You mean you thought you knew.Skjellyfetti wrote:
What got you so worked up? Always figured it was. Didn't know. Asked a question.
Deep breaths
Always Google before you come at me, Junior.
You mean you thought you knew.Skjellyfetti wrote:
What got you so worked up? Always figured it was. Didn't know. Asked a question.
Deep breaths
And you shouldn't have to tell the police the truth. Especially the federal police. Its their job to make a case without your cooperation. That's why the law is bullshit.Chizzang wrote:Pfft...CID1990 wrote:
On what planet?
You can lie to the police all you want - anywhere. But you cannot lie to the Feds.
Seriously do you even look stuff up before asking stupid questions?
I'm not sure I've ever told a police officer the actual truth..?
No way. Starr was able to hang around for years. And we love the entertainmentCID1990 wrote:No, it doesn’tkalm wrote:
Well then...ibguess that settles it.
But we’re near the end
Wow. 41 pages with 32 charges. That's a lot of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.Skjellyfetti wrote:New indictment with a massive charge list filed by Mueller against Gates and Manafort.
Laundering $30 million while working on a presidential campaign is pretty fucking brazen - and, in Gates's case working on the transition as well.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/docume ... fort-2.pdf
Gonna have to choose between life in prison and rolling on your bosses.
There goes those goalpostsSkjellyfetti wrote:If there was any coordination, I would imagine it would be among the last charges presented. Still a long way to go!
Imagine y'all's reaction if David Axelrod found himself with a couple dozen felony indictments and accusations of laundering $30,000,000 a year into Obama's term.
Obstruction is obviously way higher. But, collusion/coordination is still an unknown. I've never said it would be proven. My arguments with you has primarily been about whether it is even being investigated.Skjellyfetti wrote:
The likeliest serious charges, IMO, are:
1. FARA (Flynn is cooked. Possibly Manafort as well)
2. RICO / other financial crimes (Trump and associates' finances being poured over by FinCEN... I think is likely to uncover some wrongdoing. But, maybe they're all squeaky clean...)
3. Collusion
* Wildcard = Obstruction of Justice (not that likely as of now. but.... they're working on it )
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-ai ... d=53300996President Trump’s one-time campaign aide Richard Gates has told family and close friends in a letter sent this morning he plans to plead guilty Friday in the special counsel’s criminal case against him, setting up the potential for Gates to become the latest well-informed Trump insider to assist in the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential contest, according to sources close to the matter.
The potential for a guilty plea could dramatically change the dynamics in the investigation, just one day after special counsel Robert Mueller added a raft of new financial and tax charges to the criminal case against Gates and his longtime colleague, Paul Manafort.
Gates has for weeks been vacillating between fighting the charges and pleading guilty, and remained undecided through much of this week, according to the sources. Legal teams for President Trump and Manafort appeared to be unaware as late as Thursday about Gates’ intentions.
In the letter obtained by ABC News, Gates writes to family and friends “despite my initial desire to vigorously defend myself, I have had a change of heart,” Gates explained. “The reality of how long this legal process will likely take, the cost, and the circus-like atmosphere of an anticipated trial are too much. I will better serve my family moving forward by exiting this process.”
Sandy?Chizzang wrote:Nothing berger...
I think what we need is a debate between Schiff and Nunes where they can point and counterpoint. And I think Schiff would kick Nunes' ass in such a debate and then we could be done with this back and forth. Yes, I know, the Trump Zombies would not realize that Schiff had kicked Nunes' ass. But the squishy middle people who throw the balance of power back and forth would.HI54UNI wrote:Rep. Nunes response to the Dem memo
https://intelligence.house.gov/uploaded ... sponse.pdf
No, we don’t.JohnStOnge wrote:I think what we need is a debate between Schiff and Nunes where they can point and counterpoint. And I think Schiff would kick Nunes' ass in such a debate and then we could be done with this back and forth. Yes, I know, the Trump Zombies would not realize that Schiff had kicked Nunes' ass. But the squishy middle people who throw the balance of power back and forth would.HI54UNI wrote:Rep. Nunes response to the Dem memo
https://intelligence.house.gov/uploaded ... sponse.pdf
I go back to what I think at least SHOULD be the most compelling aspect of this situation to any objective person: The current FBI leadership said that the Nunes memo has material omissions of fact that render it inaccurate and the current FBI leadership is not the leadership under attack by the Nunes memo. They have absolutely no reason to object to it other than the fact that it really is misleading. There's no reason for Chris Wray, who was appointed by Trump and who is a Republican, to approve the issue of such a statement other than a scenario in which he thinks the statement is true.
This stuff of taking Nunes seriously has to stop.
So congress shouldn’t investigate these things or shouldn’t investigate these things once a special prosecutor is appointed?CID1990 wrote:No, we don’t.JohnStOnge wrote:
I think what we need is a debate between Schiff and Nunes where they can point and counterpoint. And I think Schiff would kick Nunes' ass in such a debate and then we could be done with this back and forth. Yes, I know, the Trump Zombies would not realize that Schiff had kicked Nunes' ass. But the squishy middle people who throw the balance of power back and forth would.
I go back to what I think at least SHOULD be the most compelling aspect of this situation to any objective person: The current FBI leadership said that the Nunes memo has material omissions of fact that render it inaccurate and the current FBI leadership is not the leadership under attack by the Nunes memo. They have absolutely no reason to object to it other than the fact that it really is misleading. There's no reason for Chris Wray, who was appointed by Trump and who is a Republican, to approve the issue of such a statement other than a scenario in which he thinks the statement is true.
This stuff of taking Nunes seriously has to stop.
What we need is for them to quietly do their jobs, and leave the overall investigation to Mueller.
In other words they need to STFU
Nunes claimed the sources weren't identified: the memo "did not name Fusion GPS and principal Glenn Simpson."was approached by an identified U.S. Person, who indicated to Source 1 that a U.S.-based law firm had hired the identified U.S. Person to conduct research regarding Candidate 1's ties to Russia. (The identified U.S. Person and Source 1 have a long-standing business relationship.) The identified U.S. Person hired Source 1 to conduct this research. The identified U.S. Person never advised Source 1 as to the motivation behind the research into Candidate 1's ties to Russia. The FBI speculates that the identified U.S. Person was likely looking for information that could be used to discredit Candidate 1's campaign.
I agree with that in principle but the reason why we're where we are is Nunes. He's the one that needed to "STFU" from the beginning.CID1990 wrote:
In other words they need to STFU
Mr Reductio Ad Absurdumkalm wrote:So congress shouldn’t investigate these things or shouldn’t investigate these things once a special prosecutor is appointed?CID1990 wrote:
No, we don’t.
What we need is for them to quietly do their jobs, and leave the overall investigation to Mueller.
In other words they need to STFU
Dammit Cid. It will come as no surprise that I didn't take logic at the Harvard of the Palouse and everytime you post a latin phrase, I assume it has something to do with logic as I didn't take latin either. So then I have to look up what it means to confirm my suspicions.CID1990 wrote:Mr Reductio Ad Absurdumkalm wrote:
So congress shouldn’t investigate these things or shouldn’t investigate these things once a special prosecutor is appointed?
that's more than half your posts
Of course Congress should exercise their oversight responsibilities
thats not what the intel committee is doing
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Actually your "innocent" questions fit in another category as wellkalm wrote:Dammit Cid. It will come as no surprise that I didn't take logic at the Harvard of the Palouse and everytime you post a latin phrase, I assume it has something to do with logic as I didn't take latin either. So then I have to look up what it means to confirm my suspicions.CID1990 wrote:
Mr Reductio Ad Absurdum
that's more than half your posts
Of course Congress should exercise their oversight responsibilities
thats not what the intel committee is doing
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In all honesty, this was a serious question and I think your answer contradicts your initial point. I'm sure there's a latin term for that reply as well but all I keep coming up with when you try and prove your logic based intellect is...