Political Forums - U.S. judge questions special counsel's powers in Manafort case

Political Forums (http://www.politicalchat.org/index.php)

- Current events (http://www.politicalchat.org/forumdisplay.php?f=26)

- - U.S. judge questions special counsel's powers in Manafort case (http://www.politicalchat.org/showthread.php?t=12371)

Quote:

Originally Posted by whell (Post 370821)

He may decide against Manafort, but not for that reason. Manafort was "tight with Russian money" before he was involved with the Trump campaign, and I've seen no evidence - nor has Mueller charged Manafort with - any activity that is connect to the Trump campaign.

There will be no "conspiracy charge" because there's been no conspiracy. But you'd also need to define what the crime is that Manafort was involved in when committing conspiracy, because conspiracy on its own is not a crime.

Is collusion same as conspiracy? ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pio1980 (Post 370829)

First, Mueller IS the adult in this room.
Second, how do you know there is no conspiracy, or collusion?

After two years of various investigations and leaks galore, if there were, the participants would, at the very least, already have been tried and convicted in the press.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chicks (Post 370825)

Actually, unlike an HR flunky, my job depends on my having original, highy creative thoughts regularly.

Damn shame that absolutely none of that carries over from your job to your participation here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by whell (Post 370834)

Damn shame that absolutely none of that carries over from your job to your participation here.

Again with the unintended humor, lol. You’re always good for a laugh! :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by whell (Post 370833)

After two years of various investigations and leaks galore, if there were, the participants would, at the very least, already have been tried and convicted in the press.

There hasn't yet been a single leak from Mueller's team and every action he has taken has been a complete surprise to everyone involved. Your faulty logic is an example of the adage "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." In other words, you seem to believe that since you don't know everything that Mueller knows, Mueller knows nothing. It doesn't work that way, Skippy.

The White House, OTOH, leaks like a sieve, likely because there are still a few good people working there who are horrified at the ineptness starting from the top. The Mueller team is composed of truly the best of the best. Quite a contrast.

I still have difficulty with folks taking this fart joke punchline potus seriously.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pio1980 (Post 370841)

I still have difficulty with folks taking this fart joke punchline potus seriously.

You and me both. :eek:
His own people have called him a joke, a moron and an idiot among other things. What is there to like or admire about this con artist?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rajoo (Post 370843)

What is there to like or admire about this con artist?

His great head of hair? Oh, wait...

Quote:

Originally Posted by finnbow (Post 370838)

There hasn't yet been a single leak from Mueller's team and every action he has taken has been a complete surprise to everyone involved.

Oh, no. Not a single leak. Except for these:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...m_npd_nn_tw_ma

https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/27/polit...ion/index.html

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ts-cooperation

https://www.wsj.com/articles/special...obe-1501788287 In this one, the WSJ reported on the Grand Jury and the Prez's legal counsel wasn't aware of it.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/special...ers-1503694304

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...-tower-n796746

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN1C92WN

https://pagesix.com/2018/01/02/russi...-says-witness/

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/15/polit...ion/index.html

You claim no leaks, yet there's been plenty of news from "sources with direct knowledge of the investigation" about what Mueller's merry band is up to. While the articles, of course, don't name sources, the leaks appear in some cases to come from folks on Mueller's team, or possibly someone within the DOJ that Mueller may be required to brief. In any case, the info is getting out there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by finnbow (Post 370838)

Your faulty logic is an example of the adage "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." In other words, you seem to believe that since you don't know everything that Mueller knows, Mueller knows nothing. It doesn't work that way, Skippy.

More BS. You may be wishing for a particular outcome here, and that's fine. But you don't get to ignore the information that's out there in the process, an then tell me "it doesn't work that way" while you ignore it.