Let the bodies hit the floor
- Thread starter osu_orangestreak
- Start date
Yeah -- those don't count, LOL. Who cares if it's just money stuff, right?
DO SOMETHING!!!!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! Somebody has to do something!!! Biff is squealing like a pig at sunshine exposing how corrupt he is after getting elected on a "drain the swamp" platform.
I don't think an interview "proves" anything. It seems like the interviewer made a pretty good case that the uranium "scandal" is just another attempt to deflect from Biff's malfeasance. Itll be like Benghazi. Years of outrage and spin and then a moron like Gowdy will have to confront the facts and change the topic.
So it looks like it's Manaforte. Be interesting to see where that unsecured $26,000,000 loan went. What's your guess?
The chick in the glasses needs to learn how to interview. She talked over the chunky broad and never let any question she asked be answered. That was a hatchet job. Don't worry, I don't expect you to be able to see the obvious.
Paul Manafort is a public official?
Congrats you nailed two businessmen. If they're guilty punish them. This is nothing more than Mueller hoping to force someone to rat on Trump. Looks like desperation to me.
If they had anything on Trump it would of been leaked. They can't even keep secret grand jury information confidential.
Yes, the campaign manager of a Presidential election is a public official
- relating to an authority or public body and its duties, actions, and responsibilities.
"the governor's official engagements"
- a person holding public office or having official duties, especially as a representative of an organization or government department.
Hug yourself and keep repeating your mantra.
I'm not making any predictions. I'm just gonna wait and see what happens and let the chips fall where they may. Like I have from the start.
The indictment against the two men contains 12 counts: conspiracy against the United States, conspiracy to launder money, unregistered agent of a foreign principal, false and misleading US Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) statements, false statements, and seven counts of failure to file reports of foreign bank and financial accounts.
Conspiracy Against the United States looks REALLY bad....until you look at the actual statute:
18 USC 371
"If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
If, however, the offense, the commission of which is the object of the conspiracy, is a misdemeanor only, the punishment for such conspiracy shall not exceed the maximum punishment provided for such misdemeanor."
Then only looks....generically bad. Not like treason or anything.
Conspiracy Against the United States looks REALLY bad....until you look at the actual statute:
18 USC 371
"If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
If, however, the offense, the commission of which is the object of the conspiracy, is a misdemeanor only, the punishment for such conspiracy shall not exceed the maximum punishment provided for such misdemeanor."
Then only looks....generically bad. Not like treason or anything.
A campaign is not a "Presidential election" or a "public body" you're stretching but I know your pathological need to be right and then throw insults when challenged isn't going to end so congrats again they got a guy who worked on the campaign for several whole months. Woo hoo!
I don't know who you are or where you're coming from, but that is a perfect video for that article. Well done, Sir.
Probably your best post ever.
I think Patterson looks like he ate Larry the Dr. Pepper guy.
You've blown up multiple threads over the uranium deal. I show a clip of some very basic questions being answered and you bitch about the style of the interview and don't address the content.
Do you have an objective article with real facts that provides both sides to the story? No. You're squealing like a pig because adults are following the rule of law instead of right wing sillyass phantasies. Truth can be such a bitch.
First, if Manafort is guilty then he should go to freakin jail and be fined a gargantuan sum of money. Second, this should open the door for anyone who has been breaking the law regarding bribery, foreign influence etc. I still don't believe Russians had anything to do with Trump winning (once that's admitted then the R's & D's have to admit they suck donkey testicles and because of their ineptness DT was elected) but t should open door to others who may have been helpful/influenced by the "Russians."
Any of these people who are corrupt should go to jail...period, even if it reaches up to Trump.
Any of these people who are corrupt should go to jail...period, even if it reaches up to Trump.
There is no such thing. Rainbow farting unicorns are more likely than an article showing both sides. That would be called investigative journalism which no longer exists in this country. Every article has a slant. It's sad really.
Lock them all up. But I doubt that will happen as Meuller isn't exactly impartial either.
So am I too understand that 9 months of investigation, millions spent, the entire DNC and media constantly looking for any linkage and the best the federal inquiry could determine was Manafort didn't report his legal dealings related to the Russia-Ukraine dispute (or invasion) from 2013? That's it? Can someone please at a minimum link this to the election?
Who says this is "the best the federal inquiry could determine"?
This is like... obvious tax fraud. Is he supposed to NOT file charges? Just pretend it didn't happen?
I mean he was only the campaign manager. Laundering russian money. So other than that how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?
These are the first indictments. So I don't get why you are saying that is all or the best that the inquiry could determine or asking if "that's it".
I guess we'll see and find out in the future if "that's it".
I get the feeling that some around here are going to characterize anything but video of Trump kneeling before Putin and kissing his ring a "nothing burger" while others are going to characterize these indictments as "proof of collusion".
- a person having...or official duties.....especially as a representative of an organization or...
He was a public official. He was not a government official.
Serious question. Have you seen a poster do this?
I agree with you re: the "nothing burger" narrative.
This doesn't make sense JD. Trump was not a public official until the inauguration. His campaign was not publicly financed, was it?
If these bozos broke the law then by all means send them to jail. But something doesn't add up in claiming that anyone in the Trump campaign was a public official solely by virtue of their involvement in the campaign. There has to be a deeper explanation to justify that claim.
The is a difference between "public officials" and "governmental officials".
All governmental officials are public officials. Not all public officials are government officials.
The CEO of a corporation is a public official. The President of the NRA is a public official. Neither is a government official.
It's right there in the definition.
Thanks. I guess you could be correct. Maybe I am giving sys the benefit of the doubt, but I don't think he actually believes there is enough evidence out there to say Russian collusion occurred. Just that there is enough that he is interested to see where it goes from here.
Hmm... Ok. I hadn't considered it that way previously. I'll have to look deeper at this to be sure I understand it properly. I think I may be biased by the public/private institution terminology.
Thanks for giving me a mini-research project.
Hmm... Ok. I hadn't considered it that way previously. I'll have to look deeper at this to be sure I understand it properly. I think I may be biased by the public/private institution terminology.
Thanks for giving me a mini-research project.
After your research, it's perfectly okay if you don't agree with me.
At least you looked at it logically and rationally before doing so.
And a quote from a different board that I saw that explicitly says it....
"Papadopoulos was a checkmate move. Day 1 we have direct admitted collusion. My stress levels have been cut in half after today."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/30/us/politics/george-papadopoulos-russia.html
Papadopoulos has already entered a guilty plea to lying to FBI about connections to Russia when he was a foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign.
Yes, I know....the link is to the failing fake news NYT....but the actual plea documents are embedded and can be read for anyone that wants to.
Papadopoulos has already entered a guilty plea to lying to FBI about connections to Russia when he was a foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign.
Yes, I know....the link is to the failing fake news NYT....but the actual plea documents are embedded and can be read for anyone that wants to.
I heard the statute of limitations was simply about to expire on the tax charges I dunno.... May be nothing more than a coincidence that Biff's campaign manager's lavish lifestyle was paid for by tax-free russian money. May not be just a coincidence. This alone? Not enough. Plenty of other evidentiary trails, though.
Waaaay to early for anybody to take victory laps. "Pretty damn close" is as good a three word synopsis of how these charges relate to collusion as I've heard. Not enough to indict. Not enough to say, "There's nothing to see" either.
Agreed, but I'm doing neither. But I'm also not going to attribute some 2013 financial boondoggle related to Ukraine's dispute with Russia to Russian interference in the 2016 election, which is what I was made to believe the Mueller investigation was focused.
I think he knew the American public was growing weary and had to throw something out there, for appeasement , so they could carry it on another nine months. All this time and this is all they have? They could've found this out within the first 30 days.
I didn't say you were either.
I quoted the actual appointment letter in this thread. I also understand the possibility (not established fact) that it could have been used as leverage for further contact and assistance by Russia and if he failed to register once, there was really nothing from him reporting similar conduct that may have occurred.
The Papadopolous guilty plea and statement of guilt is certainly closer to Russian interference than this, I agree. In fact, I can see those indictments being disclosed on the same day as his plea and cooperation agreement being done to distract from what that has to say or may turn up.
I'm actually surprised. 9 months, carte blanche access, and the best they can find is a "Dez Bryant"-like lying to the authorities about a meeting and some unregistered lobbyist activities from 2013. If this is it, I'd argue the Trump administration might be the cleanest in D.C., because if you put this same microscope on anybody whose been there for the past 10 years (Dems or Repubs) I GUARANTEE you find a heck of a lot more.
The first indictments in the Watergate Scandal were made on Sept 15, 1972 when E Howard Hunt, G Gordon Liddy and the other Watergate "burglers" were indicted by a Federal Grand Jury.
But it wasn't until July 30, 1974 until the House Judiciary Committee drafted and approved the Articles of Impeachment against Nixon, with Nixon resigning on August 8, 1974.
In the intervening 22+ months a number of others connected with the Nixon campaign or administration were indicted, convicted and investigated.
Why are you presuming that just 9 months in, that this was somehow the ultimate action that will happen in this investigation? Just like with Watergate, it's going to take some time to either exonerate or indict anyone else.
I don't know if this investigation will eventually show that Trump broke the law, however, the line you have been repeating over and over on this thread is flawed for a number of reasons.
First, this is just the first indictments. You seem to be assuming the investigation is about finished, however, if you read the indictments you will see that is highly doubtful. The fact that senior Trump campaign officials were indicted this quickly is what should surprise you.
Second, the indictments of two senior Trump campaign officials is serious business. Regardless of Trump's claims (at this point) that this has nothing to do with him.
Third, the guilty plea of another campaign official is also serious and indicates that Mueller isn't playing here. He is letting it be known that you either work with him when he comes a calling or you are going to be hit with some serious indictments that will force you to either work with him or face prison time.
Lastly, looking at the Manafort and Gates indictments, it appears to be a slam dunk case for the government. All the evidence is document based, making a possible defense difficult. Manafort and Gates' options are very slim at this moment. Cooperate with Mueller or go to prison. And you can bet that is exactly how Mueller wanted it.
The idea that what has happened today is good news for Trump, or that this is all there is, or that Trump's administration might be the cleanest in D.C. sounds like wishful thinking at the point (and political spin).
Last edited:
Or not so much.
I don't know how to prove or disprove the russians won or lost the election? That's why the right wing keeps saying that's the relevant inquiry. If you make the relevant inquiry revolve around an unprovable allegation, it can't be proven.
There's no doubt that Biff's campaign was willing to collude -- they had the meeting with the russians, remember? Donald Jr. reduced it to writing. Russian attempts and Biff's cozy relationship with them were reported at length all during 2016.
In fact, if anything, it appears Manaforte freaking spent the money -- I don't think he's the type that would kick anything upstairs to the Biff campaign, if that's the concern. Hell his greed has gotten him criminally charged, that same greed doesn't have room to share money with Biff. If the $$ was funneled to Biff's campaign I think Mueller would know.
I just want more bodies from both sides of the aisle. Whether Mueller will give us that, we'll see.
