Apparently the first indictments are for Paul Manafort and, his ex-business partner, Rick Gates.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
First charges filed in Mueller investigation
- Thread starter Baptist Believer
- Start date
Analysis | The ‘dossier’ and the uranium deal: A guide to the latest allegations
The Uranium deal
Background: In 2010, Rosatom, the Russian nuclear energy agency, acquired a controlling stake in Uranium One, a Canadian-based company that had mining licenses for about 20 percent of U.S. uranium extraction capacity. The agreement was approved by the Obama administration when Clinton was secretary of state.
Frank Giustra, a Canadian mining financier and a major contributor to the Clinton Foundation, had sold a company, UrAsia, to Uranium One in 2007. Individuals related to Uranium One and UrAsia, including Giustra, donated to the Clinton Foundation, totaling about $145 million. Meanwhile, in 2010, Bill Clinton received $500,000 from a Russian bank to give a speech at a conference in Moscow.
Trump, during the campaign, tossed all of these separate facts together to falsely claim that Clinton “gave 20 percent of our uranium — gave Russia for a big payment.” But numerous fact checks have found no evidence for this claim. The original suggestion of wrongdoing was first raised in a book underwritten by an organization headed by Stephen K. Bannon, a key adviser to Trump.
Why It’s Important: Whenever news about the Russia investigation heats up, the Trump White House cites the uranium deal in an effort to muddy the waters and suggest that Russia had gained something from Clinton in exchange for money. Trump himself has claimed the case is “Watergate, modern age.”
But there is no evidence Clinton even was informed about this deal. The Treasury Department was the key agency that headed the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States which approved the investment; Clinton did not participate in the CFIUS decision. The deal was also approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Ultimately, only the president could have blocked or suspended the arrangement.
Moreover, no uranium produced at U.S. mines may be exported, except for some uranium yellowcake which is extracted and processed in Canada before being returned to the United States for use in nuclear power plants.
OK so a couple of you were correct - Manafort and Flynn.
Bellwethers - these two will be used to test the waters and look for a path to lead to an impeachment of Trump.
I believe the path is predetermined.
If the Republicans are weak-kneed in their response, Mueller will hurry down that path.
If the RNC has the courage to pursue the Clinton machine RE:Uranium One, then that will certainly muddy the waters.
My opinion of course.
HankD
Bellwethers - these two will be used to test the waters and look for a path to lead to an impeachment of Trump.
I believe the path is predetermined.
If the Republicans are weak-kneed in their response, Mueller will hurry down that path.
If the RNC has the courage to pursue the Clinton machine RE:Uranium One, then that will certainly muddy the waters.
My opinion of course.
HankD
That’s the best ya got?!?Oh I thought better of you. Look I’ve got zero allegiance to either of these two political sides, but I do find them both absurd.
Now if the populace had any intelligence at all the world would not be in its present condition and there would not be vast opportunities for men like Hannity and politicians who profit from this crap. The only consern I have is how can I profit from this without having to go into politics
Why is the "Uranium One" deal crap? That deal, which gave our enemy Russia 20% of the uranium deposits in North America affects us all. It directly affects our national security and it is outrageous that any American would sell out his/her country in this way. It's quite funny that with the Clinton's no longer having anything to sell (their government power) most if not all of the donations to their "charity" have now dried up. Coincidence? Yeah, right. And guess what, Billy Bob is not longer getting 500k per speech either. This was corruption at it's highest level and the perpetrators Bill and Hillary should be brought to the bar of justice.
That's a weird thing to say.
"Weak-kneed"? Shouldn't Republicans be worried about what is true and right?
If there is anything to the wild claims made by Trump regarding Clinton, then she should be prosecuted. But it's not a choice of one or the other.
This thing must be bigger than rooting for your "team."
All posters, I would appreciate it if you would not choke this important thread with the uranium deal issue. Please do that on another thread.
Moderators, I would appreciate your assistance with policing that request.
Moderators, I would appreciate your assistance with policing that request.
This is a witch hunt with no real basis. Mueller has stacked his investigative team with DNC people. The investigation itself lacks credibility.
Your opinion is noted.
Would a "witch hunt" be valid if there were actually malicious "witches" on the loose?
Since Mueller claims he has caught two "witches," shouldn't we examine the evidence to see if they are indeed "witches?"
Even if the allegation is true that the investigation is "stacked with DNC people," don't you think that the court system would be able to determine if the case is valid?
Jimmy Carter is definitely a "DNC" person. Why did Trump cite him favorably (as well as many people here) if "DNC people" are always so biased that they cannot be fair about anything?
If Carter can be cited favorable as telling "the truth," then perhaps these alleged "DNC people" could also do a fair and capable job of investigation. Things are now under the rule of law, not the rule of public opinion.
No, to it all.
So witch hunts are invalid, even if there are witches. Are mouse traps also invalid if they catch mice?
So we should not even look at the evidence that Mueller has collected to see if these persons are guilty of the charges? Mueller has made accusations against their character and honesty, should they not be vindicated in a court of law if they are innocent and Mueller and his team be exposed if they have simply pursued a partisan vendetta?
So you think the court system is incapable of determining whether or not a person is guilty of charges?
So a "DNC person" is incapable of even inadvertently telling the truth or doing valid work?
You are in an epistemological free-fall. You are very close to saying that truth cannot be known. If so, your own objections are meaningless, since no one can know anything. Anything anyone has done, even Hillary Clinton, is beyond factual and moral knowledge. For that matter, any claims about Jesus fall under simple opinion in the world you propose.
But I doubt you actually mean what you say. You are just angry and don't want to be rational because it might come back to bite you.
Apparently you claim that there is nothing to the indictment?
Have you actually read it or are you just making a lofty pronouncement based on your familiarity with the specifics of the financial dealings of Manafort and Gates?
The indictment is quite specific and deals with objective issues, with dates, names, and specific financial arrangements. It also has quotes from specific testimony given. I'm sure they have evidence to amply support every claim, making it extremely hard to defend against.
What part(s) of the indictment is false?
I didn't say any of that you did. You and I have been on this board together far to long for you to try and play that game with me.
The charges against manafurt have nothing to do with Trump, his campaign, or the mythical Russia collusion. The investigation is premised on a debunked "dossier' and the investigative team is intentionally stacked against Trump. So it appears they can find nothing with regard to Russia Collusion so they find other charges to put pressure on him to speak of things they cannot find in order to make a deal. The whole thing stinks to high heaven.
You said, "No, to all of it." You wrote that in response to all of my previous assertions.
It's fine with me if you want to walk back that indefensible assertion.
I will give you one more chance to deal honestly with this.
Oh well, they say they are and they should be but they are not.
BTW personally, I'm not a Republican but a small "i" independent - a former blue-dog JFK Democrat until the Democrat Party made abortion a DNC platform issue.
All they need to do is REPENT OF AND REMOVE their official support and endorsement of a woman's "choice" aka "baby murder" from their official Party platform, then I will consider coming back to the fold.
The Republican Party has done ABSOLUTELY nothing to overturn Roe versus Wade (pronounced by the SCOTUS under a Republican administration) after it became law (legalized murder).
what team am I rooting for? I am disgusted with both of the major party "teams".
I have no "team" but support the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness which is taken away from an innocent and helpless human being who is brutally murdered while yet in its mother's womb.
HankD
President Donald Trump’s name does not appear one time in his former campaign manager Paul Manafort’s indictment records released Monday.
Manafort and his business associate, Rick Gates, were indicted in a federal court on 12 counts, including conspiracy to launder money, conspiracy against the United States, and making false and misleading statements.
The indictment related to the core of Mueller’s Russia probe, which began in May when the former FBI director was appointed special counsel, does not mention Trump’s name once. Mueller was appointed by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to investigate Russian interference in the U.S. election, as well as any related issues, including possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government.
Trump’s Name Doesn’t Appear Once In Manafort Indictment
Manafort and his business associate, Rick Gates, were indicted in a federal court on 12 counts, including conspiracy to launder money, conspiracy against the United States, and making false and misleading statements.
The indictment related to the core of Mueller’s Russia probe, which began in May when the former FBI director was appointed special counsel, does not mention Trump’s name once. Mueller was appointed by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to investigate Russian interference in the U.S. election, as well as any related issues, including possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government.
Trump’s Name Doesn’t Appear Once In Manafort Indictment
An indictment filed by special counsel Robert Mueller Monday incorrectly identifies Ukrainian politician Yulia Tymoshenko as a former Ukrainian president when she is in fact a former prime minister.
The indictment details numerous charges against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his business associate Rick Gates related to lobbying work the pair did for a Russian backed Ukrainian political party.
Mueller Makes Key Error In Manafort Indictment
The indictment details numerous charges against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his business associate Rick Gates related to lobbying work the pair did for a Russian backed Ukrainian political party.
Mueller Makes Key Error In Manafort Indictment