3 ms·

"Blackstone is owned wholly by Russian biollionaires". Source? Actual source, though. The list of reputable news orgs is great, but I can find no sign that the

"Blackstone is owned wholly by Russian biollionaires". Source? Actual source, though. The list of reputable news orgs is great, but I can find no sign that they ever printed this. What I can find, is that Blackstone is publicly traded. 50.5% institutional, which for an American company with American owners is presumably not 100% Russian. And the rest? Fidelity, Morgan Stanley, and Janus are the largest holders. Not exactly "Russian billionaires". http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/bx/institutional-holdings http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/bx/institutional-holdings

nickbauman 10y ago
This shows their involvement in managing Russian sovereign wealth lately. Note: their wealth management was directly impacted by US sanctions. Motive. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/23/business/dealbook/russian-fund-under-scrutiny-for-loan-to-company-with-kremlin-ties.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/23/business/dealbook/russian-...
- Bartweiss 10y ago
  True enough, and I did find that. But "managing money for" is not the same as - or even comparable to - "owned by". Blackstone manages money across East Asia, but is owned (almost?) entirely by Americans. You can tell a story where Schwarzman's involvement with Trump and the Russian Direct Investment Fund constitutes a shady link to Sibur, a state-tied petrochem company. Those statements are all true; the rebuttal would be something like "all big companies in Russia are in some ways intermingled with the state; all companies which invest in Russia are at most two removes from Kremlin shadiness". I think that is probably also true, but it doesn't make this a non-issue for me. Bayrock's ties are messier, certainly. They're also lower level on both ends, particularly since Trump's total involvement with them seems to be <$100 million, which makes that "$560 million in debt" claim laughable. More importantly: Do you have any actual source for the claims in the previous post? You've pointed to some other topics, but the "owned wholly" and "$560 million in debt" claims seem completely baseless, and that source list was just the names of major publication.
  - nickbauman 10y ago
    What about this? FT went around and asked all the questions and got wildly different answers. Someone is not telling the truth. https://www.ft.com/content/549ddfaa-5fa5-11e6-b38c-7b39cbb1138a https://www.ft.com/content/549ddfaa-5fa5-11e6-b38c-7b39cbb11...
  - nickbauman 10y ago
    The links to money laundering are fairly clear here. https://www.ft.com/content/33285dfa-9231-11e6-8df8-d3778b55a923 https://www.ft.com/content/33285dfa-9231-11e6-8df8-d3778b55a...
  - nickbauman 10y ago
    But you're right. In the end it's impossible to tell for sure. The claim made is not fully substantiatable.
nickbauman 10y ago
Bayrock has ties with Russian projects as well. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/former-mafia-linked-figure-describes-association-with-trump/2016/05/17/cec6c2c6-16d3-11e6-aa55-670cabef46e0_story.html?utm_term=.8e8b1a18a12a https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/former-mafia-linked-...

nickbauman 10y ago

This shows their involvement in managing Russian sovereign wealth lately. Note: their wealth management was directly impacted by US sanctions. Motive. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/23/business/dealbook/russian-fund-under-scrutiny-for-loan-to-company-with-kremlin-ties.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/23/business/dealbook/russian-...

Bartweiss 10y ago
True enough, and I did find that. But "managing money for" is not the same as - or even comparable to - "owned by". Blackstone manages money across East Asia, but is owned (almost?) entirely by Americans. You can tell a story where Schwarzman's involvement with Trump and the Russian Direct Investment Fund constitutes a shady link to Sibur, a state-tied petrochem company. Those statements are all true; the rebuttal would be something like "all big companies in Russia are in some ways intermingled with the state; all companies which invest in Russia are at most two removes from Kremlin shadiness". I think that is probably also true, but it doesn't make this a non-issue for me. Bayrock's ties are messier, certainly. They're also lower level on both ends, particularly since Trump's total involvement with them seems to be <$100 million, which makes that "$560 million in debt" claim laughable. More importantly: Do you have any actual source for the claims in the previous post? You've pointed to some other topics, but the "owned wholly" and "$560 million in debt" claims seem completely baseless, and that source list was just the names of major publication.
- nickbauman 10y ago
  What about this? FT went around and asked all the questions and got wildly different answers. Someone is not telling the truth. https://www.ft.com/content/549ddfaa-5fa5-11e6-b38c-7b39cbb1138a https://www.ft.com/content/549ddfaa-5fa5-11e6-b38c-7b39cbb11...
- nickbauman 10y ago
  The links to money laundering are fairly clear here. https://www.ft.com/content/33285dfa-9231-11e6-8df8-d3778b55a923 https://www.ft.com/content/33285dfa-9231-11e6-8df8-d3778b55a...
- nickbauman 10y ago
  But you're right. In the end it's impossible to tell for sure. The claim made is not fully substantiatable.

nickbauman 10y ago

Bayrock has ties with Russian projects as well. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/former-mafia-linked-figure-describes-association-with-trump/2016/05/17/cec6c2c6-16d3-11e6-aa55-670cabef46e0_story.html?utm_term=.8e8b1a18a12a https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/former-mafia-linked-...