Paul Manafort Told to Surrender

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This indictment pertains to the campaign. Papadopolous plead guilty,

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4163402/Papadopoulos-Statement-Offense.pdf

This is an even bigger deal than Manafort

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still struggling to see how any of this involves the campaign.

The campaign of which Manafort was chairman? That campaign?

Yeah, other than being Trump's campaign manager, his indictment doesn't have anything at all to do with Trump.

The tax issues and money laundering occurred years ago. Before Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This indictment pertains to the campaign. Papadopolous plead guilty,

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4163402/Papadopoulos-Statement-Offense.pdf

This is an even bigger deal than Manafort

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Manafort and Trump have known each other and worked together for over 3 decades.

They both laundered money. This indictment also illustrates to Trump that Mueller knows how to engage in financial forensics and use it in a legal proceeding.

But Trump has told us he isn’t being investigated. This doesn’t involve Trump. Trump has said so and Comey said it three times. And saying something three times makes it true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still struggling to see how any of this involves the campaign.

The campaign of which Manafort was chairman? That campaign?

You mean the campaign chairman who was there briefly and then let go?
Still not seeing the connection.

Okay. You don't have to see any connection. This is obviously all NBD to you.

If Mueller is so sharp and there’s such an avalanche of evidence, where is it?

No where.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still struggling to see how any of this involves the campaign.

The campaign of which Manafort was chairman? That campaign?

Yeah, other than being Trump's campaign manager, his indictment doesn't have anything at all to do with Trump.

The tax issues and money laundering occurred years ago. Before Trump.

Nope. The indictment clearly says through 2017. Try again, Volodya.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still struggling to see how any of this involves the campaign.

The campaign of which Manafort was chairman? That campaign?

Yeah, other than being Trump's campaign manager, his indictment doesn't have anything at all to do with Trump.

The tax issues and money laundering occurred years ago. Before Trump.

Not according to the indictment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This indictment pertains to the campaign. Papadopolous plead guilty,

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4163402/Papadopoulos-Statement-Offense.pdf

This is an even bigger deal than Manafort

It happened on Oct 4th. If it’s a big deal, why weren’t we talking about it when it happened?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still struggling to see how any of this involves the campaign.

The campaign of which Manafort was chairman? That campaign?

Yeah, other than being Trump's campaign manager, his indictment doesn't have anything at all to do with Trump.

The tax issues and money laundering occurred years ago. Before Trump.

Either Trump's judgment is so poor that he hired Manafort, a criminal (alleged), with no inkling of Manafort's connections to Russia, or Trump's judgment is so poor that he hire Manafort, a criminal (alleged), with an inkling of Manafort's connections to Russia. Which sounds better?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still struggling to see how any of this involves the campaign.

The campaign of which Manafort was chairman? That campaign?

You mean the campaign chairman who was there briefly and then let go?
Still not seeing the connection.

Okay. You don't have to see any connection. This is obviously all NBD to you.

If Mueller is so sharp and there’s such an avalanche of evidence, where is it?

No where.

God, you clearly have no idea how the government builds a case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still struggling to see how any of this involves the campaign.

The campaign of which Manafort was chairman? That campaign?

Yeah, other than being Trump's campaign manager, his indictment doesn't have anything at all to do with Trump.

The tax issues and money laundering occurred years ago. Before Trump.

Nope. The indictment clearly says through 2017. Try again, Volodya.

So the connection to the Trump campaign is? Anyone?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think an indictment might change Trumpers’ minds?

If the indictment is for transactions and oaymensts before the election than no. And it shouldn’t. So far no collusion between Russia and Trump. Collusion between Hillary and Russia is now known.

Have any of you read the actual indictment. Read paragraph 38. https://www.justice.gov/file/1007271/download It says FROM 2006 TO 2017 and uses the statement "TOGETHER WITH OTHERS" when mentioning conspiracy against the US.



For those of you who cannot read:

https://www.justsecurity.org/46449/legal-twitter-analyzes-manafort-indictment-mariotti-whiting/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This indictment pertains to the campaign. Papadopolous plead guilty,

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4163402/Papadopoulos-Statement-Offense.pdf

This is an even bigger deal than Manafort

It happened on Oct 4th. If it’s a big deal, why weren’t we talking about it when it happened?

It was sealed with today’s indictment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Manafort and Trump have known each other and worked together for over 3 decades.

They both laundered money. This indictment also illustrates to Trump that Mueller knows how to engage in financial forensics and use it in a legal proceeding.

So, let me get this straight.
If your best childhood friend was caught embezzling than, you, as his friend, would also be guilty?
I know how badly you want your statement to be true, but just saying it does not make it so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still struggling to see how any of this involves the campaign.

The campaign of which Manafort was chairman? That campaign?

You mean the campaign chairman who was there briefly and then let go?
Still not seeing the connection.

Okay. You don't have to see any connection. This is obviously all NBD to you.

If Mueller is so sharp and there’s such an avalanche of evidence, where is it?

No where.

God, you clearly have no idea how the government builds a case.

If the gov had a case it would not need to build one.