patrick.net

Manaforts corruption is all in regards to his swamp behavior from many years before his 9 weeks working on Trumps campaign.

he lies and false statements continued through 2017 (page 18). He also was avoiding taxes during that time by filing false tax returns. That activity would be to date, presumably. He was fraudulently applying for a mortgage during early 2016, about the time he was working with Trump. On page 23, it states that he is charged with conspiring against the United States from 2006 through 2017. Manafort pushed 75 million through those accounts and spent 18 million on himself.

Triggered much?

And that, how, implicates Trump and Trump's campaign?

Sniper says

And that, how, implicates Trump and Trump's campaign?

It doesn't really. It just shows Trump's tweet about it to be a lie, and it shows that all of Trump's supporters who mindlessly repeat the lie are useful pawns.

YesYNot says

Sniper says

And that, how, implicates Trump and Trump's campaign?

It doesn't really. It just shows Trump's tweet about it to be a lie, and it shows that all of Trump's supporters who mindlessly repeat the lie are useful pawns.

I believe Patrick considers these types of truths to be uncivil

Uncivil? no. but this is the type of BS that degenerates the conversation, over and over and over again. Be better

This is getting interesting. Gloves off.

I saw what the left and right were saying, so I just looked it up.

This doesn't change the fundamental truth that his (known) corruption crimes are from years earlier. It has nothing to do with Trump, or his 9 weeks working with the campaign.

Papadopoulos, a low ranking nobody, errand boy, who sang like a canary and is on the Russian collusion track.

Collusion means he was helping the Russians.

The President "shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."

If Trump signaled to the Russians that he was OK with them hacking DNC and HRC campaigns in exchange for favorable positions regarding Russia, that's collusion. Even signaling that he was OK with it is collusion in my opinion. Because if Trump doesn't see it as a problem, and it helps Trump, then he sees it as favorable, and will want to return the favor.

This doesn't change the fundamental truth that his (known) corruption crimes are from years earlier. It has nothing to do with Trump, or his 9 weeks working with the campaign.

So you are saying hiring criminals for your campaign is cleaning up the swamp?

So you are saying hiring criminals for your campaign is cleaning up the swamp?

Democrats need to take a step back and try to look at this objectively.

Collusion means he was helping the Russians. In what sense? What did the Russian need from Trump to do what they were doing, and have been doing long before there was a Trump in the picture?

I don't understand how anyone can seriously believe the President would quit if his family were threatened. He would much more likely pardon his family, and counter-attack against his opponents. He might even pardon Manafort.

I don't understand how anyone can seriously believe the President would quit if his family were threatened.

bob2356 says

So you are saying hiring criminals for your campaign is cleaning up the swamp?

@bob2356

We'll have to ask Tony Podesta that question, since his brother John left the company in 1993... Oh wait, John was still having conversations with Tony as late as 2015 or later.

Haven't you learned yet, when you use WaPo as your source to support your narrative, you've already lost?

rely on FACTS instead of hyperbole?

If you really want to support your delusional narrative, why don't you try posting a Fox News link instead of WaPo.

That might add some credibility to your radical, left wing, liberal trolling.

curious2 says

I don't understand how anyone can seriously believe the President would quit if his family were threatened.

Sorry I missed this in reply above.

Yes, I am presuming Trump has compassion for his family. Maybe I am wrong.

a recent military times survey showed Navy officers in particular had the highest disapproval for the commander in chief, while the Marines had the strongest level of support

Officers: -23%.
Enlisted: +10%

bob2356 says

Which podesta was it that was indicted? I missed that one on the news.

You miss them all.

Want to tell us who Company A and Company B are in the indictment?

The page of the NYT is funny. The titles:
- "Mueller’s First Indictments Send a Message to the President"
As in "I have nothing".
- "Editorial: Is the White House Scared Yet?"
Is Trump supposed to be scared? What is it? A Halloween special?
- "The Plot Against America: Robert Mueller hands a gangster administration its first indictments."
Hummm... no these guys indicted are not part of the administration.
- "Why George Papadopoulos Is More Dangerous Than Paul Manafort: The adviser’s guilty plea is evidence of collusion with Russia."
... Yeah he tried to get dirt, the way we know the DNC paid to get dirt.

These people are working themselves up to orgasm level before being within a mile of their target.

Shuck and Jive , Bullshit Bobby.

Shuck and Jive, you do it so well!

That comment doesn't make sense. If your family were threatened, would you quit and run away? The compassionate thing would be to pardon them, and face the MSM handwringing that the President is already facing anyway.

Almost any pardon would necessarily block the whole DoJ process, and could thus be called "obstruction of justice," but you can't erase an expressly authorized Constitutional power by citing a mere statute. Again, read your Constitution, it's free online.

Also, in a federal case, the President could pardon them for that, too.

I don't really have a dog in this fight, but I marvel at the TDS and I feel dismayed that certain Navy guys can't figure out the President's strategy.

Only 30% of officers approve of Trump.

I saw that too, but I would have liked to see the percentages by deployment or station. Most Navy officers have no contact with hostile Muslims; many are literally at sea, and others are sailing a desk or, at best, favored customers in a Gulf regime port. In contrast, many enlisted Marines ...

He was offering to update his Russian colleagues during the campaign

and trying to figure out how best to monetize his position.

if/when hard evidence

The most Pro-Russian president of my lifetime? One bending over in Ukraine? One loathe to level sanctions unanimously passed by Congress against Russia? An America retrenching to isolationism, alienating allies, and running from its spot of "leader of the free world"? Civil unrest and divisiveness in the US itself? The gift of an ineffectual government in your largest adversary?

In the meantime, we DO have hard evidence of DNC crimes regarding HRC's campaign. We also have plenty of hard evidence of HRC's past crimes.

Rew says

Oh, I think Dems are seeking to protect and ensure all leads are chased:

Great. Then you agree w Trey Gowdy that we should investigate Hillary and the DNC for money laundering and campaign finance violations. Ya know because $12 million invested secretly via a law firm violates the spirit of campaign finance law and is a major red flag for money laundering amongst a myriad of other crimes. Trey Gowdy described both the scale and method as "unheard of" .