Jump to content


DOJ Initial Russia Hearings


Recommended Posts


25 minutes ago, knapplc said:

Here's a really good article showing all the Russian money that went to Republican campaigns.

 

How Putin's oligarchs funneled money into GOP campaigns

 

Quote

In total, Blavatnik, Intrater, Shustorovich and Kukes made $10.4 million in political contributions from the start of the 2015-16 election cycle through September 2017, and 99 percent of their contributions went to Republicans. With the exception of Shustorovich, the common denominator that connects the men is their association with Vekselberg. Experts who follow the activities of Russian oligarchs told ABC News that they believe the contributions from Blavatnik, Intrater and Kukes warrant intense scrutiny because they have worked closely with Vekselberg.
 

Even if the donations by the four men associated with Russia ultimately pass muster with Mueller, one still has to wonder: Why did GOP PACs and other Trump-controlled funds take their money? Why didn't the PACs say, "Thanks, but no thanks," like the Republicans said to Shustorovich in 2000? Yes, it was legal to accept their donations, but it was incredibly poor judgment.

 

McConnell surely knew as a participant in high level intelligence briefings in 2016 that our electoral process was under attack by the Russians. Two weeks after the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence issued a joint statement in October 2016 that the Russian government had directed the effort to interfere in our electoral process, McConnell's PAC accepted a $1 million donation from Blavatnik's AI-Altep Holdings. The PAC took another $1 million from Blavatnik's AI-Altep Holdings on March 30, 2017, just 10 days after former FBI Director James Comey publicly testified before the House Intelligence Committee about Russia's interference in the election.

 

No way to both sides this one. Also tells you everything you need to know about McConnell's principles, or lack thereof.

 

Quote

The hybrid super-PAC, The Committee to Defend the President, was formed in 2013 under the name Stop Hillary PAC. It is managed by Dan Backer, the lead attorney who won the McCutcheon vs. Federal Election Commission case in 2014. The Supreme Court decision eliminated the cap on how much wealthy individuals can donate to federal candidates, parties and PACs in a single, two-year election cycle.

 

Like Bossie, Dan Backer helped to open the floodgates to millions of dollars of influence brought to bear on incumbents and their political challengers who are now pressured to kowtow to their donors with the biggest bank accounts, even if their billions are earned in Russian rubles.

 

Backer was born in Russia and emigrated with his family to the U.S. in 1978.

 

The changes to our campaign finance laws created an avenue for Russia to try to influence our elections. There are holes in our firewall and they aren't on the internet.

 

Fitting. It's embarrassing how full of holes our campaign finance system has become. I heard recently there is some desire to add a 7th member to the FEC, which would eliminate the stupid perpetual 3-3 partisan tie that renders it useless and unable to police anything. It's telling that the GOP unilaterally wants allow unlimited amounts of dark money from whomever as long as it lets them cling to power, and thus works toward those ends. There's mounting pressure from the rest of us to actually fix this monstrosity.

  • Plus1 6
Link to comment
21 hours ago, VectorVictor said:

 

Someone had corrected me before that Trump can't be found guilty of Treason based on the semantics of the legal definition. Collusion is the best we can get...

That only applies to criminal proceedings. Impeachment is a political process, so if the House drafts articles of impeachment that say "treason", then the trial in the Senate would be over "treason".

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

I love how there's someone that keeps eyerolling all of the actual citations and proof of wrongdoing, yet doesn't have the cojones to refute or defend the practice. 

 

It's like the ghost of RicFlair haunts these boards and eyerolls anything that doesn't conform with his (incorrect) reality. Whoooooooooooooooooo!!

  • Plus1 3
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
17 minutes ago, VectorVictor said:

I love how there's someone that keeps eyerolling all of the actual citations and proof of wrongdoing, yet doesn't have the cojones to refute or defend the practice. 

 

It's like the ghost of RicFlair haunts these boards and eyerolls anything that doesn't conform with his (incorrect) reality. Whoooooooooooooooooo!!

Yep, got to be Ric -   Funny how quiet he and others Trumpers have gotten since the 2018 election rebuttal. 

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment

12 hours ago, VectorVictor said:

I love how there's someone that keeps eyerolling all of the actual citations and proof of wrongdoing, yet doesn't have the cojones to refute or defend the practice. 

 

It's like the ghost of RicFlair haunts these boards and eyerolls anything that doesn't conform with his (incorrect) reality. Whoooooooooooooooooo!!

Facts have a liberal bias, and should be disregarded.

  • Plus1 3
  • Haha 5
Link to comment

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...