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.

 

Manafort Charged by FBI

page: 29
61
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 02:26 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

Or he will hold out on the promise if a pardon. I guess we will see.




posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus




??


I do not speak this language.



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: sdcigarpig


Regardless of the outcome, this is the investigation, as much as many do not want it and those who do, that the current administration needs, to put some legitimacy onto the administration. Even if it yields nothing, it will help calm the country down a bit.


Quite right. Let the truth speak and let justice be done.


Oh good. You changed your mind on people wanting to look at muellers investigation into groups like the podesta group as being traitors.

Thats great!



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

What crime was committed in the Uranium One merger and who committed it?



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 02:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: ketsuko

What crime was committed in the Uranium One merger and who committed it?


You missed the gist of the conversation.

The poster I replied to was implying that Uranium One was a seven year old distraction as if seven years in and of itself was criterion for dismissal.

My response was that since these charges stretch back eleven years, then seven years is obviously not too old to look at.



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

I didn’t miss anything at all. If you feel that actions seven years ago need to be investigated, what crime do you think was committed and by whom?

Unless you’re advocating for another empty investigation?



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 02:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: soberbacchus



Manafort offering to brief a Russian Billionaire close to Putin on the progress of the campaign is not illegal and there is no reason it would be included in an indictment.



Here. You answered yourself!


No I answered you.

Your claims, assertions, questions and answers seem to lack consistency and logic.

You seem to shout things like "Podesta" and "Hillary" as if the words themselves construct some kind evidence, conspiracy and crime.

I understand your enthusiasm for obfuscation and distraction at a time like this when you have married your self-identity to the orange oaf, but it really would be easier to discuss or debate if there was at least logic or consistency to your conspiratorial claims.



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 02:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: soberbacchus




??


I do not speak this language.


Question Marks mean "Question" here in the states.

You claimed:
"Mueller's team broke the law by disclosing grand jury material in a leak. "

Where? (Link) Who? (Link) When? (Link?)

Would you mind either supporting the fact or explaining the lie?



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 02:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: soberbacchus



Manafort offering to brief a Russian Billionaire close to Putin on the progress of the campaign is not illegal and there is no reason it would be included in an indictment.



Here. You answered yourself!


No I answered you.

Your claims, assertions, questions and answers seem to lack consistency and logic.

You seem to shout things like "Podesta" and "Hillary" as if the words themselves construct some kind evidence, conspiracy and crime.

I understand your enthusiasm for obfuscation and distraction at a time like this when you have married your self-identity to the orange oaf, but it really would be easier to discuss or debate if there was at least logic or consistency to your conspiratorial claims.



I will ask again, given the indictment, do you think group A and Group B in the indictment should be charged?



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 02:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: soberbacchus




??


I do not speak this language.


Question Marks mean "Question" here in the states.

You claimed:
"Mueller's team broke the law by disclosing grand jury material in a leak. "

Where? (Link) Who? (Link) When? (Link?)

Would you mind either supporting the fact or explaining the lie?


Oh you must have not been around this weekend.

It was leaked Friday that their would be an indictment Monday.

Leaking info on a grand jury indictment from an ongoing investigation is a crime.

So someone in the investigation committed a crime.



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler




So someone in the investigation committed a crime.

Either that or a jury member, or a judge.



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 02:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Grambler




So someone in the investigation committed a crime.

Either that or a jury member, or a judge.


Possible, but given the other leaks coming out of this investigation, it's probably one of the investigators.



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 03:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: soberbacchus




??


I do not speak this language.


Question Marks mean "Question" here in the states.

You claimed:
"Mueller's team broke the law by disclosing grand jury material in a leak. "

Where? (Link) Who? (Link) When? (Link?)

Would you mind either supporting the fact or explaining the lie?


In the rest of the English speaking world, questions are asked using words, not punctuation.

Yes, leaking grand jury information to CNN is illegal. The same people tasked with investigating illegal activity is engaging in illegal activity.
edit on 30-10-2017 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Interesting...

Here’s The Indictment Against Paul Manafort And His Associate, Rick Gates

12 counts... but no collusion. Also these crimes seem to have been committed during the time Manafort was lobbying for the Podesta Group on behalf of Russia. We'll see what happens when he starts to squeal.



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 03:16 PM
link   
With regards to the leak of the indictment:

Well, we know Comey leaked information from when he was still in his position as head Director of the FBI.

Comey probably learned this from someone.

Mueller was Comey's mentor.



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 03:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: knoxie
George Papadopoulos just plead guilty for lying.

foreign policy advisor on the campaign.


More interestingly, the indictment indicated that he was caught in perjury and he's been feeding them information for months now to try and avoid a sentence.



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: knoxie
George Papadopoulos just plead guilty for lying.

foreign policy advisor on the campaign.


More interestingly, the indictment indicated that he was caught in perjury and he's been feeding them information for months now to try and avoid a sentence.


Yes there are even questions of rather or not he wore a wire. This is the best chance of catching more people on trumps team.

If they do, charge them all.



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Oh, this is an empty investigation? Is that what you're implying?

The crimes he's being charged for occurred at a point in time prior to his work for the campaign.
edit on 30-10-2017 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

When all else fails for the left, deflect..



posted on Oct, 30 2017 @ 04:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Gryphon66

Oh, this is an empty investigation? Is that what you're implying?

The crimes he's being charged for occurred at a point in time prior to his work for the campaign.


What crimes do you think were committed regarding the Uranium One merger?

If there were no crimes committed, why do you want an investigation?

I know the real answer, I just want to hear you state your position clearly.



new topics

top topics



 
61
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join