Manafort Charged by FBI

a reply to: raymundoko

It's for business dealings up to 2015.

No. First page of the indictment:

MANAFORT and GATES generated tens of millions of dollars in income as a result of their Ukraine work. In order to hide Ukraine payments from United States authorities, from approximately 2006 through at least 2016, MANAFORT and GATES laundered the money through scores of United States and foreign corporations, partnerships, and bank accounts.

Sorry, had to step away from the computer for a bit.

Is Trump in jail yet?

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: raymundoko

It's for business dealings up to 2015.

No. First page of the indictment:

MANAFORT and GATES generated tens of millions of dollars in income as a result of their Ukraine work. In order to hide Ukraine payments from United States authorities, from approximately 2006 through at least 2016, MANAFORT and GATES laundered the money through scores of United States and foreign corporations, partnerships, and bank accounts.

If you look at the actual evidence in the indictment, it is plain to see that none of the money laundering charges go past 2013.

originally posted by: Kali74
Just a quick word on the Podesta group. They are a lobbying/PR group for hire. They work for profit and aren't picky about where those profits come from. They've worked for Democrats and Republicans.

That and John Podesta left the firm 25 years ago.

But hell, team Trump will keep throwing smoke bombs.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: raymundoko

Ha ha. Hillary's server was the only one that wasn't hacked. The DNC server and Hillary's email server and email issues were totally separate from the emails released by wiki but I see this common error being touted over and over. Proof that Russia was successful in muddying the waters around emails. They were different servers. Hillary's closet server was actually safer than the state department's or even George Bushes home computer.

Give solid proof please instead of your personal thoughts...

You said proof... Prove it pleas.

Thank you.

Warmest

Lags

a reply to: Grambler

Yeah...never mind those pesky sanctions being presented as the price of said dirt to trumps team.

Dirt on clinton...yes please...ok the price is the Magnitsky act being lifted. That is the very definition of collusion. Conspiracy. And we know that offer was put on the table. We have it from the horses mouth.

a reply to: face23785


Exactly. That is why blaming the DNC for Manafort's indiscretions is folly.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: face23785

Clinton's campaign also communicated with the Russians about that.

Are you sure? Because I remember reading this at the time and Peskov said that meetings "probably" took place which is certainly something short of saying that they did, right?

Moscow claimed they did, and Clinton didn't deny it. Wouldn't you deny it if you were her, unless that would expose you as a liar. And other campaigns have met with foreign officials too, for all kinds of reasons. There's nothing unusual about it:

Obama

a reply to: Grambler

John left the organization in 1993.
He didn't divorce his family especially his brother but there was no longer a corporate official connection. It's documented.

a reply to: windword

I don't recall blaming the DNC? It would certainly be folly to blame Trump as well, wouldn't it?

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: raymundoko

It's for business dealings up to 2015.

No. First page of the indictment:

MANAFORT and GATES generated tens of millions of dollars in income as a result of their Ukraine work. In order to hide Ukraine payments from United States authorities, from approximately 2006 through at least 2016, MANAFORT and GATES laundered the money through scores of United States and foreign corporations, partnerships, and bank accounts.

If you look at the actual evidence in the indictment, it is plain to see that none of the money laundering charges go past 2013.

On "Money Laundering" the last pay out is in 9/11/2014, not 2013.
It was for almost 60k to a clothing store in NYC.
All-in he paid that clothing store almost 850k.

But more to the point, in order for "Money Laundering" to occur, money must leave those shell corporations.

Will be interesting to see what has been deposited, but not withdrawn.

As far as the Indictment as a whole, he lied to the FBI and IRS repeatedly up through 2016.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Grambler

John left the organization in 1993.
He didn't divorce his family especially his brother but there was no longer a corporate official connection. It's documented.

True, but we do know they were involved with Clinton.

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: raymundoko

It's for business dealings up to 2015.

No. First page of the indictment:

MANAFORT and GATES generated tens of millions of dollars in income as a result of their Ukraine work. In order to hide Ukraine payments from United States authorities, from approximately 2006 through at least 2016, MANAFORT and GATES laundered the money through scores of United States and foreign corporations, partnerships, and bank accounts.

If you look at the actual evidence in the indictment, it is plain to see that none of the money laundering charges go past 2013.

On "Money Laundering" the last pay out is in 9/11/2014, not 2013.
It was for almost 60k to a clothing store in NYC.
All-in he paid that clothing store almost 850k.

But more to the point, in order for "Money Laundering" to occur, money must leave those shell corporations.

Will be interesting to see what has been deposited, but not withdrawn.

As far as the Indictment as a whole, he lied to the FBI and IRS repeatedly up through 2016.

So he was still hiding his illegal activities while he was working for Trump? Got it.

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: Grambler

I'm not following. I mentioned that part, although I didn't number it.

My bad I see it, I am trying to keep up with 4 threads.

Let me put it this way.

I have said all along that I did not think that either the Hillary team or the Trump team getting dirt on each other from Russians was a big deal.

The hypocrisy of saying the others did it while doing it themselves is striking(which I admit came way more from the dems and their media), and it gave russia a real and clear way to sow discord, but I didnt think it was criminal.

I do think that depending on what was done with that dirt by the FBI or Obama admin may in fact be, but thats another topic.

So yes I basically agree with you.

But Trump had to at least known of this attempt by someone on his campaign, and so I find his blanket denial of any accusation of this sort to be a lie and shameful.

Just like the dems that lied about paying for the dossier are shameful.

Are either of those a crime?

Probably not. But its ridiculous.

a reply to: face23785

How naive. Foreign policy meetings? Before the election? Okay.

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: raymundoko

It's for business dealings up to 2015.

No. First page of the indictment:

MANAFORT and GATES generated tens of millions of dollars in income as a result of their Ukraine work. In order to hide Ukraine payments from United States authorities, from approximately 2006 through at least 2016, MANAFORT and GATES laundered the money through scores of United States and foreign corporations, partnerships, and bank accounts.

If you look at the actual evidence in the indictment, it is plain to see that none of the money laundering charges go past 2013.

On "Money Laundering" the last pay out is in 9/11/2014, not 2013.
It was for almost 60k to a clothing store in NYC.
All-in he paid that clothing store almost 850k.

But more to the point, in order for "Money Laundering" to occur, money must leave those shell corporations.

Will be interesting to see what has been deposited, but not withdrawn.

As far as the Indictment as a whole, he lied to the FBI and IRS repeatedly up through 2016.

13 charges are for wire transfers prior to 2015.

The other accusations and most recent accusations deal with real estate fraud. Has nothing to do with Russians other than that's where he got the money to purchase the real estate.

a reply to: raymundoko


The RNC were not victimized by Russian operatives. The DNC was. Russian troll farms were set up to attack Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump. Trump benefited from the hacks, and the fake news, put out by troll farms, the DNC did not.

"Russia! If your listening!" "WikiLeaks! I love WikiLeaks!"

Those cries came from Donald Trump's mouth right about the same time Cambridge Analytica was seeking to coordinate with WikiLeaks and was looking for the other 33,000 emails.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: raymundoko

It's for business dealings up to 2015.

No. First page of the indictment:

MANAFORT and GATES generated tens of millions of dollars in income as a result of their Ukraine work. In order to hide Ukraine payments from United States authorities, from approximately 2006 through at least 2016, MANAFORT and GATES laundered the money through scores of United States and foreign corporations, partnerships, and bank accounts.

My understanding of the indictment is that most of the crimes of working for russsians occured up to 2015.

the financial crimes of hiding that money, and lying to the FBI occured up into 2017.

I could be wrong, but thats what it seems.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Kali74

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Kali74
Flynn or Page next?

Or someone from parts 20 on in the indictment.

You know, company A or B that lobbied for Russia.

Now who would would that be....

Why don't you tell us? Just remember that the Democrats wanted Ukraine on Europe's side and the Republicans wanted Ukraine on the Russia side.

Show me evidence of that.

What we do know is that the podesta group was lobbying to have russsians sanctions lifted.

Didn't John Podesta leave the Podesta Group in 1993, 25 years ago?

John is still heavily involved. It is ran by his brother.

Can you provide links or evidence that he is still heavily involved?

Not propaganda?

Some financial documents or company literature showing that he remains a heavy stake holder in the firm he left 25 years ago?

Thanks in advance. Just trying to help you produce a little more smoke and distraction here.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Grambler

Yeah...never mind those pesky sanctions being presented as the price of said dirt to trumps team.

Dirt on clinton...yes please...ok the price is the Magnitsky act being lifted. That is the very definition of collusion. Conspiracy. And we know that offer was put on the table. We have it from the horses mouth.

Hahaha!

So ignore the crimes of company a and B. Got it.

And lets not forget, there are accustaions (although unconfirmed) that manafort and the podesta group personally met about Uranium One.

And oh, unlike with the magnistky act, that actually did go through how the russians wanted! Isnt that curious?