Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm the OP. Thanks to 17:35 for posting their experience regarding Russian corruption. I tend to agree with you that in order to accumulate a $230M fortune through his Russian investments during the 1990s and 2000s, Mr. Browder undoubtedly was playing along with the corruption as well.

But people are complex creatures---and very flawed individuals can sometimes do very moral things. Pushing for the Magnitsky Act to avenge his former attorney wasn't going to restore Browder's lost $230M, and it came with significant risk of life given the number of people who turn up dead after crossing Putin.

I suppose it could be argued that were the act successful in forcing regime change in Russia, perhaps Browder could recoup some of his lost holdings but that is an optimistic long shot at best. Rather, it seems that guilt because Mr. Magnitsky died in his employ weighed heavily on Mr. Browder and led to his crusade.

All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good (or mediocre) people to do nothing.

We would do well to remember that adage in these current political times, as we have certainly elected evil.

We always elect evil. Anyone who gets involved in politics is evil.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New poster here. I believe Browder's story about his dealings with Putin and the oligarchs. But I skimmed through his book earlier this summer, and the same thought kept occurring to me. He didn't have the success he had in Moscow without being thoroughly corrupt himself.

Both things can be true - that Putin is a murderous and election-meddling thug who should be stopped AND that Browder is seeking vengeance for having his lawyer/friend killed and his assets stolen. His book made clear that he is certainly an egomaniac.

Why do I think all this? Because I worked in Moscow throughout the 90s. By 1995 (a year before Browder ever showed up), you couldn't even sign a contract to buy candy without being pressured for serious kick-backs. I was asked to fold the cost of new Land Rovers into the contract and have them delivered to the decision-makers in the Russian organizations. Our proposals were disqualified based on technicalities because we hadn't paid the bribes. The big corporations all hired middlemen to handle all the corruption for them and then pay "commissions" for representational services.

I was just a small-time nothing who eventually had to leave because I wouldn't play by the new rules. So no way is Browder virtuous in all this.

All the same, I'm grateful he pushed for the Magnitsky Act. His massive ego has helped to raise awareness and maybe something will come of it.

Finally someone whose thinking isn't entirely immersed in cliches!

I was there too, working in i-banking in early and mid-nineties. Russia at that time was a veritable Wild Wild West where big boys with global names were all too happy to play to collect incredible profits - for a while. Let it just be said, and sunk in, that for as long as the going was good, all the usual suspects - Credit Suisse, Warburg, Citibank, ABN, EVERYONE - were willing to play ball and go along. The ballers like Boris Johnson, Steve Jennings and, I suppose, Browder, once they saw how much money can be made, eagerly broke out of the corporate shells to open their own shops because they didn't want all the money to go to Zurich. When Russia was selling GOVERNMENT T-bonds at double-digit rates, all the Browderesque i-bankers were happy to buy, knowing full well that it had to be bogus and corrupt, because only junk bonds pay that much. But they were happy to pay and underwrite numerous conferences and panels touting Russia as the next emerging market darling. When the utterly, wholly corrupt shares auctions were organized, selling off some of the greatest mineral deposits in the world for a song, Western banks were all too happy to facilitate and make money on this. When Mark Ames and Matt Taibbi played a prank and called Burson Marsteller, pretending to be chiefs of St Petersburg police who wanted a PR campaign to counteract the "myth of police brutality", BM was happy to jump. They were all whores, drinking from the hose.

Until the game turned against them and said, thank you very much, we stole enough from the other people with your help, now we will steal from you.

Carve this on your cortex: Browder and Co. were perfectly willing to close their eyes to corruption as long as someone else was getting robbed. Corruption was the fact of life until it touched them personally. Then it was "I am a VICTIM!"

Please, bitch. Please. There are no clean hands in this game.

Putin is clearly corrupt as hell and people who cross him are doomed.

But Browder? Please.

Anonymous wrote:I was referring to Akmetshin-- I thought he was Armenian by ethnicity--but searches only refer to him as Soviet-born. My apologies for any unintended offense to Armenians.

Anonymous wrote:I'm the OP. Thanks to 17:35 for posting their experience regarding Russian corruption. I tend to agree with you that in order to accumulate a $230M fortune through his Russian investments during the 1990s and 2000s, Mr. Browder undoubtedly was playing along with the corruption as well.

But people are complex creatures---and very flawed individuals can sometimes do very moral things. Pushing for the Magnitsky Act to avenge his former attorney wasn't going to restore Browder's lost $230M, and it came with significant risk of life given the number of people who turn up dead after crossing Putin.

I suppose it could be argued that were the act successful in forcing regime change in Russia, perhaps Browder could recoup some of his lost holdings but that is an optimistic long shot at best. Rather, it seems that guilt because Mr. Magnitsky died in his employ weighed heavily on Mr. Browder and led to his crusade.

All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good (or mediocre) people to do nothing.

We would do well to remember that adage in these current political times, as we have certainly elected evil.

Anonymous wrote:New poster here. I believe Browder's story about his dealings with Putin and the oligarchs. But I skimmed through his book earlier this summer, and the same thought kept occurring to me. He didn't have the success he had in Moscow without being thoroughly corrupt himself.

Both things can be true - that Putin is a murderous and election-meddling thug who should be stopped AND that Browder is seeking vengeance for having his lawyer/friend killed and his assets stolen. His book made clear that he is certainly an egomaniac.

Why do I think all this? Because I worked in Moscow throughout the 90s. By 1995 (a year before Browder ever showed up), you couldn't even sign a contract to buy candy without being pressured for serious kick-backs. I was asked to fold the cost of new Land Rovers into the contract and have them delivered to the decision-makers in the Russian organizations. Our proposals were disqualified based on technicalities because we hadn't paid the bribes. The big corporations all hired middlemen to handle all the corruption for them and then pay "commissions" for representational services.

I was just a small-time nothing who eventually had to leave because I wouldn't play by the new rules. So no way is Browder virtuous in all this.

All the same, I'm grateful he pushed for the Magnitsky Act. His massive ego has helped to raise awareness and maybe something will come of it.

Anonymous wrote:OP here. What I liked about the article was Browder's clear presentation:

1. I had an investment company that had over $4B in Russian investments.
2. We were constantly getting ripped off by the corrupt oligarchs.
3. Putin took power and helped crack down on corruption, which helped my company protects its investments.
4. Putin figured if you can't beat 'em, join 'em, and told the oligarchs that if they cut him in for 50%, they could continue skimming from the state.
5. Once Putin joined the ranks of the oligarchs, they kicked me out of the country, retitled all my investments under the name of a Russian criminal, and then issued hundreds of millions in bogus tax refunds.
6. I hired a young lawyer to expose the corruption. He documented it extensively, but was arrested by the very people he was trying to expose, thrown into jail and tortured, and then died.
7. His blood is on my hands, so I have spent the last decade trying to hurt the oligarchs in the one place it counts---their pocketbooks. The Magnitsky Act allows the United States to target oligarchs so they can't park their ill-gotten gains in western assets (like Trump condos . . . )
8. As Putin is now the richest of the oligarchs, the Magnitsky Act is most threatening to him and his fortune. Also, if he can't adequately protect the oligarchs' ability to get their money into stable Western economies, then his value to his fellow thieves is substantially diminished.
9. A group of Putin -backed Russians and Armenians, including the two that met with Don Jr., have undertaken numerous measures to try to get the Magnitsky Act repealed.

Anonymous wrote:And yet still no evidence of any criminal wrongdoing by any Trumps... Keep trying.