TrumPutinGate

#24,602
#24,602
NorthDallas40 said:
So do banks now need to worry about over reaching meddling into their private risk management decisions on people that the current party in power doesn’t like? Looks like another precedent that’s gonna bite you Dims on the ass eventually to me abuela.
Click to expand...
I think it may just cause banks to factor into their risk management decisions the possibility that the deal may be illegal/unethical and may be investigated at some point. Seems like a pretty good thing to consider.
 
#24,606
#24,606
NorthDallas40 said:
The role in general went down hill Witt the start of the Moore movies but made a comeback with Daniel Craig. Craig was the closest we’ve gotten back to the ultimate Bond... Sean Connery.
Click to expand...

Wasn't as much of a fan with Casino Royale. But Skyfall is debatable as one of the best Bond flicks of all time.
 
#24,611
#24,611
“Trump inaugural subpoena pertains to allegations of conspiracy against the U.S., false statements, mail & wire fraud, money laundering, disclosure violations, & laws prohibiting contributions by foreign nations and in the name of another person.”

 
#24,612
#24,612
carlos86 said:
“Trump inaugural subpoena pertains to allegations of conspiracy against the U.S., false statements, mail & wire fraud, money laundering, disclosure violations, & laws prohibiting contributions by foreign nations and in the name of another person.”

Click to expand...


Putin?
 
#24,615
#24,615
Orange_Vol1321 said:
If you mean not playing around as in smearing him two more years then you're correct.
Click to expand...
Right, it’s all a big conspiracy to smear him. He can’t just be a ****** person making bad decisions or surrounding himself with bad people. It’s actually just a big conspiracy.
 
#24,619
#24,619
evillawyer said:
I know I'll get blasted because it's BuzzFeed, but this is document based

Click to expand...


Fortunately for you, I gave up *****ing on people for quoting disreputable sources after seeing Jakob Wohl quoted again this morning. At least for today, you’re safe from me.
 
#24,620
#24,620
RockyTop85 said:
Fortunately for you, I gave up *****ing on people for quoting disreputable sources after seeing Jakob Wohl quoted again this morning. At least for today, you’re safe from me.
Click to expand...

He didn't read any of the documents, if he did he would see that they pretty much kill any collusion conspiracy. Besides the deal that was being discussed was nothing more than a branding/naming rights deal, the Trump organization wasn't building shizz.
 
#24,621
#24,621
hog88 said:
He didn't read any of the documents, if he did he would see that they pretty much kill any collusion conspiracy. Besides the deal that was being discussed was nothing more than a branding/naming rights deal, the Trump organization wasn't building shizz.
Click to expand...

And didn't stand to make any money?
 
#24,625
#24,625
RockyTop85 said:
Fortunately for you, I gave up *****ing on people for quoting disreputable sources after seeing Jakob Wohl quoted again this morning. At least for today, you’re safe from me.
Click to expand...
I'm still not convinced they whiffed on the other story. That was a pretty wishy washy statement from the SC. "Not accurate" could be wrong in some respect but substantive accurate overall. Sorta like if I say I saw someone get hit by a bus at 3:00 and he really got hit by the bus at 2:57, my statement is "not accurate," but still substantively correct.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top