dagblog - Comments for "The Business Deals That Could Imperil Trump"

When Donald took the oath he

NCD — Mon, 23 Apr 2018 05:41:00 +0000

In reply to No, he was *not* a borrower

When Donald took the oath he threw all that tainted Russian oligarch money away......wrapped up in the pee pee sheets.......because Melania, Ivana, Ivanka, Stormy and Tiffany would never touch the [small - PP] hands that touched those shameful ill gotten gains!!

Hmmm.Sounds like how daddy

artappraiser — Mon, 23 Apr 2018 04:50:02 +0000

In reply to Any poperty where Trump was

Hmmm.Sounds like how daddy the commercial real estate developer would explain to his first grader about what he does for a living.If I understood as little as you do, I certainly wouldn't be commenting on topic, just sayin'.

Any poperty where Trump was

Peter — Mon, 23 Apr 2018 04:27:30 +0000

In reply to No, he was *not* a borrower

Any poperty where Trump was landloard he likely had to borrow money to become the owner and any sales would be used to pay those loans among other things. An overpay and kickback scheme hasn't been exposed and speculation isn' evidence. In Panama Trump wasn't the owner just the operator and brand supplier with some of his people acting as real estate agents who never get to touch this kind of money as it is transfered to the property owners who pay their debts with it. I don't think you and the snowflakes will see anything but abuse when the Obama/Clinton and their co-conspirator's criminal inditements become reality.

Now, Peter, you know how it

barefooted — Mon, 23 Apr 2018 00:22:03 +0000

In reply to You seem to be clueless about

Now, Peter, you know how it works. The people with the money that they need to launder contact people who would very much like their dirty money, then the two sides find an overtly legitimate way to make that happen. Sell something that's purchased at a ridiculous profit? Yeah! Lend money at a ridiculously low rate with lots of smiles attached? Yeah! You are very well aware that money is never laundered by, for or among victims.

Snowflakes trying to take on Trump should be funny but I think most of their time will be apologising for and excusing all the criminal charges against their colluders recommended in the last few days.

If you're not a bot, which I don't think you are, then stop using the language. Step up.

No, he was not a borrower

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 22 Apr 2018 23:33:43 +0000

In reply to Trump was a borrower in all

No, he was *not* a borrower in all these incidents - he was a landlord or real estate agent, typically the latter when Russians overpaid to offshore assets in hard currency ($) rather than rubles under sanction. Again, tell me who you think is being abused by Mueller, and let's talk in 3-4 months when the indictments and guilty pleas come through.

Trump was a borrower in all

Peter — Sun, 22 Apr 2018 23:18:02 +0000

In reply to You seem to be clueless that

Trump was a borrower in all these incidents but I wouldn't identify him as a victim because of the few that produced loans none have produced criminal charges against the lenders, I think. In the US it is estimated as much as $500 billion is laundered through our finincial system every year, mostly drug momey so the Russians fall behind us on another metric. None of the people you mention have been convicted of anthing and Manafort was laundering funds to himself. The American public deserve an apology from those people who continue politically motivated witch-hunts based of fabricated fantasies.

You seem to be clueless that

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 22 Apr 2018 18:43:47 +0000

In reply to You seem to be clueless about

You seem to be clueless that the laundered money is stolen in a variety of ways in Russia, or the profit from illegal drug-running in Colombia, et al. To date, few people have been held responsible, but these aren't "borrowers" or "victims" - they're co-conspirators and enablers helping to find legit-looking places in the legal West to park the money. It's like a fence whose job is to get rid of stolen goods, at a heave proit, where the discount is perfectly acceptable for the original thieves.

So tell me, oh Swami, who specifically do you think we'll be apologizing to? Manafort? Cohen? Giuliani? Jared? Roger Stone? Go ahead, list them, and we'll review in 3-4 months.

You seem to be clueless about

Peter — Sun, 22 Apr 2018 18:30:22 +0000

In reply to Not much we don't already

You seem to be clueless about the fact that in money laundering it's the people with the money who do the laundering and it is their agents and them held responsible. The borrower of the money is the victim of tainted funding they must pay back with interest and bad PR. Snowflakes trying to take on Trump should be funny but I think most of their time will be apologising for and excusing all the criminal charges against their colluders recommended in the last few days.

Not much we don't already

PeraclesPlease — Sun, 22 Apr 2018 15:34:27 +0000

In reply to The Business Deals That Could Imperil Trump

Not much we don't already know. The bigger question is "how much is enough to take on Trump direct?" What with his mafia ties and GOP backing, he's not as vulnerable as typical mere mortals.