Why new report on Manafort meeting w Russia may be key for Mueller

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by PeppermintTwist, Feb 13, 2019.

  1. PeppermintTwist

    PeppermintTwist Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2014
    Messages:
    16,429
    Likes Received:
    11,912
    Trophy Points:
    113


    Isn't interesting that the Senate investigation never spoke with Manafort. This is a reoccurring theme with the GOP...ignoring the obvious and pertinent witnesses on all issues.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2019
    Bowerbird likes this.
  2. apexofpurple

    apexofpurple Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2018
    Messages:
    342
    Likes Received:
    404
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Media speculation #278,103. These hourly smoking bombshells just don't have the impact they once did. Here's how things are likely going to go:

    1. Mr Mueller will finish his report.
    2. Within minutes there will be a massive Democrat demand to see it.
    3. Blog sites and MSM dregs will start to circulate a fear that the Trump Administration is editing the report or destroying evidence - even though Mr Mueller's team was the ones destroying evidence.
    4. There will be hearings on the report - it will last over a month, possibly longer - the Dems will want to drag it out.
    5. The report will not detail any collusion, however Democrat questioning during hearings will be designed to get witnesses to admit otherwise - they will dodge the questions, media will report as if they confirmed it even when they wont be.
    6. Mr Mueller will go from hero of the nation to enemy of the people when he cannot give Democrats justification to impeach.
    7. The dust will settle and the truth that there was never any collusion will eventually be accepted.
    8. The Democrats will then pivot to the endless series of other "investigations" for which they are currently preparing for.
    9. In short time everyone will forget about this witch hunt, the money it wasted, the crimes it overlooked, and the civil rights it trampled.
     
    Dutch likes this.
  3. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    82,284
    Likes Received:
    16,859
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why would it since Manafort is allegedly guilty of things before any association with the campaign?
     
  4. highntight

    highntight Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Messages:
    3,109
    Likes Received:
    508
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'll accept the conclusion no matter which direction the axe falls, how about you?
     
    Bowerbird and MissingMayor like this.
  5. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    44,898
    Likes Received:
    26,400
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yeah that's real interesting, especially when you recall that Manafort wasn't charged for working with Russians.
     
    Dutch likes this.
  6. archives

    archives Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2016
    Messages:
    2,888
    Likes Received:
    1,984
    Trophy Points:
    113
    For beginners, meeting with Russians in Trump Tower after Junior told them he was eager and willing to meet with them to receive their aid, that alone should have triggered a need for any investigation supposedly examining Russian attempts to influence the election to interview the participants at that meeting
     
    Bowerbird and WillReadmore like this.
  7. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    82,284
    Likes Received:
    16,859
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You mean the democrat connected Russian that met with democrats before and after the Trump Tower meeting? So far all of the real evidence of Russian collusion comes from the democrats.
     
  8. apexofpurple

    apexofpurple Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2018
    Messages:
    342
    Likes Received:
    404
    Trophy Points:
    63
    You ask that as if either of us have a choice.
     
  9. highntight

    highntight Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Messages:
    3,109
    Likes Received:
    508
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Good point. It's a gesture anyway.
     
  10. Dutch

    Dutch Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    Messages:
    34,098
    Likes Received:
    5,891
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, if the evidence against Trump is direct and indisputable.

    You?
     
  11. highntight

    highntight Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Messages:
    3,109
    Likes Received:
    508
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yeah, truth is I don't expect anything major from all this.
     
  12. Arkanis

    Arkanis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2013
    Messages:
    2,328
    Likes Received:
    1,564
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's your best argument right now.

    When Trump and his son will be also accused, the next logical step is for you to pull out the Deep State conspiracy card.

    In the meantime, the Trumpsters - of which you are a part - have great difficulty explaining why so many of the President's collaborators are going to serve prison sentences, victims of an investigation that was supposed to be nothing more than a witch hunt.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2019
  13. struth

    struth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2018
    Messages:
    8,188
    Likes Received:
    3,571
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Po
    He testified in 2017
     
  14. Dutch

    Dutch Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    Messages:
    34,098
    Likes Received:
    5,891
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Arguing?

    I never argue, my friend. Debating yes, sometimes. But never argue.

    upload_2019-2-13_20-41-48.jpeg

    “Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.”
     
  15. Andrew Jackson

    Andrew Jackson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2016
    Messages:
    18,096
    Likes Received:
    9,173
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Some correct/Some incorrect
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2019

Share This Page