Russia Collusion Scandal (aka A Leftist fantasy)

I think Trump will go on a firing spree soon and will fire Mueller, along with others, including John Kelly.
 
images.dailykos.com/images/466906/large/Screen_Shot_2017-10-30_at_5.02.13_PM

This made me lol a little bit.
 
Julio3000 said:
Trump attacked him on Twitter this morning, called him a liar.
Click to expand...

“Few people knew the young, low level volunteer named George, who has already proven to be a liar. I hope people will start to focus on our Massive Tax Cuts for business (jobs) and the Middle Class (in addition to Democrat corruption)!”

Hmm.
 
Hawk said:
“Few people knew the young, low level volunteer named George, who has already proven to be a liar. I hope people will start to focus on our Massive Tax Cuts for business (jobs) and the Middle Class (in addition to Democrat corruption)!”

Hmm.
Click to expand...

Well, I guess he's not wrong. Going after the cooperator on Twitter is just, I dunno, kinda transparent and not particularly helpful.
 
Julio3000 said:
Well, I guess he's not wrong. Going after the cooperator on Twitter is just, I dunno, kinda transparent and not particularly helpful.
Click to expand...

I don't know. Attempting to discredit him - by whatever means necessary - seems like a pretty standard (Trump) maneuver. Especially if, as you contend, the juicy beans are yet to be spilled.
 
Trump could tweet that Manafort never worked on his campaign ever and it’s fake news and most of his base supporters would probably believe it too.
 
Hawk said:
Because I haven't had the opportunity to read/research the entirety of his indictment.
Click to expand...

Wondering if you'd had a chance to do so.

Unless there's some kind of a big-picture argument about standing, I wouldn't think he'd have much chance of getting out from under it of it with lawyering. The only thing that seems tenuous to me (as a layman, obviously) is the money laundering charge.

He looks like he's pinned on everything else. And prosecutors will have fun playing up the "lavish lifestyle" stuff to a jury.
 
Julio3000 said:
Wondering if you'd had a chance to do so.

Unless there's some kind of a big-picture argument about standing, I wouldn't think he'd have much chance of getting out from under it of it with lawyering. The only thing that seems tenuous to me (as a layman, obviously) is the money laundering charge.

He looks like he's pinned on everything else. And prosecutors will have fun playing up the "lavish lifestyle" stuff to a jury.
Click to expand...

I haven't had the chance, yet.

What I do know is that FARA is rarely enforced (less than 10 prosecutions over the past 50 years) and Manafort did not wholesale avoid making the appropriate filings. I find those charges suspectible, atleast below the surface, and am curious to see how his defense approaches them. At the same time, I'm curious to see how the prosecution frames the selectivity of Manafort's filings - especially in relation to the other charges.

What I want to research are the conspiracy charges. Try and derive what evidences the grand jury was presented, and if that evidence went beyond a 'connect the dots' approach to FARA/money misdeeds.

I think the tax evasion and money laundering component is probably where Manafort will end up most entangled, simply because of who he worked with, where those monies came from, etc. And, also, because the rules of the game were different a decade ago. And because I could probably get you on tax evasion.
 
You probably could.

There's also a charge for making false statements to investigators, which is pretty cut-and-dried. The wire fraud stuff is probably pretty tight.

The reason I say the money-laundering charges are potentially tenuous is because they are based on the FARA violations as the underlying felony. If the FARA charge doesn't stick, the laundering charge doesn't stick.
 
Hawk said:
And because I could probably get you on tax evasion.
Click to expand...

Until a couple years ago, pretty much any Illinois resident who ordered anything through Amazon (amongst many other things) was evading state taxes—assuming they didn't add up the value of those goods and them correspondingly claim that annual purchase amount on their state return.

That's merely one instance (amongst, again, many) that generally supports your claim.
 
My favorite line from the indictment:

Based on a request from MANAFORT, GATES caused a document to be created which listed the Howard Street property as the second home of MANAFORT's daughter and son-in-law, when GATES knew this fact to be false.

GATES sounds like a useful guy to have around.
 
So where's the civil asset forfeiture. I bet these guys have some nice houses and cars. We got people sitting in jail awaiting trial for pot possession who had their car and home stolen from them but someone charged with conspiracy against America and he gets to sit in his nice ass house under house arrest?

Its funny in the government guide tocivil asset forfeiture they specifically talk about going after anything of significant value. They even tell them to bring an appraiser with them.
 
Mueller already has a strong case for collusion with the Papadopoulos confession and other circumstantial pieces, as well as proof Sessions has lied to Congress at least twice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top