32 Charges In New Mueller Indictment of Manafort and Gates

a reply to: JBurns

Oh and Hey...just as an aside...how long have you been holding your breath waiting for Hillary to be indicted?
Lol

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Taggart

It's not whataboutism to point out inequality where law enforcement and the search for justice is concerned. In fact, it is sort of at the crux of every federal investigation... If you have one group who is shielded from prosecution, yet you then prosecute another group or individual for similar crimes, it opens the door up very wide to unequal protection under the law, which becomes a Constitutional crisis.

I think you need to to read the definition.
It's a form of deflection and despite the triggered responses you know I'm right.
But what about.......

Double

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
a reply to: Taggart

''whataboutism'' - is that the new witty term for people who dont want to expose corruption by DNC, HRC, CNN and the DOJ/FBI of Obama's day?

how cute.. i like it...

carry on...

New? Are you sure kid?

a reply to: theantediluvian

You have my respect but it's a tiny bit disturbing that you had a bio on this guy who seems an interesting but bit player. Lol. You are a serious student. I'm sitting next to you at the final exam.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Company A is Mercury, a mostly GOP-connected firm and Company B is Podesta Group. If this is accurate, it appears that this might get both off the hook for illegal foreign lobbying as Gates apparently lied about who their ultimate client was.

Ut oh what does this do to the conspiracy theory presented in November about twelve sealed indictments which implicated the Podesta brothers along with the usual cast of characters?

Another one bites the dust.

So many tasty tidbits in this.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: face23785

It's not wishful thinking. Jesus why do you think Mueller chopped all those charges off and made this generous offer? Because he's a nice guy?
No . Did you look at the cooperation section of the plea deal? It makes Gates his bitch in every way. If he wants him to go under cover or wear a wire he will do it. If he wants him in his office in half an hour he better be at the door in twenty nine minutes. If he wants him to testify against someone else he better sing like a bird. Or he goes to jail for the rest of his natural life.
This guy has no choice. Mueller has his ass over the fire.
You're just wishing and hoping at this point that he doesn't have information to offer. But Mueller doesn't play games or make deals that won't profit his investigation. If you think he does you are the one with the deficient thinking capacity.

It certainly is wishful thinking. Gates can be Mueller's bitch all he wants, that doesn't mean he has anything on Trump. There's been no indication of that whatsoever. He may, but nothing that's transpired so far indicates that much less proves it. You could say it shows he has dirt on Manafort, and they're hoping Manafort has dirt on Trump and will give it up now, but it'd just be hope at this point. I'm not saying Mueller plays games or makes deals that won't be beneficial to him. Obviously this is beneficial because it will hep him prosecute Manafort. You're extending that to Trump through wishful thinking though. We understand that's the outcome you've been dreaming for. Just don't pretend it's anything more than your fantasy at this point though.

originally posted by: Sillyolme

originally posted by: face23785
Was just listening to Shep Smith on Fox. He's so hopeful this is leading to something that takes Trump down.

I did find it interesting that he asked his guest why else would Mueller prosecute Manafort if not to get to Trump, and his guest basically said there is no other reason.

So if they uncovered Manafort's illegal dealings during this investigation and there was no link to Trump, they would just ignore the fact that Manafort committed a bunch of felonies if he had nothing on Trump?

He may indeed have something on Trump, but to suggest that he must because otherwise Mueller wouldn't be filing charges against him is just absurd.

He is charging him because he committed crimes. He's been on the FBIs radar for years.

So you agree the fact he's being charged doesn't prove he has dirt on Trump. Charging someone because they committed crimes is perfectly legitimate, it doesn't necessarily indicate anything more than that.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Agreed Silly It looks as though they may have been unwittingly manipulated into some involvement. Of course this precludes involvement in a conspiracy, since such involvement would have to be voluntary

Either way, some very interesting stuff coming out at a very fast pace. Glad to see this business being handled

a reply to: Sillyolme

That's ante for you, Always showing up to class prepared Ha ha Making the rest of us look bad

a reply to: Sillyolme

Probably too long

And I don't necessarily believe she should be indicted/or is even guilty of a crime. Just that there are some things that apparently warrant inquiry (and not rehashing old BS either). She is fully entitled to due process and all the Constitutional protections that come along with any such matter. The emails investigation was highly questionable, but in the spirit of fair judicial system I don't believe it'd be appropriate to rehash it once again if not simply because otherwise we run the risk of investigating someone until we *find* a reason to prosecute them, as opposed to investigating reasonably suspicious potential criminal activity and discovering evidence.

In my mind, that is the line between "persecution" and "prosecution"

It isn't just Hillary though. I don't think there are too many politicians that would walk away from an investigation without indictments/at least losing their jobs

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Sillyolme

originally posted by: face23785
Was just listening to Shep Smith on Fox. He's so hopeful this is leading to something that takes Trump down.

I did find it interesting that he asked his guest why else would Mueller prosecute Manafort if not to get to Trump, and his guest basically said there is no other reason.

So if they uncovered Manafort's illegal dealings during this investigation and there was no link to Trump, they would just ignore the fact that Manafort committed a bunch of felonies if he had nothing on Trump?

He may indeed have something on Trump, but to suggest that he must because otherwise Mueller wouldn't be filing charges against him is just absurd.

He is charging him because he committed crimes. He's been on the FBIs radar for years.

So you agree the fact he's being charged doesn't prove he has dirt on Trump. Charging someone because they committed crimes is perfectly legitimate, it doesn't necessarily indicate anything more than that.

the indictments, and guilty pleas, keep piling up for this white house....but, but....look over there!!!......it's just a matter of time...desperation is setting in, the clock is ticking.

any links or coordination between Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and the Russian government

Yeah, Trump's son and other campaign people meeting with Russian officals, remember that one? The meeting that Bannon called treasonous?

Doesn't it bother any of you that your heroes people are all criminals??? Oh, and I think that eventually it will come out that Trump is involved in money laundering too.

qz.com...

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Sillyolme

originally posted by: face23785
Was just listening to Shep Smith on Fox. He's so hopeful this is leading to something that takes Trump down.

I did find it interesting that he asked his guest why else would Mueller prosecute Manafort if not to get to Trump, and his guest basically said there is no other reason.

So if they uncovered Manafort's illegal dealings during this investigation and there was no link to Trump, they would just ignore the fact that Manafort committed a bunch of felonies if he had nothing on Trump?

He may indeed have something on Trump, but to suggest that he must because otherwise Mueller wouldn't be filing charges against him is just absurd.

He is charging him because he committed crimes. He's been on the FBIs radar for years.

So you agree the fact he's being charged doesn't prove he has dirt on Trump. Charging someone because they committed crimes is perfectly legitimate, it doesn't necessarily indicate anything more than that.

the indictments, and guilty pleas, keep piling up for this white house....but, but....look over there!!!......it's just a matter of time...desperation is setting in, the clock is ticking.

Yeah those indictments for # that had nothing to do with Trump must really have him shaking in his booties.

Speaking of desperation.

a reply to: face23785

We're at a crossroads Face.

I believe Mueller wouldn't make this offer and emphasize the extensive jail terms that hang over Gates' head if he (Mueller) is not satisfied with what he gets from him unless he had ideas about what Gates knows. He is smarter than that.

You on the other hand assume Mueller is on a fishing expedition and knows nothing.
His reputation, like it or not, does not suggest use of such a fast and loose procedure to make a case. Sorry it just doesn't jive with Muellers methods in the past.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: face23785

We're at a crossroads Face.

I believe Mueller wouldn't make this offer and emphasize the extensive jail terms that hang over Gates' head if he (Mueller) is not satisfied with what he gets from him unless he had ideas about what Gates knows. He is smarter than that.

You on the other hand assume Mueller is on a fishing expedition and knows nothing.
His reputation, like it or not, does not suggest use of such a fast and loose procedure to make a case. Sorry it just doesn't jive with Muellers methods in the past.

I don't assume anything. I merely said the fact that he's prosecuting Manafort and using Gates to get to him doesn't prove they have dirt on Trump. That's wishful thinking. Meuller's methods in the past don't magically make dirt on Trump appear. If the investigation didn't turn up anything substantial on Trump, and Manafort was the biggest fish he caught, he'd be doing exactly what he's doing now. Using heat on an underling, Gates, to get as much ammo against Manafort to give himself the highest chance of convicting. It could indicate either, we don't know. You're the one assuming, because you want Trump to go down so bad.

a reply to: face23785

Not at all.
I agree it's a step in an elaborate dance. There are still the secret meetings after Manafort joined the team where he met with a representative of Oleg Vladimirovich Deripaska where he sought to "get whole" in regards to the millions he owed him. Deripaska had sued Manafort in the Cayman islands and then even though he is banned from this country in Virginia to try and collect the money Manafort owed him.
An old friend of Manaforts, Konstantin Kilimnik also an associate of Deripaska reportedly was the messenger between the two men when Manafort joined trumps team. Manafort queried Kilimnik about whether Deripaska had seen his recent press and if he (manafort) could use this relationship to "get whole" with Deripaska. In one exchange Kilimnik relayed a message from Deripaska

On July 29, a week after Trump accepted the Republican nomination, Manafort received another email from Kilimnik, this one with the subject line “Black Caviar.” “I met today with the guy who gave you your biggest black caviar jar several years ago,” Kilimnik wrote. “We spent about 5 hours talking about his story, and I have several important messages from him to you. He asked me to go and brief you on our conversation. I said I have to run it by you first, but in principle I am prepared to do it, provided that he buys me a ticket. It has to do about the future of his country, and is quite interesting. So, if you are not absolutely against the concept, please let me know which dates/places will work, even next week, and I could come and see you.”

Manafort agreed to the cryptic request, responding “Tuesday is best.”  

This exchange suggests that Manafort would use his position on the trump team ( the press he referred to in his emails) to effect Russia U.S. relations in the future.

Whether trump knew about this or not is the question.


Oops forgot the very long but interesting story here

www.theatlantic.com...

a reply to: face23785

because you want Trump to go down so bad

You're the one getting all emotional.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: face23785

because you want Trump to go down so bad

You're the one getting all emotional.

Yeah the purely fact-based analysis that you can't refute is emotional, got it. I couldn't care less if Trump gets impeached. You're the only one who has your emotions invested in it. They're blinding your judgement. Nothing we've seen indicates they have anything on Trump. You're making gigantic leaps of faith to draw that conclusion, because that's what you want to believe. That's emotional.

a reply to: Sillyolme

So even that article calls that "cryptic", yet you think you know what it means, despite no evidence. So you're assuming that, and even if that were true it doesn't do anything to Trump. If that's the best you've got to believe Mueller has something on Trump, you've got nothing.