• 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!

Manafort sues Mueller, Justice Department over Russia probe

holbritter said:
Agreed. Add to that:
and


from a link posted in #21

Just when I'm on board with what Mueller and the crew are doing, I read that crap. Hypocrisy pushes me to argue for the unfairly targeted. If you are going to apply the law, you should do so equally, or all it does look like a witch hunt.
Click to expand...

We don't know that Abedin won't be charged with anything. The investigation isn't over by any means.
 
trouble13 said:
Its not a crime to have financial ties with foreigners.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You're exactly right. And that's why it's a good thing he wasn't charged with that and didn't plead guilty to that.
 
danarhea said:
When Ken Starr was appointed special prosecutor to investigate Whitewater, he was given exactly the same instructions, which was to also investigate anything arising out of that investigation. This eventually led to Monica Lewinski. If you are attempting to shovel an argument that what was OK for Clinton is not OK for any member of the Trump team, then your slip is showing, and "political hackery" and "dishonesty" are embroidered on it in huge red letters.
Click to expand...

You nevertrumpers just can't stop talking about the Clintons!
 
Hawkeye10 said:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-...-justice-department-over-russia-probe-n834431

He should be right, and he might find a judge to rule in his favor, but the work of THE HATCHET MAN (My term for Mueller..which I claim is the real job he was hired to do)) will not be impeded by those lower judges I spect, and I cant imagine SCOTUS getting in his way now that they are primarily a political body rather than a legal body.
Click to expand...

This is how I see it: It's a delaying tactic.

Manafort sees what's happening with the Congressional committees turning their sights onto political corruption in the DOJ and FBI...which includes this whole Trump/Russia narrative. If it's found that the narrative was concocted by a group in this Obama administration, this will remove any justification for an investigation into Trump/Russia. The reason for Mueller's job will evaporate. If that happens, Manafort's case will become the purview of the IRS...where it rightfully belongs...and where it would likely fade away.

So...IF all that happens, Manafort essentially walks. If all that DOESN'T happen, he will have delayed Mueller for some period of time. Manafort loses nothing by this suit and has a possibility of walking away scott free. Yeah...if I was in his position and had his money, I think I'd do the same thing.
 
JasperL said:
Interesting. Could you find a more biased editorial to cite? It will be difficult. They guy is literally a lobbyist and shill for the GOP - that is his job.
Click to expand...

The hill is a respected source that gets posted all the time around here.
your ad hominem is meaningless.
 
lurchadams said:
The Starr investigation was launched to implicate the Clintons in a failed land deal. The investigation took 4 years and cost millions of dollars. Clinton was finally impeached for lying about sex. I'd say sex is pretty for outside the scope of real estate dealings.

Based on your logic everyone convicted or impeached in the course of Starr's independent counsel tenure should sue Starr!
Click to expand...

Mueller does not have the same power of Starr.
he has less power than star does.

the comparison is an invalid one.

Mueller is restricted by only operating within the scope of which he was assigned.
which is the russian collusion and the so called obstruction of justice.
 
GDViking said:
Really? It took ken star 2 1/2 years to find a stain on a blue dress.

Show some patients, my feeling is that the corruption being uncovered runs so deep and wide that there are so many multiple changes it will take years.
Click to expand...

Not really. this case should be pretty easy. there is either evidence that links trump to obstruction or not.
since collusion is not a crime that is dead from the get go.
 
Winchester said:
You're not helping your case any.
Click to expand...

still waiting for some kind of proof or evidence there still isn't anything.
go figure on that one.
 
Captain America said:
A good investigator will follow wherever the evidence takes them. "Beyond the scope" be damned. Leave no stone un-turned.
Click to expand...
To a point im inclined to agree. If theres a legitimate investigation taking place that in overs the sispicion of other crimes than they should ne explored. However the investigator should ne required to apply for another investigation or to have his scope expanded by whoever decides those things. Im guessing a judge? Protecting our privacy is important and what your duggesting is an attack on that.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
ludin said:
The hill is a respected source that gets posted all the time around here.
your ad hominem is meaningless.
Click to expand...

"The Hill" didn't write the editorial - a political hack did. It's the hack I was referring to, not where it was published. He runs a political operation to get Republicans elected, so he's literally a GOP political operative who wants the investigation to go away so more Republicans get elected. He's entitled to his hack opinion and the rest of us are entitled to note the opinion is that of a political hack.
 
trouble13 said:
Congratulations on figuring it out because you either did not know that earlier or you were being disceptive in the post I was responding to.

The crime he is charged with has to do with supplying the FBI with incorrect information. It could be as innocent as forgetting something or as sinister as trying to hide it. Either way it is a crime. This kind of stuff is why people should never cooperate with investigations. Let them do their own work, don't do it for them.
Click to expand...

The problem is you've confused Manafort with Flynn or someone else.

The person we are talking about in this thread was charged with money laundering and evading $millions in taxes. So, no, he didn't forget the $18 million in funds he laundered through offshore accounts into the United States while illegally failing to report that income on his taxes.

Here's the actual indictment if you're interested:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/paul-manafort-jr-and-richard-gates-iii-indictment

Here's a plain language summary of the charges: https://www.lawfareblog.com/summary-manafort-and-gates-indicted-allegations-and-charges

In total, more than $75,000,000 flowed through offshore accounts. Manafort laundered more than $18,000,000, which he used to buy properties, goods, and services in the United States. He allegedly concealed that income from the United States Treasury, the Department of Justice, and others. Manafort, without reporting the income to his tax preparer or the United States, spent millions of dollars on luxury goods and services for himself and his extended family through payments wired from offshore nominee accounts to United States vendors. Manafort also used these offshore accounts to purchase multi-million dollar properties in the United States. Manafort then borrowed millions of dollars in loans using these properties as collateral, thereby obtaining cash in the United States without reporting and paying taxes on the income. In order to increase the amount of money he could access in the United States, Manafort defrauded the institutions that loaned money on these properties so that they would lend him more money at more favorable rates than he would otherwise be able to obtain.

Gates aided Manafort in obtaining money from these offshore accounts, which he was instrumental in opening. Gates also transferred more than $3,000,000 from the offshore accounts to other accounts that he controlled, to pay for his personal expenses, including his mortgage, children’s tuition, and interior decorating of his Virginia residence.
Click to expand...
 
Cardinal said:
If you think Mueller is operating outside the law or the scope of the investigation, then post Mueller's full mandate to investigate here and explain to us how anything Mueller has done is outside that intended scope.
Click to expand...

I believe you miss the point. Mueller was hired as a special investigator to determine the irregularities, violations of election laws, by foreign entities. Like all special investigators he widened the scope to all possible crimes. I object to all special investigations and did so when Ken Starr was playing his games. I'm not discussing what is criminal, who is criminal, only that special investigations lead to expensive, wasteful, unnecessary, politically motivated witch hunts each and every time a special investigator is appointed.

We have systems of law enforcement and jurisprudence to do the job. When they are not doing the job the people want done, fix them.

I'm for law and order, at all levels, with no exemptions for any single group, whether by class, economic status, ethnicity, job description, whatever. Bring all criminals to justice. My objection is to special investigator political witch hunts. All they really accomplish is waste and distraction with deflection from the job politicians were hired to do, govern.

Whatever the criticisms from political standpoints, Bill Clinton was a good president for the nation. Not perfect, but definitely good. How much better would he have been had he not been disrupted, distracted, and deflected by Ken Starr's antics? We will never know.
 
OldFatGuy said:
I believe you miss the point. Mueller was hired as a special investigator to determine the irregularities, violations of election laws, by foreign entities. Like all special investigators he widened the scope to all possible crimes. I object to all special investigations and did so when Ken Starr was playing his games. I'm not discussing what is criminal, who is criminal, only that special investigations lead to expensive, wasteful, unnecessary, politically motivated witch hunts each and every time a special investigator is appointed.

We have systems of law enforcement and jurisprudence to do the job. When they are not doing the job the people want done, fix them.

I'm for law and order, at all levels, with no exemptions for any single group, whether by class, economic status, ethnicity, job description, whatever. Bring all criminals to justice. My objection is to special investigator political witch hunts. All they really accomplish is waste and distraction with deflection from the job politicians were hired to do, govern.

Whatever the criticisms from political standpoints, Bill Clinton was a good president for the nation. Not perfect, but definitely good. How much better would he have been had he not been disrupted, distracted, and deflected by Ken Starr's antics? We will never know.
Click to expand...

Okay, so post the full mandate here and explain how Mueller is operating outside the scope of it.
 
JasperL said:
The problem is you've confused Manafort with Flynn or someone else.

The person we are talking about in this thread was charged with money laundering and evading $millions in taxes. So, no, he didn't forget the $18 million in funds he laundered through offshore accounts into the United States while illegally failing to report that income on his taxes.

Here's the actual indictment if you're interested:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/paul-manafort-jr-and-richard-gates-iii-indictment

Here's a plain language summary of the charges: https://www.lawfareblog.com/summary-manafort-and-gates-indicted-allegations-and-charges
Click to expand...
My appologies, I stand corrected. I did mix the two up.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
 
ludin said:
Mueller does not have the same power of Starr.
he has less power than star does.

the comparison is an invalid one.

Mueller is restricted by only operating within the scope of which he was assigned.
which is the russian collusion and the so called obstruction of justice.
Click to expand...

Just because you wish it were so doesn't make it true.
 
lurchadams said:
The Starr investigation was launched to implicate the Clintons in a failed land deal. The investigation took 4 years and cost millions of dollars. Clinton was finally impeached for lying about sex. I'd say sex is pretty for outside the scope of real estate dealings.

Based on your logic everyone convicted or impeached in the course of Starr's independent counsel tenure should sue Starr!
Click to expand...

Works for me. But at this point we're looking at civil statues of limitations, and some of those people are dead. Sad, but the real justice may only come from a citizens' vigilante committee lynching Starr from a lamp pole. :)
 
JasperL said:
Just so we are clear here, one of the indictments was for money laundering and tax evasion. Who exactly gets a free pass on those crimes because I want one if the standard is we don't prosecute people for that any longer. I'd rather not report my income or pay taxes, so how do I get this special pass? Do I just have to be important enough to have offshore accounts through which I can launder the money, and then laws don't apply to me anymore?

That sounds kind of like something a banana republic would endorse and I thought you stood for something better for the U.S.
Click to expand...


No, let's get them investigated and face the judiciary by and in the appropriate jurisdictions.

Time for you to start lobbying for more IRS staffing to catch those tax evaders, and more Treasury Agents to catch those money launderers. Over the last decades both have had their staffs dramatically reduced as Congress cut funding for them, regardless of Democratic or Republican domination of Congress. You weren't watching.
 
Just out of curiosity...what was the general opinion by the leftists posting in this thread of the head of the FBI about a week before the election? I'm SURE there is some sort of historical record...
 
Tanngrisnir said:
This is what's known as a 'publicity stunt'. It's not meant to be taken seriously.
Click to expand...

It's a strategy, whether you like it or not. The best defense, when you can't run like hellcats are on your tail, is a good offense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom