Jump to content

sheeeit

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    761
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by sheeeit

  1. 12 hours ago, SKJ said:

    That's just the bullshit pricing book hospitals use.

    It's a fucking price scam. They "charge' that upfront to show the insurance companies that they're getting a "discount"rate so that insurance companies can pay only 500 for the aspirin on their books. Meanwhile, the insurance company draws that amount out of their funds in payment, but then recovered the discount in their own books, passing the "savings" onto the premiums the customers pay, since there are "rules" as to how much they can collect.

    The actual margin doesn't see the light of day.

    It's a scam called "middling"

    Good god this is some ignorant posting.  I would love to here an explanation for how a company "recovered the discount in their own books".  Would be fascinating to hear.  Equally fascinating would be how this "middling" practice actually has an impact on margins.

  2. 19 minutes ago, Pods said:

    https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/mueller-evidence-raising-questions-prince-testimony-meeting-russian/story?id=54277090

    Sources tell ABC News Nader met with Prince at New York's Pierre Hotel a week before the Jan. 11, 2017 meeting in the Seychelles, and later sent Prince biographical information about Dmitriev, which, according to those sources, noted that Dmitriev had been appointed by Putin to oversee the state-run sovereign wealth fund.

    Nader says he then facilitated and personally attended the meetings, including one between Prince and Dmitriev, at a resort owned by MBZ off the coast of East Africa, the sources told ABC News. One of the primary goals of the meeting, Nader told investigators, was to discuss foreign policy and to establish a line of communication between the Russian government and the incoming Trump administration, sources told ABC News.

    Nader — who Prince said in a 2010 lawsuit deposition had once represented his military contractor business in Iraq — was not mentioned in Prince's congressional testimony despite Prince being asked by lawmakers who was present. Prince said only that Dmitriev's wife was there but she left after a few minutes while they discussed terrorism and oil prices.

     

    Fucking perfect.  You said we KNOW something and said there are emails to prove it.  You then provide an article based on, shocking, anonymous sources.  And the article makes exactly zero mentions of any emails by prince acknowledging anything.

    I am starting to feel like Brisket and his unending notion that no one in the country will ever do the right thing.  I keep waiting for someone, anyone to call out the continual lies and misrepresentations but none of you have.  I am ever hopeful though.

    Do any of you want to comment on this?  Anyone willing to go on record that an anonymous source that mentions nothing about any emails from Erik Prince is definitive proof that Prince lied about his testimony and we have emails before and after the meeting to prove it?  Anyone?

  3. 36 minutes ago, Pods said:

    Prince lied repeatedly about this meeting under oath to Congress. There are emails that prove he knew all about the meeting with the Russian in advance and that he followed up after the meeting as well. 

     

    37 minutes ago, Pods said:

    Prince lied repeatedly about this meeting under oath to Congress. There are emails that prove he knew all about the meeting with the Russian in advance and that he followed up after the meeting as well. 

    This is a perfect microcosm of all things trump and all things Pods.  You continually accuse me of lying or ignoring stuff, which I have never done and if you can find an example I will be happy to respond.

    But this statement above is just a full on made up lie.  Please show us a source that proves that prince had emails before and after the Seychelles meeting that contradict his testimony.  Total bullshit.  

    • Fuck You 1
  4. 15 minutes ago, Zombie said:

    Why are you constantly defending Trump et al? Anytime anyone says something negative about Trump or someone in his orbit, you pop up and explain in detail how Trump or his minion couldn't possibly have done anything wrong. It's bizarre. 

    If you guys just want some big, bad trump circle jerk then so be it.  I thought this was a place to exchange different ideas.  I see no need to pile on the negative trump stuff does as there are already 50 or more folks that do so on a daily basis.  I have posted, many many times, that I would have preferred a ton of people to him as potus but that hillary is not one of them.  But if hillary had won, i would not support impeaching her on unproven things or supposition in the media.  I never once suggested anything remotely like that when obama was potus and there were a ton of positions he took that i disagreed with.  On incidents like behngazi, I made only one comment at the time which was that I felt Hillary was derelict in her duties as SOS since she told us that the attack was triggered by the movie release in Egypt and that, if that was the case and tensions were hot in the ME in the weeks leading up to the anniversary of 9/11,  that we should have had all of our embassies and related facilities in the ME on high alert and extra security should have been in place.  I have said, many many times, that i will fully support whatever mueller finds.  If trump colluded then he should be impeached.  If he obstructed justice then he should be impeached.  If he has criminality in his business dealings then I think he should be impeached.

    But i will not support the impeachment of any potus because he is childish, thin skinned, dumb, orange or whatever.  That is what elections are for.

    I have made my theory on events very public.  I find the blind trust in media articles and twitter dorks that quote anonymous sources, to be beneath the intelligence of most of you.  They COULD be accurate but when you do some digging they almost always do not hold up to scrutiny.

    But if you really just want a place to go where there is only one side of every story told then this may not be the place for you.  It certainly would not be for me.

     

    • Like 2
    • Fuck You 1
  5. 14 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

    Wrong.  

     

    Good article cle on how felon Micheal Flynn got clearance despite being under investigation.  

    http://www.newsweek.com/how-michael-flynn-got-security-clearance-591994

    Had one or more of the vetting agents, their curiosity whetted by the mounting headlines about Flynn’s Russia contacts, asked for a green light to dig deeper, the answer from FBI headquarters might well have been silence. In the FBI’s secretive realm, the counterintelligence section, or CI, is the heavily guarded queen, to be protected at all costs. “The CI investigation would be separate from the White House security and background investigation

    Stupid is as stupid does.  First, Flynn already had his security clearance from when Obama was in charge.  It never even came up for renewal under trump.  Had there been an exhaustive investigation of flynns dealing BEFORE his clearance review came up then I would think he might not have been provided clearance, but i do not know.  Second, Kushners was a new request.  Rosenstein was involved in the investigation (just google rosenstein kushner clearance).  Rosenstein is obviously aware of the entirety of the mueller investigation to date.  So, again, for any of your theories to be true, rosenstein would have had to either let a background check go to the wh that he, rosenstein, know is innacurate or it was clear enough to warrant top security clearance or the wh just ignored the report.  I would think a guy like rosenstein would not allow a person that was on the verge of being indicted for conspiracy against the US to have an unlimited security clearance with access to all of the govt secrets including those related to foreign countries.  

  6. 1 minute ago, Tuco said:

    How would John Kelly know if Kushner was going to indicted?  The whole point of the Mueller investigation is to separate it from the DOJ.  Outside of the Mueller team, the only one at the DOJ who should have any indication whether a indictment is pending is Rosenstein. 

    Because the fbi did the security investigation on kushner and rosenstein was involved with it.  You guys can not have it both ways.  rosenstein is not going to release a "positive" background investigation on Kushner to the wh if he knows that kushner is in deep shit with mueller.  That would be incredibly reckless and likely criminal on the part of rosenstein.    

  7. 2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

    Why? I mean, I agree, normally it would be very unlikely. But it seems exactly in keeping with the modus operandi of this White House

    Mostly because I have a hard time believing that John Kelly would ok a top secret security clearance to a person that was about to be indicted by the fbi for conspiracy against the US.  Also, I have a very hard time believing that that the upper echelon of the doj and fbi would not speak up or leak or something similar if they are aware that a top secret security clearance was given to a person that was about to be indicted.  Honestly, I think it would be criminal of those people to not speak up. 

  8. 8 hours ago, Pods said:

     

     

    I don't know who either of those guys are, but they are incorrect and are directly contradicted by the letter the FBI sent to Nadler. The FBI is very clear about it for a reason. The FBI does not clear anyone and did not clear Kushner. The White House issued the clearance. Here's the letter again. 

    Here's the relevant section you seem to be missing. 

    "The FBI does not grant, deny or otherwise adjudicate security clearances for individuals on behalf of these clients. As a result, the granting or suspension of Mr. Kushner's clearance would be the responsibility of the client adjudicating agency, in this case the White House."

     

    The twisting is funny to watch.  The fbi does the investigations for security clearances.  The fbi did the security investigation for Kushner.  According to multiple reports, in february, rosenstein called mcgahn or trump to alert them that kushner's application needed more time to investigate.  Kushner granted clearance in May.

    So only one of 2 things could have happened.  1) the fbi's report was clean enough for Kushner to get a clearance or 2) the fbi's report recommended not giving clearance and the WH did it anyway.

    For the scenario that you and others want us to believe, the fbi told the wh that Kushner was currently under investigation by the fbi, was likely to be indicted by the fbi, had numerous ties to foreign govts and was a great candidate to be either blackmailed or bribed for influence and then, with that report, the wh gave kushner clearance anyway.  I think that is an unlikely scenario.

  9. 46 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    Your boy is in deep shit

     

     

    I do not really know anything about Stone and if he is corrupt then fuck him.  But what did he do here that would be illegal?  Why would he be indicted?  I actually read the article.  Both people involved say they never received any info direct from Assange and there is no record of any info.  In fact, the go beteween said he never even requested the info from Assange.

    I honestly do not know the answer but is it illegal to ask if someone has hacked emails?  If they do is it illegal to receive them?

    • Fuck You 1
  10. I have no idea if the Halper stuff is true or not.  If we assume he did approach Page, Papa and Clovis then, imo, it is only a problem if he was either asked to approach them by someone in govt or if he told someone he was going to do it.  If he approached them on his own then i do not see how it could be a problem for the fbi.  If he did work with the fbi then there almost certainly has to be a paper trail.

    Also, it would be highly coincidental if the fbi based the start of their investigation on the actions of Page and Papa and Halper reached out to both of them out of the blue with little or no prior connection to them.

    9 hours ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

    I can't believe the FBI is using informants in a criminal investigation. 

    The problem with comments like this relates to the timing.  The fbi said it started an investigation in July 2016.  All of the Halper contacts were before that.  Of course the fbi can and does use informants but if they base part of the investigation on the role of the informants then they have to disclose their use of them.  They can not ask an informant to try and get close to trump folks and not consider that the start of the investigation.  There has to be a concrete reason to ask the informant to try and get close.

  11. 13 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

    Which is a bigger concern for Putin: that Mueller's investigation of Manafort gets stonewalled, or that Ukraine gets some Javelins ?  

    Is that a serious question?  Arming a territory that putin wants or halting the investigation in an unrelated country that has no jurisdiction over a guy that is already indicted in the US?  

    I would also like to know how trump asked putin which he preferred and how they got ukraine to be involved in their plot.  Bat phone?  

  12. 17 minutes ago, Pods said:

    Hot Damn!!! Vince and sheeit active and trolling at the same time. What a treat. 

    We should take bets on who will have more luck today ensnaring posters who should know better. So far, it seems to be Vince with the lead. 

     

    4 minutes ago, ShaggyBevo RIP said:

    Amazing that little ol' surly get two Russian trolls devoted to it.

    How is it not comical that you guys have all determined that Kushner is guilty as sin, has likely flipped to mueller, is going to be indicted any day now while simultaneously the very organization that is supposedly investigating him and has all of the dirt on him just gave him top secret security clearance.

    How many times have we read that we do not know what mueller knows?  1,000?  Rosenstein was the one that called trump initially to tell him that kushners clearance was delayed.  Obviously, Rosenstein knows everything mueller knows since mueller reports to rosenstein.  You think mueller told rosenstein that he had kushner dead to rights and that he has all kinds of foreign baggage and contacts with spies and actually (at least according to some of you) led a coup to get sanctions against qatar and Rosenstein said thanks but I think we will give him security clearance anyway?  

    Actually Pods retard will probably spin this as mueller using kushner as a double agent to get trump so he gave him security clearance to throw trump off.

  13. 3 hours ago, triplehorn said:

    From the linked BBC article above:

    “The report states that Poroshenko returned from Washington and, in August or September, 2017, decided to completely end cooperation with the US agencies investigating Manafort. ”

    Poroshenko would stop cooperating in the Manafort investigation and Trump would provide Javelin missiles.

    A global two-fer: quid pro quo and obstruction of justice.  

    This might be my new favorite angle.  According to you, trump is putins bitch and there is so much dirt on trump that the russians have that he is literally being blackmailed by russia as I type.  yet, he gave missiles to ukraine (currently a sworn enemy with current hostilities with russia and putin) so that the ukraine would stop investigating Manafort who was already indicted in the US.  That is fantastic!!!!!

    Question, when does putin unleash his dirt?  Do we need to arm more countries hostile to russia before it is time?

  14. 10 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

    They literally met with foreign agents in the attempt to win the election.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    They did?  Who?  Maybe they stayed at one of the trump properties that you so boldly informed us were 100% full because of trump influence.

  15. Regarding Kushner, he very well may be a complete pussy and be totally inept.  I have no idea.  This is not a defense of Kushner.  I could not care less about him or what happens to him.  I do however like how so many of you can make definitive claims about his make up and character based on..........his looks?  Funny to me but irrelevant.

    On the disclosure form and clearance stuff, I am afraid that, once again, you guys have been duped by the media.  The media did not lie per se, they just twisted the facts to paint suspicious scenario as they do with all things trump.

    This is just my opinion and I realize that it will be in complete contrast to the vast majority of you but here goes.

    So much is made of Kushners 3 tries at his sf-86.  The original one was submitted with zero foreign contacts.  Kushner said the form was sent in before it was complete.  Could be total bullshit but the state dept did confirm that there were not any foreign contacts on the first submission.  In the second submission he reported all of his contacts.  For the final submission, he was not asked to change his form and he was not required to change his form but he did anyway to include the meeting with Natalia (i think my old spelling of her name looks better).  A few quotes:

    "Mark Zaid, a national security lawyer, said he believes that a disclosure of the meeting would not have been required, because Veselnitskaya is not now a government lawyer and Kushner does not have a close or continuing relationship with her."

    "Edward B. MacMahon Jr., another national security lawyer in private practice, said he “can’t imagine there’s a risk of prosecution” with Kushner."

    Also, what does the fact that he received his clearance tell us?  He has been interviewed by mueller maybe twice, has testified under oath to sic and hic (I think).  he clearly has been under the fbi microscope for over a year, yet he was given clearance.  makes me think there is nothing on him.  I would hope that if there is even a hint of criminality regarding Kushner in the investigation that he would not get any clearance.  Yet he did.  And please spare all of us the angle that trump just intervened and did this.  No possible way.  That would have been leaked to every single media outlet in the world.

  16. Just now, Judge Roybeanbag said:

    I think he also insisted she didn’t lie about her affiliation with the Russian government. 

    And she did not.  Are you guys talking about the interview?  The one where she claimed to be an informer for the russian govt?  You realize she never said that right?  She was speaking russian and they interpreted her words in english.  Watch the WHOLE interview.  She is indignant that she never lied at all in her testimony.  

    She disclosed her relationship with the russian govt in her testimony.  She worked for the GPO early in her career and then interacted with them on a case she was defending in the US that involved a russian company.  She disclosed all of that in her testimony.

  17. 57 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

    Oh, Sheeeit is back now that the pages where  he got called on Natalia I mean Nataliya are 7 pages past....

    Where did I get called out on Natalia (other than I am bad at spelling apparently?  My stance on her has not changed at all.

  18. 1 hour ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

    Ugh.  If it was over market, in exchange for other stuff, that’s just bribery. Emoluments  can also happen without over market pricing. If Trump properties are leased a 100% occupancy all the time now because everyone wants to stay in a trump property because they want the approval that comes  from the president knowing that you are willing to give him money, that ain’t cool either.  That also has the problem of being exactly what is happening. 

    Really?    I did a 30 second Google search and found the following. 

    https://www.google.com/amp/www.newsweek.com/trump-hotel-prices-drop-organization-717189%3famp=1

     Rental rates for his properties are down everywhere and the prime hotel that is the center of the allegations, is one in Washington DC, has a 20% lower occupancy rate than the other hotels in its class. What the fuck are you even talking about. 

  19. 43 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

    Bribery is already something that trump can’t be a part of. It seems by turning the definition of emoluments into bribery, you’ve effectively made the emoluments requirement disappear. Brilliant!

    Wow.  Nice leap there.  If Trump took bribes he should go down.  If he accepted gifts from foreign govts he should go down.  If foreign govts paid over market rates for trump properties he should go down.  Nowhere did I try and turn the  definition of emoluments into bribery. Sheesh. 

  20. The emoluments issue is a tricky one.  But it is not, at all, the slam dunk many of claim.  There are plenty of legal and popular opinion arguments that trump is not violating the act.  I would think the question of whether or not paying market rate for a service is considered an emolument (it is certainly not a gift) could go to SCOTUS.

    IMO, the only way emoluments gets any traction is if it can be proved that foreign govts paid over market rates at Trump properties and then received some kind of benefit.  The public knew trump owned hotels and golf courses all over the world when he was elected.

    With that being said, I do not have a problem with an audit of the trump properties to see what was paid.  If it was over market, then trump should go down.

    I also recall the trump folks saying any profits from foreign govt revenue would be donated to charity.  I would support following up on that.

     

  21. 1 hour ago, Lagunamadre said:

     

    55 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

    Having to repost those links is further proof sheeeit doesn’t read sheeeit.  He just posts questions. 

     

    44 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

    In fairness he probably read the Russian lawyers testimony months ago so he had his talking points ready to go. The rest was just a bunch of bullshit. 

     

    33 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

    You mean the Senate testimony where she claimed she didn't have a relationship with the Russian government? Until emails between her and Russian government officials came out and she had to admit she lied in her Senate testimony? 

    Sheeit must have missed that in his extensive research. 

     

    29 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

    I’ve pointed that out to him several times.  He just never replies. I imagine he will wait a few pages to reply and skip over it again.  And if someone asks, he will won’t another link.  

    You guys are amazing.  You are all actually so stupid or lazy that you do not even know what you are talking about.  I am guessing that none of you actually read any of Nataliya's testimony.  I know reading is hard and understanding it is harder but you guys should give it a try.  

    Here is the relevant passage from the NYT article:

    "But newly released emails show that in at least one instance two years earlier, the lawyer, Natalia V. Veselnitskaya, worked hand in glove with Russia’s chief legal office to thwart a Justice Department civil fraud case against a well-connected Russian firm."

    For you uninformed (which is most of you) N was the lead attorney for a company called Prezevon that was sued by the US attorney's office for money laundering.  The US attorneys office requested information on Prezevon from their counter part in Russia (its a log name but we will call it the GPO).  When the GPO was asked by the US to provide information on Prezevon, the GPO contacted N to coordinate their response as she was the lead attorney for Prezevon.  Her only contact was as her capacity as the lawyer for Prezevon and all of the dealings with the GPO were in the Prezevon case.  This is absolutely common.  If IBM is being sued in Russia and Russia asks the Federal govt to give them info on IBM the first thing the Feds will do is call the US lawyers representing IBM in the case.

    So, now you morons (who clearly have not read the testimony) say this is evidence N lied in her testimony.  Not only is it not a lie, she admitted it and talked about it in her testimony.  

    First, she admits in her opening statement that she worked for the GPO early in her career:

    "My name is Natalia Vladimirovna Veselnitskaya. I am a citizen of the Russian Federation. I am a lawyer and a managing partner at Kamerton Consulting, a law firm, and I am licensed to work as an attorney-at-law in the Russian Federation. I operate independently of any governmental bodies. In 1998, I graduated with honors from the Moscow State Legal Academy. Upon graduation, I started working at the Central Administration of the Prosecutor’s Office of the Moscow Region where I ended up being promoted to the position of the head of the department for control over legality of the legislation adopted by the legislative bodies of the Moscow Region (the Governor, Government and the Duma). I have been practicing as a private attorney since the spring of 2001. In 2003, I established a private law firm, Kamerton Consulting. I specialize in representing clients that are parties to civil (arbitration) and criminal cases primarily associated with economic disputes or violations."

    Second, she fully admits she worked with the GPO in her formal capacity as a lawyer (Chaika is he head of the GPO):

    "22. What is your relationship with Chaika, his office, and/or his representatives?

    I have no relationship with Mr. Chaika, his representatives, and institutions, other than those related to my professional functions of a lawyer. As a lawyer of Denis Katsyv, since 2013 I have sent several appeals to the Russian Federation General Prosecutor's Office requesting documents within my legal powers, and also filed applications to verify the information about Mr. Browder’s activities in Russia that resulted in the wrongful seizure of my client's assets in the USA and Switzerland, received answers, analyzed them and addressed them anew, should I be refused answers or provision of documents – I appealed to the court. I was also invited several times to explain the contents of my applications for documents that I collected in the framework of my legal procedure. Similar work was done by me as a lawyer in the Investigative Department of the RF Ministry of Internal Affairs. Several times I was formally received by the Prosecutor General of Russia. I have interacted with the RF Prosecutor General several times in the capacity of a lawyer. For example, this summer, I was granted an audience with the RF Prosecutor General, Yu. Ya. Chaika, to deliver an official statement in connection with my defending an American citizen and a member of the US Jewish community who had been arrested in Moscow in the spring of this year for importing forbidden items. The young man was facing up to four years in prison. I accepted him as a client on his family’s request when I was still in New York. And despite the fact that the US Embassy refused to participate in the fate of the American citizen (I spoke with the US Consul in Moscow several times asking the embassy to submit a petition to the RF Prosecutor General’s Office which the embassy never bothered to do), thanks to the well-coordinated cooperation with US lawyers and experts, members of the Moscow and CHARLES E. GRASSLEY November 20, 2017 Page 23 of 52 US Jewish communities, once Mr. Chaika had heard out the arguments of the defense and instructed that they be verified, the case was closed; my client was ordered to pay a small court penalty and allowed to return home to his family. I have no right to identify the client but the case is well known to the US Embassy in Moscow."

    So gee maybe once again you sheep were fooled by the media and NYT.  N never lied at all in her testimony and she actually admitted under oath the exact thing that you dorks said she lied about.

    I have no idea how you will spin this one, but it would be nice if just once one of you had the balls to admit that you were either wrong or at least admit that you were relying on a news story that was wrong.

    • Fuck You 1
  22. 13 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

    She works with Rinat Akhmetshin. Feel free to read up on his past. And the KGB didn't dissolve, they just changed their name to the Federal Security Service. 

    So no link on her lying.  Solid proof there.  I think you mean the GRU or FSB and I am still curious how they use lobbyists.   

  23. 8 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

    Your wrong. She has already been caught lying about a meeting with Simpson from Fusion GPS. She also is a lobbyist for the KGB. Sadly Trump kool-aid chuggers like yourself have more confidence in the integrity of the KGB these days than they do of the FBI and CIA. The Trump Republicans are a sad, sad group of people and will ultimately go down in the history books as traitors. 

    how about a link?  especially that she is a lobbyist for the KGB.  it will be a neat trick since the kgb dissolved in 1991.  and i did not know that intelligence agencies had lobbyists.   

  24. 9 minutes ago, TahoeHorn said:

    The one exception to that I can speculate about (but don't have telecom expertise to say) would be if the White House switching system is big enough and sophisticated enough (and I've heard it's really something else) to have all that capability you'd expect of the telephone company.  So the White House system, not the telephone company would have all the detail, and  the phone company or outside NSA type couldn't "break into" it.  In that case Mueller would have to get the number from whoever controlled the White House system.  And that might be a problem.

    Just speculating without the facts.

    Arent you talking about calls before and after the meeting in trump tower with the russians?  Trump was not potus then.  The wh switchboard is irrelevent.  I would imagine that mueller has the ability to get the phone numbers if he wants them.

×
×
  • Create New...