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.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
Indictments are brought based the facts as they become evident. That's the way a Special Counsel Investigation works. Mueller has only begun his work, and there are many, many more facts to be revealed, more indictments, and with every one we get closer to restoring the rule-of-law in this country.
The sad thing here is that many of the liars know quite well.
and with every one we get closer to restoring the rule-of-law in this country.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
Political parties do not matter. Our opinions of prior administrations do not matter. The only things that matter are a return to truth and the rule-of-law. I will keep repeating this.
originally posted by: shooterbrody
originally posted by: Gryphon66
Political parties do not matter. Our opinions of prior administrations do not matter. The only things that matter are a return to truth and the rule-of-law. I will keep repeating this.
Perhaps to you they do not.
When did truth and rule-of-law leave?
Fast and furious?
Irs teaparty?
Benghazi?
Interesting you are only concerned about the "truth" and the "rule-of-law" now....
originally posted by: Grambler
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?
originally posted by: soberbacchus
originally posted by: Grambler
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?
Depending on what they knew, sure. If they were aware that Manafort was working for a Foreign Government in any way and teamed up to lobby with him and took payments and failed to register as foreign agents, then absolutely yes, albeit failure to register as a foreign agent doesn't seem to be arrest worthy as Flynn, Manafort and others have proven. Money Laundering is arrest worthy though.
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: Gryphon66
Indictments are brought based the facts as they become evident. That's the way a Special Counsel Investigation works. Mueller has only begun his work, and there are many, many more facts to be revealed, more indictments, and with every one we get closer to restoring the rule-of-law in this country.
The sad thing here is that many of the liars know quite well.
Yes like you.
It has been proven to you that the podesta group broke the law and is being investigated by Mueller.
But you ignore it.
I thought we all had to focus on what Mueller was doing or we are traitors?
And yet you refuse to admit that company a and b in the indictment (podesta group and mercury) worked to spread Russian influence and broke the law.
originally posted by: soberbacchus
A) Your standard for "proven" seems to be entirely dependent on whoever's team you think someone is on.
B) At most, what we know "suggests" that Podesta Group helped Manafort lobby on behalf of the corrupt Ukrainian Dictator? That means they violated FARA and failed to register as a foreign agent. Like Manafort and Flynn and neither were charged for it.
C) MONEY LAUNDERING, LYING TO THE FBI UNDER OATH, TAX EVASION...if the Podesta Group did those things then I suspect they would be indicted.
D) Tony Podesta is John Podesta's brother. John Podesta left the firm 25 years ago. You continue to claim that John Podesta is deeply involved and a stake holder in Podesta Group, despite ZERO evidence. You shouted about a link, that I read, but it did not support your claim.
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: soberbacchus
originally posted by: Grambler
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?
Depending on what they knew, sure. If they were aware that Manafort was working for a Foreign Government in any way and teamed up to lobby with him and took payments and failed to register as foreign agents, then absolutely yes, albeit failure to register as a foreign agent doesn't seem to be arrest worthy as Flynn, Manafort and others have proven. Money Laundering is arrest worthy though.
Ok well the indictment proves companies a and B knew they were working for foreign governments.
Now all of the sudden money laundering is more important than Russian influence?
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: soberbacchus
A) Your standard for "proven" seems to be entirely dependent on whoever's team you think someone is on.
Not at all.
B) At most, what we know "suggests" that Podesta Group helped Manafort lobby on behalf of the corrupt Ukrainian Dictator? That means they violated FARA and failed to register as a foreign agent. Like Manafort and Flynn and neither were charged for it.
Try to keep up. Managort and Gates were charged with that very thing yesterday.
originally posted by: soberbacchus
originally posted by: Grambler
originally posted by: soberbacchus
A) Your standard for "proven" seems to be entirely dependent on whoever's team you think someone is on.
Not at all.
B) At most, what we know "suggests" that Podesta Group helped Manafort lobby on behalf of the corrupt Ukrainian Dictator? That means they violated FARA and failed to register as a foreign agent. Like Manafort and Flynn and neither were charged for it.
Try to keep up. Managort and Gates were charged with that very thing yesterday.
Those charges did not warrant arrest, as I stated.
Flynn is walking free.
Michael Flynn belatedly registers as foreign agent
www.nydailynews.com...
Manafort (retroactively) registers as foreign agent
www.politico.com...
The difference is one was involved in Money Laundering and Tax Evasion over a period of 10+ years.
It was listed on Manaforts indictment as gravy.
You know this right? Of course you do. That is why it is silly to converse with not honest folks.
originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus
Yes my interpretation for how the law should work is that anyone guilty should be charged.
Manafort and Gates were charged for not registering.
So why shouldnt Mercury, Flynn, the Podesta group, or anyone else who also broke that law?
In addition, I thought the primary purpose of this investigation was weeding out illegal russian influence.
Easily the most serious charges of that are the fact that in 2012 thru 2014 Russians had people directly lobbying for russian interests while not being open about it.
Those groups were Manfort, Gates, the podesta group, and Mercury.
For some reason, some people want to ignore this.
originally posted by: soberbacchus
originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus
Yes my interpretation for how the law should work is that anyone guilty should be charged.
Manafort and Gates were charged for not registering.
So why shouldnt Mercury, Flynn, the Podesta group, or anyone else who also broke that law?
In addition, I thought the primary purpose of this investigation was weeding out illegal russian influence.
Easily the most serious charges of that are the fact that in 2012 thru 2014 Russians had people directly lobbying for russian interests while not being open about it.
Those groups were Manfort, Gates, the podesta group, and Mercury.
For some reason, some people want to ignore this.
Nobody is ignoring it? The fact that a Lobbyist lobbied for a crappy government or failed to register as a foreign agent is much less relevant than The Presidents Campaign Manager being charged and arrested for Money Laundering, Tax Evasion and Lying to the FBI.
Trump's Campaign Manager and National Security Director working for a foreign government and lying about it?
VS.
A lobbyist working for a foreign government and not revealing it or registering as a foreign agent?
Your brain can't cognate the difference?
A lobbyist working for a foreign government and not revealing it or registering as a foreign agent?