8
JollyRancherHard 8 points ago +8 / -0

Straw donors

Campaign records show that between 2018 and 2021 the Adams campaign received $6,000 from three U.S. citizens who are board members of the charity, the Turken Foundation, which registered as a foreign agent with the Department of Justice last year. Turkish opposition leaders have alleged that the foundation is a vehicle for the Erdogan family to stash away millions outside the country. (The Adams campaign returned $1,000 to one of the individuals for exceeding a $2,100 contribution limit.)

12
JollyRancherHard 12 points ago +12 / -0

Looking into illegal campaign contributions from the government of Turkey

Claim is he accepted campaign $ from 3 members of a foundation incorporated by Turkish President Erdogan's son.

The FBI is probing whether the Adams campaign conspired with the Turkish govt to score illegal foreign contributions:

1
JollyRancherHard 1 point ago +3 / -2

So, what is the issue with Trump having these documents?

Do you want the simple version where this is just a sting operation?

or the more complicated version where this is serious case?

The backstory to this starts with Nixon. Nixon was planning on breaking custom and keeping his presidential records. In fact, he planned on donating them and claiming a giant tax write off in the millions. Congress then passed a law that just applied to Nixon. In 1978 they passed a law that applied to all future presidents, the Presidential Records Act.

https://www.archives.gov/presidential-libraries/laws/1978-act.html

The PRA said several things.The most important thing is the President does not own Presidential Records. They are not private, they are public. They are owned by the United States.

Among other things, the PRA

Establishes public ownership of all Presidential records and defines the term Presidential records.

.>Places the responsibility for the custody and management of incumbent Presidential records with the President (While in office, the President has them.)

Establishes that Presidential records automatically **transfer into the legal custody of the Archivist **as soon as the President leaves office. (So the National Archives or NARA is the custodian of presidential records)

So far so good, but you also have to define what a presidential record is. Basically any records relating to

constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties

That big letter got from Kim Jon Un? That's a presidential record.

A letter to Trump from his high school gym teacher saying, We always knew you would go far? That's a personal record.

All of this is aside from classified materials. All presidential records are publicly owned and the legal custodian is the national archvies.

How clear is it that a President is the final authority of what is classified? The president is the ultimate authority of declassifying documents. Having documents in the possession of an outgoing president is a long held precedent. The courts have rule on this as being automatic. So, what is the issue with Trump having these documents?

President is ultimate authority on classification.....while they are in office. So there's a few issues.

Only personal records are supposed to go with presidents, not presidential records.

A classified document that becomes declassified is still a presidential record, it can never be a personal record. But this isn't what the indictment is about.

Trump is not charged with possessing these documents but "willfully retaining" them. That's the language of the law and it basically means not giving them back when asked to. He did give back so documents but not all.

The security clearance thing doesn't matter in terms of what he is charged with. The charges would be the same if he had full clearance. Because even if are allowed to access to the info, you can't just keep it.

Going back the President having the authority to declassify. The question is did he actually declassify them while President? If this is his defense that all these documents were declassified, he will have to prove this. The courts had the judge are saying these are classified and his lawyers need clearance and can only view these documents in a secure location.

4
JollyRancherHard 4 points ago +4 / -0

That's a good way to put it

Here's what she said

Stefanik said in the letter to accompany the complaint that Engoron had illegally gagged Trump’s protected political speech, violated political giving rules with financial contributions to Democrats as recently as 2018, and ignored a decision on the appropriate statute of limitations in the case. At the start of the trial, Engoron “infamously smiled and posed for the cameras,” she noted.

I don't think this has juice whatsoever.

The ignoring a decision thing I think is objectively false. The Appeals court ruled on this and said the judge had the power to decide this. Either way even if he is wrong, it's an issue for appeal, not a cause for removal.

https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-ivanka-trump-187b7656ac451d4275ced48bb92e03a8

This just feels like a defense brief.

1
JollyRancherHard 1 point ago +1 / -0

and prices of gas and diesel were the lowest in a long time.

Lower than 2016? That was pretty low that year.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=29452#:~:text=U.S.%20regular%20retail%20gasoline%20prices,cause%20of%20lower%20gasoline%20prices.

I think that was even lower than lockdown

1
JollyRancherHard 1 point ago +1 / -0

Are you claiming we didn't export oil under Trump? [ Because this says that's not true](Statista - Total petroleum exports from the United States in selected years from 1950 to 2022 (in 1,000 barrels per day) https://www.statista.com/statistics/191320/total-us-petroleum-exports/)

when we were energy independent.

I don't think we ever were energy independent. Here's our oil imports

OK, I found another article that say's energy independence has multiple definitions including one where we import oil.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2023/05/02/us-energy-independence-soars-to-highest-levels-in-over-70-years/?sh=247323ed977f

-1
JollyRancherHard -1 points ago +2 / -3

I've seen the claim but why do we believe the claim? That's my question

The whole nature of social media is things can be all over the place, but not be true.

It depends on the quality of the initial source.

So my question is how did they determine this was wife?

There's also a divorce case on line for an Arthur Engoron. So it's possible she is his ex-wife or soon to be ex-wife.

And legally I don't think it matters at all.

3
JollyRancherHard 3 points ago +3 / -0

This is for sure a 48 hour rule item.

Took me only 5 minutes to find out where this claim is coming from.

and it seems like propaganda.

This is the outfit pushing it https://honestreporting.com/about/

This is one of the things they do. Give exclusive closed door briefings with top Israeli officials.

Missions to Israel Since 2004, HonestReporting has been organizing trips to the Jewish state, providing you with the opportunity to observe the real facts on the ground. You will discover the beauty and complexity of Israel and receive insights that go beyond the headlines during exclusive closed-door briefings with top officials and academics.

1
JollyRancherHard 1 point ago +1 / -0

Michael Cohen was the only witness? Donald Trump was a witness in this case.

A witness for the Attorney General. She called Trump to help her case. Trump's children were also witnesses.

The AG's witness list had 28 people on it.

3
JollyRancherHard 3 points ago +3 / -0

I think he is talking about the valuation of Mar a Lago as that is one of key issues in this case.

1
JollyRancherHard 1 point ago +1 / -0

have you seen dollars to rubles lately?

1
JollyRancherHard 1 point ago +1 / -0

The tweet doesn't support that all

This coordination claim started from this pro-Israeli group

https://honestreporting.com/about/

That seems like an Israeli government group.

Missions to Israel Since 2004, HonestReporting has been organizing trips to the Jewish state, providing you with the opportunity to observe the real facts on the ground. You will discover the beauty and complexity of Israel and receive insights that go beyond the headlines during exclusive closed-door briefings with top officials and academics.

As for filming it from all angles. It was a multi-hour event over a wide swath of the Gaza border. Why would you expect this in this day and age.

The earliest videos I saw were not from the media but were from the concertgoers. The attack started very early in the morning.

3
JollyRancherHard 3 points ago +3 / -0

When reporters can get there faster than the military, one must question... how?

Did you ever think they lived there? And they weren't reporters or not full time reporters. The press buys photos from all sorts of folks.

Most photographers are freelancers. If you ever known someone who bought a fancy camera, lots of them wonder how they can pay it off/justify the price.

It's all about getting the shot. If your dog farts and blows out the candles on a birthday cake you can sell that footage. If you have "the shot" you can sell that to the news, even if you never worked for them before.

When something starts happening, if they are close to it, they can go out and film it.

I know someone who freelances. A sister of a friend. She doesn't even live in this city, but when she visits, she'll go out to parades, protests, maybe a court case. I have no idea the ratio of pictures she takes to pictures she sells, but I bet it's a ton. Every now and then she's get a picture picked up. The most success it when she goes to a little covered event....less competition....and something newsworthy happens. Then she would be one of the few people who got the shot. I think her main gig is doing taking pictures at small concerts.

She basically is never without her camera. The couple of times I hung out with she would shoot stuff as we were doing whatever we doing, which I assure you was not journalism.

The last two photos I remember that went wide were a local traffic accident and a shirtless guy who climbed a pole at a protest.

This "coordination" claim is coming from an explicitly not just a pro-Israel group but one close to "top officials." This is a red flag for me.

https://honestreporting.com/about/

Missions to Israel Since 2004, HonestReporting has been organizing trips to the Jewish state, providing you with the opportunity to observe the real facts on the ground. You will discover the beauty and complexity of Israel and receive insights that go beyond the headlines during exclusive closed-door briefings with top officials and academics.

1
JollyRancherHard 1 point ago +1 / -0

There is nothing nefarious about this at all.

If you look into this one, the Grand Hyatt Hotel, it's hard to conclude it's anything other than sketchy.

By 2016 the abatement returned 3x times the amount of the cost of building the Hotel and still had 4 years to go. This is because it went for an absurd 40 years. NYC has never ever given any other project a 40 year abatement. it also was not available to other developers only to Trump because again the mayor and the governor had known him since was a kid. And it was in a place where development started taking off, it's right near Grand Central, superb location....meaning it wasn't needed in the first place.

but my larger point, was Trump got his first deals done entirely through his family connections. If no Fred, no Donald. Fred had to sign for the bank loans, because Donald couldn't get financing and his political connections got him the project in the first place.

1
JollyRancherHard 1 point ago +1 / -0

You think faking Epstein's suicide and moving him to military prison in Cuba would ensure no leaks?

I think that would be the hottest gossip on the base.

I know people like to talk about military tribunals, but civilians like Epstein in virtually every case cannot be prosecuted by the miliary.

There's a chapter in the military law book. I think it's the second one that spells out why civilians are not under miliary jurisdiction.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›