3 ms·
The author is focused on making a case that the Russians are behind the Panama Papers and have an ulterior motive. Not once he mentions that the behaviours the
by havetocharge 11y ago
The author is focused on making a case that the Russians are behind the Panama Papers and have an ulterior motive. Not once he mentions that the behaviours the papers expose are criminal or otherwise negative. Even while discussing wrongdoing by Western parties, the Russians are implied to be more villainous.
- ci5er 11y ago> Not once he mentions that the behaviors the papers expose are criminal Are they criminal? Having an offshore company generally isn’t illegal. There may be questions about how some political figures' (for example) funds were obtained in the first place, but the mere existence of funds in some tax-advantaged vehicles is no evidence of a crime. gosh, one would think that some of the funds might be ill-gotten proceeds from criminal enterprises, but if the use of off-shore entities are prima facie evidence of criminal intent, then I'm in trouble.
- havetocharge 11y agoThere is an 'or' in there. Anyway, I'm not a lawyer or a judge, and the assertion that there is a crime is not related to the point was trying to make.
- ci5er 11y ago> There is an 'or' in there. Fair enough. There was. > Anyway, I'm not a lawyer Are you sure? Your very first sentence sounded very lawyer-like! :-)
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]