Manafort found guilty on 8 counts, mistrial declared on remaining 10.

a reply to: deadlysyn

Trump getting impeached supposedly means instant installation of Hillary in the White House.

No. It would be Pence. But a pretty good bloody nose for the Republicans. Because Pence, for one thing.

originally posted by: angeldoll

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: network dude

Thats because the SC investigation / prosecutions arent protecting security. They are covering for Clinton / Democrats by trying to effect a coup by removing Trump from office.

You consider having Pence in office a 'coup"?

That's funny.

No -
I call it a coup because Democrats are trying to remove a duly elected President because they dont like him and wanted Clinton to win. The p[lan by the left is to impeach TRump. They then demand the resignation of Pence using the bs guise that Trump was impeached because of russia collusion and by extension Pence is not legitimate. Democrats want Pence to appoint Clinton as Vice President and Pence resigns, given Hillary the Presidency because in the lefts deranged minds she deserves it even though she lost because she was a #ty candidate.

Next time maybe read up on the ideas that democrats put forth.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I call it a coup because Democrats are trying to remove a duly elected President because they dont like him and wanted Clinton to win.

Was the Clinton impeachment a Republican attempt at a coup as well?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Xcathdra

I call it a coup because Democrats are trying to remove a duly elected President because they dont like him and wanted Clinton to win.

Was the Clinton impeachment a Republican attempt at a coup as well?

No - his impeachment was a direct relation to Bill intentionally lying under oath and getting caught doing it. Ironically we also saw both Clintons protected by the DOJ/FBI during that time, just like now, by covering up their other crimes - white water, travelgate, murder in mena Arkansas etc etc.

Democrats had control of the Senate and protected Bill Clinton from conviction.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Right. Under oath. Was that a perjury trap, you think?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Xcathdra

Right. Under oath. Was that a perjury trap, you think?

No - he lied to the Grand Jury. It deals specifically with his "what the definition of is is". The question that was asked that got the response was not a perjury trap. In Clinton's world oral sex is not considered "sexual relations". Also its not the first time he has used that line. Going back to his days in Arkansas he split hairs on that exact topic by arguing the bible does not mention anything about oral sex so engaging in it while married is not cheating on his wife.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: F4guy

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: Willtell

Trump will and should pardon him from this witch hunt!

I hope he does. While a pardon can not in itself usually be a crime, it sure can be used as evidence of an intent to unlawfully obstruct justice. It could very well be the evidence that is conclusive. 45 is getting some horrible legal advice.

I dont think it would be evidnce of obstruction.

However, it would be incredibly shady, and I believe would massively butress an impeachment possibility.

As a retired former judge, I can tell you that it would be admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 401, as relevant to a material issue as to a charge of obstruction under 18 U.S.C. 1503 or section 371. It is relevant to the issue of corrupt or specific intent.

a reply to: F4guy

How can obstruction exist when the person fired had no direct involvement in the case itself? Even McCabe testified to Congress Comey's termination had no impact on the investigation. Secondly as chief law enforcement officer of the US he has the ability to involve himself in these cases.

originally posted by: carewemust
If this is the best that Bob Mueller can do with finding Russian collusion with Americans, his investigation needs to be terminated.

Why are you so incredibly closed minded? Your assumption is that YOU know and WE know the WHOLE story. We don't and very few people do. All we know is that 2 people close to Trump have been found guilty or decided to plead guilty to crimes. Which by the way, before they had, we had many people on the right claiming that this was a witch hunt. Clearly when 2 people are going to prison it is not a witch hunt. So stop taking a party line and start looking at this objectively. Crimes took place. It's not a witch hunt.

Also, this in NO WAY means other crimes didn't take place (such as collusion) and it certainly has no bearing on when an ongoing investigation may suddenly reveal more of the pieces to us. Stop assuming that the information which Mueller and his team have, is public knowledge. It isn't. You don't know, we don't know. There could be a breaking story tomorrow which ties more pieces together. You constantly jump the gun so much, constantly call for investigations to stop, constantly point to dubious websites to back up your arguments, that you quite frankly come across as someone who has either lost all perspective and objectivity, or you are here for far more dubious reasons. At the end of the day, Trump is a very dodgy character, we all know this. He is being investigated and SOME investigations around his investigation are showing that people close to him acted illegally. Does this mean Trump ACTUALLY did something illegal, we don't know. That includes YOU. All we can do is let the investigation run it's course and see what happens. Repeatedly calling it a witch hunt and that it should be stopped immedialtely.. well, just remember, the day you stop believing your entire security infrastructure, your courts, your news and instead believe one man, you are on a dangerous trajectory.

Be objective. Be open minded. Be patient.

This is how Mueller conducts his interrogations.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: soberbacchus

I think she might be someone we should just ship out of the country, don't really care where, send her to whereever her little heart wishes really... but just do it real quiet like.

Interesting sidenote.

Remember when Obama discovered that Russian sleeper cell in 2010 including Anna Chapman?

The Obama administration shipped them back to Russia...in a spy swap for some people we wanted freed.

One of the people we swapped those spies for?

Sergei Skripal. A Russian Intelligence Officer that was a double agent for the UK that had been imprisoned in Russia since he was found out in 2004.

He was the Russian hiding in the UK that was poisoned with an banned russian Nerve Agent this year along with his daughter in an attempted assassination.

Russia is no longer making fair trades.

They make a spy swap and then look to kill those they traded. Every spy we have gotten back from Russia in trade is going completely "dark" right now. Putins deals are worthless and he is reneging on his trades.

Otherwise, we aren't sending her back.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: angeldoll

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: network dude

Thats because the SC investigation / prosecutions arent protecting security. They are covering for Clinton / Democrats by trying to effect a coup by removing Trump from office.

You consider having Pence in office a 'coup"?

That's funny.

Hey maybe you will get your wish and the witch hunt and corrupt intel agencies will get trump out and pence in.

Then maybe gay marriage and abortion can finally be rolled back, that will be great for the left, correct?

I think you are confused thinking it's a left right thing.

You think anyone on the left is unaware that Pence is both more conservative than Trump and more effective by way of less controversial?

And they still want justice to run it's course.

Funny as you mentioned earlier, the reason they finally got manafort is because they had such a powerful special council.

So wouldnt you admit that this tool should be used to look into other alleged crimes, like that of Hillarys?

The Special Counsel was appointed because faith in Congress's ability to investigate independently was in question and the Campaign that needed to be examined were the same people that are the final authority over the DOJ/FBI conducting the investigation. Is there any doubt where the investigation would be if it still reported to President Trump directly?

As for Clinton?
It was a GOP dominated congress that was hostile to her that did the investigating.

And it is weird you keep pretending like HRC was never looked into?

That is the most insane molestation of history I have seen in a while.

1) State Department Inspector General Investigation
2) Multi-year expansive FBI Investigation
3) Senate Probe
4) Internal State Department Investigation
5) House Oversight Committee Investigation and Hearings
6) House Select Committee Investigation and Hearings
7) Accountability review Board Investigation
8) Senate Judiciary Committee Investigation and Hearings
9) House Intelligence Committee Investigation and Hearings
10) Joint Judiciary and Oversight Committee
11) Justice Department Inspector general Investigation

Hearings, Subpoenas, testimony, for YEARS. All by proud partisan politicians (except for FBI) who had every reason to "lock her up" as a political threat.

Tell me again that Hillary Clinton was never looked into.

a reply to: soberbacchus

Your point was the fbi wasnt able to get manafort in 2005 because they didnt have the great power and ability a special counsel does.

Ok, why wouldnt the same apply to hillary?

For example, we know without a doubt that her team destroyed subpoenaed evidence requested by the fbi, and yet despite this obvious crime, they were unable to get her for it.

Just like they were unable to get manafort for his obvious crimes.

And so, why shouldnt the same special counsel powers be used to look at hillary?

If there were questions as to rather Trump team could fairly investigate russian interference, why would the same questions apply with Obamas fbi and doj investigating hillary? Especially when, unlike with the under trump, we see texts of clear bias for hillary from the very investigators?

Just be honest, you are biased, and want no stine unturned in looking into trump, including a special counsel, but do not want that done to hillary.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus


Just be honest, you are biased, and want no stine unturned in looking into trump, including a special counsel, but do not want that done to hillary.

Just to be honest, I wrote a detailed response to your post, question by question, until reading this last line, then deleted it.

No need to discuss further with someone just presenting a façade of engaging in a factual discussion.

originally posted by: narrator
a reply to: Tempter

Yet.

Cohen essentially said that he did what he did because Trump asked him to (paraphrasing). That doesn't look good for your idol.

To be clear, you are correct. There is nothing officially on Trump. But, there could be soon. We should all hang back and wait to see what happens before making blanket statements about guilt or innocence.

He very specifically did NOT say Trump. I think you are falling for a head fake.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: angeldoll

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: network dude

Thats because the SC investigation / prosecutions arent protecting security. They are covering for Clinton / Democrats by trying to effect a coup by removing Trump from office.

You consider having Pence in office a 'coup"?

That's funny.

Hey maybe you will get your wish and the witch hunt and corrupt intel agencies will get trump out and pence in.

Then maybe gay marriage and abortion can finally be rolled back, that will be great for the left, correct?

It has struck me as odd, that I have not seen much speculation on Prez the Donald's use of the term witch hunt...with almost everyone interpreting it in the common use sense of it...stemming from the Salem Witch Trials...that false evidence is being used to frame innocents.

But, given the Satanic nature of the deep state control mechanisms, could he not just as easily be referring to an actual hunt for people who indeed consider themselves actual witches, in the religious sense?

Maybe I'm giving him too much Master Troll cred...but, maybe not...might have to reread all those tweets, with that idea in mind.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: F4guy

How can obstruction exist when the person fired had no direct involvement in the case itself? Even McCabe testified to Congress Comey's termination had no impact on the investigation. Secondly as chief law enforcement officer of the US he has the ability to involve himself in these cases.

Under current federal law, even an unsuccessful attempt to hinder an investigstion is crime. An example is the Martha Stewart prosecution. Also, that is what Ken Starr used to go after Susan Macdougal and Julie Hiatt Steele. It is the act that is material, not the result. An analogy is the crime of assault. If you swing at someone and miss, it is still assault. If you swing and connect, it is a different crime - battery (in most states.)

originally posted by: Phage

Right. Under oath. Was that a perjury trap, you think?

I think it is all based on a perjury trap, then and now. That is the real tool in their little bag of tricks. I have always wondered how they went from the Whitewater Scam to sperm on a blue dress...


Just like how do we get from a Russian collusion to a porn star...

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: soberbacchus


Just be honest, you are biased, and want no stine unturned in looking into trump, including a special counsel, but do not want that done to hillary.

Just to be honest, I wrote a detailed response to your post, question by question, until reading this last line, then deleted it.

No need to discuss further with someone just presenting a façade of engaging in a factual discussion.

Says the person accusing me of saying Hillary was never looked in to and that was the most insane molestation of history

Perhaps you should check your own words before calling out others

You have constantly presented reasons why the special counsel was necessary for Manafort, but when Shown the same reasons apply to Hillary, you balk at them

Turns out Cohen IS a cooperative witness.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

Andrea Mitchell
‏Verified account @mitchellreports
12m12 minutes ago

Former Trump Campaign Chairman #Manafort conviction on 8 counts of the 10 charges comes as @realDonaldTrump also learning longtime former personal lawyer #MichaelCohen agreeing to guilty plea in NY Federal Court

Jeremy Diamond
‏Verified account @JDiamond1

Jeremy Diamond Retweeted Jeremy Diamond

BREAKING: Paul Manafort guilty on 8 counts. Mistrial declared on 10 other counts.

Now we see if the SC will go for round 2 on the 10 counts or take what they got and leave the 10 alone. I am curious if Manafort is going to appeal.

In related SC news -
Also Flynn's sentencing has once again postponed by the Special Counsel.
Cohen is to plead guilty and will NOT be a cooperating witness to the SC.