(01-09-2019 11:24 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 09:39 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Why would a high ranking official in the trump campaign be giving internal polling data to Russians if not to be used by them to try and effect our election?

And if you say, we don't know it was internal data, why would he need to give them public data when it's already public?

Inquiring minds want to know...what did the current president know and when did he know it?

Quote:Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort has been accused of sharing polling data during the 2016 presidential election with a business associate allegedly linked to Russian intelligence -- and then lying about it to prosecutors.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team said Manafort “lied about sharing polling data with Mr. Kilimnik related to the 2016 presidential campaign.” The accusation was revealed by mistake in a defense filing Tuesday after the information wasn’t properly redacted as intended.

The filing sheds light on Manafort’s ties to Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian-Ukrainian businessman who was charged last year with tampering with potential witnesses. The U.S. claims Kilimnik is linked to Russian intelligence, which is accused of leading the election interference effort in 2016, but he denies those ties.

Manafort accused of sharing polling data with Russian allegedly linked to Kremlin

The why is actually quite simple.

Russia, we are going to win this election and you will be dealing with us.

We want to discuss x, y, and z with you. Please be ready to talk.

And that's essentially what Flynn DID do, and that was after they were elected. But, they look hard enough for a crime and they're damn well gonna find one. Esp when they already have tapes of the conversation.

Now they've got a 70 something YO man locked in solitary.

I feel much safer already.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/01/l...usion.html


The GOP have no shame.........

Any of you yahootsvstill saying there was no collusion.....

(01-09-2019 08:40 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/01/l...usion.html


The GOP have no shame.........

Any of you yahootsvstill saying there was no collusion.....

That article or opinion piece is laughably stupid. It assumes collusion and twists pieces of information to fit that narrative even when those pieces might tend to exonorate manafort.

(01-09-2019 04:53 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 03:30 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 02:25 PM)Jugnaut Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 02:09 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 01:25 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  So what is the issue?
Looks like, hey, let’s just keep throwing irrelevant or immaterial stuff up on the wall, and hope to keep Trump too distracted or preoccupied to function.

Gee...I dunno...maybe a senior trump official giving RNC data to Russians for a social media campaign to help the RNC candidate win the election. If that's not a crime, then fine. But I'd like to have you make the case that you'd be totally fine with any democrat doing the same thing in the future. I'll hang up and wait for that defense.......

There are a lot of assumptions there. No mention in any article that it was RNC data. We dont even know whether it was public or private polling data, whether the allegatiom is even true that he shared anything, that the Ukrainian businessman is actually a Russian asset, that Manafort knew he was a russian asset and not just an associate of manafort, and further that the data was shared with the purpose of having russia aid the Trump campaign.

Yes, but why would Manafort need to give anyone information that is already public?

Why not?

Exactly, I'm sure everyone on here shares interesting news stories etc with family and friends. This could easily be as innocuous as that. Mueller is going after Manafort for allegedly lying about the sharing of polling data, not the sharing of the data itself, i.e. another process crime.

(01-09-2019 12:15 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 11:09 AM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 10:54 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Those goal post.........


They a movin

Yeah, it would have been nice if the Muller investigation hadn't constantly moved the goal post and just stuck with the agenda, i.e. Russian collusion. Instead we have guys brought up on charges of taxes, process crimes, etc. I guess it is just the Democrat way to shift the argument to suit their need.

A G A I N, go back and read the document authorizing the special counsel. Collusion is not mentioned.

Neither is any crime. So get on the record. Are you in favor of unlimited investigations being started on administrations with no crime suspected? Let us know, inquiring minds want to know.

(01-09-2019 02:09 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 01:25 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 09:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 09:50 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  What crime was committed?

Not the issue.

So what is the issue?

Looks like, hey, let’s just keep throwing irrelevant or immaterial stuff up on the wall, and hope to keep Trump too distracted or preoccupied to function.

Gee...I dunno...maybe a senior trump official giving RNC data to Russians for a social media campaign to help the RNC candidate win the election. If that's not a crime, then fine. But I'd like to have you make the case that you'd be totally fine with any democrat doing the same thing in the future. I'll hang up and wait for that defense.......

Like Hillary Clinton did? You all seem to be fine with that.
Besides this was all started as a false flag operation to cover up the lefts own law breaking. They all consider themselves ‘to big to fail’.

Refute these facts. Anyone.

What we have here is a criminal investigation without a crime into an incoming administration being started by the holdovers from the previous administration based on unsubstantiated opposition campaign research provided by unknown Russians and being carried out by an obviously partisan group of investigators.

Nothing unusual about that is there?

THIS IS COLLUSION...... So when Orange hair tweets no collusion you know he's a damn dirty liar.

We've come a long ways from that press conference where the liar in chief says Russia is a ruse.....


and .......


wait for it..................


This was Manafort's lawyers admitting in a court filing that Manafort shared it. He has lied to the prosecutor's violating his plea agreement. None of this has come from Mueller......

bwahhhhaaaaaaaaaa

VINDICATION........... will soon be here............... You guys wanted this thing to end like a season of 24. I said. Now just wait. Let's see what comes of it. I knew he was guilty ALL ALONG but we didn't have a smoking gun. This is a smoking gun........

CAN'T WAIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We’re back to collusion this month. Gotcha.

(01-10-2019 08:58 AM)gdunn Wrote:  We’re back to collusion this month. Gotcha.

It's like a reoccurring wet dream for the Ds. Unfortunately, one day they'll have to wake up. It's going b toe another Maddow tax return moment.

Turns out, this story was FAKE NEWS.

Once again.

NYT's had to print a retraction.

Nice job lefties, you got hoodwinked again.

(01-10-2019 08:58 AM)gdunn Wrote:  We’re back to collusion this month. Gotcha.

Well they say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and exepecting a different result. How many times has Mach, the Putin puppet, repeated the same things?

(01-10-2019 09:15 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Turns out, this story was FAKE NEWS.

Once again.

NYT's had to print a retraction.

Nice job lefties, you got hoodwinked again.

lol, yet another boomerang and dreams derailed.

And people wonder why anyone with a brain does not believe ANYTHING the MSM reports these days. They did it to themselves and keep doing it as evidenced by this latest example.

(01-10-2019 09:15 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Turns out, this story was FAKE NEWS.

Once again.

NYT's had to print a retraction.

Nice job lefties, you got hoodwinked again.

bahahahahahahahahaha!!!!

Quote:Correction: January 9, 2019
A previous version of this article misidentified the people to whom Paul Manafort wanted a Russian associate to send polling data. Mr. Manafort wanted the data sent to two Ukrainian oligarchs, Serhiy Lyovochkin and Rinat Akhmetov, not to Oleg V. Deripaska, a Russian oligarch close to the Kremlin.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/08/us/po...imnik.html