Paul Manafort was Exonerated 8 Years Ago — May Call Rosenstein as First Witness

I find it hilarious you don’t even wanna know why

 

I don't need to ask myself. I'm quite sure that I knew about Paul Manafort long before you ever heard of him.

I was literally shocked when Trump picked Manafort to be his campaign manager (a point which I have made many times before on this forum).

I knew who he was, and I was well aware of his associations with slimeballs like Roger Stone.

But what really amazed me was the fact that Trump picked him despite the fact that it was open secret in Washington that Manafort was mobbed up with Russian gangsters, and had been Putin's bag man in Ukraine for years.

No elaborate conspiracy theory is necessary either.

 

They don't know that.

They only know what Fox and the talk radio tell them to believe. They are not actually following the Russia story, as you can plainly see.

Taht's why you have to keep going over the basics with them every time. They don't want to hear it.

 

So?

I don’t care about Manafort, you don’t care about Manafort. Let him.

 

other than the facts that it was 8 yrs prior to trumps election and in 2008 obama wasnt president.

 

I almost certainly voiced my reservations about him the day Trump named him.

That was about a month before Trump listed his "foreign policy team" (Carter Page and George Papadopolous), and long before we learned that his foreign policy team was "recruited" by a right wing talk radio host!

 

Guess who worked with classified data and classified networks for years.

You have no idea what you're talking about, and you're just throwing crap at the wall.

A classified network is a classified network. It is walled off both physically and virtually. Nothing gets off a classified network without the appropriate clearances and approvals.

That classified information Clinton had access to got onto her network means it was taken illegally and placed on the network illegally.

You cannot email classified data from a classified system to a non-classified system by design, o' clueless one.

There is no other way for classified information to have gotten onto her system than for it to have been intentionally placed there.

You have no clue, but please continue windmilling your arms.

 

Yay for you. Now you're appealing to your own unprovable authority. Never mind whether your experience is relevant to the case at hand. Let's assume you have a military background; I imagine the State Department handles classified materials differently than parts of the Pentagon.

Nope.

Agreed.

Incorrect.

I never said it was emailed from the classified system. FFS.

Again, the post of mine you are responding too already shows this to be nonsense.

I quoted the State Department people saying there was a lot of unclassified information on the classified network, and they routinely copied unclassified stuff off of it for use elsewhere. Are you calling them liars?

I quoted the FBI report, showing that the most Top Secret stuff found in Hillary's email was NEVER INSIDE A CLASSIFIED NETWORK. It was created outside the network and forwarded to Hillary's chief of staff, who forwarded it to Hillary. Nobody involved thought the material was classified, including the person who created it. Do you dispute the concept that not all classified information begins life inside classified networks?

I pointed out -- and I can't believe I have to say this -- that if someone sent Hillary emails containing classified information, the potential crime is on the SENDER, not the recipient. Because it would be stupid to arrest the recipient, since they have no control over what people send them. Do you believe that people should be criminally liable for what gets emailed to them?

 

You're wasting your time/

First of all. Trump is the topic.

Hillary is old news outside Limbaughlooneyland.

Second, they don't care about the facts. This is something they have all decided to believe, the facts be damned.

Why do you think Trump knows that he can lie right at them and expect them to cheer for the lies?

 

Who was exonerated 8 years ago for the same criminal complaint. Double jeopardy seems to come into play here.

 

I think it's funny. If Trump is the topic, how is what Manafort did 8 years ago a comment on what he did for the campaign?

 

Only applies if he was TRIED, which he was not.

 

Classified info is classified info, and a classified system is a classified system. The department is irrelevant.

Yes you quoted the state department saying they transferred data. I'm not calling them a liar, I'm saying you don't understand what you're talking about.

Every piece of data on a classified system, classified or not, is classified until a security officer receives a request to copy the data off the system, reviews it, and it goes through an approval process.

Oh I see. Your defense is that she created Top Secret and Secret emails in the process of doing her job on the unclass network.

Well guess what? That's no defense. That's THE REASON CLASSIFIED NETWORKS EXIST IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Oh look, another thing you're wrong about. Yes, the recipient of classified information is required to report the spillage.

https://fas.org/sgp/library/cnssi-1001.pdf

 

True. But clearly, the question becomes, when the government (Rosenstein) investigated before, the government passed on it. I'd call Rosenstein. I think that would be fun

 

Okay, so at least we're off the "classified network" irrelevancy.

Now, let me highlight a point you seem to be ignoring: The "Top Secret" stuff wasn't created by HIllary; as I have now posted THREE times, it was created by State Department employees and sent to her chief of staff, who forwarded it to her.

So here's the situation regarding those "Top Secret" documents in her email: State Department employees drafted them outside the classified system. They did not believe the documents were classified. They forwarded them to Hillary's chief of staff, obviously without "classified" markings because they didn't think the information was sensitive. He forwarded the emails to Hillary. So tell me: how is it Hillary's fault that the Top Secret documents ended up in her email, and how was she supposed to flag them when NOBODY involved in creating and sharing them thought they should be classified?

Why yes, if you receive information you know is classified, you are supposed to report it. Duh.

The mere presence of classified information in your email does not make you a criminal, however. It's a crime if you a) knew the material was classified and b) failed to report it.

Please tell me how that applies to Clinton in this case.

To review:

1. You claimed intent doesn't matter. You were wrong.
2. You claimed the mere existence of her email server proved a crime. You were wrong.
3. You claimed the only way classified material could get into her email was if it was illegally removed from a classified network. You were wrong.
4. You claimed Hillary created the "Top Secret" material herself. You were wrong.
5. Your final effort is to try to claim Hillary should have reported the "spillage", even though the information wasn't marked as classified and nobody involved in its creation or dissemination thought it should be classified. Which is a ridiculous standard.

Now please explain how I don't know what I'm talking about. And maybe try to apply it to the actual situation involving Hillary.

 

"They did not believe the documents were classified"

Right wink wink...

 

Almost certainly?

A regular Nostradamus you be; so lucky to have you we are

 

Baseless innuendo is baseless.

 

Agreed.

I'd DEFINITELY CALL HIM, were I the defense, if, for no other reason, than to demonstrate Rosenstein's GLARING conflict of interest, in altering the Witch Hunt mandate to allow the resurrection of the YEARS OLD CHARGES that Rosenstein KNOWS damned good and well, did NOT "ARISE FROM DIRECTLY INVESTIGATING RUSSIAN INTERFERNCE in the 2016 ELECTION"...

 

I quoted you......

 

And Rosenstein would just say that the Justice Department now has witnesses and evidence it did not have before. End of discussion. Not really very damning against Rosenstein. Certainly not any help to Manafort.

 

Was manafort tried and found innocent?
What I suspect happened is either he was indicted but not tried
Or he was tried and not convicted
BUT... being tried without conviction is NOT exoneration
In order to be exonerated, you first have to be convicted
Just as you cannot be pardoned without first being convicted
Manaforts lawyer himself claims manafort was “investigated”
He does not claim that manafort was tried
If he was neither tried, nor convicted... how could he be exonerated?

In any case let’s say manafort was exonerated.... who did that?
As I understand the law, A “young lawyer” is not legally empowered to find a person guilty or innocent... let alone exonerate anyone. Could someone provide details about the legal process by which rosenstein might have exonerated manafort?

 

Welks.
Put some salve on your butt

 

Actually Rosenstein wouldn't say anything except answers to the questions he was asked.