Bill Browder and the Magnitsky Act. Humanitarian Act or Big Scam?

It is so strange that Lucy or Andrei never want to follow the money claims outlined in the doc I provided.

You can speculate about timelines all you want - but following the money would make the most sense.

They also never mention several other people who have mysteriously died in relation to this case.

jamie said:
ok, the doc I referenced includes a total of 470 million dollars of fraud - where is that on the timeline?

 There is no context for this document.  Where did it come from?  What are you trying to say? How does this relate to Browder?  Also, do you have a problem with Nekersov's timeline?  Do you agree with it as is, besides saying there is a missing item two years later?

jamie said:
It is so strange that Lucy or Andrei never want to follow the money claims outlined in the doc I provided.
You can speculate about timelines all you want - but following the money would make the most sense.
They also never mention several other people who have mysteriously died in relation to this case.

 Where does this document come from?  The claim you are making goes years beyond.  Can you first verify what has happened previously?

Ok, still waiting to hear where you go this document from.  I did a little searching and it seems that it is a January 2011 letter from Bill Browder's London law firm. Brown Rudnik about money laundering through accounts held at Credit Suisse.  It seems he wants to accuse the Sepanova family of this crime.  

I remembered that name from my reading and I checked in the Krainer book and let's see what he has to say about the Sepanova family and Browder's mention of them in his book, "Red Notice" Olga Stepanova worked in the tax office that received the $230 Million check and in his book he tries to link her to the fraud:

[Red Notice] Chapters 35 and 36: “The Swiss Accounts” and “The Tax Princess”

Chapters 35 and 36 relate the story connected to a former private banker from Russia who contacted Browder through Jamie Firestone. His name was Alexander Perepilichnyy and he had been a Moscow private banker for a number of wealthy Russian clients but somehow lost much of their money. One of his clients was a certain Olga Stepanova. Browder informs us that Mrs. Stepanova was “the lady at the tax office who signed the refund cheque” paid by the Russian tax authority to the stolen Hermitage subsidiaries. The reason why Mr. Perepilichnyy brought Mrs. Stepanova to the goodfellas’ attention was because she opened a criminal case against him, accusing him of stealing her money. Once the goodfellas took aim at her, they discovered that she was inexplicably wealthy for a salaried state official and they dug up enough dirt on her to make an internet video that got even more traction than their previous videos about Karpov and Kuznetsov.

But the really odd part about the Perepilichnyy story was that as soon as Stepanova brought criminal charges against him, he packed up and moved his family to Surrey to “lie low.” Lying low and maintaining a family in the wealthy Surrey County would be very expensive for an immigrant without a livelihood. While Browder makes it seem like he was an innocent victim of a witch hunt by corrupt Russian state officials, it is likely that Perepilichnyy did embezzle much money from his clients and escaped to London to avoid arrest. Another oddity is that again we see the goodfellas completely immersed in digging up dirt and making videos about a middle rank Russian official. Shouldn’t they be busy running their hedge fund? Apparently not.

Let's face it - your sources are spending their lives trying to discredit the whistleblowers, that they have spent zero time figuring out what actually happened to the money.

Browder and his firm presented evidence of the money trails to the Russian government, and it went nowhere - why is that?

I have no idea what Perepilichnyy is brought up here.  The guy who oddly died at age 43.

Your side definitely favors placing blame on dead people - and there is a trail stemming from this corruption.  

What's the deal with using "goodfellas"?  How professional is that?  Again - just plain weird.

This seems to be a pretty decent article which follows the money trail (originally from Novaya Gazetta):

https://www.reportingproject.net/proxy/en/following-the-magnitsky-money

jamie said:
Let's face it - your sources are spending their lives trying to discredit the whistleblowers, that they have spent zero time figuring out what actually happened to the money.
Browder and his firm presented evidence of the money trails to the Russian government, and it went nowhere - why is that?
I have no idea what Perepilichnyy is brought up here.  The guy who oddly died at age 43.
Your side definitely favors placing blame on dead people - and there is a trail stemming from this corruption.  
What's the deal with using "goodfellas"?  How professional is that?  Again - just plain weird.

 That accusatory comment was practically fact free. You did not answer any of my questions.  You just posted some dense legal document and you say it proves something about the money later on, not being able to describe how, what, when, where or why.  You use stuff from Browder's untouchables website, which has blatant lies about Magnistsky being murdered and being a whistelblower. The people I follow have carefully demonstrated the evidence on that.  Browder has not produced evidence to support his side of the story.

Krainer used the term "goodfellas" because he thinks of Browder and Co as crooks.  Browder uses the equally dumb term,"Unouchables" because he wants to claim that mid-level government bureaucrats stole his money and got off scott free.  No Pulitzer prizes for writing being awarded on either side. 

Still don't get how can you say my side favors placing blame on dead people when they place blame on Bill Browder, who is very much alive.  

Their whole objective is to discredit and arrest Browder.  They place blame on one of the few survivors.  The use of the term "goodfella" takes away any credibility of responsible journalism.

Most everything on the untouchables site can be backed up - if you want to focus 100% on how he was murdered - then that says a lot about your side.  

Did all of this reporting come from the untouchables site?

https://www.reportingproject.net/proxy/en/following-the-magnitsky-money

Are the 34 PDF documents all fake?

jamie said:
Their whole objective is to discredit and arrest Browder.  They place blame on one of the few survivors.  The use of the term "goodfella" takes away any credibility of responsible journalism.
Most everything on the untouchables site can be backed up - if you want to focus 100% on how he was murdered - then that says a lot about your side.  

 We have gone through most of it here in this thread and no it did not hold up.

Is any of this true - if so, do you have any concern?

Olga Stepanova, the former head of Moscow’s 28th District Tax Inspectorate.

Three weeks after her office was said to have approved a portion of the tax refund in question, Ms. Stepanova put a $629,030 down payment on a luxury apartment in Dubai, according to financial documents gathered in the investigation and reviewed by The New York Times. The purchase, documented in a bank statement from Credit Suisse, was made under the name of Ms. Stepanova’s husband, Vladlen Stepanov, a construction worker.

Days later, two of Ms. Stepanova’s colleagues at the tax office also bought luxury apartments in the same elite Dubai neighborhood, taking money from the same account, according to the documents.

In addition to the Dubai apartment, Ms. Stepanova and her husband bought a large villa in Dubai and another in Montenegro, and built an 11,900-square-foot house outside of Moscow, according to the investigation. In total, Ms. Stepanova acquired nearly $39 million in assets and cash after her office authorized the tax refund.

jamie said:
Is any of this true - if so, do you have any concern?

Olga Stepanova, the former head of Moscow’s 28th District Tax Inspectorate.

Three weeks after her office was said to have approved a portion of the tax refund in question, Ms. Stepanova put a $629,030 down payment on a luxury apartment in Dubai, according to financial documents gathered in the investigation and reviewed by The New York Times. The purchase, documented in a bank statement from Credit Suisse, was made under the name of Ms. Stepanova’s husband, Vladlen Stepanov, a construction worker.

Days later, two of Ms. Stepanova’s colleagues at the tax office also bought luxury apartments in the same elite Dubai neighborhood, taking money from the same account, according to the documents.

In addition to the Dubai apartment, Ms. Stepanova and her husband bought a large villa in Dubai and another in Montenegro, and built an 11,900-square-foot house outside of Moscow, according to the investigation. In total, Ms. Stepanova acquired nearly $39 million in assets and cash after her office authorized the tax refund.

 First, I do not have documents to prove any of this happened.  Second, I don't have the other side of the story--what did the Stepanov's say when presented with this material?  Third, I don't have evidence showing this is related in any way to Bill Browder.  Even if Ms. Stepanova is a crooked employee of the Russian tax department, it does not mean she took Browder's money.   He claimed that this company seals were stolen and then used to take over ownership of his company, but that's not how changing company ownership even works.  He said Magnitsky was arrested because he was a whistleblower, but there is zero evidence to show that. Browder's story does not hold water long before we even get to the tax department.  

And when questioned about Ms. Stepanov under oath at the Prevezon trial, in 2015, Browder did not present any evidence to prove any of this:

When Mr. Cymrot [Prevezon lawyer] points out that those seals represent the key link tying the Interior Ministry with the fraud, Browder claims there are many other links, except he can’t actually point to any specific one and falls back on claiming incompetence: “I’m not a lawyer here...”

Mr. Cymrot: If the $230 million fraud were done with other documents, there is no tie between the $230 million fraud and the criminal investigation of you; isn’t that correct?”

Browder: No, no.

Mr. Cymrot: Why not?

Browder: You’re mischaracterizing the whole – you’re simplifying and mischaracterizing the – the whole story.

Browder then proceeds to read the text of his complaint where he implicates Interior Ministry’s Artem Kuznetsov in the fraud by claiming that “on or about 28 April 2007,” he flew to Cyprus on a private jet together with one Dmitry Klyuev, a convicted fraudster and owner of the Universal Savings Bank (through which part of the $230 million tax refund was recycled). Klyuev supposedly was the mastermind of the network that carried out the fraud. While in Cyprus, they also met with Pavel Karpov and two Russian lawyers, and some ten days later Klyuev met Olga Stepanova, the head of the Moscow Tax Office No. 28 (which paid out a major part of the $230 million refund).

So there you have it, the whole merry bunch of fraudsters met in Cyprus

where they must have forged their evil plans. But when Mr. Cymrot asks
Browder how he knew that Kuznetsov went to Cyprus with Klyuev, Browder
replies that he’d seen copies of travel records, only he can’t remember how
he got those records or from whom, only that this person (whom he couldn’t
remember) was a whistle-blower.

Mr. Cymrot: I see. But that’s just a label [whistle-blower]. We don’t know the name, we don’t know the address ... and we don’t know whether the documents are real, right?

Browder: I don’t know.

Mr. Cymrot: But you relied upon it?

Browder: My team did.

Mr. Cymrot: And you ultimately went to the U.S. Attorney’s office and said, ‘This happened’? As his deposition continued, Browder presented the same sterling quality of evidence about the meeting between Dmitiry Klyuev and Olga Stepanova:some anonymous someone told his team that this meeting took place. That was it. The fact that they couldn’t prove that the meeting actually took place or what Klyuev and Stepanova may have discussed didn’t seem to bother Browder. His further supporting evidence, consisting of money transfers that allegedly ended up in different individuals’ accounts or their purchases of expensive cars and apartments also turned out to be entirely useless. In Browder’s mind however, all these trips to Cyprus, meetings between the alleged fraudsters and their supposed wealth prove their involvement in the fraud conclusively enough to justify his making public accusations against them, destroying their reputations, and having them placed on the list of sanctioned individuals under the Magnitsky Act. However, none of his allegations could stand up in a court of law. As Browder’s depositions shows, Olga Stepanova was almost certainly innocent of Browder’s malicious accusations against her. So, probably, was Major Pavel Karpov.

Why go to Browder's testimony when I present a comprehensive list of where the money went from a legit Russian newspaper?

https://www.reportingproject.net/proxy/en/following-the-magnitsky-money

Why not reply to that - this is what I'm trying to get at.

https://www.reportingproject.net/proxy/jdownloads/Following%20the%20Magnitsky%20Money/p30.pdf

jamie said:
Why go to Browder's testimony when I present a comprehensive list of where the money went from a legit Russian newspaper?
https://www.reportingproject.net/proxy/en/following-the-magnitsky-money
Why not reply to that - this is what I'm trying to get at.

https://www.reportingproject.net/proxy/jdownloads/Following%20the%20Magnitsky%20Money/p30.pdf

 Because when Browder was asked to provide proof of all that he could not.  Your comprehensive list comes from Browder, but it suddenly disappeared when he was under oath.  And suddenly you found a "legit" Russian newspaper?   Is that an "Integrity Initiative" project, cause Browder is listed in their documents under UK Cluster.  When I opened your link the first line said "As Russian tax lawyer Sergei Magnitsky . . ."   They don't even get his profession correct. 

nan said:

  .  And suddenly you found a "legit" Russian newspaper?   Is that an "Integrity Initiative" project, cause Browder is listed in their documents under UK Cluster.  When I opened your link the first line said "As Russian tax lawyer Sergei Magnitsky . . ."   They don't even get his profession correct. 

Reportingproject.net is OCCRP, which stands for Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project. 

https://www.occrp.org/en  

If you look at the heading of the article, you'll see "By OCCRP."   OCCRP is the organization that was responsible for the Panama Papers. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organized_Crime_and_Corruption_Reporting_Project

Novaya Gazetta does seem to be the best at the moment - though they don't critique Putin much at all.  Possibly because a lot of them have been killed over the past few years.

I still don't know why anyone - like the Russian government has produced a report saying where the moment has gone?  You would think they would investigate when large sums of money disappear.  But there's nothing.

Have they run across any info relating to Delco Networks?  Why isn't Putin addressing some of these companies?  Why is it all on Browder?  This is what I really don't get.  Is Browder is prosecuted - then sanctions will be lifted next day? 

nan said:

And suddenly you found a "legit" Russian newspaper? 

 Not suddenly. Jamie had brought up Novaya Gazeta before.

cramer said:

nan said:

  .  And suddenly you found a "legit" Russian newspaper?   Is that an "Integrity Initiative" project, cause Browder is listed in their documents under UK Cluster.  When I opened your link the first line said "As Russian tax lawyer Sergei Magnitsky . . ."   They don't even get his profession correct. 

Reportingproject.net is OCCRP, which stands for Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project. 
https://www.occrp.org/en  
If you look at the heading of the article, you'll see "By OCCRP."   OCCRP is the organization that was responsible for the Panama Papers. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organized_Crime_and_Corruption_Reporting_Project

 They may be credible for some things, but this article is straight out of Bill Browder's standard playbook and has been debunked.  Sergi Magnitsky was an accountant, not a lawyer, he was not a whistleblower, and that the company seals were not used to transfer ownership of the companies, and just about every detail provided in the first few paragraphs is simply BS.  If Jaime disagrees than he can provide the evidence to  show Magnisky was a lawyer and a whistleblower, and that the company seals were used, etc.  We have gone over all of these points in this thread, some multiple times.  

Sometimes "legit" newspapers publish lies: https://theintercept.com/2019/01/02/five-weeks-after-the-guardians-viral-blockbuster-assangemanafort-scoop-no-evidence-has-emerged-just-stonewalling/

great - one lie you repeat over and over and over again - so now we can't believe any newspaper - any reporting.

This is paul and trump's MO - pick one issue and repeat it to discredit everything else.

Hillary corrupt - Emails

Intelligence Community not trusted - WMDs

Newspapers not legit - Guardian

Southern Border dangerous - Rapists

jamie said:
great - one lie you repeat over and over and over again - so now we can't believe any newspaper - any reporting.
This is paul and trump's MO - pick one issue and repeat it to discredit everything else.
Hillary corrupt - Emails
Intelligence Community not trusted - WMDs
Newspapers not legit - Guardian
Southern Border dangerous - Rapists

 Russiagate is a massive media exercise of repeating 24/7/365 allegations as facts, in particular, "Russia is attacking our democracy" and "Russia hacked the DNC and Podesta" until people believe they are true because they've heard them repeated so many times.  Propaganda/brainwashing 101.

But you can't fool all the people all the time:

And don't forget the Integrity Initiative!  Clusters of journalists in many countries writing anti-Russian propaganda and smearing left-wing and anti-war advocates.  

I have more to say on this, but first here are my notes on the indictment of the Russian Lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya.  I took them will listening to interviews which I will probably post.  Here is a copy of the indictment:

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/557-natalia-veselnitskaya-indictment/883bce187bc76e9a97ec/optimized/full.pdf

Basically, they are counting on her not showing up in court.  She did nothing wrong and Bill Browder is probably behind this.  It was filed in the Southern District of New York where he has very close friends (Preet Bharara - no longer there but still influence).  The media is claiming this has nothing to do with Russiagate, but not true.  It's related to the Prevezon hearings which I have used as major sources in this thread and  relate to the Trump Tower meeting and Bill Browder and his 230 million dollar fairy tale. Also, there are references to his claimed story in the indictment.

Natalia Veselniskaya is being accused of collaborating with the Russian prosecutors office, where she submitted her memo about the case.  She submitted the same memo with the Southern District of New York and now they are suing her.  She wanted to share it with Congress but was not allowed.  Basically they are suing her for talking with another attorney, which is not illegal.  She shared with them because Bill Browder is important news and they needed to know.  

She talked about this when she was here at the time of the Trump Tower meeting.  Here is what she said (best I could write down):  "The fact that I communicated with the Russian Federation does not. . . I’m acting as a source of information and I shared this information with . . also wanted to share this with Congress but did not get a chance."

Also, and I have posted this before, her testimony to the United States Senate, Committee of the Judiciary:

 http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4366365-Natalia-Veselnitskaya-Testimony-to-Senate.html

nan said:
I have more to say on this, but first here are my notes on the indictment of the Russian Lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya.  I took them will listening to interviews which I will probably post.  Here is a copy of the indictment:
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/557-natalia-veselnitskaya-indictment/883bce187bc76e9a97ec/optimized/full.pdf
Basically, they are counting on her not showing up in court.  She did nothing wrong and Bill Browder is probably behind this.  It was filed in the Southern District of New York where he has very close friends (Preet Bharara - no longer there but still influence).  The media is claiming this has nothing to do with Russiagate, but not true.  It's related to the Prevezon hearings which I have used as major sources in this thread and  relate to the Trump Tower meeting and Bill Browder and his 230 million dollar fairy tale. Also, there are references to his claimed story in the indictment.
Natalia Veselniskaya is being accused of collaborating with the Russian prosecutors office, where she submitted her memo about the case.  She submitted the same memo with the Southern District of New York and now they are suing her.  She wanted to share it with Congress but was not allowed.  Basically they are suing her for talking with another attorney, which is not illegal.  She shared with them because Bill Browder is important news and they needed to know.  

She talked about this when she was here at the time of the Trump Tower meeting.  Here is what she said (best I could write down):  "The fact that I communicated with the Russian Federation does not. . . I’m acting as a source of information and I shared this information with . . also wanted to share this with Congress but did not get a chance."
Also, and I have posted this before, her testimony to the United States Senate, Committee of the Judiciary:
 http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4366365-Natalia-Veselnitskaya-Testimony-to-Senate.html

It's pretty clear she was working with the Russian government against the Magnitsky sanctions. That's why she met with Trump's people, not just the phony story that it was about adoptions.  

South_Mountaineer said:

nan said:
I have more to say on this, but first here are my notes on the indictment of the Russian Lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya.  I took them will listening to interviews which I will probably post.  Here is a copy of the indictment:
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/557-natalia-veselnitskaya-indictment/883bce187bc76e9a97ec/optimized/full.pdf
Basically, they are counting on her not showing up in court.  She did nothing wrong and Bill Browder is probably behind this.  It was filed in the Southern District of New York where he has very close friends (Preet Bharara - no longer there but still influence).  The media is claiming this has nothing to do with Russiagate, but not true.  It's related to the Prevezon hearings which I have used as major sources in this thread and  relate to the Trump Tower meeting and Bill Browder and his 230 million dollar fairy tale. Also, there are references to his claimed story in the indictment.
Natalia Veselniskaya is being accused of collaborating with the Russian prosecutors office, where she submitted her memo about the case.  She submitted the same memo with the Southern District of New York and now they are suing her.  She wanted to share it with Congress but was not allowed.  Basically they are suing her for talking with another attorney, which is not illegal.  She shared with them because Bill Browder is important news and they needed to know.  

She talked about this when she was here at the time of the Trump Tower meeting.  Here is what she said (best I could write down):  "The fact that I communicated with the Russian Federation does not. . . I’m acting as a source of information and I shared this information with . . also wanted to share this with Congress but did not get a chance."
Also, and I have posted this before, her testimony to the United States Senate, Committee of the Judiciary:
 http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4366365-Natalia-Veselnitskaya-Testimony-to-Senate.html

It's pretty clear she was working with the Russian government against the Magnitsky sanctions. That's why she met with Trump's people, not just the phony story that it was about adoptions.  

Before I respond to this inaccurate statement, I want to mention something I learned last week about how the right and the left support Browder for different reasons.  On the left (Dems) there is support for Browder because he is perceived as a humanitarian activist against arch-enemy Putin who controls Trump and helped get him elected by interfering in he election.  On the right (Repubs) they think Putin is trying to sabotage Trump and the Russian Lawyer is his agent and the Trump Tower meeting was seen as a set-up to catch Don Jr.  So both Dems and Repubs fall for the Russian disinformation campaign (like the II) and think Putin and Russia are bad. They both claim that Natalia Veselnitskaya has deep ties to the Russian government.  On the right they also think that HIllary is pro-Russian because of Uranium 1.  Glad I'm in the Browder is a friggin' criminal camp.

The reason I found this out is because of a Twitter war that erupted last week between Lee Stranahan (the Republican guy who hosts the fabulous Fault Lines show with Progressive Garland Nixon on Sputnik), Kim Stossel (conservative reporter for the Wall Street Journal) and Dan Bongino (conservative personality and Fox host wanabee and author of a crap-filled book called "Spygate"). It seems Bongino is a big fan of Browder, but since he speaks to a conservative audience he leaves out stuff that right-wing Browder fans won't like:  Browder is a Democrat (and Clinton fan, I think), Browder's grandfather was a Communist and an agent for Stallin, Browder is not a Trump supporter, he's supposedly funded by Soros (and you know how crazy that gets them), and some other stuff I don't remember.

So Stossel got in the middle of the fight between Bongino and Stranahan (and Stranahan got blocked) and it got quite ugly and the upshot is I learned some new things about the Browder story and how it plays out.  Anyway, Stossel was not about to endanger her Wall Street Journal job by looking deeper into the Browder story and Lucy Komisar comments on that and the indictment below.

And now that you have the required background knowledge, I return to S_M's post above:  

How is it "pretty clear she was working with the Russian government against the Magnitsky sanctions"?   The phony story that it was about adoptions came from Don Jr. who is such a dolt he might have been confused.  The meeting was about Bill Browder and Natalia Veselnitskaya was working on the Prevezon case and wanted to tell everyone and anyone about his lies.  

The deposition is based on lies and they charge her with presenting false information but they don't say what that is. 

Lies of WSJ’s Strassel and DOJ indictment

https://www.thekomisarscoop.com/2019/01/lies-of-wsjs-strassel-and-doj-indictment/

I called up Twitter on another tab to read the exchange between Kimberley Strassel and Lee Stranahan, the Republican guy who hosts the fabulous Fault Lines show with Progressive Garland Nixon on Sputnik, but it's taking me a while to scroll through Stranahan's defenses of Steve King.

Also, the guy tweets like a hundred times a day.

DaveSchmidt said:
I called up Twitter on another tab to read the exchange between Kimberley Strassel and Lee Stranahan, the Republican guy who hosts the fabulous Fault Lines show with Progressive Garland Nixon on Sputnik, but it's taking me a while to scroll through Stranahan's defenses of Steve King.
Also, the guy tweets like a hundred times a day.

 Yeah, he's awful on many topics--just beyond cringeworthy--but he's also an honest person that relentlessly investigates facts, but he's no intellectual and he is religious and right-wing.  He's quite a character and so is Garland Nixon (a former law enforcement person--anti-war former Democrat--he's terrific) .  There are not many places where you have a Progressive and a Republican talking about issues and sometimes they pull in a Libertarian too.  It's just interesting to watch and and they have engaging discussions I have not seen anywhere else. I try to listen to all sides of an issue, so this show ticks  boxes for me without having to watch FOX news or read those conservative journals (I try that too sometimes).  It is way more engaging that that and it grows on you if you watch it for awhile. I watch it after the show has run so I can pick the topics I want to hear discussed--they also have health segments and sports and stuff that is better watched elsewhere.

But yes, he is really, really pissed off at that Bongino guy, who I had never heard of and I had to look him up and he is just super creepy. Evidently in the right-wing world he's sort of big stuff or a rising star.  

nan said:

South_Mountaineer said:

It's pretty clear she was working with the Russian government against the Magnitsky sanctions. That's why she met with Trump's people, not just the phony story that it was about adoptions.  

 
Before I respond to this inaccurate statement, I want to mention something I learned last week about how the right and the left support Browder for different reasons.  On the left (Dems) there is support for Browder because he is perceived as a humanitarian activist against arch-enemy Putin who controls Trump and helped get him elected by interfering in he election.  On the right (Repubs) they think Putin is trying to sabotage Trump and the Russian Lawyer is his agent and the Trump Tower meeting was seen as a set-up to catch Don Jr.  So both Dems and Repubs fall for the Russian disinformation campaign (like the II) and think Putin and Russia are bad. They both claim that Natalia Veselnitskaya has deep ties to the Russian government.  On the right they also think that HIllary is pro-Russian because of Uranium 1.  Glad I'm in the Browder is a friggin' criminal camp.
The reason I found this out is because of a Twitter war that erupted last week between Lee Stranahan (the Republican guy who hosts the fabulous Fault Lines show with Progressive Garland Nixon on Sputnik), Kim Stossel (conservative reporter for the Wall Street Journal) and Dan Bongino (conservative personality and Fox host wanabee and author of a crap-filled book called "Spygate"). It seems Bongino is a big fan of Browder, but since he speaks to a conservative audience he leaves out stuff that right-wing Browder fans won't like:  Browder is a Democrat (and Clinton fan, I think), Browder's grandfather was a Communist and an agent for Stallin, Browder is not a Trump supporter, he's supposedly funded by Soros (and you know how crazy that gets them), and some other stuff I don't remember.
So Stossel got in the middle of the fight between Bongino and Stranahan (and Stranahan got blocked) and it got quite ugly and the upshot is I learned some new things about the Browder story and how it plays out.  Anyway, Stossel was not about to endanger her Wall Street Journal job by looking deeper into the Browder story and Lucy Komisar comments on that and the indictment below.
And now that you have the required background knowledge, I return to S_M's post above:  

That’s not “background knowledge”.  You’ve described some argument that assorted people who nobody else really listens to (and it would drive most of us nuts to have to put up with that garbage on a regular basis).  They aren’t providing any useful information, they’re just arguing so that their “fanbase” will pay them (in dollars not rubles) or at least send them money.

nan said:

South_Mountaineer said:
It's pretty clear she was working with the Russian government against the Magnitsky sanctions. That's why she met with Trump's people, not just the phony story that it was about adoptions.  

 How is it "pretty clear she was working with the Russian government against the Magnitsky sanctions"?   The phony story that it was about adoptions came from Don Jr. who is such a dolt he might have been confused.  The meeting was about Bill Browder and Natalia Veselnitskaya was working on the Prevezon case and wanted to tell everyone and anyone about his lies.  

Easy.  I’m going to refer to actual news reports on actual documents, if that’s okay.  

Ms. Veselnitskaya, a pivotal figure in the investigation into Russian interference in the presidential election, was charged by federal prosecutors in Manhattan with seeking to thwart an earlier investigation into money laundering that involved an influential Russian businessman and his investment firm.

The money-laundering case was not directly related to the Trump Tower meeting. But a federal indictment returned in Manhattan seemed to confirm that Ms. Veselnitskaya had deep ties to senior Russian government officials and rekindled questions about whether the Kremlin tried to use her as an intermediary to Donald J. Trump’s campaign.

The charge stems from a 2013 civil investigation by the Manhattan prosecutors into the role that some of Ms. Veselnitskaya’s clients — Prevezon Holdings and its owner, Denis P. Katsyv — played in a scheme to launder ill-gotten money through New York real estate purchases.

The new indictment again raised questions about whom Ms. Veselnitskaya was representing when she met with Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, Paul Manafort and others at Trump Tower in Manhattan.

That meeting is one focus of the investigation by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, into whether the Trump campaign coordinated with Russia’s covert operation to sway the presidential race. It was organized after an intermediary promised that Ms. Veselnitskaya would deliver documents that would incriminate Hillary Clinton.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/08/nyregion/trump-tower-natalya-veselnitskaya-indictment.html

Federal prosecutors in Manhattan announced the single criminal count against the attorney, Natalia Veselnitskaya, on Tuesday. The allegation in the indictment suggests she has close ties to the Russian government — something she has previously denied in the context of the special counsel's Russia investigation.

The case stems from legal work Veselnitskaya was doing for Prevezon Holdings. Prosecutors allege the company received and laundered millions of dollars of proceeds as part of a complex Russian tax refund scheme that defrauded Russian taxpayers out of more than $200 million. The U.S. government was seeking to recover millions of dollars' worth of property, much of it tied up in New York real estate, on the ground that it was connected to the scheme.

…

Veselnitskaya submitted to the court a declaration that she presented as the investigative findings of the Russian government, the indictment says. But prosecutors allege that she helped draft the supposed independent findings "in secret cooperation with a senior Russian prosecutor."

"Fabricating evidence — submitting false and deceptive declarations to a federal judge — in an attempt to affect the outcome of pending litigation not only undermines the integrity of the judicial process, but it threatens the ability of our courts and our government to ensure that justice is done," the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, Geoffrey S. Berman, said in a statement.

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/08/683238650/russian-lawyer-at-trump-tower-meeting-charged-in-connection-to-money-laundering-

Here’s an article about that company, Prevezon, settling the money laundering case earlier, which describes some more of the details of what that company was doing and what it was charged with.  When you say, "Natalia Veselnitskaya was working on the Prevezon case and wanted to tell everyone and anyone about his lies", you might want to know what does and doesn't involve Browder.

The asset-forfeiture and money-laundering case was scheduled to begin last Monday, but it was unexpectedly settled for close to $6 million, a little under half of the amount sought by the government at the time the case was settled. The US attorney's office characterized the settlement as a win for anti-corruption efforts in a statement issued late Friday.

"Under the terms of this settlement, the defendants have agreed to pay not just what we alleged flowed to them from the Russian treasury fraud, but three times that amount, and roughly 10 times the money we alleged could be traced directly into US accounts and real estate," acting Manhattan US Attorney Joon H. Kim said.

But Prevezon described the settlement as proof that the company had done nothing wrong. It said it considered the "surprise" offer from prosecutors "too good to refuse."

"It was a surprise," said John Dillard, a spokesman for Prevezon's attorneys. "We were getting ready for opening statements and fully expected to try the case. In fact, we were looking forward to it."

"We reluctantly agreed to accept the government's offer when it became clear that the fine proposed was no more than we would have spent fully litigating the case, and that no admission of guilt, forfeiture or continued seizure of any assets was required," Dillard added. "Essentially, the offer was too good to refuse."

The investigation into whether Prevezon, a real-estate company incorporated in Cyprus, laundered millions of dollars into New York City real estate garnered high-profile attention given its ties to a $230 million Russian tax-fraud scheme and Russian lawyer Sergei Magnitsky, whose suspicious death aroused international media attention.

Magnitsky uncovered the scheme in 2008 on behalf of one of his clients at the time, the investment advisory firm Hermitage Capital. He was later thrown in jail and died in custody, and an independent human-rights commission found he had been illegally arrested and beaten. The Kremlin maintains that Magnitsky died of a heart attack.

(The founder of Hermitage, William Browder, sought justice for Magnitsky in the US and Europe after Magnitsky died. In 2012, Congress passed the Magnitsky Act, which authorizes the president to deny visas to, and freeze the assets of, Russians believed to have been complicit in Magnitsky's death.)

The US government had been investigating the $230 million scheme that Magnitsky uncovered — and what happened to the proceeds — for nearly four years. Prosecutors said the funds from the elaborate scheme had been laundered via shell companies and real-estate purchases.

The trail ultimately led to Manhattan, where Preet Bharara, then the US attorney there, accused Prevezon in September 2013 of receiving "at least $1,965,444 in proceeds from the $230 million fraud scheme" in early 2008 via wire transfers from at least two suspected shell companies through the Southern District of New York. The company then invested those funds "in various New York properties," according to the complaint.

The Russian government declined to provide the US government with evidence of Russian money flows that would strengthen the case against Prevezon. Nikolai Gorokhov, a lawyer representing Magnitsky's family, was able to photograph documents contained in a Russian case file targeting two people involved in the $230 million scheme that traced the money to Russia.

Gorokhov mysteriously fell from a window in Moscow just over a month before he was due to testify in the Prevezon case. But the documents he photographed were admitted into evidence just days before Prevezon agreed to settle.

https://www.businessinsider.com/us-v-prevezon-case-settlement-russia-money-laundering-2017-5

 I highlighted the part where an important witness (who represented Magnitsky's family) against Veselnitskaya's client Prevezon , had an unfortunate incident involving a window and the ground below that window.

South_Mountaineer said:

nan said:

South_Mountaineer said:

It's pretty clear she was working with the Russian government against the Magnitsky sanctions. That's why she met with Trump's people, not just the phony story that it was about adoptions.  

 
Before I respond to this inaccurate statement, I want to mention something I learned last week about how the right and the left support Browder for different reasons.  On the left (Dems) there is support for Browder because he is perceived as a humanitarian activist against arch-enemy Putin who controls Trump and helped get him elected by interfering in he election.  On the right (Repubs) they think Putin is trying to sabotage Trump and the Russian Lawyer is his agent and the Trump Tower meeting was seen as a set-up to catch Don Jr.  So both Dems and Repubs fall for the Russian disinformation campaign (like the II) and think Putin and Russia are bad. They both claim that Natalia Veselnitskaya has deep ties to the Russian government.  On the right they also think that HIllary is pro-Russian because of Uranium 1.  Glad I'm in the Browder is a friggin' criminal camp.
The reason I found this out is because of a Twitter war that erupted last week between Lee Stranahan (the Republican guy who hosts the fabulous Fault Lines show with Progressive Garland Nixon on Sputnik), Kim Stossel (conservative reporter for the Wall Street Journal) and Dan Bongino (conservative personality and Fox host wanabee and author of a crap-filled book called "Spygate"). It seems Bongino is a big fan of Browder, but since he speaks to a conservative audience he leaves out stuff that right-wing Browder fans won't like:  Browder is a Democrat (and Clinton fan, I think), Browder's grandfather was a Communist and an agent for Stallin, Browder is not a Trump supporter, he's supposedly funded by Soros (and you know how crazy that gets them), and some other stuff I don't remember.
So Stossel got in the middle of the fight between Bongino and Stranahan (and Stranahan got blocked) and it got quite ugly and the upshot is I learned some new things about the Browder story and how it plays out.  Anyway, Stossel was not about to endanger her Wall Street Journal job by looking deeper into the Browder story and Lucy Komisar comments on that and the indictment below.
And now that you have the required background knowledge, I return to S_M's post above:  

That’s not “background knowledge”.  You’ve described some argument that assorted people who nobody else really listens to (and it would drive most of us nuts to have to put up with that garbage on a regular basis).  They aren’t providing any useful information, they’re just arguing so that their “fanbase” will pay them (in dollars not rubles) or at least send them money.

 Oh, so the guy who wanted to give me the silent treatment because I "just did not understand" now says he has no interest understanding other people, who are dismissed as nobodies despite the numbers on twitter:  831K (Bongino), 82.6K (Stranahan) and 209K (Strassel).  

That's rich.

Anyway, I don't care about their motivation, since it's not relevant to the narrative. I find it interesting to see that the Browder story has different angles depending on party affiliation and that may well be of importance as I move this thread along.  In fact  I saw a tweet today where someone said Browder said Trump was dumb, so if the Browder story crumbles, it might go first on the right.