Posted on 07/12/2017 8:28:10 PM PDT by TigerClaws
I wish we could deport all these lefties, trade them for some people from Poland. What good are these lefties for the country? It’s like trying to swim with cement shoes. They are completely out of control now, just utterly raving lunatics.
Was that meeting here or in Russia?
Duh. Just read article.
If Ms. Veselnitskaya was in the country without a valid visa, shouldn’t the Slimes be touting it as a meeting with an illegal alien as a good thing?
Note: I linked to the YouTube search results for “maria bartiromo” + “podesta”, rather than a single video, as these things tend to ‘disappear’ from the popular video hosting site.
Maria Bartiromo Gets into Heated Debate with John Podesta Over His Ties to Russia
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=maria+bartiromo+podesta
Posted on 7/13/2017, 12:13:16 AM by ETL
The White House has been grappling all week with revelations of a meeting the president’s eldest son held last year with Russian attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya, who was said to have dirt on Hillary Clinton as part of a Russian government effort to help the Trump campaign.
But Deputy White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders used Wednesday’s off-camera briefing to highlight DNC and Clinton ties to foreign governments including Russia and Ukraine.
“If we’re looking at Russia relationships with anybody, it would be directly with the Clintons,” she said, citing examples of a speech former President Bill Clinton gave in Russia for which he reportedly earned over $500,000 and reports of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton selling what Sanders described as “a third of the world’s uranium,” to Russia.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/4635
> Thanks for sending this set of documents and the original stock option agreement document that John found (and which we did not have in our files probably due to administrative oversight at our end which I will explain further).
>
> First, with respect to the stock option agreement, there is a discrepancy in the stated vesting schedule between the one John signed back in 2011 and the one I sent to Bob which you sent back to me signed. This first document shows a 3 year vesting schedule and the current one shows a 4 year schedule. Accordingly, I dug back further and confirm that the original terms were for a 4 year vesting schedule of which John was ¾ vested (this reflects what John actually exercised – i.e. 75,000 out of 100,000 options). The 4 year schedule is reflected in the “offer” letter which our previous CEO sent to John and John signed and sent back. It is also reflected in the Board minutes where John’s grant was approved. Please see the attachments for reference. The good news is that I think John understands these options to be 4 year vesting and that his exercise of 75,000 shares is correct. The original stock option agreement with the erroneous 3 year vesting was sent and signed in error due to scrivener’s error by the folks at Joule who were handling this at the time (based on what I can tell, this was prepared by a junior finance person who left the company several years ago). Bob and John Cobb and I can brainstorm on how to deal with this discrepancy – maybe some sort of acknowledgement by the Company and John Podesta that the first version was signed in error.
>
> Second, it is my understanding that John transferred the resulting 75,000 common shares from the option exercise to the Leonidio LLC. As such, we would need to edit the Transfer of Share Agreement to reflect the transfer of 75,000 common shares to the LLC. The LLC would also sign a form of joinder agreement covering the common shares tying them to the provisions of the 2007 Stock Plan. I am comfortable with correcting the applicable page to the Transfer Agreement to reflect the common shares as we assemble the final documentation package. I think the LLC would need to sign a form of joinder agreement with regard to the 75,000 common shares – which I hope you can help coordinate. I think Bob and John Cobb have the final documents on their system with the Podesta/LLC particulars and I can edit them if they can send to me. Everything is dated January 3, 2014 as intended.
What do we know about Goldstone?
Appeasement: From ObamaCare to recess appointments, honoring the Constitution has not been an administration hallmark. But when it comes to betraying secrets to mollify the Russians, it becomes a document the president hides behind.
It was bad enough that the 2012 defense authorization bill signed by President Obama set America on a downward spiral of military mediocrity.
He also issued a signing statement, something he once opposed, saying that language in the bill aimed at protecting top-secret technical data on the U.S. Standard Missile-3 - linchpin of our missile defense - might impinge on his constitutional foreign-policy authority.
Section 1227 of the defense law prohibits spending any funds that would be used to give Russian officials access to sensitive missile-defense technology as part of a cooperation agreement without first sending Congress a report identifying the specific secrets, how they'd be used and steps to protect the data from compromise.
The president is required to certify that any technology shared will not be passed on to third parties such as China, North Korea or Iran, that the Russians will not use transferred secrets to develop countermeasures and that the Russians are reciprocating in sharing missile-defense technology. ..."
"In his signing statement, Obama said he would treat these legal restrictions as 'non-binding' and that 'my administration will also interpret and implement section 1244 (sic) in a manner that does not interfere with the president's constitutional authority to conduct foreign affairs and avoids the undue disclosure of sensitive diplomatic communications.'
Betraying our secrets is easy for a president who betrayed allies Poland and the Czech Republic to placate Moscow.
Poland was to host ground-based interceptors such as those we've deployed in California and Alaska, with missile-tracking radar deployed in the Czech Republic.
Obama pulled the plug when Moscow objected. Never mind, he said, we have a better approach: a four-phase plan that calls for using three versions of the Navy's Standard SM-3 interceptor missile that forms the backbone of its Aegis missile-defense system.
The fourth phase consists of a missile still on the drawing board scheduled for deployment by 2020, a version of the SM-3 called the Block IIB. It would intercept hostile missiles in the "early intercept" phase before an enemy missile could release its warheads and decoys. The Russians want the SM-3's secrets, and Obama appears to be willing to turn them over.
The president wants to save the New Start Treaty, which the Russians have threatened to abandon if we try to fully implement President Reagan's dream of defeating a nuclear missile attack.
Russia has unilaterally asserted that any qualitative or quantitative improvement in U.S. missile defenses would be grounds for withdrawal from the treaty.
Read More At Investor's Business Daily:
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/010912-597158-obama-gives-russia-missile-defense-secrets.htm#ixzz3jXmMbVwY
"Obama was talking with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev when neither of them realized that their conversation was being picked up by microphones. Here is what they said:
Obama: "On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved, but it's important for him to give me space."
Medvedev: "Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you ..."
Obama: "This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility."
Medvedev: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir."
"This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility." That statement tells us much about the president's mindset.
The specific mention of missile defense is worrisome enough. Mr. Obama has retreated from the missile defense plan that was negotiated with European allies during the George W. Bush administration.
Apparently, he is signaling Moscow that he intends to retreat further. The clear implication from the president's comments is that he cannot tell the American people before the election what he plans to do after the election.
In addition, there is the phrase "on all these issues," implying more is at stake than just missile defense."
Article: Obama plans double cross on missile defense
When it comes to keeping America safe, we shouldn't be too flexible:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/29/obama-plans-double-cross-on-missile-defense/print/
__________________________________________________________
Now THERE’S some “flexible” Russian collusion. For REAL.
Many facts show a democrat-Russia collusion. Few, if any, otherwise.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.