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.

 

The point of cohens plea deal

page: 3
39
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Mid terms coming up fast who is not surprised at the timing. I'm really beginning to hate people.





posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude



But rather than admit that indeed she broke some laws and somehow has no recourse to the law, you find ways to shield her from scorn. Why not just admit you have a massive hard on for her and go with it. It's obvious.


What law did she break?



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 10:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: neo96



...And is there anyone who actually believes that had hillary one and the violatuions you site came to light, the media and everyone would be calling for impeachment and making a huge deal like they are about trump?...

Of course they wouldnt.



You mean like she was hounded about Benghazi for years with absolutely nothing to show for it? I think the american people have seen enough commiserate 'witch-hunting' after Hillary that you're likely only to find agreement with those with a hate hard-on already for her.


this is something I still just don't get. Posters like you will say you don't support Hillary, but when all that is asked is justice, you still find ways to defend her from the monumentally obvious crimes she committed. If she was investigated and charged, I'd call it a win for justice, and if Trump did bad things, and he was charged, I'd say the same.

But rather than admit that indeed she broke some laws and somehow has no recourse to the law, you find ways to shield her from scorn. Why not just admit you have a massive hard on for her and go with it. It's obvious.

A fair shake for her would do WONDERS for uniting the left vs. right divide. But rather than have fairness, you offer deflection.


Except I refuse to buy into the wackadoo conspiracy theory that Hillary/Democrats run everything and control the media and the courts and that's why Hillary got off free. Its all utter BS. Prosecute her if you want, just don't cry like a baby when she beats the charges while doofus Trump and company can't even pay a hooker without getting in trouble.....

Every time Hillary gets around something the default assumption by Trump supporters is some malfeasance. Occam would suggest it more likely that the charges they try and stick her with are the weak link....

You feel this way because you can't see past your own conspiracy theory.
edit on 34am18famWed, 22 Aug 2018 10:45:48 -0500America/ChicagoWed, 22 Aug 2018 10:45:48 -0500 by Wayfarer because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 10:50 AM
link   
a reply to: smurfy


Thing is Manafort is tied deeply with pro Russian Ukraine politicos, and up to now, strict unreporting of certain telephone calls both to Trump House in regard to the Russian meeting there and, the telephone messages made at the Republican convention where Ukraine was given better treatment that was expected by most of those attending that convention.


I don't think it's any surprise that Manafort would try to use his long time Ukrainian connections to strengthen ties between the U.S. and the Ukraine. Obviously, Manafort built a business around these connections. Heck, even Manafort's wife is Ukrainian. He obviously has a personal interest in these relationships too.



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 11:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: network dude



But rather than admit that indeed she broke some laws and somehow has no recourse to the law, you find ways to shield her from scorn. Why not just admit you have a massive hard on for her and go with it. It's obvious.


What law did she break?


please remember this isn't personal. But this is a question I'd expect from Silly, not you.
Are you familiar with this?
www.youtube.com...

If you watch that video, that apparently you haven't ever seen, it is of James Comey listing the amount of classified documents and what classification they held AT THE TIME. And then there is the destruction of evidence. But that part will still need to be investigated in order to be a valid charge like the classified document mishandling.



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 11:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: neo96



...And is there anyone who actually believes that had hillary one and the violatuions you site came to light, the media and everyone would be calling for impeachment and making a huge deal like they are about trump?...

Of course they wouldnt.



You mean like she was hounded about Benghazi for years with absolutely nothing to show for it? I think the american people have seen enough commiserate 'witch-hunting' after Hillary that you're likely only to find agreement with those with a hate hard-on already for her.


this is something I still just don't get. Posters like you will say you don't support Hillary, but when all that is asked is justice, you still find ways to defend her from the monumentally obvious crimes she committed. If she was investigated and charged, I'd call it a win for justice, and if Trump did bad things, and he was charged, I'd say the same.

But rather than admit that indeed she broke some laws and somehow has no recourse to the law, you find ways to shield her from scorn. Why not just admit you have a massive hard on for her and go with it. It's obvious.

A fair shake for her would do WONDERS for uniting the left vs. right divide. But rather than have fairness, you offer deflection.


Except I refuse to buy into the wackadoo conspiracy theory that Hillary/Democrats run everything and control the media and the courts and that's why Hillary got off free. Its all utter BS. Prosecute her if you want, just don't cry like a baby when she beats the charges while doofus Trump and company can't even pay a hooker without getting in trouble.....

Every time Hillary gets around something the default assumption by Trump supporters is some malfeasance. Occam would suggest it more likely that the charges they try and stick her with are the weak link....

You feel this way because you can't see past your own conspiracy theory.


So you don't think the liberal media is at all biased against Trump, and you don't think that Hillary mishandling classified information was a crime, due to her "intent"? Well, then it's obviously me, I must be inventing all that due to my crazy conspiracy mind.



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 11:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: neo96



...And is there anyone who actually believes that had hillary one and the violatuions you site came to light, the media and everyone would be calling for impeachment and making a huge deal like they are about trump?...

Of course they wouldnt.



You mean like she was hounded about Benghazi for years with absolutely nothing to show for it? I think the american people have seen enough commiserate 'witch-hunting' after Hillary that you're likely only to find agreement with those with a hate hard-on already for her.


Oh so because their was an investigation into benghazi, we should never look at if hillary committed other crimes?

And why did none of the invetsigations into hillary involve he lawyers office getting raided to get evidence.

In fact, quite to the contrary, hillarys team destroyed subpoenaed evidence and wasnt charged for it.

But we get it, trump committs campaign violations, its a huge deal requiring lawyers be raided, talk of impeachment, etc.

Hillary does it, going after it would be a witch hunt. Obama found guilty of it, just a simple fine to pay.


The point I was trying to make is that EVERYONE here perpetually uses the same tired trope of "Well, its not so bad when my person did it because the other side did it". Hillary was hounded with an investigation longer that Trump, and yet Trump is apparently the most oppressed politician ever.....

You started off well enough, but invalidated your own position as soon as you jumped on that same old tired bandwagon. Yes, Trump should be punished for it, and yes, Hillary should too if she is in fact guilty to the same level as Trump (and that's not an admission that she was/is). The fact that Hillary managed to avoid it (a discussion had hundreds of times already on ATS and quite frankly moot at this point) is irrelevant as anything other than a smokescreen meant to hide the fact that while you prefer to act righteous with your equal application of the law, you're secretly upset that your man Trump is facing consequences for it.


I am n ot upset that trump may face consequences.

In fact, in many senses trump already accomplished what I wanted him to.

I voted for trump because I believe that the establishments powerful people in the two party system are actually one in the same, and quite corrupt.

I wanted an outsider, which is why I was pushing for bernie vs. trump, becuase I would win either way.

Had the election been Bush or ryan, or rubio vs. bernie, I nwould have voted bernie in a minute.

Bot bernie primary loss abnd trumps election victory have vindicated me that the establishment two party system is corrrupt.

Bernie loss by showing how the dems stole it from him; trumps victory by showing the double standards andunethical treatment that the intel communities would use to go after him, and how the same media that was supposedly so critical of the intel community after the irq war would not only push the intel communities narrative and not report any possible wrong doing by them, but actually tell people that to question the intel community would hurt america.

That is why I have consistently said from the begining that I dont care if trump goes down tomorrow if he commtted crime; justice should be served.

But having a corrupt intel community (with almost all of the media as their mouth pieces) is a far bigger deal than any crimes Trump or hillary have been accused of.

And so I point out this corruption and their double standards.

And yes, some people are short sited and say pointing out this is me being petty cause I like trump; they are wrong.

But I tell you what, i will make a thread in the next week of all of the double standards done by the intel community, and you can feel free to weigh in on it.

Unless you dont think having bias and corrupt inte agencies with the pwoer to overthrow elected officials is important.



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: network dude



But rather than admit that indeed she broke some laws and somehow has no recourse to the law, you find ways to shield her from scorn. Why not just admit you have a massive hard on for her and go with it. It's obvious.


What law did she break?


The most obvious is her team destroyed subpoenaed evidnce.

That is cut and dry, yet no charges.

I wonder why peter strzok, who was in charge of that investigation, and was texting how awesome she was and how smelly trump supporters were and how he needed an insurance policy against trump, would have not charged anyone on her team for doing that?



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 11:51 AM
link   
How about this crime?

Former Clinton Pollster: Hillary Clinton Broke Campaign Finance Laws, Not Donald Trump

Mark Penn, former pollster for the Clintons wrote this article:


The usual procedures here would be for the FEC to investigate complaints and sort through these murky laws to determine if these kinds of payments are personal in nature or more properly classified as campaign expenditures. And, on the Daniels payment that was made and reimbursed by Trump, it is again a question of whether that was made for personal reasons (especially since they have been trying since 2011 to obtain agreement). Just because it would be helpful to the campaign does not convert it to a campaign expenditure. Think of a candidate with bad teeth who had dental work done to look better for the campaign; his campaign still could not pay for it because it’s a personal expenditure.

Contrast what is going on here with the treatment of the millions of dollars paid to a Democratic law firm which, in turn, paid out money to political research firm Fusion GPS and British ex-spy Christopher Steele without listing them on any campaign expenditure form — despite crystal-clear laws and regulations that the ultimate beneficiaries of the funds must be listed. This rule was even tightened recently. There is no question that hiring spies to do opposition research in Russia is a campaign expenditure, and yet, no prosecutorial raids have been sprung on the law firm, Fusion GPS or Steele. Reason: It does not “get” Trump.


It appears as if the prosecutors didn't even go through the proper channels to determine if an election violation actually occurred.



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

I was watching live as it happened

I'm asking you a question - same question. What crime did she commit?

Nothing personal



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 11:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: neo96



...And is there anyone who actually believes that had hillary one and the violatuions you site came to light, the media and everyone would be calling for impeachment and making a huge deal like they are about trump?...

Of course they wouldnt.



You mean like she was hounded about Benghazi for years with absolutely nothing to show for it? I think the american people have seen enough commiserate 'witch-hunting' after Hillary that you're likely only to find agreement with those with a hate hard-on already for her.


this is something I still just don't get. Posters like you will say you don't support Hillary, but when all that is asked is justice, you still find ways to defend her from the monumentally obvious crimes she committed. If she was investigated and charged, I'd call it a win for justice, and if Trump did bad things, and he was charged, I'd say the same.

But rather than admit that indeed she broke some laws and somehow has no recourse to the law, you find ways to shield her from scorn. Why not just admit you have a massive hard on for her and go with it. It's obvious.

A fair shake for her would do WONDERS for uniting the left vs. right divide. But rather than have fairness, you offer deflection.


Except I refuse to buy into the wackadoo conspiracy theory that Hillary/Democrats run everything and control the media and the courts and that's why Hillary got off free. Its all utter BS. Prosecute her if you want, just don't cry like a baby when she beats the charges while doofus Trump and company can't even pay a hooker without getting in trouble.....

Every time Hillary gets around something the default assumption by Trump supporters is some malfeasance. Occam would suggest it more likely that the charges they try and stick her with are the weak link....

You feel this way because you can't see past your own conspiracy theory.


Only three questions for you...

1. Did Hilary and her team destroy subpoenaed evidence?
2. Is it a crime to destroy subpoenaed evidence?
3. Was Hilary or anyone on her team ever charged for destroying subpoenaed evidence?

We both know the answers to all three questions, but you're right, Hilary isn't playing off a different set of laws from common folks..



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler




The most obvious is her team destroyed subpoenaed evidnce.


Before or after the subpoena?



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 12:00 PM
link   
I agree with OP, that Cohen was likely not served well by his Clinton-crony lawyer, who very likely wanted nothing more than to sacrifice Cohen to get to Trump any way he could. The question is why was Cohen foolish enough to hire Clinton’s favorite lawyer—was he convinced that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Thus, as he feared he was going to be hung out to dry by Trump who was signaling that he was distancing himself from Cohen, he decided his new enemy’s old enemy would his new friend. I think the one thing he has to do in order to get his deal was to implicate Trump...even though the actual plea agreement didn’t mention Trump at all, yet Cohen at least insinuated that he paid for a NDA at the direction of a candidate for federal office. Source of plea agreement details: Cohen’s Plea Agreement



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 12:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: network dude

I was watching live as it happened

I'm asking you a question - same question. What crime did she commit?

Nothing personal


She mishandled classified documents by storing and sending them over unsecured means. I even linked you to the law statue. I honestly don't understand what part of this you are having trouble with. Or do you disagree with James Comey?



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 12:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
How about this crime?

Former Clinton Pollster: Hillary Clinton Broke Campaign Finance Laws, Not Donald Trump

Mark Penn, former pollster for the Clintons wrote this article:


The usual procedures here would be for the FEC to investigate complaints and sort through these murky laws to determine if these kinds of payments are personal in nature or more properly classified as campaign expenditures. And, on the Daniels payment that was made and reimbursed by Trump, it is again a question of whether that was made for personal reasons (especially since they have been trying since 2011 to obtain agreement). Just because it would be helpful to the campaign does not convert it to a campaign expenditure. Think of a candidate with bad teeth who had dental work done to look better for the campaign; his campaign still could not pay for it because it’s a personal expenditure.

Contrast what is going on here with the treatment of the millions of dollars paid to a Democratic law firm which, in turn, paid out money to political research firm Fusion GPS and British ex-spy Christopher Steele without listing them on any campaign expenditure form — despite crystal-clear laws and regulations that the ultimate beneficiaries of the funds must be listed. This rule was even tightened recently. There is no question that hiring spies to do opposition research in Russia is a campaign expenditure, and yet, no prosecutorial raids have been sprung on the law firm, Fusion GPS or Steele. Reason: It does not “get” Trump.


It appears as if the prosecutors didn't even go through the proper channels to determine if an election violation actually occurred.


That article sums up exactly what my op was saying.

From a former clinton campaign worker no less.



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: Grambler




The most obvious is her team destroyed subpoenaed evidnce.


Before or after the subpoena?


After.



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude



She mishandled classified documents by storing and sending them over unsecured means. I even linked you to the law statue. I honestly don't understand what part of this you are having trouble with. Or do you disagree with James Comey?


I honestly don't understand why you can't just answer my question?

What crime has she committed?



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: network dude



She mishandled classified documents by storing and sending them over unsecured means. I even linked you to the law statue. I honestly don't understand what part of this you are having trouble with. Or do you disagree with James Comey?


I honestly don't understand why you can't just answer my question?

What crime has she committed?


She is guilty of breaking 18 U.S. Code § 1924 - Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material, as I linked to you earlier. This is a crime.

(a) Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both. (b) For purposes of this section, the provision of documents and materials to the Congress shall not constitute an offense under subsection (a). (c) In this section, the term “classified information of the United States” means information originated, owned, or possessed by the United States Government concerning the national defense or foreign relations of the United States that has been determined pursuant to law or Executive order to require protection against unauthorized disclosure in the interests of national security.


If you honestly don't understand this, please say so. If you are playing some game, also, please just say so.

She either did screw up with her personal server and it's classified data, or that isn't a law that matters, and anyone who is charged under it should never, ever be prosecuted.

I can't be any clearer than that.



posted on Aug, 22 2018 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

It's the word knowingly. If you honestly can't understand that part - I would say you might have a hard on for locking her up


edit on 8/22/2018 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join