OK, thanks. That's a fact, or speculation? What does Trump, the deal maker, get in return?
Mueller Independent?
- Thread starter Marshal Jim Duncan
- Start date
Do you think the Russians were trying to get Trump elected? Or were they playing both sides? Weren't some on the Clinton team compromised by a Russian connection? If so, should Mueller be looking into that as well?
And I wish someone would explain to me what were the positives for each side of the Trump/Russian collusion. I get that one positive for Trump is he gets to be president (although in hind sight considering the shit storm he's enduring he probably regrets his victory). But aside from that what would be his motivation for dealing with Putin? Actually I suppose Comey has put to rest any direct involvement by Trump. But who does that leave? Flynn? Manafort? What kind of deal could either one of them have pulled off without it becoming public? Hell, it is public! What were they going to get from Putin? Money? I know nothing about either one of them, but Flynn, in particular doesn't seem to be a guy motivated by money. And what could they have offered Putin that he wouldn't get otherwise? Do you think a Trump administration would roll over for Putin, but Clinton administration would not? What would they roll over for? The Baltics? Sanctions? Probably I'm being totally naive, but both of those strike me as small potatoes in the big picture.
Someone please rationally explain the substance of the scandal. So far all I see is two sides trying to hurl hurtful insults at each other. Which makes for good theater, I suppose, but is terribly harmful to the country's well being.
Flynn and Manafort don't strike you as a guys motivated by money?
They both strike me as being primarily motivated by money.
Flynn took over $500,000 to represent Turkish interests in investigating and producing a film about Gulen and wrote an op-ed favoring Turkish interests on the day of the election.
Manafort reportedly signed a $10 million yearly contract with Russian aluminum tycoon Oleg Deripaska and did work in favor of the former Pro-Russian Ukrainian government,
Finally, sanctions against Russian aren't "small potatoes", IMO. They're pretty big potatoes in fact.
By the way, just for the record, my comment about money probably not being a motivator was about Flynn. I specifically said I don't know anything about either one of them. Particularly Mannafort, about whose name I had never heard until recently. Regarding the $500,000 to Flynn you describe, it appears that money went to his firm, not directly into his personal bank account. I know nothing about his firm, but I assume he's the rainmaker that is paid a salary or a commission. So he was probably just doing his job. You may not see the difference, in which case we'll stick with your opinion.
My firm is me, my wife and a minion or two. I draw a salary. What's your point?
Oh, heaven no, I'm feeling quite chipper today. I'm glad to see you're off the sauce today. Your personality Friday night was brutal.
Very little drops off from gross to net in his line of business, especially in a small privately held "firm".
He was Chairman, Founder, and CEO of the privately held Flynn Intel Group, Inc....so no...he is much more than a rainmaker being paid a salary or a commission.
You seem to base a lot of opinions solely on assumptions.
And get a little bent out of shape when people point that out or point out the error in your admitted assumptions.
Why not do a little research for yourself instead of just assuming?
That's your point? How much did the firm get to keep after taxes? What do you suppose his cut was? How much did the son get? The minions? After taxes $500,000 split between three or four people is chicken feed, wouldn't a man making $2800/week agree? Does Flynn seem like a guy willing to betray his country for a trivial amount? A man that had dedicated his life to service to the country? He maybe a traitor. But, mercy, I would hope he would demand considerably more to do it.
What a hot mess....
$2800 is my day bill rate, at least do me a solid and get that part right.
Several faulty assumptions here. A) more than one client B) don't assume one contract per client C) don't assume a contract equates to a year and finally D) very few traitorous acts are purely about the money. Ideology, ego, hatred of HRC all may have been factors/motivations...
Please tell me what were my assumptions. JD specifically brought up the 500K, and I specifically commented on it, and specifically asked questions regarding its dispersal. We were discussing one client only. Is it your contention that all of Flynn's company's clients are nefarious? What specifically is nefarious about the 500k? I'm not assuming anything. I'm asking you a question that I don't know the answer to. You seem to know the answer. Please enlighten me. (With apologies to JD that I'm seeking answers on a message board and not doing my own research. How crass of me!)
Geez...my suggestion that your educate yourself and do your own research has really gotten under your skin like a bad tattoo.
It's not an unreasonable suggestion.
Just curious.
If there is absolutely nothing to the Russia narrative, and it was created by Hillary and Dems, why does it matter if Mueller is on their side? If there is nothing to find, is he going to create evidence out of thin air? Wouldn't that be easy to refute if it is completely fictitious?
If there is absolutely nothing to the Russia narrative, and it was created by Hillary and Dems, why does it matter if Mueller is on their side? If there is nothing to find, is he going to create evidence out of thin air? Wouldn't that be easy to refute if it is completely fictitious?
The way I understand it, once these special independent counsels are appointed, they can go after whatever the hell they want to. Reminds me of The Wire quote: "You follow the drugs, you get drug addicts and drug dealers. You follow the money, and you don't know where the f*ck it's going to take you."
Given Trump's alleged 80s/90s connections to Manhattan real estate mafia, I think it was very stupid to allow a special prosecutor to be appointed in the first place vis-a-vis Sessions's recusal. Not to mention Mueller's Comey/deep state ties and his appointing of Clintonistas to his team. Not much Trump can do now at this point though. I believe he's probably the most vetted POTUS candidate in history so if he somehow escapes this (an investigation in search of a crime), I suppose he would have plenty to fight his enemies with. Or he may just say screw it and be a one-termer.
