AP Investigation: How two men leveraged access to Trump and Persian Gulf crown prince

[sggatecl]

If you think the AP is just a liberal rag out to get Trump, don't bother reading and move along.

https://apnews.com/a3521859cf8d4c199cb9a8567abd2b71

An investigation by The Associated Press found that fundraiser Elliott Broidy and George Nader, an adviser to the crown prince of Abu Dhabi, pushed the interests of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates at the highest levels of the U.S. government.

As they angled for lucrative contracts, they passed messages purportedly from princes of the two Gulf countries to President Donald Trump.

The Associated Press reviewed hundreds of pages of correspondence between Broidy and Nader and conducted dozens of interviews with the people involved.

Nader?s lawyer declined comment. Broidy denied any wrongdoing.

 

[Spartanmack]

If you think the AP is just a liberal rag out to get Trump, don't bother reading and move along.

https://apnews.com/a3521859cf8d4c199cb9a8567abd2b71

I can't launch the link at work so I'm wondering, have they done something illegal? were their efforts successful? if so, is it something inappropriate (i.e. Uranium One type stuff). I'm not defending pay for play by any means - I'm just wondering what the scandal is.

As for the AP, I'm not sure if they're out to get Trump but based on their seemingly biased coverage of his recent "animals" comment I think it's fair to say they may not like him much. And if there's no real scandal here, couldn't this be further evidence of cleverly worded headlines to make people suspicious of Trump.

 

[Michchamp]

I can't launch the link at work so I'm wondering, have they done something illegal? were their efforts successful? if so, is it something inappropriate (i.e. Uranium One type stuff). I'm not defending pay for play by any means - I'm just wondering what the scandal is.

As for the AP, I'm not sure if they're out to get Trump but based on their seemingly biased coverage of his recent "animals" comment I think it's fair to say they may not like him much. And if there's no real scandal here, couldn't this be further evidence of cleverly worded headlines to make people suspicious of Trump.

regardless of what happens, you'll find a way to spin this as "no big deal." However, if Hillary was president, the exact same thing would happen, and in your expert opinion (cut and pasted from Breitbart) this would be "the political scandal of the century."

 

[Spartanmack]

regardless of what happens, you'll find a way to spin this as "no big deal." However, if Hillary was president, the exact same thing would happen, and in your expert opinion (cut and pasted from Breitbart) this would be "the political scandal of the century."

it's interesting how you accuse others of engaging in the tactics you use. Do you do that to distract people from your obvious partisan hackery or do you think it somehow legitimizes your bullshit?

 

[turok]

Pretty easy to determine which Muslim nations aren't on Tsar Trumpov and his administration's Islamic shithole-list...b/c they also weren't on their immigration/refugee banhammer EOs. Plus Drumpfkopf may well be "indebted" to SA, like that prince who bailed him out of debt for that white trash elephant of a multi-million $$$ yacht that the paranoid fake real estate tycoon buffoon would rarely if ever have set foot, much less sail in.

Despite most of the 9/11 terrorists allegedly being Saudis, nothing punitive was done to it in retaliation by the chickenhawk Neocons. Perhaps had they threatened to sell their crude oil based upon the Euro, instead of the Murkin dollar, like Saddam did, then SA/UAE might have become a target for "liberating" regime change.

Moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem and reneging on the multi-nation Iran nuke deal most likely will lead to more tensions, instability, and acts of terrorism in the Middle East...as well as in Western Europe and perhaps the US.

Glad that my wife and I have had no children, one or two who could be of prime draft ages by now. Like Dear Leader implied, whats the point of spending more tens of billions on the US military and weaponry, if ya ain't gonna use them?

 

[sggatecl]

I can't launch the link at work so I'm wondering, have they done something illegal? if so, is it something inappropriate (i.e. Uranium One type stuff). I'm not defending pay for play by any means - I'm just wondering what the scandal is.

From the article:

Neither Broidy nor Nader registered with the U.S. government under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, a law intended to make lobbyists working for foreign governments disclose their ties and certain political activities. The law requires people to register even if they are not paid but merely directed by foreign interests with political tasks in mind.

Violating the federal law carries a maximum $10,000 fine or up to five years in prison.

were their efforts successful?

Broidy's contract with UAE is still good to go so it appears so at the moment.

As for the AP, I'm not sure if they're out to get Trump but based on their seemingly biased coverage of his recent "animals" comment I think it's fair to say they may not like him much. And if there's no real scandal here, couldn't this be further evidence of cleverly worded headlines to make people suspicious of Trump.

That whole situation bothered me for a couple of reasons. That our president is so inarticulate that it could be construed he said such a thing. And that our many media members would jump on it knowing full well that they were reaching but would get a great few days of 'news' coverage out of it.

I don't remember reading any AP reports that went off the rails and all I could find was this one, which makes it pretty clear he was referring to MS-13 gang members.

https://www.apnews.com/0ab25388e729483b804f7df028a7a11c

 

[sggatecl]

Despite most of the 9/11 terrorists allegedly being Saudis, nothing punitive was done to it in retaliation by ANYONE IN THE US GOVERNMENT. Perhaps had they threatened to sell their crude oil based upon the Euro, instead of the Murkin dollar, like Saddam did, then SA/UAE might have become a target for "liberating" regime change.

Fixed that for ya. They've all dropped the ball on this one from day 1, through multiple administrations.

 

[turok]

Fixed that for ya. They've all dropped the ball on this one from day 1, through multiple administrations.

Agreed...but Democrats had their best chance to do something during the two-year period of '09-'10, after which only obstruction and record-setting filibusters took place. They also were working on creating Obama's 'Affordable Care Act" legislation, dealing with a deep recession, attending hearings and meetings during and post-bailouts, and the ongoing Iraq and Afghanistan "occupations". Republicans were/still are all over condemning their later involvement in Libya's civil war and deposing/assassinating Khaddafi.

Trump may have his two year long honeymoon in office come to an end next year, if the trend to Congess having been voted in as the opposition party majority to the sitting POTUS.

 

[Spartanmack]

Agreed...but Democrats had their best chance to do something during the two-year period of '09-'10, after which only obstruction and record-setting filibusters took place. They also were working on creating Obama's 'Affordable Care Act" legislation, dealing with a deep recession, attending hearings and meetings during and post-bailouts, and the ongoing Iraq and Afghanistan "occupations". Republicans were/still are all over condemning their later involvement in Libya's civil war and deposing/assassinating Khaddafi.

Trump may have his two year long honeymoon in office come to an end next year, if the trend to Congess having been voted in as the opposition party majority to the sitting POTUS.

what punitive measures were they supposed to take against the Saudis? Do you think 9/11 was a Saudi sanctioned event? You do realize that Bin Laden was a Saudi national right? He was expelled from Saudi Arabia by the government. Are you surprised that he would recruit other Saudis to his organization?

Again, what should we have done? There's been no definitive proof that the Saudi government funded these terrorists - it's well known that they provide korans and fund madrasas to support islam and some of that money ends up in the hands of unsavory imams and clerics. But what are we supposed to do without proof that they knowingly gave material support to bin Laden or the attackers? Should we invade SA? Bomb them? Throw the crown prince in jail?

 

[Spartanmack]

From the article:





Broidy's contract with UAE is still good to go so it appears so at the moment.



That whole situation bothered me for a couple of reasons. That our president is so inarticulate that it could be construed he said such a thing. And that our many media members would jump on it knowing full well that they were reaching but would get a great few days of 'news' coverage out of it.

I don't remember reading any AP reports that went off the rails and all I could find was this one, which makes it pretty clear he was referring to MS-13 gang members.

https://www.apnews.com/0ab25388e729483b804f7df028a7a11c

Hard to get my hackles up over the registration thing - if the contract is legit and above board, then pay the fine and be done with it. If it was granted under questionable circumstances or something illegal was done (bribes, etc) then of course, that's another story.

As for the "animals" thing, I don't think the media was "reaching." I think they were intentionally lying. They deliberately misconstrued what was said. It was no accident that the context was ignored/left out - that was done to push the "Trump is racist" narrative. As for Trump, I wouldn't say this is an example of him being inarticulate - he shouldn't have to qualify every single utterance. I think any person speaks with the expectation of being treated fairly even though by now he should know he's not going to be. 100% of the blame for that shit storm is on the media in my mind.

The AP's original twitter headline was no different. It was deleted the next day and they were forced to issue a correction when they were called out for it.

 

[turok]

Bush administration claimed that Iraq was funding and supporting terrorists, which was one of two biggest excuses for building US support for invading Iraq (besides "yellowcake"), and there were no Iraqi Sunnies or Shiites in the 9/11 attacks, or the bombing which occurred @ the Twin Towers years earlier. The same could much more easily have been used to punish Saudi Arabia via trade, sanctions, blockade, or invasion.

 

[Spartanmack]

Bush administration claimed that Iraq was funding and supporting terrorists, which was one of two biggest excuses for building US support for invading Iraq (besides "yellowcake"), and there were no Iraqi Sunnnies or Shiites in the 9/11 attacks, or the bombing which occurred @ the Twin Towers years earlier. The same could much more easily have been used to punish Saudi Arabia via trade, sanctions, blockade, or invasion.

yellowcake and the fact that they'd basically ignored every sanction imposed on them since Desert Storm - with the help of the UN of course. But again, the fact that they were Saudi nationals isn't proof in and of itself. It's well documented that Saddam's government sponsored terror groups - one of the top state sponsors along with Iran and Libya. Without proof that the Saudi's gave funding to the conspirators, what should we have done?

 

[turok]

https://nypost.com/2017/09/09/saudi-government-allegedly-funded-a-dry-run-for-911/

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-bc-ct--sept-11-saudi-arabia-lawsuits-20180409-story.html

http://www.newsweek.com/why-saudi-arabia-join-north-korea-us-state-terrorism-list-911-717640

 

[sggatecl]

Hard to get my hackles up over the registration thing - if the contract is legit and above board, then pay the fine and be done with it. If it was granted under questionable circumstances or something illegal was done (bribes, etc) then of course, that's another story.

Broidy has a laundry list of dirty actions. If you're giving him the benefit of the doubt, you are a pure soul.

Elliott Broidy, former Deputy Finance Chair for the RNC:

1. Paid $1.6 million for a secret abortion through Michael Cohen - who is still a Deputy Finance Chair for the RNC.
   
2. Offered to end a U.S. government investigation of a Malaysian investment fund in exchange for $75 million.
   
3. In exchange for UAE influence over US foreign policy, George "Totally Not A Pedophile Anymore" Nader offered Elliott Broidy?s private security company $1 billion in international contracts, including over $200m in the UAE alone.
   
4. In 2009, Broidy pleaded guilty in New York to bribing New York state pension officials with almost $1m in return for their $250m investment in an Israel-focused investment fund he helped to manage. He and the firm paid over $30m in fines; however, the charges against Broidy were downgraded, and he avoided jail.
   
5. Is under investigation by the Prosecutor General of Ukraine for lobbying on behalf of Russian assets, which may also be a breach of the US Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

At the bottom of the report I originally linked, there are several documents cited that show conversations with the alleged parties involved, among other juicy bits. The main reason I posted this particular report is because there was a lack of 'anonymous sources'.

The AP's original twitter headline was no different. It was deleted the next day and they were forced to issue a correction when they were called out for it.

That would explain why I didn't see it or couldn't find it easily.

 

[Spartanmack]

https://nypost.com/2017/09/09/saudi-government-allegedly-funded-a-dry-run-for-911/

note the use of the term "allegedly" in the headline. Has it been proved or is it still alleged?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-bc-ct--sept-11-saudi-arabia-lawsuits-20180409-story.html

and what was the result? has definitive proof been turned over by the CIA or FBI?

http://www.newsweek.com/why-saudi-arabia-join-north-korea-us-state-terrorism-list-911-717640

Well, if Trump said it, it must be a lie, right? What kind of security clearance or access to intelligence information did Trump have in 2011 when he made this statement? Or was he the voice of reason then because he was a Democrat back in those days?

 

[Spartanmack]

Broidy has a laundry list of dirty actions. If you're giving him the benefit of the doubt, you are a pure soul.

Elliott Broidy, former Deputy Finance Chair for the RNC:

1. Paid $1.6 million for a secret abortion through Michael Cohen - who is still a Deputy Finance Chair for the RNC.
   
2. Offered to end a U.S. government investigation of a Malaysian investment fund in exchange for $75 million.
   
3. In exchange for UAE influence over US foreign policy, George "Totally Not A Pedophile Anymore" Nader offered Elliott Broidy’s private security company $1 billion in international contracts, including over $200m in the UAE alone.
   
4. In 2009, Broidy pleaded guilty in New York to bribing New York state pension officials with almost $1m in return for their $250m investment in an Israel-focused investment fund he helped to manage. He and the firm paid over $30m in fines; however, the charges against Broidy were downgraded, and he avoided jail.
   
5. Is under investigation by the Prosecutor General of Ukraine for lobbying on behalf of Russian assets, which may also be a breach of the US Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

At the bottom of the report I originally linked, there are several documents cited that show conversations with the alleged parties involved, among other juicy bits. The main reason I posted this particular report is because there was a lack of 'anonymous sources'.




That would explain why I didn't see it or couldn't find it easily.

No, not giving benefit of the doubt - I couldn't read the article at work. I'm wondering about the legality as well as the significance/materiality of the alleged malfeasance. Is this Uranium One level stuff? Benghazi?

I'll read it later when I get a minute.

 

[sggatecl]

No, not giving benefit of the doubt - I couldn't read the article at work. I'm wondering about the legality as well as the significance/materiality of the alleged malfeasance. Is this Uranium One level stuff? Benghazi?

I'll read it later when I get a minute.

More Uranium One considering the type of 'scandal'. More Benghazi in that there is a lot more evidence. Maybe you could say a good mix of both?

 

[turok]

note the use of the term "allegedly" in the headline. Has it been proved or is it still alleged?



and what was the result? has definitive proof been turned over by the CIA or FBI?



Well, if Trump said it, it must be a lie, right? What kind of security clearance or access to intelligence information did Trump have in 2011 when he made this statement? Or was he the voice of reason then because he was a Democrat back in those days?

They sure as hell aren't suing the Iraqi or Afghani government for sponsoring terrorist cells 17 years later, now are they?

 

[Spartanmack]

They sure as hell aren't suing the Iraqi or Afghani government for sponsoring terrorist cells 17 years later, now are they?

anyone can sue anyone for anything - that's proof of nothing. the plaintiffs have to meet a certain standard of proof, don't they?