Paul Manafort and Rick Gates
- Thread starter TarHeelEer
- Start date
He's Manafort's protege. Great choice on his part. This is going to be old fraud and money laundering charges. What a fracking circus.
No, I'm going out on a limb, it's crap violations of law that have nothing to do with the election, Russian interference, nor collusion. Mueller has too many conflicts of interest. He needs to resign from this witchhunt of people not his friends.
Tax fraud. Where's the collusion? Where's Russia? Where is Trump? Two choices, in my opinion:
- Shut this mess down, or
- Mueller needs to resign and put a non-fed prosecutor in place, one that wants to make a name for himself/herself, and not too involved in politics already. If such a thing exists.
Link
Relax, it's a process and besides, your handpicked guy (Mueller) is running things so it's all good.
I could be wrong. I read a story last night about the ptbe into Manafort and it said the ficus was 13 wires i 2012-13. I am inly assuming this indictment is for that.
He's got a point to an extent. So far it appears that they got Manafort on his shaddy business practices, no big surprise there, but nothing on him working on behalf of Trump to get Russian assistance with election.
Maybe it's a leveraging move by the SP to get people to talk. I wonder why he targeted money laundering....hmmmmm? Maybe one of the board constitutional scholars can chime in, but I remember reading something about dual sovereignty would most likely be used as a weapon against any pardon talk....and money laundering and tax evasion were the big 2 crimes prosecution could use.
Maybe they have nothing during the campaign and are just prosecuting a crime they uncovered. Time will tell. I'm just thoroughly enjoying THE whine.
We do realize that this man was Trump’s campaign director, right?
I mean, the man that ran his campaign.
I would think it's their attempt at an easy play to try and get him to flip, but if the reports are true about his work with the Podesta group, which would be easy to prove, then who knows who he could flip on.
Manafort sounds like a gun for hire when it comes to things dealing with East Europe/Russia, and I would wager he's done work for lots of people and groups in the past.
For a brief period of time, yes. You ever met any of the people that get hired to run campaigns?
From a prosecutors standpoint yes, but he doesn't come across as a spring chicken, incapable of providing a defense to the charges.
His protege however, young, more to lose, he's the one I'd be pressing.
What? Are you asking me if I have ever met someone that ran a campaign? A national campaign? Was it a rhetorical question? If so, what are you saying without saying it? If not, are you just trying to point out my inability to speak intelligently on the subject?
**** it, I don’t care about any of those answers. Mo fo is still relevant even if he ran the campaign for a day.
Don't overlook the third guy indicted.
If memory serves me (and sometimes it doesn't), the Ken Starr investigation took a long time, and the Dems were saying it should be stopped. Politics. Let Mueller do his investigation and see where it takes us. Could be crimes. Might not be crimes. Could be convictions. Might not be convictions. Could go after Repubs. Could go after Dems. Those of us on this message board know only what our favorite, biased news sources (and every one of them has a bias) feed us. The Real story is much, much richer in details and facts, but we won't know of them for a while. All any of us are doing is speculation tainted by our biases, fears, anger, and hopes.
If memory serves me (and sometimes it doesn't), the Ken Starr investigation took a long time, and the Dems were saying it should be stopped. Politics. Let Mueller do his investigation and see where it takes us. Could be crimes. Might not be crimes. Could be convictions. Might not be convictions. Could go after Repubs. Could go after Dems. Those of us on this message board know only what our favorite, biased news sources (and every one of them has a bias) feed us. The Real story is much, much richer in details and facts, but we won't know of them for a while. All any of us are doing is speculation tainted by our biases, fears, anger, and hopes.
I think that is pretty much common thought around here but today is the day dems high five each other over Paul manafort.
Chances are he is/was a DNC "plant"..wouldn't surprise me at all...Killary /OVOMIT tried every conceivable way to rig this election. ..wasn't enough that the polls were wrong and MSN lied to us for months and still are...
It amazes me how all they did do to assure Hillary's win not only blew up in their faces, but it is now turning back on them.
The media is missing it but I'm not too sure these investigations will.
Do you think that the pedocrats are sporting those Red Lobster plastic bibs...as they all get in on the reach around ?
You mean like how Ken Starr spent four years investigating every fart and hangnail of the Clintons going back 20 years, and finding nothing until Linda Tripp revealed she'd been taping her girl talk with Monica? [eyeroll]
And it wasn't just 2012 and 2013, it was from 2006 until at least 2016. But except for the fact that he was still committing the crimes alleged in the indictment while serving as Trump's campaign director, there's nothing in these charges connecting Trump to those crimes. You can read the full indictment here:
https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000015f-6d73-d751-af7f-7f735cc70000
This is just starting to unfold now and no one knows where Mueller is going from here......
So is this proof of collusion or that this helped Trump steal the sure thing election from Hillary?
If it's proof of collusion does that now mean Hillary and the Dems are guilty of the same thing? If it's not collusion does that mean Trump and the Democrats are now exonerated from all of their meetings or knowledge of any Russians at any time during the campaign?
What's the crime here as far as the election and Trump stealing it with help from Russians?
I thought that (your last line) is what we were investigating and looking for?
Oh well.
I remember plenty of people complaining about Ken Starrs tactics. Those folks dont seem upset today. Please spare me.
Did you skip over this part of my post: except for the fact that he was still committing the crimes alleged in the indictment while serving as Trump's campaign director, there's nothing in these charges connecting Trump to those crimes.
I thought we were looking for "collusion" that helped Trump win unfairly?
So we really wanted to know who Manafort was cavorting with to pad his private overseas bank accounts?
That's how Trump beat Hillary and won?