https://thinkprogress.org/greg-gianforte-financial-ties-russia-c0c34126266d
The breathless headline: “GOP candidate has financial ties to Russian companies sanctioned by the U.S. government”
The actual “transgression” is that the candidate, whose net worth is somewhere north of $100M, has $250K in shares of a couple of American ETFs that have holdings in some Russian companies.
Leftists have gone nuts.
Hey, there’s more there than Benghazi or emailgate, so it’s probably worth making a huge deal out of it. Voters love to be outraged, and apparently don’t care if it makes much sense.
President Cheeto built his early Republican credentials by loudly and somewhat frequently proclaiming that Obama was born in Kenya, implying that he was muslim, and outright stating that Obama was out to destroy or sabotage America (i.e., “Obama founded ISIS.”). There is evidence of varying levels of contact between members of Trump’s campaign and transition team and Russia. Whether this contact (which did not seem to be shared by quantity or quality by those in the Clinton campaign) is benign or something more nefarious remains to be seen. But overall, those who live by the scaremongering sword won’t get much sympathy when they are facing the business end.
When the Democrats make baseless accusations about the President’s birth certificate for 5 years despite contrary evidence, then they might have “crossed the absurdity line” anywhere close to President Trump. But this? This is nothing compared to Trump’s absurdity.
Yeah, there’s nothing remotely recent or comparable on the side of the GOP.
Trump has shown that absurdity can be a political winner. Perhaps if Hillary had been more absurd she would have won – she was definitely destroyed in the absurdity department.
@ iiandyiiii: A salesman once said, “Ignorance on fire is better than knowledge on ice.” If Hillary had learned to distill her policy proposals into sound bites 20x shorter, she might have won.
Also, if she weren’t a proven sociopath, a sleazy rapist-apologist, unfathomably dishonest, and a frail old lady who needs help up and down stairs, that would’ve helped, too.
How many times have the liberals crossed the line since you started counting? How many lines are there and how many more remain?
In my experience, leftists, as opposed to liberals, are actually pretty skeptical of the whole Russia thing.
The article has an attention grabbing headline, but the content is informative and acurate. Before the article gets to the silly comments from the Democratic party spokesperson, it makes it clear it’s not a big deal and puts the Repulican candidate’s willingness to report his finances in a good light.
I don’t know where leftists come into play here.
I also don’t know why it is wrong to ask whether investments in sanctioned businesses is what we should expect from our political candidates. If these businesses are under sanctions then it seems like a good idea to sell your investments in those businesses once you become aware your money is supporting them.
“Neo-McCarthyism”? Heavens to Betsy. Can you show us on the doll where the mean liberals blackballed you?
I maintain that nonsensical neo-McCarthyism is still more reasonable than this type of garbage.
And by the way, you’re confusing the issue. One might read your post and think, “Hey, this millionaire bought a relatively modest amount of ETFs that sound like they were broadly invested in an array of businesses, and just by total chance, those investments happened to include two sanctioned Russian companies.” That was my first opinion when I read your post, and it did indeed seem unreasonable.
However, the ETFs that he bought are called “VanEck Vectors Russia ETF” and “IShares MSCF Russia ETF.” The fact that those funds are invested in two sanctioned companies shouldn’t come as a total surprise. It isn’t clear when he bought these funds, but I do question the judgment of someone who would see Russia invade a neighboring country that did not attack them, and annex part of it; know that Russia routinely bombs civilians to defend the presidency of a mass-murdering, gas-using sociopath; and also learn that Russia illegally interfered in US elections; and then decide that he wants a piece of Russia’s action.
It’s totally legitimate to question whether this man’s commitment to his own profits is greater than his commitment to security in Europe, to oppose mass slaughter of civilians, and to uphold the integrity of US elections. Because at the moment, he seems to be putting rather modest (for him) profit above those three principles. If we go back in time, I would similarly question a politician who, say, thought that investing in South Africa was a good thing to do.
That the funds have small investments in sanctioned companies is not really a significant concern compared to the bigger picture.
That’s really an idiotic term, indicating a severe ignorance of history. (Well, not as bad as Andrew Jackson preventing the Civil War.) There is a link between current events & McCarthyism: Roy Cohn.
I do await details on links between Trump’s minions & Putin. But that’s not why I find him (& them) utterly unfit for the roles they are trying to fill. There are so many other reasons.
The Washington Post’s recent Guns and religion: How American conservatives grew closer to Putin’s Russia was quite interesting.
Oh, this one annoys me to no freaking end.
‘The stupid Democrat Party libtards still hate Russia. They are so out of touch they don’t even realize that the Russians love money these days, just like real Americans. And Putin is a leader that leads with leadership unlike that wimp Obama! And now they even love God and keep the gays in their place. Go Russia.”
Modern day Russia has none of the ideologies that McCarthyists raged against. If Russia has an ideology, it’s “identify insufficiently protected assets and steal them”. Russia is more criminal cartel than country but they are a criminal cartel with nukes and lots of oil. They have a strategic self-interest in keeping oil prices as high as possible which drives most of their so called foreign policy.
Yes, they are huge human rights abusers and Putin won’t hesitate to kill anyone that stands in the way of his accumulation of money and power. This includes not only his political enemies but anyone that has something that he wants, such as a successful business. Or a Super Bowl ring. (OK, he didn’t kill for the ring, he didn’t have to.)
But he did let this guy develop some successful businesses in Russia. And then he used the Russian legal system to steal them. And then he murdered the guys lawyer in prison.
Back in 2005, Patriots owner Robert Kraft was attending a reception in Moscow. He was showing off his SuperBowl ring and handed it to Putin. He held out his hand to get it back. Putin pocketed it and left the room with several bodyguards. Kraft never saw the ring again, but he was contacted by state department officials who urged him to issue a statement saying he had given Putin the ring.
I love this story because it illustrates the dangers of dealing with Putin like he’s someone that’s…… not a criminal.
The bottom line is that Putin has a relationship with the truth that is even shakier than Trumps. And Russia is NOT our friend and it’s a mistake to trust them. It may be worth making agreements with them because those agreements may mitigate their behavior until it becomes advantageous for them to break the agreement – but they will break it if the rewards are high enough.
If Putin says he likes you and complements your hair, you’re still not safe from his machinations. He’s lying. If he complements your hair he has an ulterior motive and he’s lying. Don’t believe him and don’t change US policy because he says he likes you and your hair. He’s lying. And if he admires your wedding ring don’t hand it to him for a closer look. You’ll never see it again and Melania will be pissed.
Benghazi was bullshit (after the initial inquiry), but in what way was maintaining private servers for the conduct of official state department business not a big deal?
Birtherism made Republicans look stupid. Is that what we are trying to achieve for the Democrats as well?
Hear hear. The primary characteristic of McCartyism wasn’t the bad mouthing of Russia, it was the vile slandering and personal destruction of thousands of US citizens due to their past political associations. Calling legitimate investigations into the extent to which Trump campaign was complicit in Russian unlawful manipulation of the US election , is like calling people assisting Sudanese refugees, neo-slave traders because both are trying to transport Africans into the United States.
As to the accusations in the OP, does anyone know how strict that sanctions against the companies were? If it was illegal according to US law to do business with these companies, than either this mutual fund was in violation of the law and should prosecuted for investing in these companies while doing business in the United States, or else the individual (or his financial advisor) should be prosecuted for doing an end run around the sanctions by investing in this foreign mutual fund without due diligence.
We must not allow an absurdity gap!