ...
And under whos watch is this being investigated and sorted out ... POTUS 45 Administration

And if your so concerned about Russian collusion head up to the Swedish and now Danish embassys and ask wtf their banks were playing at...

Last time I checked it was not Obama and HRC's job to oversee banks in Sweden and Denmark. Or can I blame Obama for the Anglo crisis here too?

mcmoustache

RIGOLO wrote: »

The REAL Russia collusion story this week (and probably for the last 12-24 months as Ive mentioned it before) was the resignation of DANSKE Bank Chairman after his Danske bank Estonia branch was found to have laundered 200Billion in Russian money ... yes folks $200billion thru its most profitable branch in Estonia , where 7,000 of its 15,000 customers are thought to be 'suspect' .

Are you sure you want to bring up money laundering and foreign banks?

everlast75

RIGOLO wrote: »

what do you mean no comment ?
I said what I thought last week... has there been a material change to the situation ... I dont think so.

Yes there has.

1) She has requested the FBI Involvement.
2) Trump has come out with the BS line that they don't investigate stuff like that (they do) and that they have no interest in doing so (the WH has to request it - they have voiced no reluctance to do anything)
3) Hatch has set a deadline for Friday for her to confirm whether she will attend on Monday or not before the Committee.
4) There is now the name of an apparent witness.

Do Trump's lies sit easy with you?
Do the Reps' conduct seem hypocritical in terms of how they treated Obama's nomination?
Do you think she has made a credible accusation?

RIGOLO

Penn wrote: »

Danish bank laundering Russian money through Estonian branch... I can't believe Hilary let this happen...

Stallingrad wrote: »

Last time I checked it was not Obama and HRC's job to oversee banks in Sweden and Denmark. Or can I blame Obama for the Anglo crisis here too?

It doesnt appear either of you know what the general end point of money laundering is, converting it to a more useable easily moved currency like $$$$
So the bulk of this 200Billion ended up a $$ with alot of it shifted thru US banks
Like I said all happened under Obamas and HRCs watch

The Trump Administration is cleaning up that mess and earlier this year effectively shut down one bank involved in Russian money laundering by getting the US Treasury to revoke access to dollar funding whihc is the death nail for a Intl bank.

Why The U.S. Treasury Killed A Latvian Bank
https://www.forbes.com/sites/francescoppola/2018/02/28/why-the-u-s-treasury-killed-a-latvian-bank/#6ef3c2357adc

So yes the 200Billion in money laundering did happen on Obama and Hilarys watch and it was something the US Treasury should have been monitoring .

But dont let your anti-Trump bias get in the way of an ill-informed quip.

mcmoustache wrote: »

Are you sure you want to bring up money laundering and foreign banks?

Sure I do, its far better than bringing up slow news day anti-Trump Russia blah blah blah click bait.

RIGOLO

everlast75 wrote: »

Yes there has.

1) She has requested the FBI Involvement.
2) Trump has come out with the BS line that they don't investigate stuff like that (they do) and that they have no interest in doing so (the WH has to request it - they have voiced no reluctance to do anything)
3) Hatch has set a deadline for Friday for her to confirm whether she will attend on Monday or not before the Committee.
4) There is now the name of an apparent witness.

Do Trump's lies sit easy with you?
Do the Reps' conduct seem hypocritical in terms of how they treated Obama's nomination?
Do you think she has made a credible accusation?

Theres not material change. Its all he said she said , click bait stuff
It was all pretty much out there when I made my comments on the issue.

Lets see what next week brings.
For now Im sticking with my bet on Grassley and the GOP to navigate thru this , for Kavanaugh to fight it and for the confirmation to go ahead as planned, but I think I already said that ..twice.

Igotadose

RIGOLO wrote: »

So yes the 200Billion in money laundering did happen on Obama and Hilarys watch and it was something the US Treasury should have been monitoring .

Not sure HRC was in the government during this time, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, seems like the worst actions by this bank were going on in 2014 if you read the complaint.

So, are you saying no banks were dealt with during the previous administration? And if you read the Forbes article, they've been going after this bank since 2015.

It takes time to prove things (well, except in Trumpworld). Now that they have, fair play to the Dept. of the Treasury for shutting this criminal enterprise down. Next up should be the Trump corporation.

But dont let your anti-Trump bias get in the way of an ill-informed quip.

And, please keep digging for what you think are good things this administration are doing. What about the 1500 missing children in the news? Collateral damage?

mcmoustache

RIGOLO wrote: »

Sure I do, its far better than bringing up slow news day anti-Trump Russia blah blah blah click bait.

I'm not sure that you understand what clickbait is. You should check out this article on clickbait. It contains examples of many different types and number 4 will SHOCK you.

everlast75

RIGOLO wrote: »

Theres not material change. Its all he said she said , click bait stuff
It was all pretty much out there when I made my comments on the issue.

Lets see what next week brings.
For now Im sticking with my bet on Grassley and the GOP to navigate thru this , for Kavanaugh to fight it and for the confirmation to go ahead as planned, but I think I already said that ..twice.

I agree - it is all "he said she said" at the moment. So are you saying that she should attend before the committee, as should he and that should be that?

I mentioned the potential for the FBI to get involved? Would you agree?

Do you not wonder why the nominee doesn't want the FBI involved?

Do you not think the potential witness should be compelled to attend, insofar as he has voiced his reluctance to do so?

Do you think there should be a cloud hanging over the nomination of a SC justice, or that it should happen now?

Add a little depth to your posts. Maybe we can understand where you are coming from a little better that way?

Stallingrad

mcmoustache wrote: »

and number 4 will SHOCK you.

Lol! Bravo.

demfad

RIGOLO wrote: »

The Trump Administration is cleaning up that mess and earlier this year effectively shut down one bank involved in Russian money laundering by getting the US Treasury to revoke access to dollar funding whihc is the death nail for a Intl bank.

From your link it appears that GW Bush's patriot act was what was invoked:

FinCEN’s notice says that it intends “to prohibit the opening or maintaining of a correspondent account in the United States for, or on behalf of, ABLV Bank, AS.” This is the fifth and most severe of the “special measures” provided for under Section 113 of the Patriot Act. It can only be imposed with the agreement of the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and after very careful consideration of the consequences for the United States.

I have a feeling that FinCEN and Trump are not friends.

There are probably hundreds of examples but the indictment of Sam Patten for not registering as a foreign agent when he used cutouts to move Russian and Ukranian money to teh TRump inauguration would be a recent one.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/31/paul-manafort-sam-patten-charged-cambridge-analytica



Also, It looks like Trump couldn't even keep massive wholesale money laundering out of his own projects:

https://www.ft.com/trumptoronto

This was a time when the former Soviet Union’s newly minted oligarchs were seeking foreign havens for their wealth. By 2008, Trump’s son, Donald Jr, was telling a real estate conference: “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets . . . We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.” Some of this came through sales of individual units in Trump-branded properties, where Trump was sometimes entitled to a cut. 


An alleged Kazakh money-laundering network channelled millions through apartment sales at the Trump SoHo; a Russian oligarch bought a Palm Beach estate from Trump in 2008 for $95m, more than double what Trump had paid for it four years earlier; in Florida, 63 Russians, some with political connections, spent $100m buying property at seven Trump-branded luxury towers, Reuters established. The money was not exclusively from the former Soviet Union: at the Trump Panama, some of it allegedly belonged to Latin American drug traffickers.

Manic Moran

Penn wrote: »

As a Judge and potential Supreme Court Judge, he hardly has no faith in the Justice System to find the truth.

That’s not his department as a judge, and especially not at the Supreme Court level, where matters of fact very rarely come up. (That is usually dealt with by jury trial at lower level). His role is to ensure that process is followed and that laws are interpreted correctly. If someone is guilty as sin, but correct processes were not followed in the prosecution, he, and any other reputable judge, would have no problem with releasing the charged man. Truth isn’t supposed to matter to SCOTUS, only law.

On other matters, Poland has said it will front up to $2bn for Fort Trump to be built in their country. They have been pushing this for about a decade now. The Baltic States are all for it. It would be in line with the current increase in permanent US military presence in Europe. (Whatever the Poles call it, it is not in line with standard US practice to name a foreign base in such a manner)

mcmoustache

Manic Moran wrote: »

On other matters, Poland has said it will front up to $2bn for Fort Trump to be built in their country. They have been pushing this for about a decade now. The Baltic States are all for it. It would be in line with the current increase in permanent US military presence in Europe. (Whatever the Poles call it, it is not in line with standard US practice to name a foreign base in such a manner)

It's very understandable that they would want it. It basically secures their future against Russian holiday makers.

The offer of naming it after Trump is a fairly transparent attempt to massage his ego. They've obviously learned, either from their own intelligence agencies' profile on him or from just paying attention to the news that this is how you get Trump to do what you want. This might just work.

eire4

everlast75 wrote: »

I agree - it is all "he said she said" at the moment. So are you saying that she should attend before the committee, as should he and that should be that?

I mentioned the potential for the FBI to get involved? Would you agree?

Do you not wonder why the nominee doesn't want the FBI involved?

Do you not think the potential witness should be compelled to attend, insofar as he has voiced his reluctance to do so?

Do you think there should be a cloud hanging over the nomination of a SC justice, or that it should happen now?

Add a little depth to your posts. Maybe we can understand where you are coming from a little better that way?

The FBI angle is especially interesting I think. My understanding is if a person lies in questioning to the FBI it is a felony and you likely go to jail. So it is very interesting to me that one person wants to involve and talk to the FBI while the other side and his friend do not.

Christy42

Manic Moran wrote: »

Penn wrote: »

As a Judge and potential Supreme Court Judge, he hardly has no faith in the Justice System to find the truth.

That’s not his department as a judge, and especially not at the Supreme Court level, where matters of fact very rarely come up. (That is usually dealt with by jury trial at lower level). His role is to ensure that process is followed and that laws are interpreted correctly. If someone is guilty as sin, but correct processes were not followed in the prosecution, he, and any other reputable judge, would have no problem with releasing the charged man. Truth isn’t supposed to matter to SCOTUS, only law.

On other matters, Poland has said it will front up to $2bn for Fort Trump to be built in their country. They have been pushing this for about a decade now. The Baltic States are all for it. It would be in line with the current increase in permanent US military presence in Europe. (Whatever the Poles call it, it is not in line with standard US practice to name a foreign base in such a manner)

Trump has been against a lot of stuff like NATO which this is similar too (and tried to sell Montenegro down the river of all places). I can see the Poles fears of Russia and this is actually a really clever way to get Trump to go against that stance (granted I have seen arguments that Trump is pro NATO and anti NATO. That is his gift, he is so unclear that people hear what they want).

Calina

The Danske story is fundamentally irrelevant to this thread and it does not preclude issues within the Trump campaign or the relationship between Trump's organisation and assorted government personnel in Russia. Invoking it is an attempt at distraction and whataboutery. If you want to discuss it, Rigolo, open a thread on it. But stop trying to distract from Trump by posting irrelevancies to this thread and falling it 'real news'.

Trump needs to go. His tax cut will force another economic mess and clean up and if he wanted a decent legacy he woukd do something serious about gun control. There is yet another shooting making international news.

Pelvis

Looks like Professor Ford is going to go ahead and testify next week.

A commentator on MSNBC made an interesting prediction. He thinks Kavanaugh won't go ahead with it, implying his eagerness to testify is a bit of a bluff, in the hope she wouldn't testify.

Obviously be won't want to potentially lie under oath, but there's also some odd entries of a sexual nature in his yearbook from school, which doesn't look good now, and which he may not want to be questioned on by Democrats.

I think he will testify, but you never know! One things for certain, it'll be a media circus!!

aloyisious

On the topic of things Don has done for the U.S. citizen, one branch has been listed here by people who don't always decry his Administration - health. I see on the CNN TV business report that the share price of one U.S. Co {Tilray] has gone up on the stock market following the decision to allow it import cannabis for medicinal and recreational use into the U.S. It seems that the FDA don't, at the moment, oppose it's use for those purposes. So what do U.S. residents posting here know of good things beneficial to U.S, citizens allowed on the medicinal front by Don's admin?

aloyisious

Pelvis wrote: »

Looks like Professor Ford is going to go ahead and testify next week.

A commentator on MSNBC made an interesting prediction. He thinks Kavanaugh won't go ahead with it, implying his eagerness to testify is a bit of a bluff, in the hope she wouldn't testify.

Obviously be won't want to potentially lie under oath, but there's also some odd entries of a sexual nature in his yearbook from school, which doesn't look good now, and which he may not want to be questioned on by Democrats.

I think he will testify, but you never know! One things for certain, it'll be a media circus!!

CNN mentioned that her lawyer had sent a letter to the senate to the effect that she would agree to testify next week, with terms and conditions. A major disagreement is that the committee insist it'll be next Monday and the Prof says next Monday is out. On an aside, it seems the citizens are taking sides on the issue with several dozen women protest-occupying what seems to be a senate location and being informed by uniformed officers that they will be arrested if they don't leave the building. Both principles and their families are reported to have received deaths threats.