The recent unclassified report made public on 1/5/17 by the intelligence community regarding Russia’s involvement in the 2016 U.S. presidential elections include the pertinent commentary:
Page 1-Putin has had many positive experiences working with Western political leaders whose business interests made them more disposed to deal with Russia, such as former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder.
Page 2-Cyber Espionage Against US Political Organizations. Russia’s intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets associated with both major US political parties (This would include the RNC.)
Page 3-Russia collected on some Republican-affiliated targets but did not conduct a comparable disclosure campaign.
Based on this report, it is my contention that the president-elect is now an unwitting Russian asset because of his business ties with Russian entities and peoples close to the Russian President Vladimir Putin; and because of the data that Russian agents have collected from republican campaign related websites, which can be used to compromise both the U.S. President-elect and fellow republicans, if in the future, they should become more critical of Russia. This knowledge alone can have a chilling effect on the republicans’ U.S. policy towards Russia.
In addition, I suspect that the president-elect keeps on denigrating the veracity of the media establishment outlets and the U.S. intelligence community in order to inoculate himself with his supporters from the negative feedback that will be certain to occur.
After the 1/5/16 meeting between the republican President-elect Donald Trump and the intelligence community where the accumulated proof regarding Russia’s interference in the 2016 U.S. election process was shared in a secure environment, the president still continued to downplay the significance of the intelligence data that he had just reviewed.
Later, CNN quoted him as saying, ““While Russia, China, other countries, outside groups and people are consistently trying to break through the cyber infrastructure of our governmental institutions, businesses and organizations, including the Democrat National Committee, there was absolutely no effect on the outcome of the election, including the fact that there was no tampering whatsoever with voting machines,”
In connecting the dots in an attempt to explain the president-elect’s denial of Russia’s meddling in the 2016 U.S. elections and the science of climate change despite overwhelming evidence proving otherwise, one has to add other clues like his pro-Russian rhetoric throughout the presidential campaign season. He has frequently verbalized the Russian President Vladimir Putin’s very own policies against NATO and questioned its sanctions against Russia for its invasion of Crimea with its annexation of this region which the international community has denounced. The president-elect has made off the cuff remarks like the people in Crimea were already Russian, and so what’s the big deal. All this pro Russian attitude bore fruit, when the U.S. policy towards Russia regarding Ukraine was deleted from the republican platform.
“The challenges ahead are evident in a survey we carried out of a representative sample of 1,800 Ukrainians in January 2013, before the Maidan. The survey was implemented by the Kiev-based Razumkov Center and focused on issues of language, identity and region.”
“However, it is worth noting that only only 1 percent of Crimeans mentioned Russia as a homeland and only 10 percent mentioned the Soviet Union. This suggests that even though Crimeans have much stronger pro-Russian geo-political preferences than other Ukrainians, these preferences did not translate into a strong emotional identification with Russia. Moreover, in a more recent Razumkov Center survey (from December 21-25 2013), while substantial minorities endorsed either Crimean independence (35 percent) or joining “another state” (29 percent), a majority (56 percent was opposed to either of the political options involving Crimea’s separation from Ukraine. Of course, it is anyone’s guess how these proportions have been affected by the events of the past two months in the context of a highly partisan political and informational environment.”
Then there is the 8/15/16 Time Magazine report by Jeff Nesbit which details the many business ties and other connections that the president -elect has with Russia. Here are excerpts:
“But Trump’s dodge—that he has no businesses in Russia, so there is no connection to Putin—is a classic magician’s trick.
“The truth, as several columnists and reporters have painstakingly shown, is that several of Trump’s businesses outside of Russia are entangled with Russian financiers inside Putin’s circle.”
“But the real truth is that, as major banks in America stopped lending him money following his many bankruptcies, the Trump organization was forced to seek financing from non-traditional institutions. Several had direct ties to Russian financial interests in ways that have raised eyebrows. What’s more, several of Trump’s senior advisors have business ties to Russia or its satellite politicians. The Trump-Russia links beneath the surface are even more extensive,” Max Boot wrote in the Los Angeles Times.”
“What’s more, three of Trump’s top advisors all have extensive financial and business ties to Russian financiers, wrote Boot, the former editor of the Op Ed page of the Wall Street Journal and now a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.”
Trump’s de facto campaign manager, Paul Manafort, was a longtime consultant to Viktor Yanukovich, the Russian-backed president of Ukraine who was overthrown in 2014. Manafort also has done multimillion-dollar business deals with Russian oligarchs. Trump’s foreign policy advisor Carter Page has his own business ties to the state-controlled Russian oil giant Gazprom. … Another Trump foreign policy advisor, retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, flew to Moscow last year to attend a gala banquet celebrating Russia Today (where he is a frequent guest)
“Manafort denounced the New York Times Monday for a deeply reported story that broke over the weekend showing that secret ledgers in Ukraine contained references to $12.7 million in payments earmarked for him. The Times report said that the party of former Ukraine president and pro-Russia ally, Viktor Yanukovych, set aside the payments for Manafort as part of an illegal and previously undisclosed system of payments.”
“But it is Trump’s financing from Russian satellite business interests that would seem to explain his pro-Putin sympathies.”
“The most obvious example is Trump Soho, a complicated web of financial intrigue that has played out in court. A lawsuit claimed that the business group, Bayrock, underpinning Trump Soho was supported by criminal Russian financial interests. While its initial claim absolved Trump of knowledge of those activities, Trump himself later took on the group’s principal partner as a senior advisor in the Trump organization.”
“Tax evasion and money-laundering are the core of Bayrock’s business model,” the lawsuit said of the financiers behind Trump Soho. The financing came from Russian-affiliated business interests that engaged in criminal activities, it said. “(But) there is no evidence Trump took any part in, or knew of, their racketeering.”
“But Bayrock wasn’t just involved with Trump Soho. It financed multiple Trump projects around the world, Foer wrote. “(Trump) didn’t just partner with Bayrock; the company embedded with him. Bayrock put together deals for mammoth Trump-named, Trump-managed projects—two in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a resort in Phoenix, the Trump SoHo in New York.”
“But, as The New York Times has reported, that was only the beginning of the Trump organization’s entanglement with Russian financiers.”
President-elect’s Nominee For Secretary Of State Was Director Of … https://grondamorin.com/…/president–elects–nominee-for-secretary-of-state-was-direct… 12/19/16
The following data is from the above link:
“Tillerson’s award followed a 2011 deal between ExxonMobil and Rosneft to explore the Kara Sea, in Russia’s Arctic.”(value up to $500 billion dollars)
“It was put on hold in 2014 after the Obama administration imposed wide-ranging sanctions against Russia. The sanctions were punishment for Putin’s Crimea annexation that spring and Russia’s undercover invasion of eastern Ukraine.”
“The ban covers the US sharing of sophisticated offshore and shale oil technology. Exxon was supposed to halt its drilling with Rosneft. The firm successfully pleaded with the US Treasury department to delay the ban by a few weeks, with the Kremlin threatening to seize its rig. In this brief window Exxon discovered a major Arctic field with some 750m barrels of new oil.”