Paul Manafort Told to Surrender

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else curious what a million dollars worth of rugs looks like?

You are not the only one.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/paul-manafort-rug-store_us_59f740a4e4b07fdc5fbfb5f6


Over a two-year period beginning in 2008, for example, Manafort allegedly paid $1,034,350 to an Alexandria, Virginia, antique rug store using wire transfers from bank accounts in Cyprus. And so our magic carpet hunt took us to J&J Oriental Rug Gallery ? whose website describes it as offering the “largest selection of antique, semi-antique, and modern oriental rugs in the greater Washington Area.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Ok, folks. This is indictment B. In 30 years of fedral litigation, I have never seen a B level defendant be higher up than an A. Flynn has already been indicted.The next person to go down here will be higher up the chain. Who will it be?

This is discussed upthread.

According to the twitterverse Indictment (A) has to be higher profile criminal that "B". Which can only be Trump, Pence or Session.

http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/sealed-trump-indictment/5796/

So when do we find out who Indictment A is?

[Anonymous]

Could also be Kushner, Ivanka or Don Jr.

I'm amused that Papadapolous has been wandering around wearing a wire for Mueller since July. Wonder if he got some good dirt...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I admit I haven’t read the whole thread— why no developments on Flynn? Any thoughts about that? There seems to be as much if not more evidence there.

He's been indicted. What more developments? Arraignment? Pre-trial hearings? In the fullness of time--it's a slow grind through federal court. Unless he pleads, which he probably should--soon. If he goes for a trial, it will be a good long time before he is through with this. And he would lose. And a judge would max out his sentence for wasting everyone's time.

[Anonymous]

The rugs look look like nothing. Buying "antiques", "art", real estate is classic money laundering. Things that are hard to pin a price down on. Manafort "paid" a million dollars for one crappy Ikea style rug to launder the money. The rug dealer gets a cut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Ok, folks. This is indictment B. In 30 years of fedral litigation, I have never seen a B level defendant be higher up than an A. Flynn has already been indicted.The next person to go down here will be higher up the chain. Who will it be?

This is discussed upthread.

According to the twitterverse Indictment (A) has to be higher profile criminal that "B". Which can only be Trump, Pence or Session.

http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/sealed-trump-indictment/5796/

Is anyone more credible discussing this? I want to see Trump come down more than anyone but the palmer report isn't much more than a liberal brietbart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else curious what a million dollars worth of rugs looks like?

You are not the only one.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/paul-manafort-rug-store_us_59f740a4e4b07fdc5fbfb5f6


Over a two-year period beginning in 2008, for example, Manafort allegedly paid $1,034,350 to an Alexandria, Virginia, antique rug store using wire transfers from bank accounts in Cyprus. And so our magic carpet hunt took us to J&J Oriental Rug Gallery ? whose website describes it as offering the “largest selection of antique, semi-antique, and modern oriental rugs in the greater Washington Area.”

LOL

I hope the "40 Thieves" sold him a boat load of "semi-antiques".
What a greedy, soulless, POS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Ok, folks. This is indictment B. In 30 years of fedral litigation, I have never seen a B level defendant be higher up than an A. Flynn has already been indicted.The next person to go down here will be higher up the chain. Who will it be?

This is discussed upthread.

According to the twitterverse Indictment (A) has to be higher profile criminal that "B". Which can only be Trump, Pence or Session.

http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/sealed-trump-indictment/5796/

Is anyone more credible discussing this? I want to see Trump come down more than anyone but the palmer report isn't much more than a liberal brietbart.

You can easily google it. Numerous news outlets and genuine twitter outlets are talking about it. GO out and read about it then come back to us with what you learn!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Ok, folks. This is indictment B. In 30 years of fedral litigation, I have never seen a B level defendant be higher up than an A. Flynn has already been indicted.The next person to go down here will be higher up the chain. Who will it be?

This is discussed upthread.

According to the twitterverse Indictment (A) has to be higher profile criminal that "B". Which can only be Trump, Pence or Sessions.

http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/sealed-trump-indictment/5796/

Is anyone more credible discussing this? I want to see Trump come down more than anyone but the palmer report isn't much more than a liberal brietbart.

Indictment A has to be more high profile than Indictment B (Manafort, which is already pretty high profile). The Palmer Report thing analyzes why he thinks it's Trump rather than Sessions (who wouldn't need to have their indictments sealed) or Pence (who he can' not imagine getting indicted without Trump being indicted too.)

[Anonymous]

Well at least Manafort will be enjoying his house arrest in a well-furnished home.

[Anonymous]

http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/pocket-indictment/5798/

Here’s why the sealed indictment is most likely against Trump. Because it’s in tandem with the Manafort-Gates indictment, it has to be related to the specific charges that were brought against Manafort and Gates. Those charges center around money laundering, financial fraud, and money gained as unregistered foreign agents. The list of high profile people who could be named in Indictment (A) is very small: Trump, Mike Pence, Jeff Sessions, perhaps Jared Kushner. Trump is the only one of them with financial connections to Manafort. Thus, the only logical explanation is that the sealed indictment is against Trump.

If this indictment is against Trump, it’s for financial crimes related to Manafort. That’s rather narrow, and it would only represent a small fraction of the things that Mueller wants to end up charging Trump with. Mueller can’t magically oust Trump from office simply by indicting him. Instead, he has to build up a war chest of evidence, witnesses, and indictments against Trump that he can unleash in order to make the overwhelming case that Trump is criminally culpable – because the ouster of a sitting president is still largely a political process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/pocket-indictment/5798/

Here’s why the sealed indictment is most likely against Trump. Because it’s in tandem with the Manafort-Gates indictment, it has to be related to the specific charges that were brought against Manafort and Gates. Those charges center around money laundering, financial fraud, and money gained as unregistered foreign agents. The list of high profile people who could be named in Indictment (A) is very small: Trump, Mike Pence, Jeff Sessions, perhaps Jared Kushner. Trump is the only one of them with financial connections to Manafort. Thus, the only logical explanation is that the sealed indictment is against Trump.

If this indictment is against Trump, it’s for financial crimes related to Manafort. That’s rather narrow, and it would only represent a small fraction of the things that Mueller wants to end up charging Trump with. Mueller can’t magically oust Trump from office simply by indicting him. Instead, he has to build up a war chest of evidence, witnesses, and indictments against Trump that he can unleash in order to make the overwhelming case that Trump is criminally culpable – because the ouster of a sitting president is still largely a political process.

"Palmer Report." Bwahahahaha . . . . seriously??!?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/pocket-indictment/5798/

Here’s why the sealed indictment is most likely against Trump. Because it’s in tandem with the Manafort-Gates indictment, it has to be related to the specific charges that were brought against Manafort and Gates. Those charges center around money laundering, financial fraud, and money gained as unregistered foreign agents. The list of high profile people who could be named in Indictment (A) is very small: Trump, Mike Pence, Jeff Sessions, perhaps Jared Kushner. Trump is the only one of them with financial connections to Manafort. Thus, the only logical explanation is that the sealed indictment is against Trump.

If this indictment is against Trump, it’s for financial crimes related to Manafort. That’s rather narrow, and it would only represent a small fraction of the things that Mueller wants to end up charging Trump with. Mueller can’t magically oust Trump from office simply by indicting him. Instead, he has to build up a war chest of evidence, witnesses, and indictments against Trump that he can unleash in order to make the overwhelming case that Trump is criminally culpable – because the ouster of a sitting president is still largely a political process.

"Palmer Report." Bwahahahaha . . . . seriously??!?

Yes, Dear, seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

According to the twitterverse Indictment (A) has to be higher profile criminal that "B". Which can only be Trump, Pence or Session.

Anonymous wrote:Could also be Kushner, Ivanka or Don Jr.

It makes me sad to think that it's only one of them. Why can't it be multiple people on the same indictment, the way Manafort and Gates were indicted together?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting observation from the twitterverse:

Gates & Manafort indictment is labeled "Indictment (B)". There must be another sealed indictment. It's not Papadopolous; has diff case #.

So there is another indictment with label "Indictment (A)"...

Are we sure that it's not Papadopolous? I dont see an A on is papers, but it could be, no?

Papadopoulos's indictment has a different case number. So would an indictment against Flynn. So I think the implication is that there is another sealed indictment (A) with different charges against Manafort/Gates.

According to the twitterverse Indictment (A) has to be higher profile criminal that "B". Which can only be Trump, Pence or Session.

http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/sealed-trump-indictment/5796/

Wow. Mueller is moving fast. This is going to be a bad week for Trump.

The ‘adult daycare center’ will need to stock up on adult diapers - I'm guessing there's a lot of self-soiling today and in the near future.

When will we hear who is the subject of Indictment A?

Your crystal ball is as good as mine!