Paul Manafort breaches plea agreement, likely to receive 20+ years in jail

[Xzi]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...c76d5a-f18d-11e8-aeea-b85fd44449f5_story.html

Seems like associates of Trump have a very hard time sticking to the truth on any given subject, although that's probably not a shocker to anybody. This story broke yesterday and Trump is of course rage tweeting about it today. It also broke today that Manafort held secret talks with Julian Assange months before e-mails hacked by Russia were published. Another piece of the puzzle fits into place:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...cret-talks-with-assange-in-ecuadorian-embassy

It feels like a lot more dominoes are getting ready to fall soon after the Democrat-majority Congress is seated. Mueller's investigation is getting to about the length that the Watergate investigation was when it started to wrap up, so hang on to your butts.

 

[Taleweaver]

That's a weird move. Assange is, in a way, imprisoned in an embassy for years now It's not someone you can just pay a visit anonymously. So why did Manafort lie about this? Of course that sort of information comes to light, so why deny it in the first place?

Of course it's pretty convenient to notice that Russians visited as well, but again : it's an embassy. That doesn't really show anything. In any case: I hope it'll lead to something.

 

[SG854]

They really crussified Assange after all the stuff he leaked. He public enemy number 1 for the U.S. And they are trying their best to slander this guy.

We found out with WikiLeaks that Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party influenced the Republican Primaries and made sure that Trump was the Republican Nominee. Polls were showing that other Republican Canidates would’ve beaten Hillary in the General Election. She thought she had a better chance beating Trump because people didn’t like him.

Hillary blames WikiLeaks was the reason she lost the election, but why? It’s because she was doing illegal corrupt things that Wikileaks showed. And now she’s targeting Assange and blaming him for colluding with Russians. Even if he did get the emails from the Russians how does that help her case? She still did illegal stuff.

 

[Xzi]

Even if he did get the emails from the Russians how does that help her case?

It doesn't help Hillary's case because Hillary Clinton is not dealing with any sort of lawsuit or investigation. She's not involved in Paul Manafort's (likely Trump-ordered) collusion with the Russians in any way. Can we just not with the whataboutism?

I do have a good reason for posting an update, though. Turns out Manafort's lawyers were talking to Trump's lawyers about Mueller's questions and the answers being given the entire time. Which means Trump very likely submitted a lot of written lies to Mueller based on what Manafort believed he was getting away with:

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-lawy...nafort-often-shared-mueller-questions-1234622

Mueller had requested a 10 day delay on Manafort's cooperation report so that he didn't have to reveal the fact that he was pulling the plea deal prior to Trump submitting written testimony. The real 4D chess right here. When the full investigation report drops, expect several counts of perjury and probably one or two counts of obstruction, in addition to either a collusion or conspiracy charge.

 

[Viri]

They really crussified Assange after all the stuff he leaked. He public enemy number 1 for the U.S. And they are trying their best to slander this guy.

I hope one day he can get out. Likewise with Edward Snowden being banished to Russia. He deserves a pardon. Fuck the NSA!

 

[Xzi]

I hope one day he can get out. Likewise with Edward Snowden being banished to Russia. He deserves a pardon. Fuck the NSA!

Snowden deserves a pardon because he brought valuable information to the public. Assange is essentially a foreign intelligence officer for exclusively Russian interests now, so fuck him. Last net positive thing Wikileaks released was the Panama Papers, and they were released elsewhere anyway.

 

[Taleweaver]

Hillary blames WikiLeaks was the reason she lost the election, but why? It’s because she was doing illegal corrupt things that Wikileaks showed. And now she’s targeting Assange and blaming him for colluding with Russians. Even if he did get the emails from the Russians how does that help her case? She still did illegal stuff.

To be more precise: she lost the election because her one flaw* - using a private mail server rather than the government's - was framed as if it was somehow not even comparable but even worse than the numerous scandals that Donald Trump is involved in. Heck...his own child does the very same thing, so surely it's not THAT "illegal corrupt".


*okay: two, if you consider "using her influence in the party to chose her as presidential candidate over a better one" as something other than 'the way politics are'.

 

[SG854]

It doesn't help Hillary's case because Hillary Clinton is not dealing with any sort of lawsuit or investigation. She's not involved in Paul Manafort's (likely Trump-ordered) collusion with the Russians in any way. Can we just not with the whataboutism?

I do have a good reason for posting an update, though. Turns out Manafort's lawyers were talking to Trump's lawyers about Mueller's questions and the answers being given the entire time. Which means Trump very likely submitted a lot of written lies to Mueller based on what Manafort believed he was getting away with:

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-lawy...nafort-often-shared-mueller-questions-1234622

Mueller had requested a 10 day delay on Manafort's cooperation report so that he didn't have to reveal the fact that he was pulling the plea deal prior to Trump submitting written testimony. The real 4D chess right here. When the full investigation report drops, expect several counts of perjury and probably one or two counts of obstruction, in addition to either a collusion or conspiracy charge.

Right after Wikileaks told them that it was a false news they altered the original publication without announcing to anyone they did.

First it was absolute certainty he coluded, then they altered it so that they can avoid repercussion if people find out the story is not true by saying we are not 100% sure but “sources” say.

Wikileaks bets 1 million they never met.
Manafort says story is not true.
Gaurdian altered original article.
Their sources is “unnamed” Code for its all made up.

So no evidence for anything. They don’t present it. And Wikileaks has an extremely good track record for truth. Everything they have said was true.

The media is manipulating you to hate Assange, this isn’t new. And I highly doubt it’s an honest mistake and correction. They do this all the time, they purposely generate fake news to get clicks, then they edit the story after.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...ell-manafort-wikileaks-story-softens-language

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

To be more precise: she lost the election because her one flaw* - using a private mail server rather than the government's - was framed as if it was somehow not even comparable but even worse than the numerous scandals that Donald Trump is involved in. Heck...his own child does the very same thing, so surely it's not THAT "illegal corrupt".


*okay: two, if you consider "using her influence in the party to chose her as presidential candidate over a better one" as something other than 'the way politics are'.

I’m talking about the fact that Hillary approved $80 billion in weapons deal to Saudi Arabia which allowed the Kingdom to carry out a war in Yemen. That caused food shortages and thousands to die.

She believe that Wallstreet would best mange the economy which contradicted her promises.

From 1,700 of her emails we found out she was the primary architect of the war in Libya. The war in Libya left things in chaos which gave rise to radical Jihadists and triggered huge migration to Europe.

These were some of the things wikileaks leaked that caused her to election.

 

[Xzi]

First it was absolute certainty he coluded, then they altered it so that they can avoid repercussion if people find out the story is not true by saying we are not 100% sure but “sources” say.

The man who knows for certain is Robert Mueller. And I'm guessing the release timing of the story isn't coincidence. Obviously this is all speculation until the full investigation report comes to light, but I'm betting this information is at least part of what caused Manafort to break his plea deal and lie. He didn't want to admit to further crimes that weren't covered by the plea deal.

So no evidence for anything. They don’t present it. And Wikileaks has an extremely good track record for truth. Everything they have said was true.

Horse shit. Not everything they have posted has been corroborated by a second source, and they've grown blatantly more and more partisan since the 2016 election. They're also very selective about what they omit (RNC docs and Russian government docs), and that's what you're willfully choosing not to see.

 

[barronwaffles]

Sucking the dick of your own fucked up intel/propaganda agencies just to score points online over Trump.

Noice.

 

[SG854]

The man who knows for certain is Robert Mueller. And I'm guessing the release timing of the story isn't coincidence. Obviously this is all speculation until the full investigation report comes to light, but I'm betting this information is at least part of what caused Manafort to break his plea deal and lie. He didn't want to admit to further crimes that weren't covered by the plea deal.


Horse shit. Not everything they have posted has been corroborated by a second source, and they've grown blatantly more and more partisan since the 2016 election. They're also very selective about what they omit (RNC docs and Russian government docs), and that's what you're willfully choosing not to see.

Name specifics on what they omit. What specifics do they exaclty omit so I can read up on it.

 

[Xzi]

Name specifics on what they omit. What specifics do they exaclty omit so I can read up on it.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/1...-government-during-u-s-presidential-campaign/

https://www.thedailybeast.com/wikileaks-hid-documents-showing-syrian-deposits-in-russian-bank

https://www.thedailybeast.com/report-russian-hackers-had-rnc-data-but-didnt-release-it

Assange himself admits that Wikileaks doesn't publish anything on Trump or the Republicans. His only excuse is that they "don't have anything more damaging than what comes out of his own mouth," but that's a poor excuse. If Wikileaks goal is transparency, then you're not going to get that by only publishing documents from specific political parties or countries.

 

[Taleweaver]

I’m talking about the fact that Hillary approved $80 billion in weapons deal to Saudi Arabia which allowed the Kingdom to carry out a war in Yemen. That caused food shortages and thousands to die.

She believe that Wallstreet would best mange the economy which contradicted her promises.

From 1,700 of her emails we found out she was the primary architect of the war in Libya. The war in Libya left things in chaos which gave rise to radical Jihadists and triggered huge migration to Europe.

These were some of the things wikileaks leaked that caused her to election.

That's pretty bad, indeed. Luckily, she didn't become president, and the current one would never do such a thing.

Well...except, that in reality Trump signed a $110 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia after only a couple months in office.

As for your next two phrases: care to share some sources? I've got a feeling that this "we" that discovered those bits of info aren't out for the truth but for slandering.

 

[SG854]

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/1...-government-during-u-s-presidential-campaign/

https://www.thedailybeast.com/wikileaks-hid-documents-showing-syrian-deposits-in-russian-bank

https://www.thedailybeast.com/report-russian-hackers-had-rnc-data-but-didnt-release-it

Assange himself admits that Wikileaks doesn't publish anything on Trump or the Republicans. His only excuse is that they "don't have anything more damaging than what comes out of his own mouth," but that's a poor excuse. If Wikileaks goal is transparency, then you're not going to get that by only publishing documents from specific political parties or countries.

For those articles it’s acussations without proof.

The articles mentions that Russians hacked both the DNC and the RNC, but we know that there was no Russian hack.

They were leaked because Podesta replied to an Email and gave his password away. This wasn’t a high profile hack. That’s him not being careful. Yet Hillary knows this and still blamed that Russia hacked and gave the emails to Assange without any proof.

It’s just scapegoating. And it makes me supicious that the article mentions Russians hacked both the DNC and the RNC, when they didn’t even give the DNC emails to Assange to begin with. So what makes me think they did the same with the RNC.

Assange himself said those claims of missing Emails are false. It clearly says that in the Article you linked. And he threatened the Daily Dot with retaliation for posting false claims.

That's pretty bad, indeed. Luckily, she didn't become president, and the current one would never do such a thing.

Well...except, that in reality Trump signed a $110 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia after only a couple months in office.

As for your next two phrases: care to share some sources? I've got a feeling that this "we" that discovered those bits of info aren't out for the truth but for slandering.

I’m only saying why Hilary lost. I remember specifically people say they would rather vote Trump, even many Bernie Supporters. Me saying why Hillary lost doesn’t mean I support everything Trump. I’m only giving reason why people did.

I never stated you specifically that you are just slandering, I’m specifically talking about the Democratic politicians which I see seperate from the voters.

It’s slandering because it’s accusations without proof. They been trying to ruin this mans reputation and trying to get people to turn on him without any evidence for their accusations. It’s Russia this and Russia that.

I already stated my source Wikileaks.

 

[radicalwookie]

please for the love of god could you please leave at least Temp free of this politics toxicity

 

[ShonenJump]

please for the love of god could you please leave at least Temp free of this politics toxicity

then change your preferences so they won't show up

 

[sarkwalvein]

Wouldn't friends of a(ny) president receive presidential pardon anyway?

 

[brickmii82]

Wouldn't friends of a(ny) president receive presidential pardon anyway?

https://nypost.com/2018/11/28/trump-says-pardon-for-paul-manafort-still-a-possibility/

 

[Xzi]

The articles mentions that Russians hacked both the DNC and the RNC, but we know that there was no Russian hack.

There's no discussion to be had here if we can't agree on the facts, and we obviously can't. Every US intelligence agency confirmed that it was state-sponsored Russian hackers that went after the DNC/RNC. Specifically the GRU. At the time, everybody was trying to portray these hackers as "Guccifer 2.0," including Roger Stone who is likely now facing indictment from the Mueller investigation. His associate, Jerome Corsi, is expecting to spend the rest of his life in jail after rejecting a supposed plea deal.

https://nypost.com/2018/11/29/roger...-corsi-i-might-die-in-jail-for-helping-trump/

Conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi, who is an associate of Roger Stone, said Wednesday that he “might die in jail” and admitted he wanted to get stolen Hillary Clinton emails to the Trump campaign.

In any case, we know Trump has been getting played like a fiddle by Mueller throughout this investigation, and the noose is now starting to tighten:

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profil...eller-just-played-donald-trump-like-a-fiddle/

We're going to see indictments for all that "nothing" Trump has done soon enough, so just be patient.



EDIT: Just as I say that, there's new information today. Turns out Trump was planning to build a tower in Moscow, and these plans were being made during the 2016 campaign. Michael Cohen recently confessed to this:

https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/...-lawyer-is-making-a-surprise-court-appearance

Cohen also now has a plea agreement with the Mueller investigation, in addition to the plea agreement he had with the Southern district of New York.

 

[SG854]

There's no discussion to be had here if we can't agree on the facts, and we obviously can't. Every US intelligence agency confirmed that it was state-sponsored Russian hackers that went after the DNC/RNC. Specifically the GRU. At the time, everybody was trying to portray these hackers as "Guccifer 2.0," including Roger Stone who is likely now facing indictment from the Mueller investigation. His associate, Jerome Corsi, is expecting to spend the rest of his life in jail after rejecting a supposed plea deal.

https://nypost.com/2018/11/29/roger...-corsi-i-might-die-in-jail-for-helping-trump/



In any case, we know Trump has been getting played like a fiddle by Mueller throughout this investigation, and the noose is now starting to tighten:

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profil...eller-just-played-donald-trump-like-a-fiddle/

We're going to see indictments for all that "nothing" Trump has done soon enough, so just be patient.



EDIT: Just as I say that, there's new information today. Turns out Trump was planning to build a tower in Moscow, and these plans were being made during the 2016 campaign. Michael Cohen recently confessed to this:

https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/...-lawyer-is-making-a-surprise-court-appearance

Cohen also now has a plea agreement with the Mueller investigation, in addition to the plea agreement he had with the Southern district of New York.

The Intelligence Agency said it was Russia without any evidence. And we know they’ve been working to promote Hillary.

That first link says he was an intermediary but doesn’t explain how the Emails were leaked.

We know how they got leaked because Podesta fell for an Email scam. Someone tricked him that he needed to change his password and he typed it. It could’ve been anyone and not specifically Russia. It’s a simple scam a 12 year old could do it.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vo...28/13456368/how-john-podesta-email-got-hacked

Even if Russia gave the Emails to Assange you give no reason as to why this is a bad thing. Why is it bad that he is exposing the corrupt politics of the Hilary campaign. The only reason you gave was the he’s working for Russia so F*** him.

Shouldn’t we know that Hillary screwed over Bernie Sanders. Shouldn’t we know that what they are doing behind the scenes is manipulative. So why should Assange be criminalized? Or should he be considered a criminal only because people try link him with Trump and Russia. And if they never linked to Trump to begin with then would have people respected what Assange did.