• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mueller team won battle to force testimony from lawyer for Manafort and Gates

Chomsky said:
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!

Why is he still giving interviews? About legal involvement?

These guys are freaking nuts!
Click to expand...

I figure it could be a reverse psychology ploy.

"Hey, there's no way they could think I did anything if I go on MSNBC."

Or, he might know he's in the clear. If he is innocent like he says, why not?
 
Cardinal said:
Don't laugh. There's a theory that Trump may be aware of his lying and believe his lies simultaneously.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that grandpa is sundowning?
 
Chomsky said:
Yeah, well take a look at my post #24 and tell me if Page is playing with a full deck?
Click to expand...

I saw that interview too. "Why is he giving interviews?" is what everybody says every time he goes on tv. Nobody can figure it out. The only reasonable theory is he's trying to demonstrate that he's too stupid to be a criminal.
 
Chomsky said:
Thanks, and fair enough.

Though it would seem the feds have to convince a judge the lawyers conspired to commit a crime. With these well experienced lawyers, it seems a reach they would now turn dirty. This stinks a little, I think.
Click to expand...

I think this from the story explains it. The lawyer didn't have to KNOWINGLY commit a crime.

New York University law professor Stephen Gillers said the judge was persuaded that there was significant evidence Manafort and Gates had duped their lawyer into sending inaccurate letters to Justice about their lobbying efforts and about what emails might exist about the work.

"Essentially, the judge is saying that it is probable or likely that the clients had a criminal or fraudulent purpose in hiring the lawyer, even if (we would hope) the lawyer did not know it," Gillers told POLITICO.
Click to expand...

But on a side note, I was always told it's better to use a lawyer-accountant for accounting, than a regular accountant. Because if the IRS inquires, an accountant must turn over all your stuff and they will do it willingly even without notice to you. However a lawyer-accountant doesn't, and will act in your best interest. You can also speak more freely to your lawyer accountant.
Click to expand...

Hmmm.... What kind of stuff are you into on your tax return? ;)
 
poweRob said:
Are you saying that grandpa is sundowning?
Click to expand...

It's not improbable. There have been multiple videos of him appearing to be clearly confused and wandering off before he could complete a ceremony or signing.
 
Winston said:
I figure it could be a reverse psychology ploy.

"Hey, there's no way they could think I did anything if I go on MSNBC."

Or, he might know he's in the clear. If he is innocent like he says, why not?
Click to expand...
Because even if we believe we're innocent, we may not be. Legal technicalities abound, even in the most altruistic pursuits.

Why anyone would talk about their personal legal issues outside of their lawyer's office, is beyond me!
 
poweRob said:
Oh dear. This is going to be just terrible news for the Clintons and probably some relative of Podesta somehow.
Click to expand...

This does not bode well for Hillary or Bill Clinton.

And Obama, even worse.
 
JasperL said:
I think this from the story explains it. The lawyer didn't have to KNOWINGLY commit a crime.





Hmmm.... What kind of stuff are you into on your tax return? ;)
Click to expand...
Hey, when it comes to government or the courts you gotta' play it safe! ;)

But thanks for your post, I think it clears things up here.

It still feels a bit greasy though, but if a judge signs off on it I guess I'm good with it.
 
Chomsky said:
Because even if we believe we're innocent, we may not be. Legal technicalities abound, even in the most altruistic pursuits.

Why anyone would talk about their personal legal issues outside of their lawyer's office, is beyond me!
Click to expand...

Always ask for a lawyer. Everyone from the detective to the judge will use you to further there career. None are your friend or are looking out for your best interest unless it coincides with their best interest.
 
Lutherf said:
This isn't a surprise. In the indictment it was disclosed that Manafort gave false statements to his attorney and his accountant. If either of those knew of the illegal acts or advised him regarding how to commit the illegal acts then they are as culpable as he is.
Click to expand...

yet there is nothing that mentions trump or indicates trump.
all the fan fair and horn blowing and stamping of feet shows that there
was no collusion by trump so far.
 
Chomsky said:
FYI -

Earlier this year a guy who writes golf books made a claim of playing golf with one of Trump's sons at the height of the recent real estate & economic crash. When the son was bragging about building a new golf course, the writer inquired as to how the Trump's could do this when no one was lending. Trump's kid replied that they had access to over a $100M from wealthy Russian investors, and there was more if they wanted.

You might be able to Google this for more info, and I make no claims as to it's accuracy. I seem to recall the writer came forward maybe in March or May. Cable news and some internet sources carried it. I saw it referred to on CNN, I believe.
Click to expand...

Thank you I will look for it.
 
Cardinal said:
For me, one theory that remains in play is that collusion is still a non-starter, and Trump sees this as simply a precursor for looking into (and possibly exposing) his finances. In the past, Trump has seemed at oddly at peace with the collusion issue, appearing more irritated than anything by how the optics reflects on his legitimacy. It's the financial angle which has consistently driven him banana-pants.
Click to expand...

I have long wondered whether his irritation related to financial questions and his refusal to divulge the details relate more to some impropriety or to the possibility that he is less rich than he represents.

He is both a crook and a grandstander, so both scenarios seem plausible to me.
 
Chomsky said:
Uh, someone help me here if you will:

"How does one force a break in attorney-client privilege?"

There must be something of which I'm unaware.
Click to expand...

"The*attorney-client privilege*protects most communications between clients and their lawyers. But, according to the crime-fraud exception to the privilege, a client’s communication to her attorney isn’t privileged if she made it with the intention of committing or covering up a crime or fraud."

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/the-crime-fraud-exception-the-attorney-client-privilege.html
 
Winston said:
This does not bode well for Hillary or Bill Clinton.

And Obama, even worse.
Click to expand...

It's kind of odd how Mueller is going after Manafort so "aggressively", yet we have the elephant in the room in the form of all this information about Clinton/Obama/Podesta taking money from Russia. The $500k paid to Bill Clinton alone is enough for an investigation. Yet, nothing, so far.

And Mueller, friends with Comey and the Clintons, should have turned down this assignment because of his relationships with these perps. Of course, he didn't. That is a very bad sign, and tells you a lot about him. For this reason alone, there needs to be an impartial SC appointed.

But, we shall see where this goes.
 
Anthony60 said:
It's kind of odd how Mueller is going after Manafort so "aggressively", yet we have the elephant in the room in the form of all this information about Clinton/Obama/Podesta taking money from Russia. The $500k paid to Bill Clinton alone is enough for an investigation. Yet, nothing, so far.

And Mueller, friends with Comey and the Clintons, should have turned down this assignment because of his relationships with these perps. Of course, he didn't. That is a very bad sign, and tells you a lot about him. For this reason alone, there needs to be an impartial SC appointed.

But, we shall see where this goes.
Click to expand...

Mueller is investigating the Podesta Group, so I imagine that will soften the Republicans' viewpoint of him a certain amount. Personally, I'm all up for making up a story that claims Mueller is investigating Clinton personally.
 
Cardinal said:
Has somebody suggested otherwise?
Click to expand...

back peddling from the months and months of trump colluded with russian hmm interesting.
even though you were told time and time again that no evidence existed, and well so far still
no evidence that trump did anything wrong.
 
Anthony60 said:
It's kind of odd how Mueller is going after Manafort so "aggressively", yet we have the elephant in the room in the form of all this information about Clinton/Obama/Podesta taking money from Russia. The $500k paid to Bill Clinton alone is enough for an investigation. Yet, nothing, so far.

And Mueller, friends with Comey and the Clintons, should have turned down this assignment because of his relationships with these perps. Of course, he didn't. That is a very bad sign, and tells you a lot about him. For this reason alone, there needs to be an impartial SC appointed.

But, we shall see where this goes.
Click to expand...

Do you honestly think the mueller is going to even touch the clintons or now it looks like obama?
hell no he isn't.

over half his lawyer staff support both clinton and obama.
 
ludin said:
back peddling from the months and months of trump colluded with russian hmm interesting.
even though you were told time and time again that no evidence existed, and well so far still
no evidence that trump did anything wrong.
Click to expand...

Why did you expect that charges against Manafort would be connected to Trump or about collusion?
 
ludin said:
over half his lawyer staff support both clinton and obama.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting claim. Can you support that?
 
Cardinal said:
Why did you expect that charges against Manafort would be connected to Trump?
Click to expand...

i know backpedaling is hard so. you have a lot of it to do.
PS we are still waiting for evidence that trump broke any laws regarding the election with regards to russia.

since collusion is not really a crime as we have stated time and time again you should be able to support the claims
you have been shouting for months.

so i will again be waiting for evidence that trump did anything illegal.
I mean after all that is what this investigation was supposed to be about.

yet trump isn't mentioned anywhere from what i have read or seen.
 
ludin said:
back peddling from the months and months of trump colluded with russian hmm interesting.
even though you were told time and time again that no evidence existed, and well so far still
no evidence that trump did anything wrong.
Click to expand...

The special counsel was appointed to determine if and how Russia interfered in the 2016 election, not to uncover evidence of collusion between Russia and the current president's campaign (unless that did happen).

I do not think that the investigation is back peddling from anything; and it's certainly far from finished.
 
ludin said:
i know backpedaling is hard so. you have a lot of it to do.
Click to expand...

Really? Am I backpedaling away from claiming that Manafort was charged for collusion? Funny thing is, I don't recall making that claim in the first place. Can you quote it for me?

ludin said:
PS we are still waiting for evidence that trump broke any laws regarding the election with regards to russia.

since collusion is not really a crime as we have stated time and time again you should be able to support the claims
you have been shouting for months.

so i will again be waiting for evidence that trump did anything illegal.
I mean after all that is what this investigation was supposed to be about.

yet trump isn't mentioned anywhere from what i have read or seen.
Click to expand...

Oh, well so long as you're willing to wait, then.
 
ludin said:
Do you honestly think the mueller is going to even touch the clintons or now it looks like obama?
hell no he isn't.

over half his lawyer staff support both clinton and obama.
Click to expand...

When has there ever been an impartial investigation into the corruption that is our government. It will always be the 2 corrupt parties fighting for control of our money and the power our government wields across the world. Justice is nothing but a pawn used to try and hurt the other side while their side furthers their agenda of becoming rich and powerful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom