Votto
Diamond Member
- Oct 31, 2012
- 56,228
- 56,850
- 3,605
- Thread starter
- #41
Rinat Akhmetshin is a name we should have heard a lot of but we didn't. This guy seems to be in the middle of everything. He even has ties to Fusion GPS Sen. Chuck Grassley has accused Fusion GPS, which admits it was behind the Steele dossier, of being an unregistered Russian agent because of its work with the Russians lobbying against Magnitsky, including Akhmetshin and Veselnitskaya.
Rinat Akhmetshin: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know | Heavy.com
Was the Trump dossier written by a Russian? Perhaps Rinat Akhmetshin.
The Trump Dossier Is Fake -- And Here Are The Reasons Why
In any case I think it is clear that Rinat Akhmetshin should be getting some serious news media attention. There are only two possibilities, he is working for the CIA or he is a Russian spy sent to help half the country take down Trump.
Either way, the Left wing media has not interest, nor does the Left winged Federal government.
"no collusion" "collusion is not a crime" "but they did collusion too!" derrrrrp![]()
Both Campaigns Sought Russian Dirt. Clinton's Way Was Legal.
Both Campaigns Sought Russian Dirt. Clinton's Way Was Legal
Do you not understand the difference between LEGAL and ILLEGAL?
Fox News host wrong that no law bans Russia-Trump collusion
https://lawandcrime.com/politics/ab...foreign-nationals-to-influence-u-s-elections/
Federal election law, administered by the Federal Election Commission, prohibits contributions, donations and other expenditures by “foreign nationals” in any federal, state or local election as well an exchange of any “thing of value.” Most recently, Section 303 of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, also known as the McCain-Feingold Act, strengthened the ban on foreign money in U.S. electioneering.
Six years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a decision by a U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., that Congress can ban individuals who lawfully reside in the U.S. and are neither U.S. citizens nor “permanent residents” from making donations or gifts related to any election. In that case, Bluman v. Federal Election Commission, a three-judge panel said the limitation was a legitimate tool for government to prevent “foreign influence over U.S. elections.” The decision specifically banned contributions to candidates and political parties as well as “express-advocacy” expenditures — those ads that clearly support or oppose a specific electoral outcome. The Supreme Court affirmed the decision without comment.
Yep, just like how using her personal e-mail to reveal confidential government information was legal and then lie her arse off about it.
Naturally, the FBI had no problems with that either.