Well said, which is why I told you from the start take nothing said here personally, my friend. I sure don't.
|
Well said, which is why I told you from the start take nothing said here personally, my friend. I sure don't.
As I've said before, I don't usually agree with you, but at least you come out and say what you think. I like that a great deal. I think that "friend" describes it very well for both of us.Quote:
Well said, which is why I told you from the start take nothing said here personally, my friend. I sure don't.
Kind of reminds me of some other people.
https://thepoliticalinsider.com/plea...ing-a-scandal/
It is a great pity everyone didn't do it
Pleading the 5th doesn't stop prosecution. Just cooperation. The onus is still on the prosecution to bring a case, and make it. That's where the rubber meets the road.
Yes so why help them?
Not saying the dufus sycophants should help Mueller. They have a right to remain silent, and should use it.
Hello j:Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Here's what I think.. I watched Obama pretty carefully.. Did he lie? Once, he did.. He said if you like your doctor, you can keep him.. He also said there were 57 states, but you wouldn't call that a lie would you? Other than that, he ran a pretty tight ship.
And, I don't wanna get all strung out here, about each and every so called "scandal" you've listed... Let's just take the IRS.. You accuse Obama of PURPOSFULLY denying conservative organizations tax exemptions they were entitled to, simply BECAUSE they were right wing.. You believe that just as sure as you're reading this..
Of course, that's impossible because the politics of the organization applying for tax exempt status IS NOT DISCLOSED.. Did you know that?? Have you even investigated what Obama said about it?? I suspect not.. It's NOT news you'd like to hear.. Truth is, the bureaucrats at IRS wouldn't, in a million years, commit CRIMES for Obama. Some applications were returned because of errors in them, but I submit once again, that these career bureaucrats would NOT jeopardize their careers for Obama.. It's ridiculous on it's face..
But, you weren't having any of that.. It was Obama doing it to right wingers - plain and simple..
Benghazi??? In retrospect, men died. War is like that.. Did Hillary DO something to get those men killed? You think yes, but haven't said WHY she wasn't indicted.. Maybe, just maybe, there wasn't any evidence of wrong doing???
Ok, I don't think this is gonna help.. You believe what you believe..
Step away from the FOX News.. It's rotting your brain..
excon
Quote:
Hello tom:
Tis true.. But, why LIE about it? In fact, why would ALL his henchmen tell the same COORDINATED lie?? Before Cohen had his come to Jesus moment, HIS lie was coordinated too..
IF all was hunky dory, SOMBODY in that vast group of people would have told them that they don't HAVE to lie.. But, they did lie - ALL of 'em,. Something's hinky..
I'm thinking there IS a pee tape, and THAT'S what all the lying is about.. Here's the punch line, though.. What Trump doesn't know, is that even IF there IS a pee tape, his supporters would love him all the more..
Glad Mueller is on Americas side.
excon
I don't know if there is a pee tape or not . All that would be is an embarrassment ;and maybe not even to Trump. It is certainly no more so than leaving a stain on an interns dress.
Unless Mueller can prove all there real estate deals are tied into some kind of money laundering scheme then there was nothing illegal in Trump managing his business while running . After all ;until about 9PM on election night ,Trump thought he was going to lose . So the allegations are as follows . Trump had a bunch of former Soviet oligarchs (through the Bayrock Group )looking to launder their plunder by getting involved in his real estate business .
The Bayrock group is headed by Felix Sater (person # 2 in the Cohen indictment ) Back in the day Sater got into a bar fight and stabbed someone with the stem of a champagne glass . He was sanctioned against doing business in finances after he was involved in some dirty Wall Street business . But he violated that . The Feds swooped down on him,and he was prosecuted by the FBI . Then he became an FBI informant from 1998 through 2015. It was at this time he was working with Trump as a sorta front man in setting up real estate deals ;some in Moscow. Oh and Mueller was the chief of the FBI at the time. Now if they had evidence of Trump wrong doing in those years Mueller would've had it in the NY Second District in a New York minute . Trump had stopped actually developing real estate at that time . Through the Bayrock group ,Trump instead was letting them use his name for royalty fees . Bayrock did the developing.
Sorry ,haven't seen any evidence that Trump was involved in any criminal activity ;nor any evidence that Trump's campaign and the Russians "colluded " to steal the election.If Trump was taking dirty money or engaged in criminal activity with Russians then he was doing it with Felix Sater through the Bayrock Group .Sater was under the control of the FBI. Sater was proposing deals and making contacts with Russian criminals overseas and this activity surely was known by the FBI. If there was any suspicion on the part of the FBI that Trump was taking bad money, they would have recorded such activity in detail and he would have been indicted.During Mueller’s term as FBI Chief (2001 thru 2013) the FBI did not make or bring a case of money laundering against Donald Trump. Yet, during this period, Sater, an FBI informant, was trying to cobble together real estate deals with Russians . Trump and his organization were not implicated in any of this activity in a way that led the FBI to seek an indictment against them.
First of all, I did not accuse Obama of denying tax exempt status to these groups. That was done by the IRS, and he never held anyone accountable. That it happened is unarguable. If you don't believe it, you are living in a liberal fantasy world.Quote:
And, I don't wanna get all strung out here, about each and every so called "scandal" you've listed... Let's just take the IRS.. You accuse Obama of PURPOSFULLY denying conservative organizations tax exemptions they were entitled to, simply BECAUSE they were right wing.. You believe that just as sure as you're reading this..
Of course, that's impossible because the politics of the organization applying for tax exempt status IS NOT DISCLOSED.. Did you know that?? Have you even investigated what Obama said about it?? I suspect not.. It's NOT news you'd like to hear.. Truth is, the bureaucrats at IRS wouldn't, in a million years, commit CRIMES for Obama. Some applications were returned because of errors in them, but I submit once again, that these career bureaucrats would NOT jeopardize their careers for Obama.. It's ridiculous on it's face..
"In late September 2017, an exhaustive report by the Treasury Department's inspector general found that from 2004 to 2013, the IRS used both conservative and liberal keywords to choose targets for further scrutiny.[2][3]In October 2017, the Trump Administration agreed to settle a lawsuit filed on behalf of more than 400 conservative nonprofit groups who claimed that they had been discriminated against by the Internal Revenue Service. The settlement includes an apology from the IRS and a monetary portion characterized by an attorney for the plaintiffs as "very substantial."[4][5]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRS_targeting_controversy
First of all, there was no war going on in Libya involving the U.S., so no, you can't use the "war is like that" ridiculous excuse. It's not that HC DID something to get those men killed, The problem is that she did NOTHING to keep them secure, and then when the attack was underway, she and her boss did NOTHING to help them. Again, your liberal fantasy world could profit from a little knowledge.Quote:
Benghazi??? In retrospect, men died. War is like that.. Did Hillary DO something to get those men killed? You think yes, but haven't said WHY she wasn't indicted.. Maybe, just maybe, there wasn't any evidence of wrong doing???
Flynn sang like a bird and no telling what he told Mueller which I'm sure he verified before he gave him a pardon. While the dufus tells people don't testify or cooperate, and reminding everyone that he can pardon anybody. That's not witness tampering? Or flat out obstruction? I'll wait to see what Mueller has next.
Considering that the interviewers of Flynn determined he had not lied to them ;Mueller has a lot to answer for himself regarding his Gestapo tactics in this investigation . Heck even Comey didn't believe Flynn lied . I don't know what Flynn said . 99 % of Mueller's report on Flynn is redacted .
Even with the redactions Mueller laid out a strong case against Flynn, and alludes to at least one ongoing criminal investigation, and I must say ordinary citizens get these gestapo tactics laid on them everyday and nothing is said. So all of a sudden we should go soft on high level white collar crime? Really?
Moral of the story is this: Do not talk to the FBI. The practice now is evidently to examine everything you say in minute detail and if there is a single discrepancy, even a minor one, then you will be charged with lying to the FBI. Sad our country has come to this. It seems rather plain that Mueller's number one goal is to get Trump at any and all costs.
You and Tom amaze me in your support for white collar exploiters and influence peddlers enriching themselves by lying scheming and gaming the system. We both know the lies these men tell are not about small discrepancies, but huge whoppers to hide what they were REALLY doing.
The real moral of the story is lying about big stuff has consequences so should they take responsibility who ever they are, or can they get away with those lies because the are running with the big boys?
Why are they lying about BIG STUFF?
What did they lie about, specifically?Quote:
You and Tom amaze me in your support for white collar exploiters and influence peddlers enriching themselves by lying scheming and gaming the system. We both know the lies these men tell are not about small discrepancies, but huge whoppers to hide what they were REALLY doing.
They lied to congress about they're dealings with Russian government officials. In addition some were charged with criminal activities.
https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...MHAaSgkjPw--~C
The dufus has just been implicated in felonious activity with Michael Cohen over those payments to keep his affairs out of the public during the '16 presidential election.
If you are talking about Flynn, he was charged with lying to the FBI, not the Congress. It has become clear that Mueller is leaning on these people to get them to give him any evidence he can use against Trump. It seems he came up empty with Cohen. Now Hillary Clinton did lie to congress when she claimed she had no classified material on her little amateur email server. Even Comey admitted that was true, but she was not indicted. So why the difference? Politics. Pure politics. That's what the FBI does these days. If you make the smallest misstep in your interview with them, they come back and want to indict you for lying to the FBI just so they can lean on you to implicate someone else. That's sickening.Quote:
They lied to congress about they're dealings with Russian government officials. In addition some were charged with criminal activities.
So when you say "they" lied to congress, other than Hillary Clinton, who are you talking about? It wasn't Flynn, so who is it who lied to the congress?
I don't think you are correct on that one.Quote:
The dufus has just been implicated in felonious activity with Michael Cohen over those payments to keep his affairs out of the public during the '16 presidential election.
Of course I'm correct unless you have evidence that I am not. Here's my evidence. Notice this was from August, confirmed in the Mueller fillings.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...821-story.html
Quote:
Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump's former personal lawyer and fixer, pleaded guilty Tuesday to campaign-finance violations and other charges, saying Trump directed him to arrange the payment of hush money to porn star Stormy Daniels and a former Playboy model to fend off damage to his White House bid.Cohen's extraordinary account marks the first time that any Trump associate has gone into open court and implicated Trump himself in a crime, though whether — or when — a president can be prosecuted remains a matter of legal dispute.
Now if you think I will go one by one and tell you what each of the persons indicted by Mueller was charged with that's kind of lazy since the details are out there, and you asked a very broad question to begin with. Suffice it to say that just because a defendant copes to a lesser offense doesn't mean he is charged with just that offense. Had he pleaded not guilty and gone to trial there would no doubt be MANY charges to answer to and Manafort is a perfect example of that scenario. Convicted on 8 counts of criminal wrong doing in one trail and facing more charges in a second trial.
I'm not even going to comment on the "What about what Hillary did?" thing as that's always the conservative dodge when the dufus and his antics are discussed, but I must add your about to see if the dufus and his sycophants can survive the legal onslaught into his antics, as Clinton did for decades.
I doubt it, and I blame you right wingers and greedy repubs for holding your nose and giving us this real time political drama and corruption. LOL, you would have done better electing Hillary and make her a target and had a special counsel appointed to "LOCK HER UP!".
Elections truly do have consequences!
1. You said it "just" happened, and then you link to a newspaper article from August containing a story that has already been demonstrated to be a non-factor in any criminal accusation against Trump. So yes, you are wrong.
2. I don't blame you for non commenting about HC. She is without question the most plainly guilty person of the whole group. And as usual, your comment about holding noses must apply to yourself as well as the rest of us.
3. You don't provide details because you don't know any. I am not going to do your work for you. You make accusations. You back them up. If you can't, then don't make them.
4. Manafort's convictions have not been demonstrated to have any connection with Trump.
As I've said many times, it's all about politics.
Your post doesn't surprise me since you have a knack of letting things that don't meet your own sense of truth go over your head. No I didn't hold my nose and vote for Hillary, because I have watched the right wing noise machine spout all kinds of accusations with no evidence that ends up in court even after decades of investigations.
That's not politics, that's insanity by incompetents. Simply put, you've been ignoring the facts about the dufus and his antics for a long time and now they just keep coming back in the court of law, as sycophants go to jail. No amount of semantic parsing will alter that reality, nor can you dismiss them.
It's not over so keep defending those criminals the dufus brought with him. It's amusing to watch you right wingers head explode when you find out your insanity has bitten you in the arse once again.
One of my favorite columnists said this in today's Chicago Sun-Times:
https://chicago.suntimes.com/columni...ladimir-putin/
Trump hasn't been in a court of law. He has not even been charged with a crime. And you pretending that HC was a totally innocent individual is laughable. She was guilty of criminal activity. Even Comey said so, but then declined to prosecute her. So go on holding your nose and pretending otherwise, but you are not fooling anyone.Quote:
That's not politics, that's insanity by incompetents. Simply put, you've been ignoring the facts about the dufus and his antics for a long time and now they just keep coming back in the court of law, as sycophants go to jail. No amount of semantic parsing will alter that reality, nor can you dismiss them.
Again, it's all about politics.
Wondergirl, you need something better than an op-ed piece from the Chicago Sun Times. You need to work much harder.
For the record, if anyone actually comes up with a crime committed by Trump, I'll be all in for an investigation, but be sure to ask yourself if you felt the same way about Bill Clinton.
JL, you obviously didn't read the link I posted. You're still one of those running horses Gene Lyons talks about. :DQuote:
Wondergirl, you need something better than an op-ed piece from the Chicago Sun Times. You need to work much harder.
An excerpt: "Nobody knows exactly how the story’s going to end, but it’s surely significant that White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders has switched from saying there was no collusion with the Russian government during the 2016 campaign to emphasizing that the president wasn’t personally involved.
Big difference. And she’s said it several times, so it’s no accident."
Tell you what, JL -- I won't post any more op-ed pieces if you don't drag Hillary into any of these discussions.
I did read it.Quote:
JL, you obviously didn't read the link I posted. You're still one of those running horses Gene Lyons talks about. :D
Weak as water. I mean, the best they can come up with is "it's surely significant". Are you kidding? "I mean, I think it might possibly be perhaps significant." Could be summarized by saying, "We have no evidence." Trump Derangement Syndrome at work.Quote:
An excerpt: "Nobody knows exactly how the story’s going to end, but it’s surely significant that White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders has switched from saying there was no collusion with the Russian government during the 2016 campaign to emphasizing that the president wasn’t personally involved.
Link all the op eds you want. You won't get rid of HC that easily! I use her to point out that all of the "holier than thou" people who are up in arms about mere allegations against Trump were strangely quiet when it was clearly proven that HC broke the law. Why??? Politics. Pure politics.
I can't blame you for stubbornly sticking to your position, nor dismissing the position in others but when a guy who pleads guilty and says he was doing it at the bosses orders I call that some pretty good EVIDENCE, and expect a lot more.
And was told by the FBI, "Sing, and we'll be more lenient." Besides, if that's all there is, then it's just "he said, he said". Now you are free to expect more, but that's really questionable.Quote:
who pleads guilty and says he was doing it at the bosses orders I call that some pretty good EVIDENCE, and expect a lot more.
I expect a dem house to do a REAL investigation, starting in January, and Mueller to continue sending folks to jail. You have to figure that Mueller has evidence through documentation, and testimony to verify what he has learned and if not for the dufus being the prez, he would have been indicted as there is PLENTY of probable cause.
We'll just have to wait and see. Their effort to have a kangaroo court failed, thankfully, with Kavanaugh, so we'll see how it goes.Quote:
I expect a dem house to do a REAL investigation, starting in January, and Mueller to continue sending folks to jail. You have to figure that Mueller has evidence through documentation, and testimony to verify what he has learned and if not for the dufus being the prez, he would have been indicted as there is PLENTY of probable cause.
I can wait as a real investigation winds its way though the legal process unlike the sham investigation repubs perpetrated on the country with the SCOTUS nomination.
https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/cac...30/1683009.jpg
https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...PSg44aDeeQ--~C
Sour grapes
Mueller isn't going to touch Trump. Not so sure I can say the same thing about Campaign Finance violations . Southern District NY seems determined to indict Trump. Campaign finance violations are usually not treated as felonious criminal violations just as the Foreign Agent Registration act isn't[. But in this case they appear to be treating them as heinous acts of crime. Prosecutors would have to establish criminal intent which is probably a bar too high to hurdle . Oh the irony . 20 years after Bubba got in legal jeopardy for trying to cover up an extra-marital affair ;Trump gets himself into the same trap.
Robert Khuzami, the Acting US Attorney in US 2nd District NY filed a sentencing memo claiming Trump organized illegal payments. Khuzami doesn’t know the law. Non-disclosure contracts are legal in every state. It’s not an illegal campaign contribution.
I feel a Supreme Court action coming on
No way does the repub senate impeach the dufus over campaign finance felonies. But I seriously doubt that's all Mueller has.
He doesn't have squat
Aw, come on Clete. Don't be such a sourpuss Aussie who doesn't give a fig about American politics. You can't know what Mueller has, nobody does, but you have to admit at least he has exposed and caught a few swamp critters in Washington, and that alone is a better job of it than the dufus who PROMISED to drain the swamp if elected.
https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/168/16833/1683375.gif
Even the rats are abandoning the ship, and the dufus can't find enough cheese to replace them... YET!
That is what comes of not having a political party behind you. You can make just so many enemies. We all have to give a fig about American politics because you haven't got it all together and you have elected a dangerous man to be president
Repubs are fully behind our dufus whether from fear, anger, or both. They want what they want and that may be the conflict ultimately because dems want what they want to. That's just the natural course of things since we are a rather large ATIVELY engaged country, with a wide reach I admit. Expectations are globally mixed, and grant you events lately are quite challenging given the reputation we have built. That last statement you made is proving very true and not surprising, but just another challenge to face.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
LOL, NONE of the nations have it ALL together Clete, and it's still a messy process trying to get it together.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:14 AM. |