|
Leak reveals Rex Tillerson is director of Bahamas-based US-Russian oil company
|
|
Topic Started: Dec 18 2016, 06:36 PM (1,172 Views)
|
|
Coast2coast
|
Dec 19 2016, 06:30 PM
Post #41
|
|
- Posts:
- 16,072
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #19
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- Demagogue
- Dec 19 2016, 06:16 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 04:47 PM
- Dem4life
- Dec 19 2016, 11:47 AM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 18 2016, 06:37 PM
Oops! Yeah, no conflict of interests here.
His supporters don't care...
That's the truth. They have already chosen Russia over the United States. That makes news like this a non-issue to these "patriots".
Ok, just to be clear on your position here. Having done business with China and accepting campaign donations from Chinese agents does not disqualify you from being SecState but being on the board of a business that drills for oil in the Russian Arctic does disqualify you for SecState? To be clear and without getting into the foreign donation swamp (which as a President-elect Trump supporter you probably don't want to wade into) personal financial gain is the difference.
How great that personal gain will be for the President of the United States will remain an unknown factor as President-elect Trump keeps his ties with Russia under wraps by not releasing his taxes (and we all know why).
It's supposed to be "America First" and not "Personal Gain First and if there's time... America".
|
|
|
| |
|
Demagogue
|
Dec 19 2016, 06:56 PM
Post #42
|
|
Administrator
- Posts:
- 8,234
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 06:30 PM
- Demagogue
- Dec 19 2016, 06:16 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 04:47 PM
- Dem4life
- Dec 19 2016, 11:47 AM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 18 2016, 06:37 PM
Oops! Yeah, no conflict of interests here.
His supporters don't care...
That's the truth. They have already chosen Russia over the United States. That makes news like this a non-issue to these "patriots".
Ok, just to be clear on your position here. Having done business with China and accepting campaign donations from Chinese agents does not disqualify you from being SecState but being on the board of a business that drills for oil in the Russian Arctic does disqualify you for SecState?
To be clear and without getting into the foreign donation swamp (which as a President-elect Trump supporter you probably don't want to wade into) personal financial gain is the difference. How great that personal gain will be for the President of the United States will remain an unknown factor as President-elect Trump keeps his ties with Russia under wraps by not releasing his taxes (and we all know why). It's supposed to be "America First" and not "Personal Gain First and if there's time... America". This topic and the question at hand here is about the Secretary of State position. Clinton has known, documented ties to China and has known, documented donations that were received from a person who turned out to be acting as an agent of the nation of China. While on the board of Walmart Clinton was party to the votes that led to much of their production being moved to China. While her husband was president (and both he and she said she was co-president) that administration oversaw a massive shift of manufacturing into China along with an alteration of China's trade status with the USA as a nation.
Knowing all of these things, democrats and Obama had no problem with Clinton as Secretary of State. In fact, other than the donations most leftists probably saw these things as experiences that helped qualify her for the position.
Now, I know very little about Mr. Tillerson but I expect him to be vetted fully in confirmation hearings but a liberal posted this topic claiming that his being on the board of this company (which would end when his tenure at Exxon ends I am certain) somehow disqualifies Mr. Tillerson as Secretary of State.
If the left feels so strongly that folks who do business with foreign nations are disqualified as SecState candidates shouldn't they have opposed Clinton for all of her known Chinese ties?
|
|
People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would do them harm.
|
| |
|
Coast2coast
|
Dec 19 2016, 08:22 PM
Post #43
|
|
- Posts:
- 16,072
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #19
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- Demagogue
- Dec 19 2016, 06:56 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 06:30 PM
- Demagogue
- Dec 19 2016, 06:16 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 04:47 PM
- Dem4life
- Dec 19 2016, 11:47 AM
Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
That's the truth. They have already chosen Russia over the United States. That makes news like this a non-issue to these "patriots".
Ok, just to be clear on your position here. Having done business with China and accepting campaign donations from Chinese agents does not disqualify you from being SecState but being on the board of a business that drills for oil in the Russian Arctic does disqualify you for SecState?
To be clear and without getting into the foreign donation swamp (which as a President-elect Trump supporter you probably don't want to wade into) personal financial gain is the difference. How great that personal gain will be for the President of the United States will remain an unknown factor as President-elect Trump keeps his ties with Russia under wraps by not releasing his taxes (and we all know why). It's supposed to be "America First" and not "Personal Gain First and if there's time... America".
This topic and the question at hand here is about the Secretary of State position. Clinton has known, documented ties to China and has known, documented donations that were received from a person who turned out to be acting as an agent of the nation of China. While on the board of Walmart Clinton was party to the votes that led to much of their production being moved to China. While her husband was president (and both he and she said she was co-president) that administration oversaw a massive shift of manufacturing into China along with an alteration of China's trade status with the USA as a nation. Knowing all of these things, democrats and Obama had no problem with Clinton as Secretary of State. In fact, other than the donations most leftists probably saw these things as experiences that helped qualify her for the position. Now, I know very little about Mr. Tillerson but I expect him to be vetted fully in confirmation hearings but a liberal posted this topic claiming that his being on the board of this company (which would end when his tenure at Exxon ends I am certain) somehow disqualifies Mr. Tillerson as Secretary of State. If the left feels so strongly that folks who do business with foreign nations are disqualified as SecState candidates shouldn't they have opposed Clinton for all of her known Chinese ties? You can't avoid business. The conflict of interest occurs when personal gain is the advantage to securing the position.
And this one from the head down reeks of it.
|
|
|
| |
|
estonianman
|
Dec 19 2016, 09:13 PM
Post #44
|
|
- Posts:
- 19,768
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #44
- Joined:
- Mar 19, 2016
|
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 03:15 AM
- estonianman
- Dec 18 2016, 10:27 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 18 2016, 09:30 PM
- clone
- Dec 18 2016, 07:10 PM
So....what's your problem? Plenty of people have offshore entities....
John Kerry, Valerie Jarrett, Charlie Rangel....etc....
And ties with Russia and President Putin?
Where's your evidence liar
:oyvey You pay attention like you vote. Evidence please or you are lying.
Fake news is reporting on anonymous CIA sources and an ambiguous letter from intelligence agencies.
Anyone who believes that crap is a useful idiot.
|
|
MEEK AND MILD
|
| |
|
Coast2coast
|
Dec 19 2016, 09:15 PM
Post #45
|
|
- Posts:
- 16,072
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #19
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- estonianman
- Dec 19 2016, 09:13 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 03:15 AM
- estonianman
- Dec 18 2016, 10:27 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 18 2016, 09:30 PM
- clone
- Dec 18 2016, 07:10 PM
So....what's your problem? Plenty of people have offshore entities....
John Kerry, Valerie Jarrett, Charlie Rangel....etc....
And ties with Russia and President Putin?
Where's your evidence liar
:oyvey You pay attention like you vote.
Evidence please or you are lying. Fake news is reporting on anonymous CIA sources and an ambiguous letter from intelligence agencies. Anyone who believes that crap is a useful idiot. Your denials echo your allegiance and clearly it's not to the country that flies this ->
|
|
|
| |
|
estonianman
|
Dec 19 2016, 09:26 PM
Post #46
|
|
- Posts:
- 19,768
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #44
- Joined:
- Mar 19, 2016
|
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 09:15 PM
- estonianman
- Dec 19 2016, 09:13 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 03:15 AM
- estonianman
- Dec 18 2016, 10:27 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 18 2016, 09:30 PM
Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
Where's your evidence liar
:oyvey You pay attention like you vote.
Evidence please or you are lying. Fake news is reporting on anonymous CIA sources and an ambiguous letter from intelligence agencies. Anyone who believes that crap is a useful idiot.
Your denials echo your allegiance and clearly it's not to the country that flies this -> So you have no evidence.
|
|
MEEK AND MILD
|
| |
|
Coast2coast
|
Dec 19 2016, 09:35 PM
Post #47
|
|
- Posts:
- 16,072
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #19
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- estonianman
- Dec 19 2016, 09:26 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 09:15 PM
- estonianman
- Dec 19 2016, 09:13 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 03:15 AM
- estonianman
- Dec 18 2016, 10:27 PM
Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
:oyvey You pay attention like you vote.
Evidence please or you are lying. Fake news is reporting on anonymous CIA sources and an ambiguous letter from intelligence agencies. Anyone who believes that crap is a useful idiot.
Your denials echo your allegiance and clearly it's not to the country that flies this ->
So you have no evidence. Like I have said before, you pay attention like you vote.
And your allegiance to Russia over this nation has been exposed.
Dance all you like - it won't change a thing.
|
|
|
| |
|
Demagogue
|
Dec 19 2016, 09:41 PM
Post #48
|
|
Administrator
- Posts:
- 8,234
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 08:22 PM
- Demagogue
- Dec 19 2016, 06:56 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 06:30 PM
- Demagogue
- Dec 19 2016, 06:16 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 04:47 PM
Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
Ok, just to be clear on your position here. Having done business with China and accepting campaign donations from Chinese agents does not disqualify you from being SecState but being on the board of a business that drills for oil in the Russian Arctic does disqualify you for SecState?
To be clear and without getting into the foreign donation swamp (which as a President-elect Trump supporter you probably don't want to wade into) personal financial gain is the difference. How great that personal gain will be for the President of the United States will remain an unknown factor as President-elect Trump keeps his ties with Russia under wraps by not releasing his taxes (and we all know why). It's supposed to be "America First" and not "Personal Gain First and if there's time... America".
This topic and the question at hand here is about the Secretary of State position. Clinton has known, documented ties to China and has known, documented donations that were received from a person who turned out to be acting as an agent of the nation of China. While on the board of Walmart Clinton was party to the votes that led to much of their production being moved to China. While her husband was president (and both he and she said she was co-president) that administration oversaw a massive shift of manufacturing into China along with an alteration of China's trade status with the USA as a nation. Knowing all of these things, democrats and Obama had no problem with Clinton as Secretary of State. In fact, other than the donations most leftists probably saw these things as experiences that helped qualify her for the position. Now, I know very little about Mr. Tillerson but I expect him to be vetted fully in confirmation hearings but a liberal posted this topic claiming that his being on the board of this company (which would end when his tenure at Exxon ends I am certain) somehow disqualifies Mr. Tillerson as Secretary of State. If the left feels so strongly that folks who do business with foreign nations are disqualified as SecState candidates shouldn't they have opposed Clinton for all of her known Chinese ties?
You can't avoid business. The conflict of interest occurs when personal gain is the advantage to securing the position. And this one from the head down reeks of it. You are convicting these guys of malfeasance when they have yet to take office.
The Clinton's on the other hand have a documented history of turning public office into personal wealth but that is OK with you.
I have seen you repeatedly accuse conservatives of being OK with anything a politician does so long as it is a conservative politician.
Now, I can't say you are wrong about folks giving the guys on their side a pass for transgressions that they condemn the opposition for. In fact it appears to apply to many folks on your side of the aisle too.
|
|
People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would do them harm.
|
| |
|
estonianman
|
Dec 19 2016, 09:45 PM
Post #49
|
|
- Posts:
- 19,768
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #44
- Joined:
- Mar 19, 2016
|
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 09:35 PM
- estonianman
- Dec 19 2016, 09:26 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 09:15 PM
- estonianman
- Dec 19 2016, 09:13 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 03:15 AM
Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
Evidence please or you are lying. Fake news is reporting on anonymous CIA sources and an ambiguous letter from intelligence agencies. Anyone who believes that crap is a useful idiot.
Your denials echo your allegiance and clearly it's not to the country that flies this ->
So you have no evidence.
Like I have said before, you pay attention like you vote. And your allegiance to Russia over this nation has been exposed. Dance all you like - it won't change a thing. Hahahahahhah - allegiance
Lmao
|
|
MEEK AND MILD
|
| |
|
Coast2coast
|
Dec 19 2016, 09:50 PM
Post #50
|
|
- Posts:
- 16,072
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #19
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- Demagogue
- Dec 19 2016, 09:41 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 08:22 PM
- Demagogue
- Dec 19 2016, 06:56 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 06:30 PM
- Demagogue
- Dec 19 2016, 06:16 PM
Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
To be clear and without getting into the foreign donation swamp (which as a President-elect Trump supporter you probably don't want to wade into) personal financial gain is the difference. How great that personal gain will be for the President of the United States will remain an unknown factor as President-elect Trump keeps his ties with Russia under wraps by not releasing his taxes (and we all know why). It's supposed to be "America First" and not "Personal Gain First and if there's time... America".
This topic and the question at hand here is about the Secretary of State position. Clinton has known, documented ties to China and has known, documented donations that were received from a person who turned out to be acting as an agent of the nation of China. While on the board of Walmart Clinton was party to the votes that led to much of their production being moved to China. While her husband was president (and both he and she said she was co-president) that administration oversaw a massive shift of manufacturing into China along with an alteration of China's trade status with the USA as a nation. Knowing all of these things, democrats and Obama had no problem with Clinton as Secretary of State. In fact, other than the donations most leftists probably saw these things as experiences that helped qualify her for the position. Now, I know very little about Mr. Tillerson but I expect him to be vetted fully in confirmation hearings but a liberal posted this topic claiming that his being on the board of this company (which would end when his tenure at Exxon ends I am certain) somehow disqualifies Mr. Tillerson as Secretary of State. If the left feels so strongly that folks who do business with foreign nations are disqualified as SecState candidates shouldn't they have opposed Clinton for all of her known Chinese ties?
You can't avoid business. The conflict of interest occurs when personal gain is the advantage to securing the position. And this one from the head down reeks of it.
You are convicting these guys of malfeasance when they have yet to take office. The Clinton's on the other hand have a documented history of turning public office into personal wealth but that is OK with you. I have seen you repeatedly accuse conservatives of being OK with anything a politician does so long as it is a conservative politician. Now, I can't say you are wrong about folks giving the guys on their side a pass for transgressions that they condemn the opposition for. In fact it appears to apply to many folks on your side of the aisle too. Your claiming that as President and as Secretary of State that conflicts of interest took place and choices were made so that there was personal profit for the Clinton's and their industries for profit?
You and I both know why President-elect Trump did not release his taxes and yes conservatives were fine with it.
Our incoming President is dirty. He is not just connected to... but he and his family lead for profit industries and I seriously doubt either of those two gentleman will make choices or push for international agreements or sanctions that will cost them cash in pocket.
|
|
|
| |
|
Drudge X
|
Dec 19 2016, 10:11 PM
Post #51
|
|
- Posts:
- 14,846
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #11
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
Leak revealed Rex Tillerson, must be true. Leak revealed Clinton shady charitable foundation, right wing lies.
That's how the left see things.
|
|
Kate Steinle was separated from her family permanently but leftists didn't seem to mind.
|
| |
|
Coast2coast
|
Dec 19 2016, 10:14 PM
Post #52
|
|
- Posts:
- 16,072
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #19
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- Drudge X
- Dec 19 2016, 10:11 PM
Leak revealed Rex Tillerson, must be true. Leak revealed Clinton shady charitable foundation, right wing lies.
That's how the left see things. Inaccuracies of facts are the lifeblood of conservatism.
And isn't it interesting that President-elect Trump's transition team did not admit to this information, it had to be leaked.
But today you're fine with that. :oyvey
|
|
|
| |
|
Drudge X
|
Dec 19 2016, 10:20 PM
Post #53
|
|
- Posts:
- 14,846
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #11
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
Information leak all the time from someone said something or post something on Twitter or Facebook. Unfortunately you find it credible only when conservatives are involved as the victim roles.
|
|
Kate Steinle was separated from her family permanently but leftists didn't seem to mind.
|
| |
|
Coast2coast
|
Dec 19 2016, 10:35 PM
Post #54
|
|
- Posts:
- 16,072
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #19
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- Drudge X
- Dec 19 2016, 10:20 PM
Information leak all the time from someone said something or post something on Twitter or Facebook. Unfortunately you find it credible only when conservatives are involved as the victim roles. Do you deny the information?
|
|
|
| |
|
Demagogue
|
Dec 19 2016, 10:53 PM
Post #55
|
|
Administrator
- Posts:
- 8,234
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 09:50 PM
- Demagogue
- Dec 19 2016, 09:41 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 08:22 PM
- Demagogue
- Dec 19 2016, 06:56 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 06:30 PM
Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
This topic and the question at hand here is about the Secretary of State position. Clinton has known, documented ties to China and has known, documented donations that were received from a person who turned out to be acting as an agent of the nation of China. While on the board of Walmart Clinton was party to the votes that led to much of their production being moved to China. While her husband was president (and both he and she said she was co-president) that administration oversaw a massive shift of manufacturing into China along with an alteration of China's trade status with the USA as a nation. Knowing all of these things, democrats and Obama had no problem with Clinton as Secretary of State. In fact, other than the donations most leftists probably saw these things as experiences that helped qualify her for the position. Now, I know very little about Mr. Tillerson but I expect him to be vetted fully in confirmation hearings but a liberal posted this topic claiming that his being on the board of this company (which would end when his tenure at Exxon ends I am certain) somehow disqualifies Mr. Tillerson as Secretary of State. If the left feels so strongly that folks who do business with foreign nations are disqualified as SecState candidates shouldn't they have opposed Clinton for all of her known Chinese ties?
You can't avoid business. The conflict of interest occurs when personal gain is the advantage to securing the position. And this one from the head down reeks of it.
You are convicting these guys of malfeasance when they have yet to take office. The Clinton's on the other hand have a documented history of turning public office into personal wealth but that is OK with you. I have seen you repeatedly accuse conservatives of being OK with anything a politician does so long as it is a conservative politician. Now, I can't say you are wrong about folks giving the guys on their side a pass for transgressions that they condemn the opposition for. In fact it appears to apply to many folks on your side of the aisle too.
Your claiming that as President and as Secretary of State that conflicts of interest took place and choices were made so that there was personal profit for the Clinton's and their industries for profit? You and I both know why President-elect Trump did not release his taxes and yes conservatives were fine with it. Our incoming President is dirty. He is not just connected to... but he and his family lead for profit industries and I seriously doubt either of those two gentleman will make choices or push for international agreements or sanctions that will cost them cash in pocket.
No point in going further is there.
Have a good evening.
|
|
People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would do them harm.
|
| |
|
Drudge X
|
Dec 19 2016, 11:58 PM
Post #56
|
|
- Posts:
- 14,846
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #11
- Joined:
- Mar 17, 2016
|
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 10:35 PM
- Drudge X
- Dec 19 2016, 10:20 PM
Information leak all the time from someone said something or post something on Twitter or Facebook. Unfortunately you find it credible only when conservatives are involved as the victim roles.
Do you deny the information? Let's see... this is only at the developing stage and you took all news about this at face value.
Clinton pay to play charitable foundation was caught red handed. Every evidence were pointing to their quid pro quo modus operandi and you denied it flatly.
Care to explain?
|
|
Kate Steinle was separated from her family permanently but leftists didn't seem to mind.
|
| |
|
Coast2coast
|
Dec 20 2016, 02:51 AM
Post #57
|
|
- Posts:
- 16,072
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #19
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- Demagogue
- Dec 19 2016, 10:53 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 09:50 PM
- Demagogue
- Dec 19 2016, 09:41 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 08:22 PM
- Demagogue
- Dec 19 2016, 06:56 PM
Quoting limited to 5 levels deep
You can't avoid business. The conflict of interest occurs when personal gain is the advantage to securing the position. And this one from the head down reeks of it.
You are convicting these guys of malfeasance when they have yet to take office. The Clinton's on the other hand have a documented history of turning public office into personal wealth but that is OK with you. I have seen you repeatedly accuse conservatives of being OK with anything a politician does so long as it is a conservative politician. Now, I can't say you are wrong about folks giving the guys on their side a pass for transgressions that they condemn the opposition for. In fact it appears to apply to many folks on your side of the aisle too.
Your claiming that as President and as Secretary of State that conflicts of interest took place and choices were made so that there was personal profit for the Clinton's and their industries for profit? You and I both know why President-elect Trump did not release his taxes and yes conservatives were fine with it. Our incoming President is dirty. He is not just connected to... but he and his family lead for profit industries and I seriously doubt either of those two gentleman will make choices or push for international agreements or sanctions that will cost them cash in pocket. No point in going further is there. Have a good evening.
|
|
|
| |
|
Alt Right PEPE
|
Dec 20 2016, 04:43 AM
Post #58
|
|
- Posts:
- 7,770
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #195
- Joined:
- May 14, 2016
|
So.
Red China hacks America daily. U S Companies are in Totalitarian Communist China.
This Russia bad, Red China good nonsense has to stop!
|
We Will Gnaw on ANTIFA Skulls
|
| |
|
Coast2coast
|
Dec 20 2016, 06:29 AM
Post #59
|
|
- Posts:
- 16,072
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #19
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- Drudge X
- Dec 19 2016, 11:58 PM
- Coast2coast
- Dec 19 2016, 10:35 PM
- Drudge X
- Dec 19 2016, 10:20 PM
Information leak all the time from someone said something or post something on Twitter or Facebook. Unfortunately you find it credible only when conservatives are involved as the victim roles.
Do you deny the information?
Let's see... this is only at the developing stage and you took all news about this at face value. Clinton pay to play charitable foundation was caught red handed. Every evidence were pointing to their quid pro quo modus operandi and you denied it flatly. Care to explain? You can link me this denial discussion and then we can take it from there.
|
|
|
| |
|
Coast2coast
|
Dec 20 2016, 06:30 AM
Post #60
|
|
- Posts:
- 16,072
- Group:
- Admins
- Member
- #19
- Joined:
- Mar 18, 2016
|
- I_feel_the_trump
- Dec 20 2016, 04:43 AM
So.
Red China hacks America daily. U S Companies are in Totalitarian Communist China.
This Russia bad, Red China good nonsense has to stop! Yeah, sure, I applauded hacking by a foreign government?
Please don't try to make me into you. It's most distasteful.
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|