Mueller's Decade+ Old Crime Trial Soon To Begin

[easyt65]

There is a prime example of what I'm saying. Your focal point is Trump, the presumption of guilt, and casual disinterest in the evidence except where you hope it will lead you to Trump. You are operating on the direct opposite philosophy of "innocent until proven guilty". Which has been a core tenet of our judicial practices in this nation historically.

Snowflakes DECLARED him to be guilty before a Special Counsel was even appointed, despite the fact that there was never any evidence of 'illegal collusion' between the President and Russia. THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF SUCH A CRIME that merited an investigation let alone a Special Counsel.

Mueller was another blazing neon sign exposing the fact that the Democrats did not give a damn about Russian interference, which Obama himself said happens all the time ...at the same time he declared there was no way the Russians could hack the election ... when he thought Hillary was going to win in a 'Landslide'. The Democrats were out to get TRUMP for beating Hillary. If they gave a damn about the Russians interfering they would have started with asking Obama why he knew in 2014 when it all started and did NOTHING about it. Mueller, however, as I said, was the Red Flag giving the whole thing away as a Witch Hunt / Stacked Deck.
- Rosenstein made the argument of why Comey needed to be fired. He advised the President to fire Comey. And when the President followed his advice and exercised his Constitutional authority to fire Comey, Rosenstein appointed Mueller to investigate 'Obstruction' charges. This whole thing immediately made Rosenstein's continued involvement - since he advised the President to fire Comey - a CONFLICT OF INTEREST. His insistence that he is not is asinine - intellectually, ethically, and criminally insulting.

- Mueller was Comey's MENTOR and career/life-long CLOSE FRIEND. The mere consideration of Mueller for Special Counsel was an invitation to a Conflict of Interest so huge it was comical. His appointment was akin to the Democrats screaming out publicly, 'We are going to take Trump down!' There is no / can be no impartiality with Mueller leading the now obvious witch hunt.

 

[jc456]

Charged with investigating possible illegal Trump collusion with Russians and / it Russian interference in the 2016 election. Special Counsel Robert Mueller instead went back more than a decade - to before Obama was elected - to find a crime.

While the country was rocked with tales of illegal collusion with Russians, the trial Mueller brings to court has nothing to do with President Trump, has nothing to do with 'illegal Russian collusion', and has nothing to do with the 2016 Presidential election.

Instead we are forced to endure a case whose purpose is to try to get the indicted to agree to give the Special Counsel something he has desperately looked for but does not have - EVIDENCE of anything he can use to take down the President.


Showdown in Virginia: Manafort fraud trial set to kick off in first Mueller probe prosecution

"Neither the Virginia trial nor Manafort's separate upcoming trial in Washington, D.C., directly relates to any alleged collusion between Trump officials and the Russian government, or purported Russian disinformation campaigns -- a fact that led to a tense courtroom showdown just months ago.

The judge in the case, T.S. Ellis III, harshly rebuked members of Mueller's team in a preliminary hearing in May, saying they were pursuing the case against the 69-year-old ex-Trump adviser only as a means to target the president."

vindictive people. evil!!!

 

[bodecea]

Charged with investigating possible illegal Trump collusion with Russians and / it Russian interference in the 2016 election. Special Counsel Robert Mueller instead went back more than a decade - to before Obama was elected - to find a crime.

While the country was rocked with tales of illegal collusion with Russians, the trial Mueller brings to court has nothing to do with President Trump, has nothing to do with 'illegal Russian collusion', and has nothing to do with the 2016 Presidential election.

Instead we are forced to endure a case whose purpose is to try to get the indicted to agree to give the Special Counsel something he has desperately looked for but does not have - EVIDENCE of anything he can use to take down the President.


Showdown in Virginia: Manafort fraud trial set to kick off in first Mueller probe prosecution

"Neither the Virginia trial nor Manafort's separate upcoming trial in Washington, D.C., directly relates to any alleged collusion between Trump officials and the Russian government, or purported Russian disinformation campaigns -- a fact that led to a tense courtroom showdown just months ago.

The judge in the case, T.S. Ellis III, harshly rebuked members of Mueller's team in a preliminary hearing in May, saying they were pursuing the case against the 69-year-old ex-Trump adviser only as a means to target the president."

Hasn't the statute of limitations expired on the charges against Manafort?

Sure....you seem to be the only one who knows that.

 

[jc456]

Rich folk squirming......

which folk?

 

[jc456]

You're the one who claims to know people are

Hmm, not really. I think it likely, not 100% certain. And I do have anecdtoal and circumstantial evidence, while you have not a shred.

So clearly it is different, and clearly you are talking to convince yourself.

like?

 

[jc456]

That is exactly how Mueller got other mob characters, and it will work equally well on Trump, for he is no different.

like?

 

[Vastator]

There is a prime example of what I'm saying. Your focal point is Trump, the presumption of guilt, and casual disinterest in the evidence except where you hope it will lead you to Trump. You are operating on the direct opposite philosophy of "innocent until proven guilty". Which has been a core tenet of our judicial practices in this nation historically.

Snowflakes DECLARED him to be guilty before a Special Counsel was even appointed, despite the fact that there was never any evidence of 'illegal collusion' between the President and Russia. THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF SUCH A CRIME that merited an investigation let alone a Special Counsel.

Mueller was another blazing neon sign exposing the fact that the Democrats did not give a damn about Russian interference, which Obama himself said happens all the time ...at the same time he declared there was no way the Russians could hack the election ... when he thought Hillary was going to win in a 'Landslide'. The Democrats were out to get TRUMP for beating Hillary. If they gave a damn about the Russians interfering they would have started with asking Obama why he knew in 2014 when it all started and did NOTHING about it. Mueller, however, as I said, was the Red Flag giving the whole thing away as a Witch Hunt / Stacked Deck.
- Rosenstein made the argument of why Comey needed to be fired. He advised the President to fire Comey. And when the President followed his advice and exercised his Constitutional authority to fire Comey, Rosenstein appointed Mueller to investigate 'Obstruction' charges. This whole thing immediately made Rosenstein's continued involvement - since he advised the President to fire Comey - a CONFLICT OF INTEREST. His insistence that he is not is asinine - intellectually, ethically, and criminally insulting.

- Mueller was Comey's MENTOR and career/life-long CLOSE FRIEND. The mere consideration of Mueller for Special Counsel was an invitation to a Conflict of Interest so huge it was comical. His appointment was akin to the Democrats screaming out publicly, 'We are going to take Trump down!' There is no / can be no impartiality with Mueller leading the now obvious witch hunt.

Not to mention... If their real passion was following Russian collusion, and meddling; they already have rock solid evidence in the form of the Steele dossier, Fusion GPS's involvment in said dossier, and The law firm that hired Fusion GPS. A law firm hired by the Clinton campaign. Loads of unquestioned, verifiable evidence. Yet they have no interest in pursuing this.
That shows their hand...

 

[easyt65]

Manafort partnered with the Podestas in this crime of over a decade ago. Again, a Judge has already pointed out that the indictment of Manafort is a prosecutorial gambit to use someone to get to another, necessary when you don't have any evidence on the other person.

So, in the name of justice for the crime of Money Laundering, the FBI / Mueller's team raided Manafort's house and office, seizing everything on their warrant...and reportedly some of the things that weren't...and the warrant was reportedly changed after the fact to cover everything.

Whose homes were NOT raided as well were the Podestas, Manafort's 'partners in crime'?
-- Yeah, evidence shows the Podestas were Manafort's partners and arejust as guilty as Manafort. Fortunately for them Mueller's witch hunt is solely focused on getting Trump. Not only were they spared a Gestapo-esque search and seizure Manafort was forced to endure (instead of being asked to turn over things when he felt like getting around to it like Hillary was asked to do so), but the Podestas have been given IMMUNITY as well to make sure they are spared from accountability - or even further scrutiny - of their own crimes. (Can't have people so closely tied to Hillary...and Russians...implicated in any crime!)

Rosenstein, Mueller, and the Liberal media...and thus the snowflake sheep...have totally ignored the fact that the Podestas were Manafort's partners in crime, that the Podesta Firm worked for the KGB Bank in the past, that FAT Tony Podesta worked for both the KGB Bank and THE Russian spy agency and ILLEGALLY refused to comply with US law requiring him to register himself as a 'foreign agent'...that Hillary Campaign Manager John Podesta took THOUSANDS of UN-REPORTED Russian stocks and that 1/3rd of his company's Board of Directors were prominent Russian businessmen who had direct ties to the Kremlin and Putin himself.

What you do not hear about is how when word on the street about all of this got out, the Podesta Group's clients fled the firm like rats off of a sinking ship. The firm collapsed and went under...

...but at least they are not going to jail ... thanks to Rosenstein and Mueller!


(Interesting - if Mueller is only interested in 'Justice', especially when he learned of this 'Money Laundering', why did he target MANAFORT - if Trump was NOT his main target? Why give the Podesta boys immunity to testify against HIM? Why not give Manafort Immunity to testify the Podesta boiys, who ere not only engaged in Money Laundering but also had been working for the KGB Bank, working for the Russian Spy Agency, had taken thousands of unreported Russian stock, was colluding with Kremlin/Putin-connected connections....?

Oh yea...because Mueller was only focused on Trump and was targeting Manafort to get to Trump. He didn't give a sh!t about money laundering or any other evidence of crimes. It was and has been nothing but all about 'getting Trump'!

 

[easyt65]

Not to mention... If their real passion was following Russian collusion, and meddling; they already have rock solid evidence in the form of the Steele dossier, Fusion GOD's involvment in said dossier, and The law firm that hired Fusion GPS. A law firm hired by the Clinton campaign. Loads of unquestioned, verifiable evidence. Yet they have no interest in pursuing this.
That shows their hand...

Evidence shows Fat Tony Podesta and his brother John - Hillary's campaign manager - was working with the Russians and being paid well.

Evidence shows Fat Tony was working for the KGB Bank and the Russian Spy agency...while NOT being legally registered as a 'foreign agent'. Evidence shows John took THOUSANDS of unreported shares of Russian stocks and 1/3rd of his board of directors were Kremlin/Putin-connected Russians.

"If their real passion was following Russian collusion, and meddling" he had his men in the Podestas. Giving them immunity (or at least Fat Tony) to testify against Manafort WAS them showing their hand that their 'real passion' was ONLY taking down Trump!

 

[Vastator]

Not to mention... If their real passion was following Russian collusion, and meddling; they already have rock solid evidence in the form of the Steele dossier, Fusion GOD's involvment in said dossier, and The law firm that hired Fusion GPS. A law firm hired by the Clinton campaign. Loads of unquestioned, verifiable evidence. Yet they have no interest in pursuing this.
That shows their hand...

Evidence shows Fat Tony Podesta and his brother John - Hillary's campaign manager - was working with the Russians and being paid well.

Evidence shows Fat Tony was working for the KGB Bank and the Russian Spy agency...while NOT being legally registered as a 'foreign agent'. Evidence shows John took THOUSANDS of unreported shares of Russian stocks and 1/3rd of his board of directors were Kremlin/Putin-connected Russians.

"If their real passion was following Russian collusion, and meddling" he had his men in the Podestas. Giving them immunity (or at least Fat Tony) to testify against Manafort WAS them showing their hand that their 'real passion' was ONLY taking down Trump!

Mueller was nothing more than a judicial hitman. I believe he is in his clean up phase now. Failing to have found anything to bring trump down with, he is now doubling back, to bring charges against people, who can be linked to guilty Clinton acolytes, so that he may offer them "immunity". Whereby shielding them, and Clinton, from future retaliatory investigation once his failed witch hunt is over...

 

[easyt65]

I do have anecdtoal and circumstantial evidence, while you have not a shred.

Time to educate the highly opinionated yet evidence-LESS snowflakes....


What are the Rules of Evidence? - FindLaw

There are four general types of evidence:

1. Real evidence (tangible things, such as a weapon)
2. Demonstrative (a model of what likely happened at a given time and place)
3. Documentary (a letter, blog post, or other document)
4. Testimonial (witness testimony)

Terms to Know

• Circumstantial Evidence: Evidence that tends to prove a factual matter by proving other events or circumstances from which the occurrence of the matter can be reasonably inferred.

• Corroborating Evidence: Evidence that is independent of and different from but that supplements and strengthens evidence already presented as proof of a factual matter.

• Hearsay: A statement made out of court and not under oath which is offered as proof that what is stated is true (usually deemed inadmissible).

• Exclusionary Rule: A rule of evidence that excludes or suppresses evidence obtained in violation of a defendant's constitutional rights.

For a guilty verdict in a criminal trial, the prosecution must prove guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt."


1. There is no such thing as 'anecdotal' evidence. That is what is frequently referred to as a 'strawman' or bull$h!t.

2. 'Circumstantial evidence' is not DIRECTLY CONNECTED evidence proving 100% that a / the crime was committed. It can be used to help BUILD a case, but it does NOT prove guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt."

Direct, undeniable evidence proving a crime of 'Illegal Collusion between President Trump and the Russians' can neither be presented by Mueller or snowflakes because no such evidence exists. It never has and never will.

I predict snowflakes will rush head-long to attempt to prove this NOT to be the case, but instead we will all will be subjected to butt-hurt and whining...and the ever constant mantra of 'Just wait and see' (the repeated mantra of sports fans whose team loses ever year - 'You just wait...').

 

[easyt65]

A Judge appropriately already called out Mueller for this case, acknowledging it is all about Trump.

The Judge knows it.
Mueller knows it.
Democrats know it.
Snowflakes know it.

... but in an attempt to pass this 'Scooter Libby Clown Show' off as a 'legitimate' case....

Prosecutors advise witnesses in Manafort trial: Avoid saying 'Trump'

'Prosecutors preparing witnesses for the upcoming trial of President Donald Trump’s one-time campaign chairman Paul J. Manafort are advising them to avoid mentioning Trump’s name.

The Mueller team laid out tight restrictions for witnesses in recent days, according to two sources familiar with those conversations. Witnesses have been told to avoid any mention of President Trump or anything related to his 2016 campaign.'


Funny.....Mueller's 1st trial is a trial that has nothing to do with Trump, the 2016 election, or Russian Interference in the 2016 election....which is the what Mueller was appointed as Special Counsel to investigate.

Mueller had already indicted actual Russians prior to Rosenstein indicting his baker's dozen...and yet Mueller keeps postponing their trial.

 

[Crepitus]

Charged with investigating possible illegal Trump collusion with Russians and / it Russian interference in the 2016 election. Special Counsel Robert Mueller instead went back more than a decade - to before Obama was elected - to find a crime.

While the country was rocked with tales of illegal collusion with Russians, the trial Mueller brings to court has nothing to do with President Trump, has nothing to do with 'illegal Russian collusion', and has nothing to do with the 2016 Presidential election.

Instead we are forced to endure a case whose purpose is to try to get the indicted to agree to give the Special Counsel something he has desperately looked for but does not have - EVIDENCE of anything he can use to take down the President.


Showdown in Virginia: Manafort fraud trial set to kick off in first Mueller probe prosecution

"Neither the Virginia trial nor Manafort's separate upcoming trial in Washington, D.C., directly relates to any alleged collusion between Trump officials and the Russian government, or purported Russian disinformation campaigns -- a fact that led to a tense courtroom showdown just months ago.

The judge in the case, T.S. Ellis III, harshly rebuked members of Mueller's team in a preliminary hearing in May, saying they were pursuing the case against the 69-year-old ex-Trump adviser only as a means to target the president."

Even though most if you post is hyperbolic nonsense I have a question for you.

Should the crime be ignored because it happened a decade ago?

 

[easyt65]

Should the crime be ignored because it happened a decade ago?

Now that the crime has been uncovered it should not be ignored....

HOWEVER, you snowflakes continue to avoid the point / facts that:

No crime of illegal collusion between Trump and Russians occurred
- There was never any evidence o such warranting an investigation let alone a Special Counsel.

- Investigating Russian Interference - according to real evidence - only dated back to 2014. Digging back 10 years ago, to before Obama was elected President, had nothing to do with what he was appointed and charged to investigate.

- Now that the crime has been exposed, the entire crime and all of the suspects involved should be equally held accountable. Evidence shows both John and Fat Tony Podesta were equally involved in the crimes with which Manafort has been charged. Instead of indicting them as well, Mueller is protecting them.

Why shouldn't these two criminals be indicted as well?

 

[bendog]

Charged with investigating possible illegal Trump collusion with Russians and / it Russian interference in the 2016 election. Special Counsel Robert Mueller instead went back more than a decade - to before Obama was elected - to find a crime.

While the country was rocked with tales of illegal collusion with Russians, the trial Mueller brings to court has nothing to do with President Trump, has nothing to do with 'illegal Russian collusion', and has nothing to do with the 2016 Presidential election.

Instead we are forced to endure a case whose purpose is to try to get the indicted to agree to give the Special Counsel something he has desperately looked for but does not have - EVIDENCE of anything he can use to take down the President.


Showdown in Virginia: Manafort fraud trial set to kick off in first Mueller probe prosecution

"Neither the Virginia trial nor Manafort's separate upcoming trial in Washington, D.C., directly relates to any alleged collusion between Trump officials and the Russian government, or purported Russian disinformation campaigns -- a fact that led to a tense courtroom showdown just months ago.

The judge in the case, T.S. Ellis III, harshly rebuked members of Mueller's team in a preliminary hearing in May, saying they were pursuing the case against the 69-year-old ex-Trump adviser only as a means to target the president."

fake news
Trump misleads on years between campaign, Manafort charges

 

[Vastator]

Should the crime be ignored because it happened a decade ago?

Now that the crime has been uncovered it should not be ignored....

HOWEVER, you snowflakes continue to avoid the point / facts that:

No crime of illegal collusion between Trump and Russians occurred
- There was never any evidence o such warranting an investigation let alone a Special Counsel.

- Investigating Russian Interference - according to real evidence - only dated back to 2014. Digging back 10 years ago, to before Obama was elected President, had nothing to do with what he was appointed and charged to investigate.

- Now that the crime has been exposed, the entire crime and all of the suspects involved should be equally held accountable. Evidence shows both John and Fat Tony Podesta were equally involved in the crimes with which Manafort has been charged. Instead of indicting them as well, Mueller is protecting them.

Why shouldn't these two criminals be indicted as well?

All the Clinton Acolytes are being preemptively immunized from future prosecution. That's all Mueller is doing now.

 

[easyt65]

fake news
Trump misleads on years between campaign, Manafort charges

BS.

There is NO EVIDENCE of a crime of illegal collusion between Trump and Russia.

There is NO EVIDENCE of a crime involving illegal collusion between Manafort and the Russians affecting the 2016 election. If there were Mueller would be focused on THAT instead of having to go back 10 years to go after Manafort for Money Laundering involving the Podestas yet protects them from the same crime.

 

[easyt65]

All the Clinton Acolytes are being preemptively immunized from future prosecution. That's all Mueller is doing now.

Mueller knows the American people can see the evidence exposing Liberal / Democrat crimes just as well as he can and is moving to protect them from prosecution while he continues to go after Trump...still armed with ZERO evidence against the President.

 

[Edgetho]

Rich folk squirming......

There's more rich dimocraps than there is Republicans, scumbag.

But you're too stupid to know that. You're still parroting the stupid mantra of your youth

 

[DJT for Life]

Should the crime be ignored because it happened a decade ago?

Now that the crime has been uncovered it should not be ignored....

HOWEVER, you snowflakes continue to avoid the point / facts that:

No crime of illegal collusion between Trump and Russians occurred
- There was never any evidence o such warranting an investigation let alone a Special Counsel.

- Investigating Russian Interference - according to real evidence - only dated back to 2014. Digging back 10 years ago, to before Obama was elected President, had nothing to do with what he was appointed and charged to investigate.

- Now that the crime has been exposed, the entire crime and all of the suspects involved should be equally held accountable. Evidence shows both John and Fat Tony Podesta were equally involved in the crimes with which Manafort has been charged. Instead of indicting them as well, Mueller is protecting them.

Why shouldn't these two criminals be indicted as well?

Wait up Easy.

In regard to your first sentence. This crime hasn't just been discovered.
The DOJ had this information 10 years ago and declined to prosecute.
The lead attorney was Rod Rosenstein.

I'm anxious to see when/if the defense put Rosenstein on the stand.

This judge has already been a pain in the ass to Mueller. He won't
play around.

This entire file was handed to Mueller to squeeze Manafort. He didn't
get any of it thru investigating.

This could be a real circus. The prosecutors have already promised the
Judge that they won't even mention the word "Russia" in this Judge's court
room.

The cross-examination of Rosenstein could be a classic.