US v Manafort

Post Reply
User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 21810
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Brian Peacock » Sat Sep 15, 2018 4:26 am

He might still be the recipient of s presidential pardon I suppose...
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 21810
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Brian Peacock » Sat Feb 16, 2019 6:02 am

Mueller has recommended a 24 year sentence for Manafort. If that's what he's suggest for people who help his inquiry I hate to think what the uncooperative are going to get.
...

Special Counsel Robert Mueller claimed Manafort had "lied about sharing polling data ... related to the 2016 presidential campaign" with Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian-Ukrainian businessman who the U.S. claims to have links to Russian intelligence and was charged last year with tampering with potential witnesses.

Manafort, former chair of the Trump campaign, pleaded guilty last year to conspiracy charges in Washington and faces sentencing in a separate case in Virginia, though none of the charges are directly concerned with the alleged collusion between the Kremlin and the Trump campaign.

"This shows that Bob Mueller can demonstrate to a court, without the testimony of Paul Manafort, that the campaign had a connection to Russian intelligence and the connection involved information going from the campaign to the Russians," Napolitano said. "The question is, was this in return for a promise of something from the Russians, and did the candidate, now the president, know about it?”

He said that agreement would be a "conspiracy," whether or not the Trump campaign actually got anything of value from the Russians....

link >>
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
Scot Dutchy
Posts: 10552
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:07 pm
About me: Dijk beschermer
Location: 's-Gravenhage, Nederland
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Scot Dutchy » Sat Feb 16, 2019 10:06 am

Life for Trump as that is the least he deserves. 15 years for his kids for corruption.
"Wat is het een gezellig boel hier".

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 25991
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Tero » Sat Feb 16, 2019 12:12 pm

Nah, I just want him out. Ankle monitor at Mar-a-Lago to the end of his would have been term.
http://karireport.blogspot.com/ (:_funny_:)
http://esapolitics.blogspot.com/
Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh!

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 25991
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Tero » Sat Feb 16, 2019 12:34 pm

Forty Two wrote:
Thu Nov 02, 2017 7:07 pm
https://apnews.com/ffb7fc2995d64452be11 ... indictment

So, Paulie says he dindoonuffin.

He says all transactions were from legal sources, and that he did not set up offshore accounts or otherwise avoid US processes and taxes. He claims the indictment is "embellished." Pleads not guilty.

So, what have they got on him?

Where's the beef?
Ukraine. He is going to jail.
Manafort is a somewhat legendary Republican operative and lobbyist who spent a decade working for pro-Russian Ukrainian politicians before joining Trump’s presidential campaign in 2016.

Because of his ties to pro-Russian interests, Manafort has long been a major figure of interest to investigators probing whether the Trump campaign conspired with Russia to interfere with the election — and he ended up being the first person indicted by special counsel Robert Mueller. His legal road since then has been long and winding....bla bla bla...
No story. Another loser criminal employed by tax evading criminal Trump. We are going to Al Capone him to jail sooner or later, maybe by Nov 2020. Save us all a lot of mudslinging pocahontas and brown people insults.
http://karireport.blogspot.com/ (:_funny_:)
http://esapolitics.blogspot.com/
Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh!

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14167
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Forty Two » Tue Feb 19, 2019 6:09 pm

Tero wrote:
Sat Feb 16, 2019 12:34 pm
Forty Two wrote:
Thu Nov 02, 2017 7:07 pm
https://apnews.com/ffb7fc2995d64452be11 ... indictment

So, Paulie says he dindoonuffin.

He says all transactions were from legal sources, and that he did not set up offshore accounts or otherwise avoid US processes and taxes. He claims the indictment is "embellished." Pleads not guilty.

So, what have they got on him?

Where's the beef?
Ukraine. He is going to jail.
Manafort is a somewhat legendary Republican operative and lobbyist who spent a decade working for pro-Russian Ukrainian politicians before joining Trump’s presidential campaign in 2016.

Because of his ties to pro-Russian interests, Manafort has long been a major figure of interest to investigators probing whether the Trump campaign conspired with Russia to interfere with the election — and he ended up being the first person indicted by special counsel Robert Mueller. His legal road since then has been long and winding....bla bla bla...
No story. Another loser criminal employed by tax evading criminal Trump. We are going to Al Capone him to jail sooner or later, maybe by Nov 2020. Save us all a lot of mudslinging pocahontas and brown people insults.
All for stuff having nothing at all to do with Trump or the Trump campaign.
"If socialists understood economics, they wouldn't be socialists." Friedrich Von Hayek.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14167
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Forty Two » Tue Feb 19, 2019 6:13 pm

Sean Hayden wrote:
Sat Sep 15, 2018 1:29 am
If he knows something he should have flipped a long time ago. Why wait till now? I'd guess that if he knows anything then he's stayed quiet because he had stronger loyalties elsewhere. I mean most people are going to flip on Trump right away aren't they? :dunno:
He has nothing to share about Trump. He would have flipped. And, he got himself in hot water over breaking his deal with Mueller, so Mueller is letting him have it in the culu.

This is all orgaxmic for anyone who is suffering under TDS, but it really has nothing to do with Trump.
"If socialists understood economics, they wouldn't be socialists." Friedrich Von Hayek.

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 25991
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Tero » Tue Feb 19, 2019 6:58 pm

Trump got a time share in Ukraine. He’ll be golfing there soon.
http://karireport.blogspot.com/ (:_funny_:)
http://esapolitics.blogspot.com/
Dominus vo-bisque'em Et cum spear a tu-tu, oh!

User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 1981
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Wed Feb 20, 2019 3:52 am

Apparently Forty Two knows what was in the redacted sections of the filings in Manafort's case, and is able to tell us that Manafort 'has nothing to share about Trump.' Well that's settled then. Or perhaps not.
According to a previous filing in the case, Manafort allegedly lied to the government about sharing 2016 presidential polling data with Kilimnik and about discussing a so-called Ukrainian peace plan with him during the 2016 campaign. The FBI has said that Kilimnik has ties to Russian intelligence, and news outlets have reported that Kilimnik has relationships with oligarchs and other powerful Russians who are close to President Vladimir Putin.

One of Mueller’s top prosecutors, Andrew Weissman, recently suggested that Kilimnik may play a far more central role in the special counsel’s investigation than previously known. According to a partially redacted transcript of a closed hearing in Manafort’s case, Judge Jackson questioned Weissman as to why Manafort’s lies about his interactions with Kilimnik were so important.

“This goes to the larger view of what we think is going on, and what we think is the motive here,” Weissmann told the judge. “This goes, I think, very much to the heart of what the special counsel’s office is investigating.”

The heart of what the special counsel’s office is investigating. With those 10 words, Kilimnik’s place in the Mueller probe vaulted from obscure bit player to main character.

There are a couple of potential explanations here. Perhaps Manafort lied about his interactions with Kilimnik because he thought he wouldn’t get caught, or because lying so often seems to be the default setting for those within President Trump’s orbit.

Another theory is that Manafort intentionally misled the government about his interactions with Kilimnik over a supposed Ukraine peace plan because those conversations revealed something more damning about his — and potentially the Trump campaign’s — interactions with Kilimnik as the 2016 campaign was underway. That seems to be what Weissman was alluding to in his comments at the recent closed-door hearing.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: L'Emmerdeur and 4 guests