The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject

Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Elvis, Jeff

Re: The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject

Postby Belligerent Savant » Sat Apr 20, 2019 4:24 pm

.

overcoming hope » Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:13 pm wrote:


I know I've read it and I wanted to try and make this a learning exercise. You have not presented the whole quote and do not have the proper context.

on that same page, he says that:

"Everyone tells me if you get one of these independent counsels it ruins your presidency."

he also says:

"It takes years and years and I won't be able to do anything."

Do you see how that provides a little more context?



Indeed, it provides additional context that demonstrates it doesn't mean what those frothing at the mouth for ANY semblance of validation (in this Russiagate farce) want it to mean.

More desperation/grasping at straws.

[Trump may well be guilty of crimes completely removed from activities related to Russia, but "Russiagate" won't be addressing/investigating them.]

Belligerent Savant » Sat Apr 13, 2019 11:01 am wrote:
Via Counterpunch, Jim Kavanagh:

https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/04/12 ... -politics/


Excerpts:


It wasn’t an investigation. It was/is an act of political theater, staged in an ongoing dramatic festival where, increasingly, litigation substitutes for politics. Neither party has anything of real, lasting, positive political substance to offer, and each finds itself in power only because it conned the electorate into thinking it offered something new. That results in every politician being vulnerable, but to a politically vacuous opposition that can only mount its attacks on largely politically irrelevant, often impossible to adjudicate, legalistic or moralistic grounds. Prosecutorial inquiry becomes a substitute for substantive political challenge.

...

the Democratic establishment’s’ main goal throughout this was not to “get” Trump, but to channel its own voters’ disgust with him into support for some halcyon, liberal, status quo ante-Trump, and away from left demands for a radical change to the social, economic, and political conditions that produced him and his clueless establishment opponent in 2016. The Democrats’ goal was, and is, not to defeat Trump, but to stave off the left.

User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 2184
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject

Postby stickdog99 » Sat Apr 20, 2019 5:11 pm

JackRiddler » 20 Apr 2019 03:54 wrote:.

Breaking! Dutch spy agency claims to have pictures of Russians going in and out of a Russian building in the years 2014-2017! Breaking! Dutch spy agency assigns name to this Russian group, and it's the same name that US spy agencies have also given it! Breaking, breaking, Q-E-fuckin'-D!!! What do you mean, you don't care and you don't want to see the pictures? Fuck, you CAN'T see the pictures, sorry. You don't have the clearance that Dutch and US spy agencies award, as a matter of national security, to protect you, you ungrateful traitor. But maybe if you wait, and keep following this, like a patriot and not a traitor, you can be strung along and made to anticipate the pictures for another four or five years. By then, you won't know the labor theory of value or the history of imperialism or how to effect social and political change in American contexts, but you'll have learned the names of many Russians going in and out of a Russian building in the years 2014-2017, and the crimes that US and Dutch spy agencies and/or FBI informant Marcy Wheeler allege or insinuate or speculate or vaguely suggest they may have committed! Several of which might not even seem like crimes to you but that will be because you are either not an expert and should keep your trap shut about national security and things you don't know, or because you are a fucking Russian traitor. You'll be sorry if you ever doubted it, because these pictures will indeed show Russians going in and out of a Russian building in the years 2014-2017! Breaking! This is proof of the crime, it's a smoking gun!


Four or five years? I am still waiting for that video footage of a plane hitting the Pentagon.
stickdog99
 
Posts: 3386
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject

Postby RocketMan » Sat Apr 20, 2019 5:52 pm

Had a laugh at this. Moderate Rebels is a pretty interesting channel.

-I don't like hoodlums.
-That's just a word, Marlowe. We have that kind of world. Two wars gave it to us and we are going to keep it.
User avatar
RocketMan
 
Posts: 2311
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:02 am
Location: By the rivers dark
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject

Postby liminalOyster » Sat Apr 20, 2019 8:57 pm

Rocketman ... This is fucking amazing.
"It's not rocket surgery." - Elvis
User avatar
liminalOyster
 
Posts: 1222
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject

Postby stickdog99 » Sun Apr 21, 2019 1:34 am

Image
stickdog99
 
Posts: 3386
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject

Postby overcoming hope » Sun Apr 21, 2019 10:00 am

seemslikeadream » Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:01 pm wrote:it is exactly what Hunt wrote and what was presented in the Mueller report when I have time I will look for the exact page of the Mueller report for you

there is no more context

you could google it if you do not believe me and can not wait


Slad, do you still insist there is no more context that would help us better understand the quote "I'm Fucked"? You seem to be willfully ignoring the rest of the quote that has been provided. Please respond to my specific question.
overcoming hope
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 11:32 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject

Postby Elvis » Sun Apr 21, 2019 3:22 pm

there is no more context


Slad, that's pretty darned disingenuous! :lol:
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 5820
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject

Postby alloneword » Mon Apr 22, 2019 6:26 pm

RocketMan » Sat Apr 20, 2019 9:52 pm wrote:Moderate Rebels is a pretty interesting channel.


That it is. :lol:

alloneword
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:19 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject

Postby stickdog99 » Tue Apr 23, 2019 9:36 pm

Looking at a recent court filing of the defense team of the Russian catering company of "Putin's cook" that was subject to a sham PR indictment by Mueller in order to make Mueller's counterespionage investigation look like it was making some actionable headway is illuminating.

Remember that Mueller's team was taken by surprise when Concord Management and Consulting (the company owned by "Putin's cook") hired a DC law firm and showed up in court demanding discovery of the crimes it was accused of. Since then, Mueller's team has tried to argue that its vague indictment and a dump of 4 million documents (about 80% of which has been declared "too sensitive" to be shared with anyone working for the indicted Russian company) has provided the defense team of Concord Management and Consulting with all the "discovery" information it needs to prepare its defense against the US government's charges.

Here are some choice excepts from the defense's motion to be granted a bill of particulars so the defense team can actually make sense of the government's charges against Concord Management and Consulting.

This case is a first of its kind, alleging that a foreign company with no presence in the United States conspired to defraud the United States by allegedly funding social media content directed at the 2016 American presidential election. ...

While providing no details about what the Concord corporate entity actually did, the Indictment simply states over and over again that the “Defendants and their co-conspirators” engaged in various acts, making it impossible to determine when and where the term “Defendants” includes Concord and who the co-conspirators are.

These vague and overly general allegations are insufficient to permit Concord to prepare adequately for trial. First, the Indictment—which charges Concord only with conspiracy—references that Defendants (including Concord) conspired with persons “known and unknown to the Grand Jury,” Indictment ¶¶ 2, 9, but fails to identify the names of these purported coconspirators.

Second, the Indictment generally alleges that “Defendants and their coconspirators” committed acts in furtherance of the alleged conspiracy, and the general assertion that Concord was the “primary source of funding” for its co-conspirators’ alleged activities, and that Concord engaged in such vague pursuits as “recommend[ing] personnel and over[seeing] . . . activities,”, but provides no details about what Concord actually did and when it did it.

Third, the Indictment does not identify a single employee of Concord who is alleged to have performed acts that would have bound Concord; and as to co-defendant Mr. Prigozhin ("Putin's cook"), is devoid to any allegation about who or what he allegedly approved or supported. Id. ¶ 12. Without more detail, Concord cannot defend itself at trial against allegations involving unknown co-conspirators relating to unidentified social media accounts that it allegedly conspired to fund.

Concord is entitled to this basic information under Rule 7(f).

To this point, the government has denied Concord’s request for basic information on the sole ground that it is an improper attempt to preview the government’s evidence. This is not the case. Rather, Concord, as a corporate defendant incapable of acting otherwise than through the actions of its employees and agents, is simply seeking to determine who did what, when, and where in order to assess whether any individual had requisite authority and, as such, may have bound or created liability for the corporate entity. As a corporate entity, Concord only possesses knowledge through those employees and agents who acted on its behalf. A bill of particulars is therefore necessary to provide Concord with the information needed to prepare its defense and avoid surprise at trial.

Concord was charged, along with several co-defendants, in one count of an eight-count Indictment on February 16, 2018. The only individual co-defendant allegedly connected to Concord is Mr. Prigozhin. ...

None of these allegations inform Concord of the essential facts constituting a conspiracy to defraud the United States as required by Fed. R. Crim. P. 7(c). Nor do the allegations inform Concord of any actions specifically taken by its officers or employees.

III. Procedural Background

...

The requests in Concord’s letter generally fall into three broad categories. First, Concord seeks the identity of all unindicted alleged co-conspirators referenced (but not identified) in the Indictment.

Second, Concord seeks the identification of the social media accounts and email addresses allegedly controlled by or posted by the alleged co-conspirators.

...

This motion tracks the requests Concord made in its April 11, 2018 letter. First, it seeks the identities of the unindicted co-conspirators referenced in the Indictment—a request courts in this district commonly grant in cases like this one that involve complex conspiracy allegations and non-violent conduct. Second, Concord seeks an order directing the government to specify exactly which social media accounts and email addresses were allegedly controlled by those co-conspirators and form the basis of the allegations in the Indictment. Finally, Concord seeks definitions for the undefined terms used in the Indictment, details about the vague expenditures referenced in the Indictment, information about specific computer identification data (such as VPNs), and the identities of individuals referenced in the Indictment who are not alleged to be co-conspirators. All three of these categories of information fall within the scope of Rule 7(f), and the government should be directed to produce a bill responding to Concord’s request before trial in this matter.

A. This Court routinely orders the government to disclose the names of alleged unindicted co-conspirators

This court has routinely granted motions for bills of particulars where the defendant seeks the identities of unindicted co-conspirators. See United States v. Ramirez, 54 F. Supp. 2d 25, 30 ...

The broad conspiracy charged in the Indictment repeatedly includes various activities allegedly undertaken by “Defendants and their co-conspirators,” which includes “others known and unknown to the Grand Jury.” These “coconspirators” are not identified in the Indictment, making it impossible for Concord to identify who was involved in the alleged conduct, and specifically whether the government alleges that Concord itself engaged in the specified conduct. ...

Given the circumstances here, to the extent that the “co-conspirators” referenced in the Indictment are officers, employees, or agents of Concord, it is inconceivable that the government would not have to provide that information. ...

B. The identification of social media and email accounts is necessary to allow Concord to adequately prepare for trial

The Indictment alleges that as part of the alleged conspiracy “Defendants and their coconspirators . . . created hundreds of social media accounts,” “thematic group pages on social media sites,” and “registered and controlled hundreds of web-based email accounts hosted by U.S. email providers under false names so as to appear to be U.S. persons and groups.”

The Indictment identifies a total of fifteen social media accounts and group pages and two email addresses, but not the “hundreds” of accounts that the government alleges the Defendants created and used as part of the conspiracy. Without knowing precisely which social media accounts, group pages, and email accounts the government asserts were part of the alleged conspiracy, it will be impossible for Concord to prepare a defense against these allegations.
...

The government should also be ordered to provide definitions for the undefined terms used in the Indictment, details about the vague expenditures referenced in the Indictment, information about specific computer identification data (such as VPNs), and the identities of individuals who are not alleged to be co-conspirators (such as a volunteer for the Trump campaign, “real U.S. persons,” and “Campaign Officials”). Each of these categories of information will similarly allow Concord to adequately prepare for, and avoid surprises at, the trial in this matter. Definitions are appropriate subjects of a bill of particulars motion, especially when the terms can be characterized as “unnecessarily vague.” Hubbard, 474 F. Supp. at 80.

Here, Concord has sought clarity about the terms used in the Indictment—vague terms such as “improper foreign influence,” “political activities,” “interfere with elections and political processes,” “impairing,” “interfering,” “computer infrastructure,” “strategic goal to sow discord,” “derogatory information,” disparaging,” “certain domestic activities,” “interference operations,” and “approved and supported.” See generally, Ex. A. These terms have no legal meaning, and by virtue of their inclusion in the Indictment, they force Concord to speculate what their meaning might be.

...

Finally, computer information including VPNs, and the identities of non-conspirators including the volunteer for the Trump campaign, the “real U.S.persons,” id. and the “Campaign Officials,” are necessary to allow Concord to prepare for trial.

VI. Conclusion

In seeking the particulars of the allegations in the Indictment, Concord is not asking that the government explain the manner in which it will prove its allegations, but rather for an explanation of the allegations themselves so as to allow it to prepare a defense and avoid surprise at trial.
stickdog99
 
Posts: 3386
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject

Postby coffin_dodger » Tue Apr 30, 2019 10:38 am

Perhaps this should have been posted in The Onion thread. But still.

Norway finds 'Russian spy whale' off Arctic coast
BBC News 29 April 2019 - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-48090616

A beluga whale found off Norway's coast wearing a special Russian harness was probably trained by the Russian navy, a Norwegian expert says.

Marine biologist Prof Audun Rikardsen said the harness had a GoPro camera holder and a label sourcing it to St Petersburg. A Norwegian fisherman managed to remove it from the whale.

He said a Russian fellow scientist had told him that it was not the sort of kit that Russian scientists would use.

Russia has a naval base in the region.


probably trained. Vague enough to stick, I guess.
He said a Russian fellow scientist had told him that it was not the sort of kit that Russian scientists would use. OK, so confirmation from a Russian that it isn't Russian kit - but we can't trust those slippery Russian bastards, can we?
Russia has a naval base in the region. Well, it's them then, isn't it?

The BBC is a joke.
coffin_dodger
 
Posts: 2087
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 6:05 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (14)

Re: The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject

Postby RocketMan » Tue Apr 30, 2019 3:19 pm

The reporting on this was so po-faced in places like BBC and The Guardian I almost did a spit take. Hilarious stuff. :mrgreen:

Nice to see you, long time, coffin_dodger! :yay

coffin_dodger » Tue Apr 30, 2019 5:38 pm wrote:Perhaps this should have been posted in The Onion thread. But still.

Norway finds 'Russian spy whale' off Arctic coast
BBC News 29 April 2019 - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-48090616

A beluga whale found off Norway's coast wearing a special Russian harness was probably trained by the Russian navy, a Norwegian expert says.

Marine biologist Prof Audun Rikardsen said the harness had a GoPro camera holder and a label sourcing it to St Petersburg. A Norwegian fisherman managed to remove it from the whale.

He said a Russian fellow scientist had told him that it was not the sort of kit that Russian scientists would use.

Russia has a naval base in the region.


probably trained. Vague enough to stick, I guess.
He said a Russian fellow scientist had told him that it was not the sort of kit that Russian scientists would use. OK, so confirmation from a Russian that it isn't Russian kit - but we can't trust those slippery Russian bastards, can we?
Russia has a naval base in the region. Well, it's them then, isn't it?

The BBC is a joke.
-I don't like hoodlums.
-That's just a word, Marlowe. We have that kind of world. Two wars gave it to us and we are going to keep it.
User avatar
RocketMan
 
Posts: 2311
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:02 am
Location: By the rivers dark
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject

Postby stickdog99 » Tue Apr 30, 2019 5:02 pm

coffin_dodger » 30 Apr 2019 14:38 wrote:Perhaps this should have been posted in The Onion thread. But still.

Norway finds 'Russian spy whale' off Arctic coast
BBC News 29 April 2019 - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-48090616

A beluga whale found off Norway's coast wearing a special Russian harness was probably trained by the Russian navy, a Norwegian expert says.

Marine biologist Prof Audun Rikardsen said the harness had a GoPro camera holder and a label sourcing it to St Petersburg. A Norwegian fisherman managed to remove it from the whale.

He said a Russian fellow scientist had told him that it was not the sort of kit that Russian scientists would use.

Russia has a naval base in the region.


probably trained. Vague enough to stick, I guess.
He said a Russian fellow scientist had told him that it was not the sort of kit that Russian scientists would use. OK, so confirmation from a Russian that it isn't Russian kit - but we can't trust those slippery Russian bastards, can we?
Russia has a naval base in the region. Well, it's them then, isn't it?

The BBC is a joke.


I'm not sure that this story still has legs.
stickdog99
 
Posts: 3386
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject

Postby coffin_dodger » Tue Apr 30, 2019 5:15 pm

:rofl2
coffin_dodger
 
Posts: 2087
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 6:05 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (14)

Re: The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject

Postby alloneword » Sat May 04, 2019 5:50 pm

McGovern keeps it short and sweet:

Orwellian Cloud Hovers Over Russia-gate - May 3, 2019

Ray McGovern calls out the void of evidence at the heart of the Senate hearing with Attorney General Barr on Wednesday.

By Ray McGovern
Special to Consortium News

George Orwell would have been in stitches Wednesday watching Attorney General William Barr and members of the Senate Judiciary Committee spar on Russia-gate. The hearing had the hallmarks of the intentionally or naively blind leading the blind with political shamelessness.

From time to time the discussion turned to the absence of a legal “predicate” to investigate President Donald Trump for colluding with Russia. That is, of course, important; and we can expect to hear a lot more about that in coming months.

More important: what remains unacknowledged is the absence of an evidence-based major premise that should have been in place to anchor the rhetoric and accusations about Russia-gate over the past three years. With a lack of evidence sufficient to support a major premise, any syllogism falls of its own weight.

The major premise that Russia hacked into the Democratic National Committee and gave WikiLeaks highly embarrassing emails cannot bear close scrutiny. Yes, former CIA Director John Brennan has told Congress he does not “do evidence.” In the same odd vein, Brennan’s former FBI counterpart James Comey chose not to “do evidence” when he failed to seize and inspect the DNC computers that a contractor-of-ill-repute working for the DNC claimed were hacked by Russia.

Call us old fashioned, but we Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) still “do evidence” — and, in the case at hand, forensic investigation. For those who “can handle the truth,” the two former NSA technical directors in VIPS can readily explain how the DNC emails were not hacked — by Russia or anyone else — but rather were copied and leaked by someone with physical access to the DNC computers.

We first reported hard forensic evidence to support that judgment in a July 2017 memorandum for the president. Substantial evidence that has accumulated since then strengthens our confidence in that and in related conclusions. Our conclusions are not based on squishy “assessments,” but rather on empirical, forensic investigations — evidence based on fundamental principles of science and the scientific method.

Bizarre, Medieval

All “serious” members of the establishment, including Barr, his Senate interrogators, and the “mainstream media” feel required to accept as dogma the evidence-free conventional wisdom that Russia hacked into the DNC. If you question it, you are, ipso facto, a heretic — and a “conspiracy theorist,” to boot.

Again, shades of Orwell and his famous “two plus two equals five.” Orwell’s protagonist in “1984,” Winston Smith, imagines that the State might proclaim that “two plus two equals five” is fact. Smith wonders whether, if everybody believes it, does that make it true?

Actually, the end goal is not to get you to parrot that two plus two equals five. The end goal is to make it so you’d never even consider that two plus two could equal anything other than five.

During the entire Barr testimony Wednesday, no one departed from the safe, conventional wisdom about Russian hacking. We in VIPS, at least, resist the notion that this makes it true. We shall continue to insist that two and two is four, and point out the flaws in any squishy “Intelligence Community Assessment” that concludes, even “with high confidence,” that the required answer is “five.”

Doubtful Dogma

Wednesday’s Senate hearing brought a painful flashback to a similarly widely-held, but evidence-free dogma — that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction before the U.S. attacked that country. It gets worse: Many of the same people who promoted the spurious claims about WMD are responsible for developing and proclaiming the dogma about Russian hacking into the DNC. The Oscar for his performance in the role of misleader goes, once again, to former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, whose “credits” go back to the WMD fiasco in which he played a central role.

Before the war on Iraq, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld put Clapper in charge of analysis of satellite imagery, the most definitive collection system for information on WMD. In his memoir, Clapper admits, with stomach-churning nonchalance, that intelligence officers, including me, were so eager to help [spread the Cheney/Bush claim that Iraq had a ‘rogue WMD program’] that we found what wasn’t really there.” [Emphasis added]

Last November as Clapper was hawking his memoir at the Carnegie Endowment I had a chance during the Q and A to pursue him on that and on Russia-gate. I began:

“You confess [in Clapper’s book] to having been shocked that no weapons of mass destruction were found. And then, to your credit, you admit, as you say here [quoting from the book], ‘the blame is due to intelligence officers, including me, who were so eager to help [the administration make war on Iraq] that we found what wasn’t really there.’”

“Now fast forward to two years ago. Your superiors were hell bent on finding ways to blame Trump’s victory on the Russians. Do you think that your efforts were guilty of the same sin here? Do you think that you found a lot of things that weren’t really there? Because that’s what our conclusion is, especially from the technical end. There was no hacking of the DNC; it was leaked, and you know that because you talked to NSA.”

Evidence

Back to the Senate hearing on Wednesday: Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), during a line of questioning about evidence of obstruction of justice, asked the attorney general if he personally reviewed the underlying evidence in the Mueller report.

“No,” said Barr, “We accepted the statements in the report as factual record. We did not go underneath it to see whether or not they were accurate. We accepted it as accurate.”

Harris: You accepted the report as evidence? You did not question or look at the underlying evidence?

Barr: We accepted the statements in the report and the characterization of the evidence as true.”

Harris: “You have made it clear that you did not look at the evidence.”

It was crystal clear on Wednesday that Barr had bigger fish to fry, as well as protective nets to deflect incoming shells. He is likely to be preoccupied for weeks answering endless questions about his handling of the Mueller report. It is altogether possible, though, that in due course he plans to look into the origins of Russia-gate and the role of Clapper, Brennan and Comey in creating and promoting the evidence-free dogma that Russia hacked into the DNC — and, more broadly, that, absent Russia’s support, Trump would not be president.

For the moment, however, we shall have to live with “The Russians Still Did It, Whether Trump Colluded or Not.” There remains an outside chance, however, that the truth will emerge, perhaps even before November 2020, and that, this time, the Democrats will be shown to have shot themselves in both feet.

For further background, please see:
VIPS Fault Mueller Probe, Criticize Refusal to Interview Assange
VIPS: Mueller’s Forensics-Free Findings

alloneword
 
Posts: 246
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:19 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The Russian Conspiracy as RI subject

Postby liminalOyster » Wed May 08, 2019 11:08 am

DC-area radio station told to register as Russian agent
ByTHE ASSOCIATED PRESS WASHINGTON — May 8, 2019, 4:15 AM ET

The owner of a Washington, D.C., area radio station that broadcasts Sputnik International 24/7 has been ordered to register his Florida-based broadcasting company as a Russian federal agent.

WTOP-FM reports Judge Robin Rosenburg ruled Tuesday that RM Broadcasting must register with the U.S. government. RM and a Russian government-owned news agency agreed in 2017 that the station would broadcast the agency's communications continuously without edit until 2021.

Federal agents told RM in 2018 that the station was acting as a "publicity agent" for the Russian agency. It said RM would need to register as a foreign principal under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, originally adopted to fight Nazi propaganda. RM asked the court to rule on the matter, arguing that it only buys and resells airtime.

———

Information from: WTOP-FM, http://www.wtop.com

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/dc- ... t-62897558
"It's not rocket surgery." - Elvis
User avatar
liminalOyster
 
Posts: 1222
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 5 guests