It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

It's Manafort and It's From 2012 or Earlier.

page: 8
36
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 10:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
After reading more into this, there's no need to worry about a trump pardon. Not happening. Manafort will be in prison for years.

Here's the indictment www.justice.gov...
Zero mention of trump campaign. He laundered $18 million. He's so screwed.


Naw.. that was step 1. Step 2 is "Let's make a deal!"




posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 10:47 AM
link   
a reply to: fleabit

There's no deal to be made. Sorry.



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 10:51 AM
link   
Your source might not have been "right on the money" but DAMN! They were mighty close. Kudos.

** interpretations may vary.
edit on 10/30/2017 by ladyinwaiting because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: kurthall

I was right on all counts.


Except on this...


originally posted by: Dfairlite
I know many on the left here are chomping at the bit, hoping this is going to be a close Trump associate and implicate Trump in the russia thing. But the opposite is true. The indictment is going to be Manafort and it's going to be from his dealings long before Trump.


Manafort was a "close Trump associate". He served as the head of Trump's Campaign, and attended the Don Jr./Jared/Russian meeting in attempts to gather dirt on Hillary. That's certainly a close associate. Furthermore, the indictment states...


The Scheme

14. Between in and or around 2008 and 2017, both dates being approximate and inclusive, in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, Manafort and Gates devised and intended to devise, and executed and attempted to execute a scheme and artifice to defraud, and to obtain money and property....


Actions in 2017 are not "long before his dealings with Trump".
edit on 10/30/17 by redmage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Good prediction by OP.



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 11:42 AM
link   
a reply to: redmage


Manafort was a "close Trump associate".


Your interpretation of close associate may be different than mine, but I told you it would be manafort. Manafort and trump worked together for a few months. I don't consider that a close associate, but you can go ahead and think it is.


Actions in 2017 are not "long before his dealings with Trump".


His money laundering operation began back in 08, long before his dealings with the Trump campaign. His money laundering scheme may have continued through 2017, you're correct about that. However, the most damning evidence they have is from 2012. Furthermore, there is zero mention of the trump campaign or his role in that campaign in the indictment. This means it's unrelated to trump.

Your plumber may be money laundering, if you hire him to come fix your pipes, you're not in any way part of the money laundering nor tied to his criminal behavior.
edit on 30-10-2017 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 11:45 AM
link   
Good call, OP...right on the money, nice job .



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 11:55 AM
link   
For a little more in depth look at Paul Manafort, folks might want to take a look at my thread here, in which many of Manafort's past indiscretions are listed.

Good job OP, will be looking for more from you in the future.



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 12:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
Manafort and trump worked together for a few months.


Again, He was the Campaign manager. The top dog.

How you could interpret that as being anything other than a "close associate" makes absolutely no sense at all.


originally posted by: Dfairlite
Furthermore, there is zero mention of the trump campaign or his role in that campaign in the indictment. This means it's unrelated to trump.


Just because this indictment makes no specific references to the campaign, doesn't mean that any subsequent indictments related to the investigation won't. It would be prudent to allow the investigations and prosecutions to finish up before attempting to draw any final conclusions.

This indictment neither condemns nor exonerates Trump and his campaign, but it could present an issue if Manafort does posses knowledge worthy of cutting a deal.
edit on 10/30/17 by redmage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 12:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
I know many on the left here are chomping at the bit, hoping this is going to be a close Trump associate and implicate Trump in the russia thing. But the opposite is true. The indictment is going to be Manafort and it's going to be from his dealings long before Trump. The truth is that this was a fishing expedition and they came up empty handed. So team Mueller headed to the grocery store to get a fish or two to put in their basket to save face for the dems.

Only the most delusional of lefties will be satisfied with this indictment. The right won't really care. Manafort committed crimes and should pay the price for those crimes. The only obnoxious part of this is the way that it all came about; with a fake narrative meant to cover for the dems losing what they thought was a surefire win.


Also, Expect a new AG by the beginning of the year. Trump is done with sessions.


Stop COPY/PASTING from Fox dude.

They don't pay any of us to repeat their lies.



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 12:12 PM
link   
a reply to: redmage

Are you a close associate with the guy GC you hire to build your house? How about if you fire him after a couple months and hire a new one, are you still a close associate with that person?

The way I see it, a close associate is someone you have worked with for a long time and currently work with or someone in your inner business circle, someone with a personal connection to you even when you aren't doing business together.

Again, you are welcome to your interpretation of what a close associate is. It doesn't change the fact that I told you who it was going to be and what it would be for. I told people weeks ago what it was. My sources were spot on.


Just because this indictment makes no specific references to the campaign, doesn't mean that any subsequent indictments related to the investigation won't.


This is true. But I have knowledge of the evidence gathered. They have nothing on Trump. The closest they'll come to Trump is a FARA violation by kushner, and that's if they are desperate and are just looking to tar trump. They have no evidence of collusion (because it didn't happen).



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 12:13 PM
link   
So why is Podesta stepping down at his firm if this has nothing to do with them?

www.politico.com...



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 12:15 PM
link   
a reply to: DanteGaland

LOL is someone a little butt hurt that I was right?

Do tell, where did I copy/paste this from (make sure you provide a link for everyone): www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 30-10-2017 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Throes

Yep. A lot of this took place during manafort's time with the podesta group. Both manafort and the podesta group have a lot of the same foreign connections. Podesta group is in deep doo-doo.



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 12:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
They have nothing on Trump. The closest they'll come to Trump is a FARA violation by kushner, and that's if they are desperate and are just looking to tar trump. They have no evidence of collusion (because it didn't happen).


Except that there is evidence of collusion already in the public domain. Roger Stone, another close associate, friend, and political-advisor, openly admitted to his contacts with Guccifer2.0 in his senate testimony.

Trump himself openly called for Russia's help in hacking and releasing Hillary's emails at his campaign rallies.

Furthermore, it's openly known that Don Jr, Jared, Manafort and other top Trump advisors met with Russian representatives with the intent to gather dirt on Hillary to influence the election. Even though the meeting was allegedly unfruitful... that is collusion. If you attempt to rob a convince store, and find that the cash register is empty... that doesn't make you innocent.
edit on 10/30/17 by redmage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: redmage

None of that is illegal. Attempted robbery is illegal. A better analogy is you walk into the store and watch them drop the money from the till into the time delayed safe and decide that's not going to work for a robbery, so you leave. Bad intentions aren't illegal. but can you really say with a straight face that attempting to get dirt on your opponent is bad intentions?
edit on 30-10-2017 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite

A home contractor is a far cry from a campaign manager working to elect the "leader of the free world".



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 12:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dfairlite
can you really say with a straight face that attempting to get dirt on your opponent is bad intentions?


I think colluding with a hostile foreign government to influence a domestic national election qualifies as "bad intentions".



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 12:50 PM
link   
dbl post
edit on 10/30/17 by redmage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: redmage

I was just looking for a person who you deal with on a temporary basis but could form a bond with. A contractor and campaign manager are very similar in that regard. Once the campaign is over the manager moves on to other campaigns. Once your house is built, your GC moves on to another.



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join