Schumer to force vote on Trump administration move to ease sanctions on Russian firms

[Samhain]

Thanks, but I'm not French. I'm American. Why are you bringing up Parisians?

I don't believe the government either way. Mnuchin is a Goldman Sachs man and a film producer. And he's talking about corrupt Russian oligarch.

I wish I lived in the simple world of you Trump Fans, where Russian oligarchs are honest.

Sorry, it must have been curved( and clearly the joke went way over you head, or off to the side a little at best ).

Seriously though, as evidenced by the linked articles, these companies were only sanctioned because Deripaska had a controlling interest in them, and he no longer has a controlling interest. One has to assume that the US government had a way to determine he had control in order to apply sanctions, therefore, they know if he no longer has control.

If we were, however, to utilize your logic, every company in Russia would have to be sanctioned for time eternal, but that hasn't happened, so your logic is clearly flawed.

 

[tres borrachos]

Sorry, it must have been curved( and clearly the joke went way over you head, or off to the side a little at best ).

Seriously though, as evidenced by the linked articles, these companies were only sanctioned because Deripaska had a controlling interest in them, and he no longer has a controlling interest. One has to assume that the US government had a way to determine he had control in order to apply sanctions, therefore, they know if he no longer has control.

If we were, however, to utilize your logic, every company in Russia would have to be sanctioned for time eternal, but that hasn't happened, so your logic is clearly flawed.

If you can find a single post from me where I said that "every company in Russia would have to be sanctioned for time eternal", link it. Or one where I even hinted about anything close to that.

My posts, which were clear, were about this one particular oligarch and his companies, and you and Mycroft blindly accepting what Steve Mnuchin tells you. Now, if you don't want to discuss that, then say so. but don't ignorantly make things up that I never said or never hinted about, as you did here.

 

[Samhain]

If you can find a single post from me where I said that "every company in Russia would have to be sanctioned for time eternal", link it. Or one where I even hinted about anything close to that.

My posts, which were clear, were about this one particular oligarch and his companies, and you and Mycroft blindly accepting what Steve Mnuchin tells you. Now, if you don't want to discuss that, then say so. but don't ignorantly make things up that I never said or never hinted about, as you did here.

How many companies in Russia are controlled by "Russian oligarchs" that are good guys? Or are all but this one Russian oligarch "honest"?

 

[tres borrachos]

How many companies in Russia are controlled by "Russian oligarchs" that are good guys? Or are all but this one Russian oligarch "honest"?

I don't know. I never heard of a good oligarch, or a trustworthy one. You tell me.

But let's get back to "Mnuchin says it, and it must be so, because a Russian oligarch promised it". That's what you and Mycroft are saying.

 

[Samhain]

I don't know. I never heard of a good oligarch, or a trustworthy one. You tell me.

But let's get back to "Mnuchin says it, and it must be so, because a Russian oligarch promised it". That's what you and Mycroft are saying.

So how many companies should be sanctioned that are owned or controlled of these non-good Russian oligarchs?

And you do realize that this Russian oligarch hasn't promised anything, its the companies that have shown that he is no longer involved. The oligarch himself is still sanctioned. Do you read?

 

[tres borrachos]

So how many companies should be sanctioned that are owned or controlled of these non-good Russian oligarchs?

And you do realize that this Russian oligarch hasn't promised anything, its the companies that have shown that he is no longer involved. The oligarch himself is still sanctioned. Do you read?

I can't answer the first question, and that isn't what I'm discussing anyway. You are struggling with that.

or are you saying that Mnuchin lied when he said what was committed to? Nothing was committed to?

A commitment is not a quantifiable change in behavior. A quantifiable change in behavior is just that. Maybe Mnuchin should sit at a parole hearing and say "Well, listen! He promised to never commit a crime again, so let's just let him go."

 

[Common Sense 1]

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate...rump-administration-move-to-ease-sanctions-on

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Sunday that he will force a vote on a resolution to disapprove of the Trump administration's decision to relax sanctions on companies connected to Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, calling the move "wrongheaded."

Schumer will force the vote under the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, which requires a simple majority to proceed to the resolution to disapprove. The announcement comes days after Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin briefed House lawmakers on the decision to ease sanctions.
==================================
The recent lifting of sanctions against Oleg Deripaska smells like pay back for Manafort's back channel help on getting inside intel on the Mueller probe while at the same time helping to write down Manafort's $19M debt to this oligarch.

The administration's current plan is to ease sanctions on the three businesses tied to the Oligarch — Rusal, EN+ and EuroSibEnergo. But Deripaska will remain sanctioned and his property blocked. Lawmakers, however, have voiced concern about the business links, despite Deripaska reducing his ownership stake in the three companies to below 50 percent.


“Treasury has made its best judgment in applying the law and regulations for us to have effective sanctions programs. We both have to have a way that companies affected by ownership and control will be picked up and that a fair way that they will be delisted,” he continued.

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/424849-house-democrats-clash-with-mnuchin-following-sanctions-briefing

 

[Samhain]

I can't answer the first question, and that isn't what I'm discussing anyway. You are struggling with that.

or are you saying that Mnuchin lied when he said what was committed to? Nothing was committed to?

A commitment is not a quantifiable change in behavior. A quantifiable change in behavior is just that. Maybe Mnuchin should sit at a parole hearing and say "Well, listen! He promised to never commit a crime again, so let's just let him go."

You didn't read the article's quote. They've already changed their structure so he's not in control and given Treasury direct access to assure that he doesn't regain control. If they remove the access, or he regains control, the sanctions come back.

 

[tres borrachos]

You didn't read the article's quote. They've already changed their structure so he's not in control and given Treasury direct access to assure that he doesn't regain control. If they remove the access, or he regains control, the sanctions come back.

So you agree they haven't changed any behaviors.

There is nothing wrong with Americans exhibiting caution. I know it offends Trump fans when Russian companies get sanctioned. Caution is good for most people, especially when there is a pattern of bad behavior.

They can't give Treasury direct access to anything. They committed to "transparency". I see nothing that indicates that they have basically handed over operations to the US government. That is the only means of ensuring changes. Do you know who all of the management of those 3 companies are, and are personally vouching for them?

 

[Samhain]

So you agree they haven't changed any behaviors.

There is nothing wrong with Americans exhibiting caution. I know it offends Trump fans when Russian companies get sanctioned. Caution is good for most people, especially when there is a pattern of bad behavior.

They can't give Treasury direct access to anything. They committed to "transparency". I see nothing that indicates that they have basically handed over operations to the US government. That is the only means of ensuring changes. Do you know who all of the management of those 3 companies are, and are personally vouching for them?

Wow. Russia is everywhere in your head. Best of luck to you.

 

[American]

???

Did you seriously NOT read the article I quoted?

Remember, orange man bad.

 

[Mr Person]

So...we have a situation in which sanctions have actually worked, though we are still going to keep an eye on things and will reimpose sanctions if necessary.

And Schumer thinks this is the wrong thing to do?

'Member when Russia was "our greatest geopolitical foe", since Russia being "our greatest geopolitical foe" was important for attacking the black man you accused of lying about his religion, lying about his place of birth, being racist against white people, and wanting to destroy America who was then running for re-election ?



No? Yeah, right. Enough transparent bull**** from you

 

[Thelion]

The administration's current plan is to ease sanctions on the three businesses tied to the Oligarch — Rusal, EN+ and EuroSibEnergo. But Deripaska will remain sanctioned and his property blocked. Lawmakers, however, have voiced concern about the business links, despite Deripaska reducing his ownership stake in the three companies to below 50 percent.


“Treasury has made its best judgment in applying the law and regulations for us to have effective sanctions programs. We both have to have a way that companies affected by ownership and control will be picked up and that a fair way that they will be delisted,” he continued.

https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/424849-house-democrats-clash-with-mnuchin-following-sanctions-briefing

It’s getting easier to see which Russians are using the tRump organization to launder their mob money.

 

[tres borrachos]

Wow. Russia is everywhere in your head. Best of luck to you.

You seem to forget that there is a word in the subject line of this thread and that word is "Russian". Did you not know what we were discussing?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

What the hell is curved behavior?

Well, it could mean "smoothly crooked" since "crooked" on its own implies "jagged".

I think the words you are all looking for is "curbed behavior"

Obviously, and other than the fact that I find the repeated "curved" jarring, I'm quite able to understand what they are talking about.

Hell, if someone was speaking directly to me they might find MY accent "jarring" but still be able to understand what I was talking "aboot" when I referred to the "garadge" that had been turned into a "labratory" in which experiments involving "aluminium" were conducted.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Sorry, it must have been curved( and clearly the joke went way over you head, or off to the side a little at best ).

Seriously though, as evidenced by the linked articles, these companies were only sanctioned because Deripaska had a controlling interest in them, and he no longer has a controlling interest.

Would you like to bet?

You are, of course, aware of what a "shell company" is, aren't you?

You are, of course, of what a "privately held" company is, aren't you?

One has to assume that the US government had a way to determine he had control in order to apply sanctions, therefore, they know if he no longer has control.

One would LIKE to assume both of those things, but, based on the reliability of the statements coming from the government of the United States of America, do NOT bet the rent on the Daily Double there.

If we were, however, to utilize your logic, every company in Russia would have to be sanctioned for time eternal, but that hasn't happened, so your logic is clearly flawed.

One should never attempt to do the manifestly impossible (especially in public and accompanied by great blares of publicity) - it only makes one look foolish.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

If you can find a single post from me where I said that "every company in Russia would have to be sanctioned for time eternal", link it. Or one where I even hinted about anything close to that.

The US government tried to do exactly that with respect to Cuba. It didn't work there and it wouldn't work on an economy that is much more robust than the Cuban economy (especially once all the Mafia money left) was.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

The administration's current plan is to ease sanctions on the three businesses tied to the Oligarch — Rusal, EN+ and EuroSibEnergo. But Deripaska will remain sanctioned and his property blocked. Lawmakers, however, have voiced concern about the business links, despite Deripaska reducing his ownership stake in the three companies to below 50 percent.

Did you know that, in the 1930s and during WWII, American companies "reduced ownership" of German companies to zero by "selling" their interests to "neutral" Swiss citizens? Did you know that, at the end of WWII those "neutral" Swiss citizens "sold" their interests in those German companies back to the same American companies for what they "paid" for them? Did you know that, when those German companies were "sold" back to their "former" American owners, all of the profits which they had made during WWII were included in the sale AND so were the rights to claim "war damages" from the victorious United Nations powers (which included the United States of America)?

If I own 50%+1 of the stock in 10 companies, each of which owns 5%+1 of the stock in 4 companies, each of which owns 13% of the stock in "American Amalgamated Buggy Whips and Churns" who owns controlling interest in "American Amalgamated Buggy Whips and Churns"? If NONE of the stock in the 14 companies is publicly traded, how are you going to find out?

 

[Airyaman]

One must wonder at this point if the color red means more than we think it does...

https://twitter.com/kenvogel/status/1085601056137138176

Kenneth P. Vogel@kenvogel

BREAKING: Senate GOP defeats Dem measure to enforce sanctions against companies controlled by Russian oligarch OLEG DERIPASKA.
Dems needed 60 votes, only got 57, even after GOP defections.
Sanctions now all but certain to be lifted this week pursuant to TRUMP administration deal.

10:13 AM - 16 Jan 2019

Well, at least we know 11 Republicans who don't appear to be Russian assets.

Interestingly, the guy who warned us about Russia -- Mitt Romney -- is all for easing sanctions.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

One must wonder at this point if the color red means more than we think it does...

https://twitter.com/kenvogel/status/1085601056137138176

Kenneth P. Vogel@kenvogel

BREAKING: Senate GOP defeats Dem measure to enforce sanctions against companies controlled by Russian oligarch OLEG DERIPASKA.
Dems needed 60 votes, only got 57, even after GOP defections.
Sanctions now all but certain to be lifted this week pursuant to TRUMP administration deal.

10:13 AM - 16 Jan 2019

Well, at least we know 11 Republicans who don't appear to be Russian assets.

Interestingly, the guy who warned us about Russia -- Mitt Romney -- is all for easing sanctions.

Traditionally, "Red" is the colour of "The Left" and "Blue" is the colour of "The Right". (ASIDE - The terms "Left" and "Right" have nothing whatsoever to do with a political ideology but are merely descriptive of the seating arrangements in the earliest French parliaments where "The Aristocracy" (read as "Blue Bloods") sat on the right hand side of the chamber (as you faced the speaker's chair) and "The Peasants" sat on the left hand side of the chamber.)

The "Republicans" (whatever that is) inherited the color red when they were "The LESS Reactionary Wing of the American Oligarchic Capitalist Party" and the "Democrats" (whatever that is) thus inherited the color blue. To change the colours now that the "Democrats" are "The LESS Reactionary Wing of the American Oligarchic Capitalist Party" would only confuse the voters.

 

[Airyaman]

Traditionally, "Red" is the colour of "The Left" and "Blue" is the colour of "The Right". (ASIDE - The terms "Left" and "Right" have nothing whatsoever to do with a political ideology but are merely descriptive of the seating arrangements in the earliest French parliaments where "The Aristocracy" (read as "Blue Bloods") sat on the right hand side of the chamber (as you faced the speaker's chair) and "The Peasants" sat on the left hand side of the chamber.)

The "Republicans" (whatever that is) inherited the color red when they were "The LESS Reactionary Wing of the American Oligarchic Capitalist Party" and the "Democrats" (whatever that is) thus inherited the color blue. To change the colours now that the "Democrats" are "The LESS Reactionary Wing of the American Oligarchic Capitalist Party" would only confuse the voters.

I was thinking red = Russia