“These decisions aren’t made upon presidential whims,”Typical Lax Dad wrote:You mean Rupert Murdoch....the editorials have gone down hill...try FTold salt wrote:The sanctions still hammer Deripaska. From the WSJ :Trinity wrote:GOP Sen. John Kennedy on why he voted to keep sanctions on Oleg Deripaska: "This guy is bad news. He's a tyrant, a pirate, a gangster and he's hurting the Russian people every day and he's trying to hurt America. We've got him down. I say let's choke him."
Big difference from Trump and Manafort who want to “get whole.”Deripaska must reduce his stake in EN+ to 44.95%, down from 70%. It also limits his voting share to 35%, severing his ability to control the company. EN+ has to appoint a new board of directors, and the U.S. will get to read quarterly earnings reports and the minutes of board meetings. And Mr. Deripaska can’t any collect future dividends.
EN+ is “the linchpin” underlying the sanctions designations on all three companies, according to the U.S., because Mr. Deripaska has virtually no direct ownership in Rusal and none at all in EuroSibEnergo.
Congress, under a 2017 sanctions law, had 30 days to block the deal by passing disapproval resolutions. The failed vote in the Senate all but doomed the effort, however, and the sanctions on the companies are expected to be removed Friday. Mr. Deripaska will remain on the sanctions list.
Checks and balances are important, but Congress shouldn’t be overturning the technical decisions made by the Treasury, said Douglas Jacobson, a partner at the law firm Jacobson Burton Kelley PLLC. “These decisions aren’t made upon presidential whims,” he said.
Really????
Who is going to testify under oath that this did not come from Trump, but rather was entirely derived and signed off on by non-partisan staff? Was there anyone who disputed it at Treasury? Who and what was their view?
The House should ask the question even if the Senate won't.