• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: Breaking: Mueller Grand Jury charges filed, arrests as soon as Monday pt 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
I really want to know how Giuliani got this far as a lawyer.

He said that Kushner, Manafort and Jr. took a meeting took the meeting to get dirt on Hilary and didn't know the person they were meeting was Russian. They only knew her name. Her name you ask?

Natalia Veselnitskya.

Yeah right Rudy.

I swear these guys are like the fella Lucy Lui shot in the movie Chicago. The guy after being discovered in bed with two women says 'I'm alone.' Lucy replies 'ALONE?! You're in bed with two women!' He answers back "C'mon doll, you gonna believe your eyes or what I tell you? "
 
acbytesla said:
I really want to know how Giuliani got this far as a lawyer.
Click to expand...

I've been wondering that ever since he started being on TV as Trump's lawyer. I'd never seen him outside of wearing his "politician" hat before, and he was pretty convincing in that "role".

But holy WOW does he suck as a lawyer. It's like nobody ever taught him the art of how to just STFU and think for a second before talking and ending up with his foot in his mouth, down his throat and all the way exiting his digestive track. He is the least "lawyerly" lawyer I've ever seen before.

I've actually had the thought that he might be on drugs.
 
acbytesla said:
I really want to know how Giuliani got this far as a lawyer.

He said that Kushner, Manafort and Jr. took a meeting took the meeting to get dirt on Hilary and didn't know the person they were meeting was Russian. They only knew her name. Her name you ask?

Natalia Veselnitskya.

Yeah right Rudy.

I swear these guys are like the fella Lucy Lui shot in the movie Chicago. The guy after being discovered in bed with two women says 'I'm alone.' Lucy replies 'ALONE?! You're in bed with two women!' He answers back "C'mon doll, you gonna believe your eyes or what I tell you? "
Click to expand...

He also insisted that they had no reason to believe she was an agent of the Russian gov't, despite the initial email saying she represented the gov't. (My wording on both claims may be a little off, from memory only)
 
phiwum said:
He also insisted that they had no reason to believe she was an agent of the Russian gov't, despite the initial email saying she represented the gov't. (My wording on both claims may be a little off, from memory only)
Click to expand...

"

3 June 2016
Rob Goldstone to Trump Jr

Emin [Agalarov, a Russian pop star represented by Goldstone] just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting

The*Crown prosecutor of Russia*met with his father Aras [a Moscow-based developer who tried to partner with Trump in a hotel project] this morning and in their meeting*offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary [Clinton] and her dealings with*Russia*and would be very useful to your father.
This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is*part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr Trump*– helped along by Aras and Emin. What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be able to speak to Emin about it directly?

I*can also send this info to your father*via Rhona [presumably Rhona Graff, Trump’s longtime executive assistant], but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first.

Trump Jr to Goldstone

Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I just speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and*if it’s what you say I love it*especially later in the summer. Could we do a call first thing next week when I am back?

6 June 2016
Goldstone to Trump Jr

Let me know when you are free to talk with Emin by phone about this Hillary info – you had mentioned early this week so wanted to try to schedule a time and day. Best to you and your family.

"​


It's even more damning than you rememberef
 
Last edited:
kellyb said:
I've been wondering that ever since he started being on TV as Trump's lawyer. I'd never seen him outside of wearing his "politician" hat before, and he was pretty convincing in that "role".

But holy WOW does he suck as a lawyer. It's like nobody ever taught him the art of how to just STFU and think for a second before talking and ending up with his foot in his mouth, down his throat and all the way exiting his digestive track. He is the least "lawyerly" lawyer I've ever seen before.

I've actually had the thought that he might be on drugs.
Click to expand...

Which makes him the perfect lawyer for Trump as Trump sees those as his own personal attributes.
 
phiwum said:
He also insisted that they had no reason to believe she was an agent of the Russian gov't, despite the initial email saying she represented the gov't. (My wording on both claims may be a little off, from memory only)
Click to expand...

EXACTLY! This telling us the opposite of what we know and what the evidence proves is mind boggling and insulting.
 
jimbob said:
"

3 June 2016
Rob Goldstone to Trump Jr

Emin [Agalarov, a Russian pop star represented by Goldstone] just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting

The*Crown prosecutor of Russia*met with his father Aras [a Moscow-based developer who tried to partner with Trump in a hotel project] this morning and in their meeting*offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary [Clinton] and her dealings with*Russia*and would be very useful to your father.
This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is*part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr Trump*– helped along by Aras and Emin. What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be able to speak to Emin about it directly?

I*can also send this info to your father*via Rhona [presumably Rhona Graff, Trump’s longtime executive assistant], but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first.

Trump Jr to Goldstone

Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I just speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and*if it’s what you say I love it*especially later in the summer. Could we do a call first thing next week when I am back?

6 June 2016
Goldstone to Trump Jr

Let me know when you are free to talk with Emin by phone about this Hillary info – you had mentioned early this week so wanted to try to schedule a time and day. Best to you and your family.

"​


It's even more damning than you rememberef
Click to expand...

But "If it's what you say it is, I love it" makes such a better soundbite.
 
Trump says about Russia probe: ‘I could run it if I want’
President Trump on Monday took his attacks on the Russia investigation being led by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III in a novel direction, declaring that he could run the investigation himself if he wanted to.

“I can go in, and I could do whatever — I could run it if I want,” Trump said in an Oval Office interview with Reuters. “But I decided to stay out.”

He added: “I’m totally allowed to be involved if I wanted to be. So far, I haven’t chosen to be involved. I’ll stay out.”
Click to expand...

49053bb07f12a993.jpg


Could he, though? He can hire/fire people all day long, but I'm not sure he could run an investigation himself, even ignoring the conflicts of interest (which he does so well).
 
Rumors are the Manafort jury is about to return a verdict.

My prediction: they find him guilty on most things, not guilty on maybe a charge or two, and Trumpets call the guilty charges irrelevant ("it's not collusion" and "has nothing to do with Trump") and pretend the not guilty verdict(s) vindicate everyone.
 
CNN is reporting that Cohen is negotiating a plea bargain and that there will be a court hearing at 16:00 EDT (20:00 UCT).
 
Segnosaur said:
Just did a quick search.

Looks like the jury has asked the judge about what happens if they can't agree on 1 of the 18 charges. (So, they've got a verdict on 17 of 18). Judge sent them back in for more deliberations.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/21/politics/paul-manafort-trial-jury/index.html
Click to expand...

There seem to be 2 realistic possibilities:
1) the jury is obsessively conscientious;
2) they've voted to convict on some counts and acquit on other counts.

I'd have trouble believing that they would all agree that the evidence did not support a conviction on all but 1 count and be disagreeing over the remaining count (unless it was the most trivial of all the charges). And I think a lot of juries would feel that they had done their job if they convicted on 17 out of 18 counts and acquit on the remaining count so that they could go home. But I've been wrong before.
 
In the linked prediction market

https://www.predictit.org/Contract/...ted-of-a-federal-charge-by-year-end-2018#data

shares that Manafort will be convicted are selling at 94 cents a piece (they had dropped to 75 cents after the jury asked what was meant by reasonable doubt).

You can also bet on how many charges he'll be found guilty by 12/31/2018. 11-20 charges sells for 58 cents, and 21-30 is going for 40 cents (both jumped up today).

I should also note that in this betting market, the day of the election, Clinton was selling for 80 cents a share. When I started grading papers on the day of the election around 5:00pm, she was down to 70. I think by the time I finished grading I checked again around six and she was down to 10 cents.
 
Last edited:
Captain_Swoop said:
"I allowed White House Counsel Don McGahn, and all other requested members of the White House Staff, to fully cooperate with the Special Councel. In addition we readily gave over one million pages of documents. Most transparent in history. No Collusion, No Obstruction. Witch Hunt!"
Click to expand...
I recall reading (though can’t remember where), given the White House Counsel works for the office of the president and not its occupant, the latter has zero say in whether or not the former may testify on any matter.
 
Regnad Kcin said:
I recall reading (though can’t remember where), given the White House Counsel works for the office of the president and not its occupant, the latter has zero say in whether or not the former may testify on any matter.
Click to expand...

At the least, the White House Counsel can only claim attorney-client privilege for conversations that pertain to a president's official duties. There is no attorney-client privilege in regards to any of a president's personal legal issues.
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
At the least, the White House Counsel can only claim attorney-client privilege for conversations that pertain to a president's official duties. There is no attorney-client privilege in regards to any of a president's personal legal issues.
Click to expand...

Do you guys really think you know more than the president about White House councel?
 
Cain said:
In the linked prediction market

https://www.predictit.org/Contract/...ted-of-a-federal-charge-by-year-end-2018#data

shares that Manafort will be convicted are selling at 94 cents a piece (they had dropped to 75 cents after the jury asked what was meant by reasonable doubt).

You can also bet on how many charges he'll be found guilty by 12/31/2018. 11-20 charges sells for 58 cents, and 21-30 is going for 40 cents (both jumped up today).

I should also note that in this betting market, the day of the election, Clinton was selling for 80 cents a share. When I started grading papers on the day of the election around 5:00pm, she was down to 70. I think by the time I finished grading I checked again around six and she was down to 10 cents.
Click to expand...


Cool site! I see that "no" on Trump being the 2020 candidate is only 36¢. That's very tempting. I did buy "no" for Warren running at 29¢.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom