Frank and Jim. Manafort is 69 and has gout.
Although he got a measly three years (after all of that), you may still get your wish that he die in prison.
So relieved we took care of him. The judge told him today that this is not about Russian collusion whatsoever, but you both of course know better than the judge.
Replies to: Frank and Jim. Manafort is 69 and has gout.
Should have given him the death penalty. Many Catholics on this board would flip the switch
The hatred for anything and anyone associated with Trump is palpable.
I bet you have an ostrich jacket, yes?
(no message)
He just buries his head in the sand no need for a jacket with him.
(no message)
Was that supposed to be funny? Work on it. But I do have Ostrich boots.
(no message)
M’on now fess up the jacket also. You are a head in the sand kinda guy.
(no message)
And you are an angry and bitter kinda guy. Touche!
(no message)
But a bemused one today marveling at you bots even offering props to Paul. Well done guys.
You get a 100 on today’s bot test.
Sympathy for the devil? Guy would sell out his country in a nanosecond. #konstantinkliminik.
(no message)
"Trump Only Hires the Best People", "Drain the Swamp", "Lock Her Up!"
There is no world in which Trump's former campaign manager going to prison is a good look for Trump.
But by setting you expectations ridiculously low, everything is great!
And involved in one of the already demonstrated instances of collusion.
(no message)
You know better than the Judge.
(no message)
His case wasn’t about that. Of course, facts mean zero to you. If he does ten years total, that’s
fine.
Very Soviet strategy: "Find me a man, and I will find you a crime."
(no message)
More like find me a traitor and his other crimes will become apparent.
He did collude. He offered them briefings on the campaign.
You should be so proud.
The guy was a greedy bastard only interested in feathering his nest.
Yet you guys defend even him. Shameful.
"Briefings"? I thought it was polling data. Offered to Ukranians.
(no message)
You are the best. He offered internal polling data to Kliminik who had worked for Russian GRU
intelligence. He also offered a briefing to one of of Puties oligarch friends to whom he owed money.
We know about those. NYT claims other regular contacts as well.
He’s a fucking greedy traitor.
At some pooint you would think that Mueller would come to grips with the origin of his
appointment. The FISA warrant was secured through a fake dossier paid for by the opposition campaign. Given the poisonness nature of how the Russian investigation started, he should have rejected the assignment.
The FISA warrant on Page didn’t start the investigation numbnuts.
Again you know this but it doesn’t fit the narrative.
If Hillary’s campaign had the same quantity and quality of Russian govt contacts, you wouldn’t want that investigated? I would have.
You know you would, so stop being a fraud.
Reread his post. He didn"t say that. This started with Dem oppo research.
(no message)
The investigation also did not start with the oppo research.
That’s the point.
You guys are indeed the best in defending criminals and traitors.
That is your point now that you re-read the post.
How did this investigation start?
Okay, added the word also. Any nit to be picked that makes you happy.
(no message)
Kyle needs to pin this post to the top of the Open Forum.
(no message)
Of course this wasn't about collusion.
Here you go portraying yourself as the board's judicial expert (hint: you're not) but somehow forget to mention that this judge's instructions to the prosecution last July were to specifically not mention the words "collusion" or "Russia" during the trial or sentencing. The prosecution readily agreed with the judge's instruction. This sentence was only about bank and tax fraud. Everyone knew that going in (except our resident judicial expert of course).
Collusion and Russia were never charges in this case so you can't go claiming victory for something that was never on the table.
The board hall monitor has arrived. Pay Attention!
(no message)
Bears repeating, though. Many Lefties think the investigation is about collusion.
It's just politics. Target people in the Trump campaign; find something that they did before the campaign (or catch them in a lie); put them in jail. It is an interesting tactic, and it will be even more interesting if Trump does it to the Dem campaign staffers in the next election. No guarantee that Trump will stoop to acting like a Dem, but we shall see.
People don't end up in prison if "it's just politics". Not in America. Yet.
By the way your line about Trump "stooping" was great. He'll need to climb up a really long ladder if he's going to stoop.
Oh, and my main point stands: Many people think this is about collusion. Quaint, that.
(no message)
Please, he WAS one of the main colluders.
When the docs showing the payments from his paymasters demonstrate clear and unequivocal fraud and tax evasion, they are just supposed to ignore that?
Is that the new announced Neddie standard for investigations?
Who who had that type of clear evidence against him developed legitimately hasn’t been prosecuted? Give me all the D names.
That is very naive. Open your eyes. Manafort would not be in jail if he worked for HRC.
I'm not saying he is not guilty. I'm saying that guilty people who worked for Trump are far more likely to go to jail than guilty people who worked for the Clintons. Guilty people who worked for the Clinton's get immunity agreements. Guilty people who worked for Trump get early morning SWAT raids and jail time.
Wanna bet? His crimes were obvious. Even the Trump juror said that.
They had to investigate his financials to investigate collusion.
Anyone with his blatant and obvious fraud would have been prosecuted by DOJ. It was THAT obvious. He had zero defense at trial. The docs they needed to look at for collusion proved it by themselves.
I'll bet you one million dollars.
(no message)
My eyes are open and they are reading your partisan response.
(no message)
They can’t attack the fact that he’s a criminal. So, the shuffling, what about, or it’s political
starts.
The D’s would have said the same if Hills has been indicted.
Party over country is our mantra.
Why would I attack the fact that he's a criminal? I have no interest in doing that.
My point is about how we select people to prosecute, not guilt. We are all guilty of something.
You have GOT to be joking.
He was clearly a key figure in the alleged collusion. They couldn’t have investigated it without investigating him, and who was paying him. From there it became pretty easy to see thst he was both a financial and tax criminal as well as a traitor.
The fact that you would try to equate him to just anyone shows how morally bankrupt you have become.
He wasn't just anyone. He worked with Trump. That's why the collusion accusations were made.
Collusion isn't even a crime, but it is an excuse to launch an investigation, apparently.
They didn't make collusion accusations against Schiff when he was trying to work with the Russians to get compromising pictures on Trump. Why aren't they going through his tax returns? They didn't accuse the Clinton's of collusion when they were working with the Russians (and even flying over there to meet with people who wouldn't risk a trip to the US).
Except that you are one that just said “we are all guilty of something”
We all don’t have documentary evidence that is undisputed showing financial crimes and tax evasion in the millions of dollars.
The point is his prosecution was a no brainer. Tell me anyone else who had that kind of undisputed evidence of such crimes that wasn’t prosecuted?
Except you don't think a special prosecutor could comb through the HRC campaign...
...and find someone who didn't hide their activities well enough?
Except that Manafort was investigated due to his known ties to Russia that had led to his
resignation. They didn’t comb through anything to pick him out. He had already picked himself out.
Ah. Your contention is that he was not part of the overall effort to take Trump down. Got it.
(no message)
No, you never get it. You likened the situation to prosecutors combing through a campaign to go
after the most personally vulnerable. That is NOT what happened with Manafort. He was widely reputed to have had the most frequent and questionable Russian contacts. That’s why they looked at him. Of course you know this, but spout BS anyway.
Who cares about me. You have a man swept up in all of the hysteria about Russians and charged
with things that he would not otherwise have been charged with. While he should suffer consequences for avoiding taxes, in no way shape or form should he have ever been subject to 24 years in jail as Mueller requested. That is simply ridiculous.
The Left seems to love McCarthy-ite prosecutors when their barrel isn't pointed at them. It would be good if the Left could develop some principles.
Well of course he can.
As you aptly pointed out. He’s a law expert
The President’s campaign manager is serving a prison sentence for bank and tax fraud.
And he faces sentencing before Judge Jackson next week for additional criminal wrongdoing.
Yes, it was a relatively lenient sentence.
My view is that the federal sentencing guidelines are heavy handed across the board, so I like when judges undercut them. But, it is fair to say that Manafort’s sentence reeks of preferential and disparate treatment.
I still wonder why you Trump University subway alums never ask why Donald Trump surrounds himself with crooks and dishonest people engaged in criminal wrongdoing?
An Obama bundler -- Lasry -- who Obama wanted to make the Ambassador of France has Russian mob ties.
Obama kept his bundled money and Lasry withdrew after it came to light that he was allegedly close with Russians who run guns in NY.
Why does Obama surround himself with these people?
Solid response. Was this person convicted by a jury?
(no message)
Link?
Seriously...Manafort, Flynn, Cohen, Stone, Papadopolous...at least 4 CONVICTED criminals in his camp...and I'm probably leaving someone off the list.
Rick Gates.
(no message)
I have an idea. Google Lasry and Obama. If you still can't find it, let me know.
(no message)
Just fess up the right wing twatter post.
(no message)
That might be your wish, not mine - it appears you're gloating his lenient sentencing.
It certainly breaks down the trust one has with our justice system when the wealthy and well connected are spared what would be for those who have no money or connections a much stiffer sentence of up to 24yrs.
I'm not sure why you singled me out on this - He was found guilty of tax evasion tax fraud and more -
Mueller was the FBI director who signed off on Epstein's 13 month sentence and
authorized a probation sentence for Asimov (Isaac's son), the man with the largest collection of child porn in California history. By comparison, Manafort got hit hard.
Odd how you’re going to bat for Manafort the criminal
(no message)
Yup. I think he got swept up because (1) Trump beat Hillary, and (2) Russian hysteria.
As you can see, people like Epstein and Asimov who committed much greater crimes got cushy plea deals from Mueller. Mueller hasn't even charged Podesta who did the same type of lobbying and committed the same FARA violations. The gross misapplication of Justice continues perpetrated by a roving prosecutor who is barely supervised . Seeking 24 years against Manafort was a complete joke. The only people that the Left want in jail are people who went to work for Trump.
You have a shitty perspective on those who have money and influence.
(no message)
Of course you do. Must defend Orangeman pal.
(no message)
(no message)
He should cut down on shellfish. As to next week's sentence...
(no message)
Well done. The wheel chair was also classic. His lawyers were good.
(no message)
Now he's faking a wheelchair. You are sick.
(no message)
You are delusional if you think that wasn’t for sympathy. Nice lawyering.
(no message)
Do you remember this insane headline in the NYSlimes? "Trump Campaign Aides had Repeated Contacts
with Russian Intelligence".
The NYSlimes article said that the aide was Manafort.
Do you know what the Brady rule is? That is the rule that requires the government to provide exculpatory evidence to criminal defendants.
Turns out the FBI was forced to admit to Manafort in a Brady disclosure that the government had no surveillance intercepts of Manafort and, just yesterday, Judge Ellis went out of his way to state that Manafort was not charged with much less convicted of anything to do with Russia.
The NYSlimes still has not withdrawn its story. It is very strange to me why the Left seems so willing to destroy people's lives with no evidence whatsoever.
Link: https://twitter.com/JohnWHuber/status/1103813213009920000
You are a beauty. No wire intercepts or no evidence? Big difference champ.
(no message)
if only he had been able to run all his money through the Clinton Foundation, Frank and Jim would
give him a high 5.
"Almost" Four Years - according to BBerg Headline
The disappointment is palpable.