Mueller Files First Charges

[KCfromNC]

In all fairness, there are people who plead "guilty" to things are aren't illegal... we call them "imbeciles."

Not according to Trump - "He's an excellent guy".

 

[TLK Valentine]

Not according to Trump - "He's an excellent guy."

Consider the source...

 

[bhsmte]

Which raises two important questions:

1: Was Donald aware of this when he hired Manafort?
2: Was this the reason Donald hired Manafort in the first place?

If either of those answers is yes, then el presidente has some 'splainin' to do...

All legit questions.

Another one could be, since the feds were aware of his activities for sometime (years) did they not do anything because it could expose podesta' lobbying firm?

Lots of questions to ask and i am quitesure, this is only the beginning of more revelations from the investigation.

 

[mark kennedy]

Which raises two important questions:

1: Was Donald aware of this when he hired Manafort?
2: Was this the reason Donald hired Manafort in the first place?

If either of those answers is yes, then el presidente has some 'splainin' to do...

Not one, not two but three felonious foriegn agents. The only question is is whether or not he is really that gulliable. This is the money trail and apparently Mueller is sending a strong message, don't you dare lie. Trump has been very Russia friendly and Russians are fond of Deutch bank, a place Russian oligarchs launder money through by the hundreds of millions. Whatever these staffers did or did not do it was over money.

 

[redleghunter]

You might consider reading the charge to Mueller. His scope is much more than investigating collusion.

Scope pertains to what is relevant to the investigation.

The powers of the office allow the special counsel to bring charges forward if a crime was discovered while operating within the scope. Many fail to realize such.

Within the scope of the investigation no charges have been brought forward in the 2016 election collusion claims. None. Yet.

Now apply the above to a home no knock raid on a US citizen with no prior convictions who already handed over hundreds of documents pertaining to his time in the Trump campaign. Meaning nothing was found or released on Manafort regarding his tenure with Trump. Yet a raid on a private residence turned up unrelated documents which led to an indictment.

When Ken Star did this nonsense in the 90s the liberals were all up in arms about the 4th amendment and fishing expeditions. Why now the silence?

 

[redleghunter]

Aren't we in a truth-free zone and in a world of alternative facts? Just listen to WH comments from yesterday. No one in the campaign knew the man who pleaded guilty. Of course, hundreds of emails are in Mueller's hands.

As in the past, folks may be indicted or impeached for lying to the FBI, the Commission or Congress. By far, it is the easiest crime to prove.

Yet in the history of special counsels they never convict or even indict on what they set out to do. They always find someone for something unrelated. This one no different.

 

[TLK Valentine]

All legit questions.

Another one could be, since the feds were aware of his activities for sometime (years) did they not do anything because it could expose podesta' lobbying firm?

Lots of questions to ask and i am quitesure, this is only the beginning of more revelations from the investigation.

What the feds are aware of, and what they have enough evidence to prosecute for, are often two different things...

 

[bhsmte]

What the feds are aware of, and what they have enough evidence to prosecute for, are often two different things...

Could be, but how many years of evidence do you need? This whole investigation is just starting to reveal its work and again, IMO, when they are done revealing, folks on both sides are going to be unhappy.

 

[redleghunter]

*Ya know he was a volunteer and not on a payroll, he was trying to be noticed.

(a) Papadopoulos was working/communicating with actor(s) he knew were trying to subvert the election (he had been made aware of Clinton email, felt it necessary to lie about his contacts)

How could he know they were planning to subvert the election? Ya think they opened up their whole plan to a volunteer, if they were working for the Gremlin they knew exactly who he was.

*(b) Papadopoulos had discussions with high level campaign officials after the point he became aware of such email

Pap knew on April 26, but which Emails?

The indictment says “… the professor had told him about the Russians possessing "dirt" on then-candidate Hillary Clinton in the form of "thousands of emails,"

Was he told at that time they were from Pedesta’s computer? We don’t have the answer to that yet, which might make the difference.

*On July 22 wikileaks began publishing Pedesta’s Russian hacked emails however no one publicly knew who had done it.

Trump was joking on July 29th about the 30,000 missing emails from Hillary’s wiped clean server.

So … what does that mean?

Did he think the Pedesta’s emails were separate from Hillary’s missing stash and the Russians still had them, it appears he did.

*The actual hacking into Pedesta’s computer occurred in March and Trump’s campaign didn’t learn about Emails until April so…. that shows they did not organize or pay for the hacking, ie no collusions to subvert the elections on Trump’s part.

Alan Dershowitz who is a far left liberal but a darn good lawyer still says there is still nothing illegal here. It’s not illegal for Trump to be told the Russians hacked the DNC or that they might have Hillary’s missing emails. It’s not illegal for him to say, hey publish those so the world can see how corrupt she and the Democrats are.

Papadopoulos is in hot water for lying about contacting a Russian professor. Ever since Watergate it's always about the cover up of perceived wrong doing instead of the alleged trasngression.

Unless the SP has actual documents showing Papadopoulos took information on HRC then he will only go to jail for perjury. Even if he said he would take information from the Russian professor nothing will come of it. Why? We were told by Dems this past week opposition research is perfectly legal. Meaning if Papa paid for dirt on Hillary and the Trump campaign actually used it, that would be opposition research according to the WashPo and NYTs.

We were told such here in this forum numerous times as well by liberal posters.

So no big deal right?

 

[redleghunter]

The 4th Amendment requires law enforcement (who are, for the most part, unelected, BTW) to show probable cause to a judge to obtain a search warrant (which Mueller did, BTW)... not to knock politely at the door and wait to be invited in for tea and crumpets.

No priors. Already complied with the SP office handing over hundreds of documents. Although a slime ball Manafort was compliant before the break in raid.

I get it the dude is dirty but had no priors and was cooperating. If this was some liberal pol I'm sure you would be concerned the heavy hand of government coming down on such a person.

Why not a knock? They had warrants. You knock and if they refuse you bust the door down.

Very odd and all the privacy defenders are silent except for me.

 

[redleghunter]

Had Manafort not been a white (collar) criminal or so closely connected to Donald himself, I find it unlikely that our friends on the right would be batting an eye. After all, are they not the party of "Lock her up! Lock her up! Lock her up!"?

Manafort is an influence peddler. He provided services for Dem and Rep campaigns and administrations before joining team Trump. Or was that fact lost on the comments you made?

 

[redleghunter]

The Manafort indictment has been described as a living document. Most likely he will be charged for other things later, but I've read the statute of limitations were running out on some items plus it may be used to leverage him for other things.

George Papadopolous is the one to watch. He's already pleaded guilty and provided new information regarding Russia. Most likely he's been wearing a wire for the past few months. His sentencing will only be 0-6 months. It has been suggested that one of the unnamed superiors we was keeping appraised of his actions at the time was none other than the Honorable Jefferson Beauregard Sessions.

As we were told last week when it was confirmed the Hillary and DNC campaigns bought a Russian dossier on Trump....it's just opposition research.

We will have to wait for the hard copy evidence Papa took and or paid for foreign intelligence.

Because we already know just sitting down and talking with Russians is not illegal. We learned that last week.

 

[withwonderingawe]

WHO IS JOSEPH MIFSUD, THE PROFESSOR IN THE GEORGE PAPADOPOULOS RUSSIA INVESTIGATION?

Who is Joseph Mifsud, the professor in the George Papadopoulos Russia investigation?

After reading through this Pap sounds like he's either a fool or he was played for one.

 

[bhsmte]

Papadopoulos is in hot water for lying about contacting a Russian professor. Ever since Watergate it's always about the cover up of perceived wrong doing instead of the alleged trasngression.

Unless the SP has actual documents showing Papadopoulos took information on HRC then he will only go to jail for perjury. Even if he said he would take information from the Russian professor nothing will come of it. Why? We were told by Dems this past week opposition research is perfectly legal. Meaning if Papa paid for dirt on Hillary and the Trump campaign actually used it, that would be opposition research according to the WashPo and NYTs.

We were told such here in this forum numerous times as well by liberal posters.

So no big deal right?

There is no such crime as collusion, so that term tends to throw people off and is over used.

They would have to get people on conspiracy charges, related to aiding or abetting illegal activity. If this aid, paid the russians for illegally obtained emails, offered something of value in exchange for them and or helped the russians in the release of illegally obtained emails, they could go after conspiracy charges. Simply communicating with or meeting with the russians, without conspiring, is not a crime.

Same applies to clinton campaign funding the fusion work. Now if someone in the clinton campaign, told fusion which russians to talk to, or told fusion what to manufacture, that may be a problem.

If any of this tells us anything, it is just how dirty politics is in general.

 

[camille70]

As we were told last week when it was confirmed the Hillary and DNC campaigns bought a Russian dossier on Trump....it's just opposition research.

We will have to wait for the hard copy evidence Papa took and or paid for foreign intelligence.

Because we already know just sitting down and talking with Russians is not illegal. We learned that last week.

He didn't plead guilty to collusion. He pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. My thing is, if there is no wrong doing why is he and practically everyone else around Trump lying about the Russian contacts they've had? It's over and done with for him, I believe. However no telling what he gave them or if he agreed to wear a wire so they could implicate others.

 

[bhsmte]

He didn't plead guilty to collusion. He pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. My thing is, if there is no wrong doing why is he and practically everyone else around Trump lying about the Russian contacts they've had? It's over and done with for him, I believe. However no telling what he gave them or if he agreed to wear a wire so they could implicate others.

Since collusion does not exist as a criminal code, you cant plead guilty to it.

 

[redleghunter]

They would have to get people on conspiracy charges, related to aiding or abetting illegal activity. If this aid, paid the russians for illegally obtained emails, offered something of value in exchange for them and or helped the russians in the release of illegally obtained emails, they could go after conspiracy charges. Simply communicating with or meeting with the russians, without conspiring, is not a crime.

Thank you for clearly summarizing the reality which I agree with.

Which also means if the DNC or HRC campaigns did not directly pay for the Russian dossier they too will not be charged with conspiracy. Podesta group and Fusion perhaps.

These pols keep filters to top officials. Once again we will only "get" the Libbys and Liddys of the world in these investigations.

 

[Allandavid]

WHO IS JOSEPH MIFSUD, THE PROFESSOR IN THE GEORGE PAPADOPOULOS RUSSIA INVESTIGATION?

Who is Joseph Mifsud, the professor in the George Papadopoulos Russia investigation?

After reading through this Pap sounds like he's either a fool or he was played for one.

What...? Donald has only “the best people”, don’t you know...?

Papadopoulus seems to embody that adage that ‘it’s just as well that most crooks are dumb’....

 

[bhsmte]

Thank you for clearly summarizing the reality which I agree with.

Which also means if the DNC or HRC campaigns did not directly pay for the Russian dossier they too will not be charged with conspiracy. Podesta group and Fusion perhaps.

These pols keep filters to top officials. Once again we will only "get" the Libbys and Liddys of the world in these investigations.

It is not illegal for the clinton campaign to hire fusion for research on the opposition, just as it isnt illegal for trumps people to communicate or meet with russians.

What is illegal, is to conspire with another party, to actually do something illegal.

 

[redleghunter]

If any of this tells us anything, it is just how dirty politics is in general.

It tells me one other fact. The one I brought up during the GOP primaries last year. The Trump campaign going into the convention was a neophyte hodgepodge of wannabes who really thought their chances of winning were slim to none.

I opined how team Trump was months behind team Clinton on get out the vote and presidential elections handlers. She had Obama's model and in no way was a Trump campaign going to get the folks needed to compete. That was my mild rant after Trump destroyed the GOP field. Which of course I have egg on my face since Team Trump Forest Gumped their way to victory with a lot of help from Team Hillary in the last 3 months.

So these recent indictments tell me I was partially correct in that no one was properly vetting the team members of the Trump campaign. That's the real story here and the real concern we should all have.