Papadopoulos was in contact with senior members of Trump's campaign staff

Really? You've been contending that Papadopolous comminications and contacts were illegal. You denied Mueller had yet to determine so ... but he has. You 1st claim Papadopolous wasn't prosecuted, then in #191, the fact you feel cheated out of the public spectacle you'd relish is obvious.

 

1 more lie to add to the list? Care to post the amended indictment that reflects Papadopolous charges were reduced to a lesser crime? I also think you've embellished Papadopolous subsequent cooperation with Mueller. Nothing demonstrates Papadopolous covertly collected anything for Mueller. Papadopolous gave Mueller an accounting of who was informed of what, and was likely directed to resume his normal routine. You can't provide anything to suggest otherwise. You sound like someone who's writing a fictional political thriller, who'll include the ambiguous disclaimer: "based on actual events".

 

Papadopolous was an unknown 5 months ago, but as I stated to the poster who said Trump should be charged with perjury, Trump never gave testimony, although he offered. Your "technicalities" are legal statutes. Sorry you find them inconvenient. Trump can't be indicted, so the grand jury is moot.

 

BTW ... Comey won't " take Trump up on " anything ... ready or not! You seem flustered.

 

No, he cannot be subpoenaed as long as it is government and politics related. Even beyond that a court has to approve a subpoena to appear for any reason in front of a grand jury, ala Bill Clinton -- and that is dicey. As a matter of fact a sitting president, like in-session congressmen, are above the law, in that neither can be arrested or investigated by outside sources. A president can be charged with a crime only after being impeached and removed from office.

 

I asked you quote me. What you think is a lie. You did not do that. To be perfectly honest, I have no idea what you are talking about in this post. What you are saying has nothing to do with what I have said.

Which is why you didn't quote me. Instead, you made it up. You are making yourself look silly.

 

I am not going to waste my time researching what you should already know about Papa. Obviously, that is your purpose. I have better things to do.

What I have said about Papa is the truth. Mueller allowed him to plead to a lesser charge for a lesser sentence so that he would become an informant. If you are unaware of all that, you don't belong in this conversation.

 

The President can be subpoenaed for a crime, such as, for example, collaboration with a hostile foreign power.

I am aware of that. This whole time I have been talking about impeachment, not what happens after impeachment and Senate trial. You are getting way ahead of me.

 

Oops, working too fast again. Obviously, I meant, "I am reasonably certain that Mueller will take Trump up on his offer when he is ready, and not before."

Not flustered. So many threads and so little time.

 

I'll go slow one last time. Accept it or not. T h e p r e s i d e n t c a n n o t b e s u b p o e n a e d f o r a n y t h i n g i n a p o l i t i c a l c o n t e x t. -- e v e r (while president).

[sorry, PF won't accept extra spacing.]

 

~~~~
Surely you are claiming that like CNN and WaPo the CNBC report is the epitome of Truth in reporting and Just-Us.

 

Its all about money laundering...

The Questionable Math Behind Manafort's Extravagant Home ...

https://www.bloomberg.com/.../the-questionable-math-behind-manafort-s-extravagant...
3 days ago - Ross Delston, a Washington attorney and money laundering expert, ... In the case of ahome contractor, payments would include the cost of ...

 

You're right ... I don't belong on this thread.

 

Having oppo research done is altogether different from the act of trying to procure oppo research from the government of a foreign adversary. I don't get why you guys can't see the difference.

 

~~~~
Your source didn't work: This one does.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ehind-manafort-s-extravagant-home-renovations

Tucker Carlson Source: Podesta Brothers and Manafort, Not Trump ...
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/.../tucker_carlson_source_podesta_brothers_and_m...
Oct 25, 2017 - Before last night's show was even over, we got an email from a man with direct ... In fact, Paul Manafort spent years working with The Podesta Group on ... as a hunt for collusion between Donald Trump's presidential campaign and ..... Of course, as a long time carrier of the Clinton's polluted water, and as a ...

~~~~~~~~~~~~​

Paul Manafort's renovation payments come under scrutiny
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...fort-s-renovation-payments-come-scrutiny.html
1 day ago - Money Paul Manafort spent renovating two homes in New York has been ... Brit publicist at the centre of Trump Russian collusion. ... says Manafort relied on $18 million in 'laundered' funds to live his lavish lifestyle. ... The Questionable Math Behind Manafort's Extravagant Home ...... Here comes the booty!

~~~~
So what you're claiming is that Trump planted Manafort in the Clinton/Podesta camp years ago? Ross Delston a Democrat Operative?

 

Duplicate deleted....

 

I understood it the first time. Did you understand my reply? Hint: My reply had nothing to do with a political context.

 

I have nothing to do with this blogger, the story, or CNBC. Your desperation is showing.

 

If you know so little about Papa and Mueller that you have to ask me about common knowledge, perhaps you are right.

 

What are you talking about?

 

""If true," Carlson said, the story weaved by the source shows the media is focusing on the wrong Russia story."

We don't know that its true. We don't know the name of the source. Fox is so pro-Trump I call it the Trump Network. Carlson, Pirro, and Hannity are Trump lackeys. Anything they say should be taken with a grain of salt.

You are overlooking the fact that Manafort was Trump's campaign manager for the Republican National Convention and for a period of three months.

 

WASHINGTON — President Trump's Twitter habit may become a legal liability for him, as his latest tweets about the Russia investigation could help build a potential case against him for obstruction of justice or witness intimidation, legal experts say.

After news broke last month that George Papadopoulos, a former foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign, revealed that he is cooperating with special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Trump tweeted that Papadopoulos is "a liar."

Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to lying to FBI agents about his contacts during the campaign with a professor he believed "had substantial connections to Russian government officials," according to court documents unsealed by Mueller. The professor offered Papadopoulos thousands of emails containing "dirt" on Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

Trump's tweets about indictments in the Russia probe "could be used to further support a case against him for obstruction of justice," said Barry Berke, a partner at the New York law firm of Kramer Levin Naftalis and Frankel.

Trump also tweeted that Mueller's indictment of his former campaign manager, Paul Manafort, had nothing to do with his campaign and that Mueller should be going after Democrats instead. Mueller indicted Manafort and his associate Rick Gates on charges that they secretly worked on behalf of pro-Russian factions in Ukraine, laundered millions of dollars in profits through foreign bank accounts, and sought to cover up their work while they held senior roles in Trump’s campaign.

"To the extent the president’s tweets regarding the indictment of Manafort and Gates or the cooperation of Papadopoulos are knowingly false and intended to mislead investigators, influence the testimony of others or cover up what actually occurred, that could support an obstruction of justice case," Berke said.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...contribute-obstruction-intimidatio/872567001/

 

I'm left wondering why you'd author a thread on Papadopolous if you have no desire to debate, or educate on the subject as you infer. As you, without exception, demand that I support my assertions by providing links, I see no reason not to hold you to the same standard. Here ... let me help. http://thehill.com/homenews/news/35...dictment-against-an-ex-trump-campaign-adviser Just highlight the more serious charges that were reduced ... or maybe the charges related to Russians. Note the title: "full indictment" ... see, pages, like amended charges and "nolle prosequi" are added to original indictments. Pages are NEVER removed from the original indictment.

 

You talked about Mueller's investigation,, the possibility of being called to testify for congressional committees, and being subpoenaed by Mueller's grand juries: all political/government, i.e. non-private, and can't be done.

 

You are not making any sense. I have made it very clear I am talking about Trump being called to testify in a criminal matter. The allegation that he and his staff collaborated with a hostile foreign power.

Are you wasting my time by acting stupid?

This issue is now being dropped.