BREAKING: The Trump Organization Planned To Give Vladimir Putin The $50 Million Penthouse In Trump Tower Moscow
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Du ring the presidential campaign, Michael Cohen discussed the matter with a representative of Putin’s press secretary, according to two US sources.
President Donald Trump’s company planned to give a $50 million penthouse at Trump Tower Moscow to Russian President Vladimir Putin as the company negotiated the luxury real estate development during the 2016 campaign, according to four people, one of them the originator of the plan.
The revelation that representatives of the Trump Organization planned to forge direct financial links with the leader of a hostile nation at the height of the campaign raises fresh questions about President Trump's relationship with the Kremlin. The plan never went anywhere because the tower deal ultimately fizzled, and it is not clear whether Trump knew of the intention to give away the penthouse. But Cohen said in court documents that he regularly briefed Trump and his family on the Moscow negotiations.
Tags
Who is online
88 visitors
BuzzFeed News first reported in May on the secret dealings of Cohen and his business associate Felix Sater with political and business figures in Moscow.
The two men worked furiously behind the scenes into the summer of 2016 to get the Moscow deal finished – despite public claims that the development was canned in January, before Trump won the Republican nomination. Sater told BuzzFeed News today that he and Cohen thought giving the Trump Tower’s most luxurious apartment, a $50 million penthouse, to Putin would entice other wealthy buyers to purchase their own. “In Russia, the oligarchs would bend over backwards to live in the same building as Vladimir Putin,” Sater told BuzzFeed News. “My idea was to give a $50 million penthouse to Putin and charge $250 million more for the rest of the units. All the oligarchs would line up to live in the same building as Putin.” A second source confirmed the plan.
Sater, a brash real estate promoter who pleaded guilty to racketeering in 1998 and became a longtime asset to US law enforcement and intelligence agencies, had worked with the Trump Organization on deals in the past and said he came up with the idea. Cohen, Sater recalled, said, “Great idea.”
Mueller fished until he struck gold. (Mix metaphors)
Many questions are being raised, none of which are good for Trump. Having raised these questions, Mueller now has an unquestionable responsibility to follow them through. I doubt there will be a minutes peace for Trump from now until election day 2020, if he lasts that long. ( I don't think he will). These revelations are cumulatively grabbing Trump by his balls and putting on the squeeze. Couldn't happen to a more deserving guy.
The Trump organization is like a stocked pond of criminal fish. All Mueller had to do was throw an un-baited hook in the water and "Bam!", first indictment. And before he could get the line back in the water a Popadopoulos fish jumped in the boat, and it's been one indictment after guilty plea after indictment since then. Mueller had to take the boat to shore, unload at the court house, and go back out because the fish just won't stop biting out on Golden Trump pond...
It has long been rumored that if there articles of impeachment, trump will resign immediately to, "save face". So he can say, "I didn't get impeached, I resigned!!". Remember, trumps ego comes before everything and everyone.
Trump is so full of himself that he has to hang a bucket from his ass to catch the overflow.
good one, Paula
I do. I hope in includes a full investigation of what Pence knew and when as well.
I can't take full credit. It is from the movie Patch Adams.
Yup Fieryone - however he gets the boot - a full investigation into the whole goddamned bloody corrupt gop administration and basically the whole goddamned bloody corrupt gop senate - needs to happen.
And Mueller can respond with, "I don't care, but now you're indicted."
Just curious what law you think was broken by a non-gift IDEA.
Even if he had given him a condo, is that against American law--to gift someone something when you are an American citizen, not an office-holder?
Just curious if you are still spitting out, "no collusion!!!!", as tump has commanded you to do?
So you are just shouting collusion without proof?
Abuela will be proud of you!
If it just remains an idea, nothing but, if that idea then becomes the real thing, maybe a lot of laws, it depends.
If it is done as a "tit for tat" it is, especially for an office holder. It is something like this, "I'll give you the 50 million dollar condo at the top of Trump Tower Moscow, if you help me become president and, let me build the Tower in Moscow." then Putin says, "If I help you become president then you have to get rid of all those nasty sanctions on my country and, my friends." Trump then says, "Done". Now, the deal did fall through, there's no doubt about that but, Trump was elected president and, Putin now has something to blackmail him over, I'm sure he has tapes of their agreement somewhere and, maybe pictures of him with the hookers in his hotel room too.
And he did!
Nice fantasy.
Now, all you have to do is prove it.
And since the whole deal fell through, the point is rather moot, isn't it.
And if you truly believe that it was a deal designed to help Trump win an election, then when the deal fell through, it would be rather silly of Putin to help Trump, right? And why on earth would the deal fall through?
Awwwww, still carrying a candle for Hillary huh? That's so sweet of you. LOL
The pee tapes!!
Thanks for reminding us of those again, Galen, why, the pee tapes will probably come out when Trump starts going down!
Ummm, he was already president and, what makes you think it's over, I'm sure Putin still has his evidence of the Trump deal and, those nice tapes from Trumps night with the Hookers. This is what the Founders said they didn't want to happen when they wrote the Constitution.
I think if you take a look at the Steele Dossier you will find that what Cohen said today is covered in that dossier.
Now, things might be different where you live, but the word DURING would lead most people to assume that means PRIOR to the election.
Where I come from, that means that Obama was President, because the election had not taken place.
The rest is mere speculation on your part.
In your very own words, further proof that whatever took place happened before the election.
Thank you.
Well, you seem to have missed the most important part of the phrase "during the 2016 election", that didn't end until election night and, no, I'm not moving the goal posts, this is according to the testimony by Cohen today, the deal didn't fall through until it was too late for Putin to pull his hackers off of the job, they had already sent the email dump and, as we know that along with Comey's October surprise changed the polls from pro Hillary to pro Trump to win.
Nice little conspiracy theory.
Hollywood might buy that plot line.
Hmmmmm…..Freudian slip?
No one but you mentioned "moving the goalposts".
Did you feel your post would warrant that charge?
If you're in a room with friends and you're throwing out ideas to make money, it's not a crime to say "Hey, what if we rob a bank?". Now, if you took that further and started planning a bank robbery, named the bank, planned the route, assigned jobs, bought ski masks and bought guns, then you've conspired to commit a crime which is illegal, even if you never go through with it.
But what if you have a mob boss in a room with several of his top lieutenants, and the boss says "Hey, what if we rob a bank?" and then doesn't say another word about it and doesn't plan anything himself, doesn't name the bank, doesn't ever say more than that. But later, one of the lieutenants plans and executes a bank robbery and gives the proceeds to the mob boss. Is the mob boss guilty of a crime if he never explicitly told his underling to commit the crime? Do you only punish the underling even though the mob boss profited off the heist?
I think it's clear Trump and his campaign discussed getting the dirt on Hillary, that's established fact now. And in the room were the Russian operatives who could be viewed as that lieutenant that took the "discussion" as a general request and acted on it believing they would get sanctions removed, the Magnitsky Act repealed and neuter NATO as they'd been wanting to do for so long. And because the mob lieutenant is effectively out of reach for prosecution, even though we've indicted over a dozen, they're never going to be brought to justice. And we're supposed to just sit here and watch the mob boss who profited from their theft and crimes take control of the highest office in our land. Why more people aren't stomping mad about this is astounding to me. I think it may be because so many are on overload, there's just too much insanity coming from Trump no one can wrap their heads around it all so many tune out. I think that same effect was likely common among rational German citizens during the 1930's who watched the rise of Hitler and just tuned out the vitriol and rhetoric he was shouting at his regular rallies.
Did you even read the title of the article?
I believe a competent prosecutor could make a charge of possession of stolen goods pretty easily against the mob boss.
Also, a mob boss could be proven to be running a criminal enterprise in some cases. Especially if the mob boss paid the underling.
Like the Trump/Putin Crime Syndicate?
Accusations are easy.
Proving them is hard.
I know, I know...…….."Wait until...…….whatever the story of the day on the Hate Trump Train is"
Sigh.
SOSDD
"But what if I call it gift? Yes, all help we give him, millions we spend to get him elected, emails we stole for him, dirt we leak, all was gift, that make okay, right gullible, 'cough', I mean very smart and never get fooled American mooses? Yes, we friends again? So much easier fooling, I mean working with you when you not angry wis us, right Natasha, er I mean Natalia Veselnitskaya?" - (read in your best Boris impression from Rocky & Bullwinkle)
Should be too hard to find should it? Given the way we spy on everyone, including our allies.
Spoken like a true left wing parrot that thinks the Steele dossier wasn't paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign. It was a political hit piece, nothing more. Which shows how gullible/moronic our intelligence community really is.
Spoken like someone who doesn't want to know the truth, here, I found the court documents from Cohens plea deal, see if they match up to what the Steele Dossier says,
If you're honest you'll read this and, come to the conclusion that the dossier match's what Cohen said in court yesterday.
The last couple weeks are very bad for Trump. Very bad. And for Trumpsters as well of course. They are running out of ammunition.
Yesterday Cohen went to court and pled guillty to a crime he committed on behalf of Donald Trump. It wasn't something that had benefited himself or his family, it had benefited(supposedly) Trump for Cohen to lie about the dealings with Moscow.
You know what this means? It means Mueller is coming after Trump.
Where have all the Trumpsters gone who said for the past year and a half or two years that the "real" targets of the investigation were Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama , and they were going to prison?
People who continue to support Trump are making fools out of themselves. Although I hate to see that from fellow Americans, they have had enough chances to get off the Trump train.
It seems tRump has sold the USA to the Russian mob.
You gave a scenario, I responded. I am real sorry you don't like my responses, but sometimes that happens when you ask questions you don't know the answers to.
And I believe people who make allegations and assumptions on a "I Hate Trump" bandwagon, the same ones who have predicted gloom and doom for Trump for over two years now, are silly and immature people incapable of separating their obvious hatred for our President with facts and reason.
So what?
will probably come out when Trump starts going down!
That is a different tape.
There's evidence all over the place. Why are people pleading guilty if there's nothing there?
How many of them and who was it that plead guilty to anything that had to do with the campaign or Russian collusion?
Okay, then show us where Trump colluded. What was said, what was promised, what was delivered.
The trump meeting that junior set up.
There is no reason to assume senior didn't know about that meeting. Manafort and Cohen both lied about that and it has been proven to the extent that one lost his cooperation agreement and the other pled guilty for that lie.
Deny that isn't evidence of trumps campaign colluding with the russians.
Ummm, Cohen, Trumps lawyer. Now, we're waiting for his accountant and, several people from his organization to come forward, they've already asked for plea deals from Mueller in this. Would you like their names too?
So a meeting is evidence of collusion in your world?
No, [Deleted] Lying and denying and committing perjury about that meeting...Yes.
Has Trump committed perjury regarding that?
When will the charges be filed?
When did he testify?
Leave your name-calling to others. I don't play that shit.
Paul Manafort was Trump's campaign manager at one time.
He most certainly did spin that meeting. He lied about it to the public. We will see what he said to Mueller about it in his answers.
My apologies Texan...it wasn't meant as a slight. It was intended to lighten the exchange. I can see it wasn't received as intended.
I am sorry.
So? Nothing that Manafort has been charged with have anything to do with Trump or the campaign.
The Trump Tower meeting is the very definition of "collusion".
Junior agreed to the meeting so as to collude with Russian representatives in order to obtain "dirt" on Hillary.
That is a different tape.'
I'm sure little putin has a copy of that tape also.
A shock to absolutely no one.
Makes perfect sense that trumpy wants to buddy up to putin... He is worth over 200 billion dollars.
The walls are closing in on the orange buffoon. The funny part is how obviously panicked he is. I don't know how this guy has ever fooled anyone, he wears his emotions on his sleeve like a child.
6He didn't actually fool anybody. The problem was the other candidate running in 2016 was worse than he could ever be and still bamboozled enough people to vote for her to be a threat.
Yep, Hillary was a bad choice but, I would rather have her in office right now than Trump, guaranteed there wouldn't be all this shit about a Trump Tower Moscow right now and, there wouldn't be all this other crap happening in North Korea or, in the Middle East with Saudi Arabia. And, if you think it wouldn't be different or, you think it would be worse then you ain't thinkin'.
Ya know, trump said that if I voted for Hillary I would be stuck with a president that would have one scandal after another and be under FBI investigation from day one...
He was right...
I voted for Hillary and I am stuck with a president that has one scandal every day and has been under FBI investigation since day one.
No he didn't. Why do you all keep forgetting that Hillary won the popular vote by almost 3 million?
I haven't forgotten. It is like I keep telling you and everyone else that brings that up, it is meaningless and irrelevant. Hillary still lost the election (THANK YOU LORD!)
The fact that the scum won with the help of Putin has nothing to do with a fictional character.
He won because of Putins help and ignorant voters.
Prove it. Show where any vote was changed by Putin.
I know, I know, it is the only excuse you can use to explain how the Crone of Chapaqua lost. The idea that she was even a worse candidate than him escapes you.
I love that weak ass argument.
Putin put out tons of disinformation in support of trump. There's no doubt that had an impact on peoples choice in the voting booth.
We don't have to prove a vote was changed..that has never been the implication.
Children name call.
So you in fact have no credible evidence. Git it!
Does that include those that call Trump names or do you give them a pass.
Yes I know .Innuendo and rumor is good enough for you to make a charge against a conservative or Republican. Facts are not needed .
BS. You don't have anything to back that up.
Facts are always needed. I see the facts in this case...the facts in the public domain.
I don't converse with those that do. I don't vote up their comments either. I'm consistent.
You are not.
Then please prove it and provide something.
You yourself, elsewhere on this seed have called the president names. I have yet seen you chastise those that have called Trump names. You only go after those that call your mistress names.
You're right. I did call him scum.
I apologize for that hypocrisy. I retract that. Yours was misogynistic and that's what I reacted to.
How is calling Hillary a crone ( a factual statement) misogynistic? I didn't say it applied to all women .Just her.
How is using a gender specific term in a negative way against a woman not misogynistic?
It's also not a factual statement. It's your opinion.
The voters did not count. The ignorance lies solely with the EC.
I've been listening to the Pundits tonight talking about this, one theme keeps playing over and, over again, Trump said during the campaign, "I have nothing to do with Russia", now we know he had a lot to do with Russia, I mean if someone offered me a 50 million dollar home and, I had the power to help, to put him or, her in the White House, I would do it and, if someone asked if I had I'd tell them no, especially if I were Putin. People, let's get real here, Trump seems to be even more dirty than a pig in a pig pen.
And people will still defend the Orange Scumbag Traitor in Chief
Putin could have had this for his theme song, he might still be planning on it,
With all this coming out now, I wonder if Trump plans on returning from Argentina.
I think that's my favorite trmp tower!
Trumpunzel trumpunzel let down your sorry ass weave
...and the plot thickens.
....or is it the thlot pickens?
;~)
The thick plottens!
So liberals will fall all over themselves on this story even after they were so sure after the original guilty plea from Cohen that Trump knew about the Trump Tower meeting beforehand- a story that was retracted by all respectable news sources (not counting fake news CNN of course).
Sounds to me like Democrats are just jealous that Trump was a successful businessman who actually had something tangible to offer, unlike some Democrats who only ever made money off influence peddling or abusing a govt position- if this story is even true.
Successful businessman? How so? How many bankruptcies?
He's now a washed up reality show 'star'
A lot of successful people have ups and downs in their finances. At least Trump made his money before entering office, not by leaving the White House broke and then making a fortune making speeches as cover for selling political favors to foreign countries.
So he says. I wonder if he's letting the Secret Service stay at Mar-A-Lago for free?
I guess you may have a point, though. He did profit from his fraudulent charity organization before taking office.
He got his money from his dad.
Before he entered office!?
Hell,Trump was making his money before he was 3 years old. If you call being giving 400 million dollars by your daddy and then losing it all as "Making Money".
Trump's father gave his son at least $413 million: New York Times
.
With a 400 million dollar head start of course it's possible that even the most incompetent, unregulated capitalist, supply side myth believing, orange buffoonish baby man might end up with enough money on hand to awe some of the more gullible among us.
Money on hand only after several bankruptcies and large infusions of cash from Russian Oligarch because Banks and other legal lending institutions wont deal with your crooked, incompetent, broke ass of course.
Rump and his administration (gang of thieves) are looting and pillaging and raping the treasury as fast as they can.
He's gone bankrupt 4 times and lost a BILLION dollars in ONE year...successful? Newp. 😂
Sadly, losing a bunch of money is almost as impressive as earning it to Trumps base, and most of them know at least three or four friends or family who've filed bankruptcy more than once. It's a selling point to them, not a detriment.
"You hear how Jim Bob got that big insurance settlement? He got himself a million dollars!"
"What? I knew that boy'd do right someday!"
"Well he already spent it, blew it all on women and coke... and now they're repossessing his swamp boat, double wide, El Camino, they even took his dog man..."
"Damn, he was one helluva guy, if I had the chance, I vote for him for President..."
"Damn straight..."
Be accurate. He has never personally gone bankrupt but have had businesses go broke, there is a difference.
Be accurate. He has never personally died from exhaustion, he's just ridden several horses to their deaths, so why worry about letting him ride our collective government horse? I mean, what could possibly go wrong? /s
Businesses go bankrupt for all sorts of reasons not necessarily for things under its control .His Atlantic City casino went broke but then so did several others in that town that had nothing to do with him .
The denial is strong in you.
If you'd built up a business and were now looking for a CEO to run it, would you hire the CEO who had run at least four other businesses into bankruptcy? Would you hire the guy who lost a billion dollars of wealth in less than a year? Would you really accept his excuse that "Hey, lots of businesses fail, it's doesn't reflect on me in the slightest...".
The fact is Trump paid himself $39 million for "consulting" in that Casino deal, then filed bankruptcy and let the contractors who did all the work take the hit and get paid pennies on the dollar of what they were owed. Trumps a piece of shit and everyone knows it, he's a terrible businessman. If he'd simply invested the money his father gave him he would be worth more than triple his current worth, he's effectively lost nearly $10 billion trying to play real estate magnate.
What I posted above is factual, like it or not.
What fact? That other casinos went bankrupt at the same time? THat has nothing to do with how he handled his failed business.
He has never personally gone bankrupt but have had businesses go broke
Correct. Trump has personally been responsible for causing several business bankruptcies!
What I posted above is factual, like it or not.
That is a lie. He's not successful. Successful business people have no problem obtaining loans from US banks.
Did I see something about Deutschbank, which is the only bank that will loan money to Trump, being under investigation for money laundering?
Deutsche Bank’s Troubles Are Donald Trump’s Troubles
The president has a long-standing business relationship and conflict of interest with a German banking giant often mired in scandal.
Thanks.
Yes, you did.
Is there never a bridge to far for trump supporters?
I doubt it.
I keep thinking there has to be some breaking point.
Yet time and again, no matter what he does, some close their eyes and still defend his every action.
He now has a directive that federal employees cannot talk about him.
Clearly not.
When you're looking to hire an arsonist to burn down a building for you so you can collect the insurance money, what on his resume would make you not hire him?
Trump supporters hired Trump to burn it all down. They have been bitterly gnashing their teeth over being forgotten by the coastal elites and the "establishment" so they decided to elect the worst possible candidate who would do the most possible damage to the institution they blame for their hardships. They couldn't care less that the arsonist they hired to burn it all down is an adulterous slime ball who ran multiple businesses into the ground, shamelessly benefitted from Russia's illegal aid during the election, and lies more than he tells the truth. Those are all bonuses to Trumps supporters, he's a half witted but ruthless criminal mob boss, not unlike Al Capone with his below average IQ, and that's exactly what they ordered.
And the fact that it didn't happen should put those questions to rest. What are we talking about? A plan? A thought? An idea? So effing what?
Why should it? That one deal may not have gone through, but what about the others we haven't heard about yet?
What about Kershner and Trump's dealings with Saudi Arabia?
What about Ivanka's dealings with China, you know the ones that are excluded from the tariffs?
Because we don't convict people for considering a thing - especially a perfectly legal thing.
You really want people to bothered by something you can imagine?
What about them? Seriously, give me a solid reason to care about an actual thing and I might jump on the outrage train with you. But "X might possibly happen" is just speculation and imaginings.
A solid reason? How about the Constitution of the United States?
What Is the Emoluments Clause
The Emoluments Clause isn't going to apply to anything he did or any exchange that developed before he was president. Even if you got the timing right, you'd have to demonstrate that it was a gift as opposed to a fair exchange, or that the president didn't receive special consideration for the exchange. Considering that he isn't running the Trump corporation right now, that seems like a tough collection of things to prove. If you could, though, I would say impeach him for it unless it's something really minor. Remember that foreign officials give gifts to all presidents. It's common.
You just keep your eyes closed there Tacos!.
Saudi Arabia is putting money in Trump’s pocket. Is that shaping U.S. policy?
Trump and Kushner Put Saudi's Money First
America deserves to know how much money Trump is getting from the Saudi government
Trump said he has 'no financial interests in Saudi Arabia.' But his businesses have made millions from the Saudi government, and the crown prince gave his New York City hotel a huge boost.
I'm just reporting the news and you're ignoring it. Trump had customers from all over the world long before he was president. We all knew that when he was elected. It would be wildly hypocritical and unfair to set about impeaching him for it now.
You're doing the opposite of reporting news. The news is reporting all the conflicts of interest Trump has with various foreign countries that Trump Industries does business with. You're saying, "No don't look there, just look here in this little tiny hole. See? Nothing to see there".
I noticed that you totally ignored all the links I gave you.
I noticed that you ignored Trump refusal to stand up to Saudi Arabia, since he and Kershner are making so much money from them.
I noticed that you ignored Trump's campaigning on removing Russian sanctions, while he was still doing business with them.
Your powers of noticing are weak old man
Stories about stuff that was perfectly legal and began before he was president. Like I said, the emoluments clause does not apply.
Actually, he sanctioned 17 people in SA that the White House has connected to the murder and the story is not over yet. By the way, Saudi Arabia kills thousands of people every year, many of them for far less than speaking out against the government and you and all the other sanctimonious critics of Trump couldn't care less. But when a journalist dies, the media cares. A lot! And thanks to their outrage over that one death, so do you.
What he says as a candidate has no connection to the emoluments clause, which applies to government officials. And, as it turns out, we still have a whole bunch of sanctions in place against Russia and against individuals in Russia. Makes it kind of hard to prove a quid pro quo - even harder when that real estate deal he was contemplating didn't actually happen.
Damn well stated!
Moving the goalposts now? I never claimed illegality, I claimed conflict of interest and a foothold that foreign governments could use to sway Trump as President. Why Trump won't condemn Putin or Saudi Arabia for their assassinations?
You forget that everything he says is recorded?
What he says he will do as POTUS, does make a difference, and he has continued making money from business deals with foreign governments after the election. It is still his money.
Saudi-funded lobbyist paid for 500 rooms at Trump’s hotel after 2016 election
Nope!
I've been talking about "convicting" the president since @16.1.1. That's the context of this conversation. Otherwise, what's the point? If the allegations aren't about wrongdoing that would justify removing the president from office, then you're just mud-slinging.
Again . . . a difference in what? And to what end? Unless you're talking about removing the president, you're just smearing him to sabotage governance. So unless we're talking about something that would justify that level of response, or produces an action that actually impacts real people, policies, or practices, it doesn't make a difference.
No, the conversation is about Putin's 50 million dollar penthouse that Trump was going to gift/bribe/payoff to him. Look at the title of the article if you are confused.
Are you really that dense? I difference in Trump configuring his foreign policy based on his bank account and not what is best for this country.
Smearing him? By taking the facts that are known and following them to their logical conclusions? What other reason can you think of, for Trump to give passes to Putin and Saudi Arabia, for the murders and election interference?
Congress has been given the same security briefing and they all acknowledge, beyond a doubt, Putin's attempt to interfere in the 2016 election and the Saudi prince's complicity in Khashoggi's murder. Only Trump refuses to, and only Trump has millions of dollars on the line from those 2 people.
Interesting photo on this seed.