Reply to Paul Manafort's lucrative Russian connections

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Paul Manafort's lucrative Russian connections"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Actually...according to cables released by wikileaks, he was a source for US information
https://mobile.twitter.com/wikileaks/status/760111699936550912

He wasn't some Russian spy, he was the US embassies source in the Ukraine.

[/quote]

This of course assumes Wikileaks is a fully honest broker themselves. [/quote]

They can't be any less trusted than the NY Times at this point.  [/quote]

The NY Times doesn't hack emails.  Wikileaks sole purpose is to do exactly that.  Say what you will about the Times, they are still much more reliable than Wikileaks.[/quote]
The NY times based a hot piece off a pice of paper that was handwritten.  No forensic evidence found for the transactions other than conjecture.
[/quote]
The story came from Ukrainian investigators, so it's well sourced.

[quote]
More to the point, [b]wikileaks doesn't hack, they just publish.[/b]  It shows how uninformed you are.  The state dept cables are there to read and it shows Manafort was our source being utilized by the State Dept.[/quote]
Stop nitpicking, you knew what I meant.  And at best, they show Manafort trying to play both sides, which makes him even less reliable than if he were just working for the Ukrainian dictator.[/quote]
Except he didn't and you don't have proof, other than a handwritten ledger.  Even they claim they have no records of transactions.  You're grasping...[/quote]

So other than written proof, there is no proof?  Hate to tell you this, but handwritten ledgers are admissible in a court of law, and many people have gone to jail based on them.  And of course they have no record of transaction. They were CASH payments.  If there was even a hint that Hillary Clinton had received $12.7 million in cash from anyone, you'd be hitting the roof.[/quote]

I guess you haven't paid attention to the Clinton Foundation, Uranium deals an so on.

Hand written ledgers hold no legitimacy.  The 9-11 hijackers got payments in cash from the Saudis and we tracked that. [/quote]

Tell Al Capone that hand written ledgers are not legitimate.  I'm sure he'll be happy to be postumously exonerated. As for payments to highjackers, my understanding is that they were wire transfers, not suitcases full of cash. [/quote]

Game set match![/quote]

Except you're wrong and so is the PP
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/capone/caponeaccount.html

The ledgers themselves wouldn't have been enough, they had sworn testimony and other indirect evidence.  They fact he had purchased expensive items was used to sway the jury...

More to the point, written ledgers with no evidence coming from some random ledger means nothing so far.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics