Special counsel: Manafort, Gates worked with Russian intelligence agent

So if I ask Russia to hack Hillary's emails it's treason? How is that treason?

a reply to: soberbacchus

Well thank you for your attempts to put words in my mouth.

Fisrt, the law is the law. Either its ok to lobby for a foriegn government without filing it, or its not. Your interpretation that it was worse for people connected to trump rather than people connected to hillary is irrelevant.

Secondly, the Podesta group was literally working with the exact same people manafort is being charged with, proving the crime is the same.

Third, the Podesta group worked heavily with hillary, as the article I linked showed, helping foriegn lobbyist have access to her.

Forth, John Podesta, whose brother is the head of the Podesta group, was hillarys campaign manager. Tony also fund raised and worked for hillary to get her elected.

I am not saying espionage against the US should be legal, nor have I said anything that would lead any reasonable person to believe that.

I am saying the law should be equally applied, regardless of what political side you are on; and thus far it seems that is not the case.

You are saying that it should not apply to some because you feel they were somehow more justified in their actions, or less connected to hillary than manafort was to trump, which is ridiculous.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus

Well thank you for your attempts to put words in my mouth.

Fisrt, the law is the law. Either its ok to lobby for a foriegn government without filing it, or its not. Your interpretation that it was worse for people connected to trump rather than people connected to hillary is irrelevant.

Insanely incorrect

Which one is not like the others

A) A President's National Security Advisor covertly working for and receiving payments from Russia and Turkey to carry out a covert agenda including discussions of kidnapping American Citizens. This person repeatedly lies about it in FBI interviews under oath and on multiple security clearance forms under penalty of prosecution.

B) A Presidential Campaign Chief covertly working with and receiving and hiding payments from a foreign government for a covert agenda and hiding that money and laundering the payments through shell companies in Cyprus. Having discussions about continuing work and payments and denying those conversations to the FBI under penalty of prosecution.

C) A Political Lobbying firm who regularly conducts lobbying efforts on behalf of foreign governments failing to officially register their work on behalf a given foreign government who immediately admits the error and retro-actively registers their work and files the proper paperwork.

The Foreign Agents Registration Act is the official violation that is applied to both professional lobbyists and proven traitors and foreign spies in the United States.

Which ones are employed by the United States Government? Which ones lied under oath and in security forms about who they worked for? Which ones are Publicly and Professionally registered as Lobbyists engaged in foreign work? Podesta Group and Mercury failed to register declaring their work for a given country, but their was no deceit about what they do for a living. They are a lobbying firm, not a Chief National Security Advisor to the President or Presidential Campaign Chief.

Example: When the Obama administration arrested a Russian Sleeper Cell Spy Ring Network (Anna Chapman), all of them were charged with Failure to Register as Foreign Agents.

Sidenote:
Those 10 spies were sent back to Russia in a trade for 4 Spies of our own:
Igor V. Sutyagin
Sergei Skripal
Aleksandr Zaporozhsky
Gennadi Vasilenko
That were released from Russian prisons and handed over in the trade.

*Sergei Skripal (and his daughter) were the ones that Putin just tired to murder with the first Nerve Agent attack in Europe by a foreign government in almost a century, leading to the expulsion of 60 Russian Ambassadors from the US.


You are equating Charges with what they are found guilty of.

A guy threatening his neighbor with a gun during an argument and a guy that robs a bank with a gun will both receive the charge of "Unlawful use of a weapon".

That is not the entirety of their circumstances or guilt.

Although, if the bank robber pleads guilty and cooperates to convict his accomplices, he can negotiate having the greater charges mitigated or eliminated.

This is logic.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Ridiculous.

First and most importantly; you are making excuses for one side because you like that side. Period.

The law is the law. Show me in the Fara laws where is says only people officially working for a campaign must register as a foriegnn lobbyists if they are doing that.

Secondly, Manfort specifically was not charged with fara violations while working for trump, it was from 2012, when he was working with the Podesta group, to give lobbyists access to politicians like Hillary clinton.

third, you downplay the podesta groups connection to Hillary. We are to believe that even though hillary met with tony, and at the same time manafort was charged, he was illegally operating as a foreign lobbyists to give foriegn state actors access to then SOS Hillary, and he is hillarys campaign managers brother; none of that is a big deal.

But the most hilarious thing that you wrote here was the following.

who immediately admits the error and retro-actively registers their work and files the proper paperwork.

Immediatly!

Hahahahaha!!!!!

Sure, they immediately registered; 5 years later!!

Hahahahaha!!!!

Funny, why wasnt Manafort allowed to retroactively file?

Again, this proves your judgement is clouded by partisanship. You are Ok with people connected to hillary breaking the law, and being allowed to retroactively file.

I am for the equal application of law to every side.

originally posted by: sunShines
So if I ask Russia to hack Hillary's emails it's treason? How is that treason?

All they were supposedly was yoga schedules and innocuous things like that. No work stuff was in there, so what's the problem? Unless she was lying about what was in them, which we already know she was.

Judicial Watch today released 1,617 new pages of documents from the U.S. Department of State revealing numerous additional examples of classified information being transmitted through the unsecure, non-state.gov account of Huma Abedin, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, as well as many instances of Hillary Clinton donors receiving special favors from the State Department.

The documents included 97 email exchanges with Clinton not previously turned over to the State Department, bringing the known total to date to at least 627 emails that were not part of the 55,000 pages of emails that Clinton turned over, and further contradicting a statement by Clinton that, “as far as she knew,” all of her government emails had been turned over to department.

Judicial Watch

But at the time, we were told it was nothing but non-work stuff, so it's definitely not treason to ask someone to get them.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus

Ridiculous.

First and most importantly; you are making excuses for one side because you like that side. Period.

that is idiotic.

The law is the law. Show me in the Fara laws where is says only people officially working for a campaign must register as a foriegnn lobbyists if they are doing that.

Why? When did I say that Podesta Group or a gazillion other firms aren't required to register?

Secondly, Manfort specifically was not charged with fara violations while working for trump, it was from 2012, when he was working with the Podesta group, to give lobbyists access to politicians like Hillary clinton.

Right, His FISA charges are one of dozens of charges for Money Laundering, tax Evasion etc.
If he was cooperative the FISA charges would likely be dropped.

third, you downplay the podesta groups connection to Hillary.

I don't care. They are lobbyists and they lobby politicians. They have worked for the GOP and Dems. It is what they do.

Funny, why wasnt Manafort allowed to retroactively file?

Because there were dozens of other charges and he remains uncooperative.

Flynn's charges were dropped in plea deal negotiations.

Podesta Group and Mercury were settled with fines.

Again, this proves your judegment is clouded by partisanship.

Kettle black? I am discussing reality, you seem to be the one triggered by it and offering bizarre claims that spies and lobbyists are equal.

a reply to: sunShines

Hmm and yet you can vote. Let’s see I ask Russia to hack a government email system for personal gain. Nope not treasonous.

originally posted by: sunShines
So if I ask Russia to hack Hillary's emails it's treason? How is that treason?

If you work for the future President of the United States in a campaign capacity, yes.

It is soliciting foreign contributions to a campaign.

If you offer something in return from a potential or actual Presidential Administration, that is treason.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Not if it's a joke.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Its real simple.

]If manafort is charged for not filing in 2012 for working with ukraine, then the Podesta group he was working with should also be charged.

You can make any excuse you want, thats fine.

Just come right out and say it, we know you are thiniing it.,

Its ok for hillarys people to break the law, and work for the interests of foreign governments, including pro russian ukrainians, because you like them. If trumps people work with those same groups though, they should be prosecuted.

I will admit it is very fun watching you try to twist and turn why one should be allowed and the other not.

a reply to: sunShines

Treason isn’t quite a joking comment. And since when can anyone decifer when the idiot in chief is joking or not joking. Point blank he is, was, and always will be his own worst enemy. He is used to not having to answer to anyone and acts like it. If you own business you can do whatever you want. If you are a ceo of a publically traded company you have accountability to the board. Trump isn’t used to being accountable to anything and acts like a spoiled 4 year old when someone holds him accountable. Being a president is all about accountability.

www.politico.com...

originally posted by: mzinga
a reply to: sunShines

Hmm and yet you can vote. Let’s see I ask Russia to hack a government email system for personal gain. Nope not treasonous.

Read the constitutional requirement for treason.

Try and stay current - with 1787.

originally posted by: mzinga
a reply to: sunShines

Hmm and yet you can vote. Let’s see I ask Russia to hack a government email system for personal gain. Nope not treasonous.

Her emails weren't on a government email system. That was kind of the whole reason it was illegal to be sending classified information on it.

a reply to: DogStarIn1066

Exactly. Hey Russia come on in and read the sec states email, release that to Wikileaks and help me win an election. Nope no state secrets, nothing wrong here.

Grow up man.

a reply to: face23785

Actually she wasn’t the first or last person to do this. You also are missing the point. Tell you what I’ll go hack the prez’s email and give all that information to North Korea. Would I end up in jail?

a reply to: mzinga

Treason is defined in the US contitution. You might want to check out the document some time.

Who can declare war, and exactly who are we at war with now?


That should give you a starting point.

originally posted by: mzinga
a reply to: face23785

Actually she wasn’t the first or last person to do this. You also are missing the point. Tell you what I’ll go hack the prez’s email and give all that information to North Korea. Would I end up in jail?

Someone else was doing classified government business through their own private unsecured server? Link? If you're thinking of the Bush email scandal, it was never shown that they had sent anything classified as far as I know. It's been proven Clinton sent and received classified data on her private server. That's a felony. Bush and his cronies were still guilty of failing to preserve records. If you want to nail them to the wall too, go ahead.

You're actually the one missing the point. If all those 33,000 deleted emails contained was personal stuff, like her yoga routine and emails about Chelsea's wedding, then it makes no difference that she was Secretary of State. And she wasn't Secretary of State when he made that joke anyway, she was literally no one, a private citizen. It's not treason to invade someone's privacy, which is literally all you'd be doing snooping through her personal emails on her private server. IF that's all the server contained. Aside from the obvious laws against hacking anyone, which only the person who did the hacking would be guilty of breaking. Just calling for some random person to do it doesn't actually violate any laws, much less qualify as treason.

Anyway, this thread isn't about Clinton.

a reply to: face23785

Possibly an emotional response to wishes vs facts and logic.

Mueller end of the line is nigh. One year of investigation and nothing to show for it. Nixon was already finished when evidence came up weeks after the burglary.

originally posted by: DogStarIn1066
a reply to: face23785

Possibly an emotional response to wishes vs facts and logic.

Except when I was in the Air Force I dealt with classified material and did federal records searches, so I'm familiar with the rules and laws. Possibly a failure to point to any specific thing I said wrong?

ETA: Again this thread isn't about Clinton. There's dozens of threads about this, I'm sure if you go through them you'll find thorough explanations of exactly which laws she broke and how. Clinton worshipers just don't want to believe it. If you're still confused, DM me.