Breaking: First Charges Filed in Mueller Investigation

a reply to: proximo

You don't...

He is parroting the DNC / Clinton campaign / media lapdogs. Just like the left wing media keeps reporting "Trump aides" even though what they are being accused of has absolutely nothing to do with Trump or the Trump campaign.

The Popdopolas guy finally had to go on twitter and announce he never worked for the trump campaign in any official capacity because media kept saying he was a policy advisor.

a reply to: Xcathdra

You can be a policy adviser without officially being part of the campaign. The Trumpsters are murdering truth.

a reply to: DJW001

sorta like you can influence policy decisions without being Secretary of State?

sorta like you can run Company A/B without being officially on staff?

thanks for making a logical argument that cuts both ways.

a reply to: DJW001

"Policy adviser" automatically implies some kind of official capacity. Otherwise you're just a friend.

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
a reply to: DJW001

"Policy adviser" automatically implies some kind of official capacity. Otherwise you're just a friend.

You can officially advise a candidate without being part of the campaign, just as you can be a personal physician or priest to a candidate without being part of the campaign. Team Trump is playing technicalities.

a reply to: DJW001

The problem with your defense is the people who were charged committed their crimes between 2006 and ending in 2014. Kind of hard to be a policy advisor when Trump was not even elected, let alone having decided if he would even run for office.

These charges are a distraction from Clinton / DNC illegal activities and nothing more. I look forward to Mueller bringing similar charges against Democrats who committed the exact same crime, like both Podesta brothers.

If Mueller doesnt bring charges against anyone other than Trump people then he has confirmed what Trump and others have been saying all along. Also since Mueller is going on a fishing expedition into the past then that should also apply to Clinton and anyone else connected to her.

This is nothing more than a witch hunt to get Trump.

In that instance not only should Mueller and his staff be fired they should face prosecution for prosecutorial misconduct and malicious prosecution (just as Mueller and others on his team have done over the years).

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: DJW001

The problem with your defense is the people who were charged committed their crimes between 2006 and ending in 2014. Kind of hard to be a policy advisor when Trump was not even elected, let alone having decided if he would even run for office.

These charges are a distraction from Clinton / DNC illegal activities and nothing more. I look forward to Mueller bringing similar charges against Democrats who committed the exact same crime, like both Podesta brothers.

If Mueller doesnt bring charges against anyone other than Trump people then he has confirmed what Trump and others have been saying all along. Also since Mueller is going on a fishing expedition into the past then that should also apply to Clinton and anyone else connected to her.

This is nothing more than a witch hunt to get Trump.

In that instance not only should Mueller and his staff be fired they should face prosecution for prosecutorial misconduct and malicious prosecution (just as Mueller and others on his team have done over the years).

Personally, I'd say you're better off letting the indictments roll out before hunting heads. Otherwise...you're simply hunting heads.

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: DJW001

The problem with your defense is the people who were charged committed their crimes between 2006 and ending in 2014. Kind of hard to be a policy advisor when Trump was not even elected, let alone having decided if he would even run for office.

These charges are a distraction from Clinton / DNC illegal activities and nothing more. I look forward to Mueller bringing similar charges against Democrats who committed the exact same crime, like both Podesta brothers.

If Mueller doesnt bring charges against anyone other than Trump people then he has confirmed what Trump and others have been saying all along. Also since Mueller is going on a fishing expedition into the past then that should also apply to Clinton and anyone else connected to her.

This is nothing more than a witch hunt to get Trump.

In that instance not only should Mueller and his staff be fired they should face prosecution for prosecutorial misconduct and malicious prosecution (just as Mueller and others on his team have done over the years).

Personally, I'd say you're better off letting the indictments roll out before hunting heads. Otherwise...you're simply hunting heads.

Maybe - From a legal aspect though if the investigations into Manafort and the others stemmed from the FISA warrants then the prosecutions will go no where as the judge will throw the case out since the evidence was illegally obtained.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Xcathdra

You can be a policy adviser without officially being part of the campaign. The Trumpsters are murdering truth.

Papadopoulos was an official advisor to the campaign. I pasted a Washington Post story in a thread yesterday showing what they said about him in March of 2016. The guy is all over the place. He might even have dirt on the Hillary campaign.

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Xcathdra

You can be a policy adviser without officially being part of the campaign. The Trumpsters are murdering truth.

Papadopoulos was an official advisor to the campaign. I pasted a Washington Post story in a thread yesterday showing what they said about him in March of 2016. The guy is all over the place. He might even have dirt on the Hillary campaign.

I would say he has plenty on the Clinton/DNC Campaign.

He was an implant.

He had to be taking orders from somebody.

(Probably Manafort)

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Xcathdra

You can be a policy adviser without officially being part of the campaign. The Trumpsters are murdering truth.

Papadopoulos was an official advisor to the campaign. I pasted a Washington Post story in a thread yesterday showing what they said about him in March of 2016. The guy is all over the place. He might even have dirt on the Hillary campaign.

Wait so the narrative was that the Trump admin was going to try to downplay this guy. What's actually happening is the media said he was a nobody earlier this year and now they have to try to up-play him?

That's hilarious.

Gryphon66, you are absolutely being dishonest again.

what is proven now beyond a single shadow of a doubt, is that the Trump campaign through multiple associates worked directly with Russian agents directed by Vladimir Putin to influence the General Election 2016 and that is called collusion

That is NOT called collusion, because collusion does not exist in the context you're describing it. That is called nothing, because what you described is NOT a violation of any US law.

Furthermore, you lie and say this is a proven fact when it is the absolute opposite. I would write you off as a paid shill if not for the fact you've been here a few years, so that only leaves "obviously ignorant" as an option.

Do me a favor and research the word "collusion" in the US code. Come back and tell us all if you're being honest, or telling bold faced lies.

a reply to: face23785


They don't know face, they're just here to spout off a bunch of totally unsubstantiated rumors and parade them around as fact. Fortunately, there are vigilant members here that have thoroughly discredited and debunked them.

Gryphon66, for example, continues to insist that "collusion" involving an election is actually a real crime (it isn't), and that somehow it has already been proven the President is guilty of this non-existent crime.

These leftists lack any sort of critical thinking or reasoning skills, sadly. It is a big part of what is wrong with this country. They need to take their lies and innuendo back to their echo chambers though, we're on to them.

originally posted by: JBurns
Gryphon66, you are absolutely being dishonest again.

what is proven now beyond a single shadow of a doubt, is that the Trump campaign through multiple associates worked directly with Russian agents directed by Vladimir Putin to influence the General Election 2016 and that is called collusion

That is NOT called collusion, because collusion does not exist in the context you're describing it. That is called nothing, because what you described is NOT a violation of any US law.

Furthermore, you lie and say this is a proven fact when it is the absolute opposite. I would write you off as a paid shill if not for the fact you've been here a few years, so that only leaves "obviously ignorant" as an option.

Do me a favor and research the word "collusion" in the US code. Come back and tell us all if you're being honest, or telling bold faced lies.

Actually, while collusion itself is not a crime specifically stated in the US code, it does manifest itself in many other forms.

The various laws concerning conspiracy to commit crimes fall under that category, by the very definition of collusion.

a reply to: JBurns

The word "collusion" is a euphemism that the press has been using for "conspiracy with a foreign power against the people of the United States." The indictment against Paul Manafort states it more succinctly: conspiracy. That is a crime. The issue is whether Donald Trump was aware that he was surrounding himself with traitors.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: JBurns

The word "collusion" is a euphemism that the press has been using for "conspiracy with a foreign power against the people of the United States." The indictment against Paul Manafort states it more succinctly: conspiracy. That is a crime. The issue is whether Donald Trump was aware that he was surrounding himself with traitors.

It’s a very broad crime, likely related to cheating the government out of property or money. The “trailer” moniker is a little premature.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: JBurns

The word "collusion" is a euphemism that the press has been using for "conspiracy with a foreign power against the people of the United States." The indictment against Paul Manafort states it more succinctly: conspiracy. That is a crime. The issue is whether Donald Trump was aware that he was surrounding himself with traitors.

Except Manafort wasn't charged with conspiring with a foreign power. He was charged with conspiracy to commit fraud. Can you guys ever stick to the truth?

a reply to: DJW001

Conspiracy is actually a crime that is committed by more than one person.

There is no such thing in the federal body of law as collusion. Yes, the media made it up to push a baseless claim against Trump.

I have said it before and i will say it again. The way info is leaked about Trump if there were evidence of a crime it would have also been leaked.

The fact it has not should tell you something. The fact the sealed indictments were leaked (which is a federal crime) and dont apply to Trump again should tell you something.

People have noticed there are 2 more sealed case files in the same grouping as Manaforts and the other guy who was indicted that also plead innocent. Those could be unrelated but my theory is they would possibly be for the Podesta brothers.

You dont resign as the head of your company out of the blue for no reason at all.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Correct; conspiracy involves more than one person... in this case it would be the various parties representing the Russian government. As I have explained before, Mueller is an experienced organized crime prosecutor. In those cases you go for solid indictments on lesser crimes by peripheral operators, and use increasing pressure to get them to turn state's witness. In this particular case, Mueller is tempting Trump to fire him, strengthening the case for obstruction of justice.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: DJW001

The problem with your defense is the people who were charged committed their crimes between 2006 and ending in 2014. Kind of hard to be a policy advisor when Trump was not even elected, let alone having decided if he would even run for office.

These charges are a distraction from Clinton / DNC illegal activities and nothing more. I look forward to Mueller bringing similar charges against Democrats who committed the exact same crime, like both Podesta brothers.

If Mueller doesnt bring charges against anyone other than Trump people then he has confirmed what Trump and others have been saying all along. Also since Mueller is going on a fishing expedition into the past then that should also apply to Clinton and anyone else connected to her.

This is nothing more than a witch hunt to get Trump.

In that instance not only should Mueller and his staff be fired they should face prosecution for prosecutorial misconduct and malicious prosecution (just as Mueller and others on his team have done over the years).

Personally, I'd say you're better off letting the indictments roll out before hunting heads. Otherwise...you're simply hunting heads.

Maybe - From a legal aspect though if the investigations into Manafort and the others stemmed from the FISA warrants then the prosecutions will go no where as the judge will throw the case out since the evidence was illegally obtained.

Why are you assuming the warrants were not obtained legally?