smiling bill clinton

And as a result of his seeking clearence prior to going the FBI discovered the Russian's were bribing an American trucking company which turned out to be a security threat.

So...maybe next time you should try harder?

Yeah.

Yeah, you should.

FAIL. Clinton didn't try to dismantle NATO or give Syria to the Russians. And he didn't launder Russian mob money in his own building for decades.

LOL. Forcing NATO members to pay their already agreed upon financial obligations is akin to dismantling NATO....Holy hell

Do you have any evidence of Trump laundering Russian mob money? You would think if you had the evidence, that said evidence would also be available to law enforcement, which begs the question why Trump was never arrested for money laundering. Which brings to us Occam's Razor, that perhaps there is no evidence of money laundering

https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/12/21/how-russian-money-helped-save-trumps-business/

From your article "in particular investment by wealthy people from Russia and the former Soviet republics."

Notice how it says "wealthy people from Russia" and it does not say "Russian Government?" That's because they are two different things.

Further is not evidence of money laundering, the entire purpose of money laundering is to hide the IDENTITY of who's money your laundering. If they know where the money is coming from, then they are not good at money laundering.

Now, an inquisitive mind like yours is probably wondering "how do they know it came from Russia?" Well, in America, we have this thing called OFAC. OFAC is a federal database that is used to stop illicit funds from bad people entering our financial system. When foreign people, or foreign entities invest in America, in this case real estate, the American investor must run an OFAC check to insure they are not working with people who are banned from US financial system (eg. People subject to US sanctions). This OFAC check is submitted to the Federal Government for review.

I hope this helps you in your quest to forumlate a better conspiracy theory.

Yes, just like "wealthy Americans" is not the same as "The American Government".

I know, these are kind bending concepts to grasp.

and if you dont think the wealthy influence our laws you are not paying attention.

^^^ see this children, this is what stupid people do when they cannot defend their premise, in this case, he cannot his own article stating something that debunks his narrative.

Oligarch is defined as a wealthy business person with great political influence. By this logic, Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Jamie Dimon, etc are all "oligarchs".

Having "much political influence" is not the same being a member of the Russian Government.

Sad day for you.

he has you hoodwinked. had been lying since day one. How are those adoptions coming?

And the topic of discussion moves again. Your surrender is accepted.

But they did care about him getting blown by his secretary!

Clinton sought State permission to do so, and didn't lie about it unlike Trump who lies about everything. (For example, lying to the public that he had no dealings with Russia during the 2016 campaign when negotiations were going on to create a Trump Moscow Tower). You'd be wrong to say that Democrats don't care about that. The fact that so much Russian money is sloshing around both sides of the political aisle is worrying.

Sought State permission from his wife and two of her advisers. Also, its unknown (from document releases) what the State Departments final say was.

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/356323-bill-clinton-sought-states-permission-to-meet-with-russian-nuclear

Is this true? Yes , so anything said after means little. Trump sold 20% of our uranium to the russians . No that would be obam hildi holder and All the others on that board are on the board of the clint foundation

How many buildings was Clinton buying in Russia at the time?

How many buildings did Trump buy in Russia

Buying. Not buy. Difference.

Trump doesn't believe in paying for things.

HE BOUGHT NONE. FACTS MATTER.

They were in initial DUE DILIGENCE...the "middle buying" would imply they were under contract and closing was close.

You don't get to make up facts to suit your agenda. The reality is, Trump never bought a building in Russia, and yes the Trump Organization did look at developing a project in Russia, and this is not abnormal for a GLOBAL real estate developer.

I've not said anything that contradicts your statements yet you continue to argue.

You said "he was in the middle of buying a building". This was false. You said Trump hates paying for buildings, thereby implying Trump was getting a building in Russia for free. This is absurdly false.

How do you buy real estate, on a global basis, if you don't pay for the properties?

I've said two statements.

1. Trump doesn't believe in paying for things.

This doesn't mean he DOESN'T pay for things.

2. Trump hates paying for things.

Again, doesn't mean DOESN'T pay for things.

But if you want to talk about how your boss doesn't like paying what he promised contract workers, ripping off musicians, and failing to adhere to copyright laws. Pull up a chair.

Come on now, its clear your inane question was a jab at Trump.

Sounds like you got Trump living rent free in the brain. Charge that dude, my brother!

Says the girl who made this about Trump to distract from Clinton. Sad day for you.

Again, I didn't make this about Trump. I asked how many buildings he was buying at the time when he made his speech. I barely mentioned the cheeto in chief to trigger you.

Red herring introduced here: But if you want to talk about how your boss doesn't like paying what he promised contract workers, ripping off musicians, and failing to adhere to copyright laws. Pull up a chair.

We were talking about buildings, you stated Trump doesn't like paying for things while discussing him possibly buying a building in Russia.

Whole things a red herring. None of this has anything to do with billy boy.

Still. Clinton had no interest in Russia property at the time of his meetings. Unlike Trump.

No Clinton had interest in $500,000 speech, which he received. Trump got nothing. Thanks for settling the point.

The point being that Clinton took $500,000 and didn't collude with the Russia government to interfere in an election?

Yes, I know the point is settled. Very good.

"The point being that Clinton took $500,000 and didn't collude with the Russia government to interfere in an election?

Yes, I know the point is settled. Very good"

Uh dear, Trump didn't collude. Thanks. This has been established thanks to a two year long investigation.

Oh, has the Mueller Report been released or are you going off by what some Trump appointee said?

"Some Trump appointee"? LOL...you really are a special village idiot. Every AG is appointed by the President, the Senate then approves the appointment. Barr is no different.

Also, If Barr lied, why would Mueller not correct the record? LOL.

I see your attempting to hold on to your first conspiracy by creating another conspiracy out of thin air. Nice work at employing rational thought.

Mueller did go on record to say the report doesn't exonerate Trump.

There is no conspiracy here. Just facts. You argue semantics about Trump buying property but conveniently leave out the fact that Mueller's report doesn't exonerate the President.

Tsk tsk tsk.

A little bit of consistency would be nice.

"Mueller did go on record to say the report doesn't exonerate Trump." FALSE...he was speaking in regards to OBSTRUCTION...not COLLUSION.

Reading is not your thing.

So which is it? Did Mueller not correct the record or did he not? So inconsistent.

At least your consistent in your childish attempts to have the last word. I look forward to your reply.

Okay, I get it, you're not a bright person so lets go slowly.

1. The report from Mueller does clear Trump on the allegation of Collusion. Barr's summary directly quotes the report on this issue. There is zero ambiguity here.

2. The investigation also looked at whether not Trump obstructed the investigation. This is not a collusion issue. The report states, Trump is not absolved of this issue.

But again...MUELLER STATED TRUMP AND HIS CAMPAIGN DID NOT COLLUDE.

And neither did Clinton.

Choad moves the goalpost again "And neither did Clinton."

Where did anybody say Clinton did "collude"? Oh that's right, you just can't help yourself. In your failure to claim that Trump colluded, you now create another red herring to distract from this failure. Pathetic.

You don't get to complain after you brought Trump into the debate little girl.

Actually, I just asked how many buildings Clinton was buying at the time.

You were the one who made this about Trump, little boy.

I notice you deleted your comment where you called me a fascists. Classic triggered liberal reaction.

Yes, because my political leanings have much to do with how I choose to treat people. You and me are conservatives, boy. I vote Republican. Just not for stupid liberal idiots who pretend to be Republican.

Is your Mommy at work?

Do you need a hug?

Choad is back!