Manafort caught dead to rights on collusion

https://www.ohio.com/zz/news/20190108/filing-manafort-lied-about-sharing-poll-data-with-russian/1

Manafort caught lying to Mueller on providing voter data to Russians.

In a disastrous blunder, manaforts lawyers failed to properly redact sensitive information on his recent court filing.

One of the charges is, providing polling data to the Kremlin.

Polling is a generic term used for many things, including specific voter data.

Manafort was providing Republican voter polling data to the Kremlin in order for them to specifically target certain demographics with customized propoganda in order to sway public opinion in favor of trump.

This propoganda came in the form of memes, social media bots, as well as Twitter and Facebook accounts.

Mueller has specific evidence and proof of collusion with Russia.

Manafort has not denied that information sharing did not take place. He is officially challenging that he knowingly lied to Congress, because he just "couldn't remember that any of these events took place".

Border wall and government shut down a fabricated distraction.

This is huge news. That will undoubtedly start to pick up steam.

Don Jr indictment coming soon.

Trump and his legal team are in full panic mode. His defense will go from NO COLLUSION, to I didn't know they were colliding with Russia

I'd heard about the redaction failure yesterday. Hilarious blunder.

This'll be nothing to Trump's mindless cult followers, but it's been highly amusing to watch the gradients of their defenses.

"Nothing happened at all!"

"Okay, something happened, but it's not collusion"

"Alright, it may be collusion, but even if it was, everyone does it!"

....and on and on and on as more evidence arises. There's always an excuse given until they've effectively redefined the playing ground in small steps. The sad truth is, Trump supporters don't even care if our election process was compromised as long as the election went in their favor. They are traitors, every single one of them.

On Facebook they are blaming Hillary and Obama.

Sad and pathetic.........

The page you were on is trying to send you to an invalid URL.

@Damedius: link fixed. Thanks

He shared it with a business associate. That doesn't seem odd to me.

What does seem odd is that they are accusing him of lying about it. It doesn't really make any sense to me why he would lie about it.

Haha, how in the hell is the fact that he knew this guy a long time a viable defense in your mind?

"Yes, your honor, I provided campaign polling data to a Russian intelligence officer who is known to have previously worked to elect pro-Russian candidates in foreign countries. But it's not what it looks like. Our business relationship preceded the Trump campaign by a decade and a half!"

That's the defense?!

It's the new republican anthem:

"Nothing really matters,
Nothing really matters
Anyone can see,
Nothing really matters, to meeeeeee!"

LOL, you guys are trying so hard to find anything that confirms your false assumptions it´s almost sad in that hilarious way.

@Serraph105: It... is... maddening.

@mattbbpl: Fuckin tell me about it.

So you have some proof he is a Russian Intelligence Officer I presume?

@Damedius: are you serious?

Can you even wonder why they tried to react it?

I'll take that as a no.

@Damedius: no what I commented to but it's the fbi say he's the spy.

Also argiing on the point that something is being for to be collusion with something so obvious is collusion and conspiracy it troubling to see in pro trump apologists.

Is that English?

@Damedius: let me clear this up for the ignorant.

I was not commenting on your question on it he was a spy or not. I was commenting on what you said earlier.

I also said the source stating the guy is a spy is the fbi. Aka Muller is the source. And they refer to him as person a in the reports.

Also, I stated it was troubling to see someone who is pro trump try to fine faults in this report of collusion even though it obvious so clearly obvious to being collusion.

There is so much misinformation here I don't know where to begin.

@Nuck81 said: In a disastrous blunder, manaforts lawyers failed to properly redact sensitive information on his recent court filing.

One of the charges is, providing polling data to the Kremlin.

False. There are no charges forthcoming in relation to this. Furthermore there is no mention of the word "Kremlin" nor is he accused of providing any information to them. More on this below.

The defense team says Mueller’s team has indicated that they will not pursue additional charges against Manafort.

@Nuck81 said: Manafort was providing Republican voter polling data to the Kremlin in order for them to specifically target certain demographics with customized propoganda in order to sway public opinion in favor of trump.

Patently false. Manafort provided polling data to an associate. That associate is alleged to have ties to Russian intelligence. That's all it is at this point.

They also do not speculate on what purpose this polling data intended to serve. That unfounded assertion was made by you alone and is provided without any evidence to support your conclusion.

Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort shared polling data during the 2016 presidential campaign with an associate accused of having ties to Russian intelligence and lied to federal investigators about it, according to a court filing Tuesday.

@Nuck81 said: This propoganda came in the form of memes, social media bots, as well as Twitter and Facebook accounts.

This information is found nowhere in the article you quoted. You made it up. AKA lying and inventing information. You must be a journalist.

@Nuck81 said: Mueller has specific evidence and proof of collusion with Russia.

Yet another tinfoil hat fabrication stated nowhere in the material you sourced.

It's more troubling to see you and others construe something that would be natural in any business relationship as proof of collusion.

@Damedius: here is what you are still not getting.

The people who are part of the government hired to investigate crime and the people who are part of the government hired to do spy work state the guy Manafort is conected to is a spy. And Manafort's lawyer accidently in a email PDF revealed Manafort being trump's campaign manager was giving this spy us election data to give to heada in the Russian government..

And they were trying a failing to his it.

None of that ring any bells?

@sn0man: https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/01/09/politics/manafort-ukrainian-oligarchs/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F

"Manafort intended for polling data to go to 2 Ukrainian oligarchs who owed him millions

Lawmakers respond to Manafort revelation 02:36

(CNN) — Serhiy Lyovochkin and Rinat Akhmetov, two Ukrainian oligarchs who had paid Paul Manafort for years for his political work in their country, were the intended recipients of the American polling data that Manafort shared with Konstantin Kilimnik during the 2016 presidential campaign, a person familiar with the matter said on Wednesday.

Special counsel Robert Mueller's team has been circling Lyovochkin and Akhmetov's dealings with Manafort for a while, as they were both key, generous backers of Manafort's Ukrainian lobbying work, prosecutors said at Manafort's financial fraud trial last summer.

The Justice Department initially asked Mueller to look into the pro-Russian Ukrainians' ties to Manafort, a former Trump campaign chairman, because of how they may relate to other allegations of Russian coordination with the Trump campaign."

Dude the source of all this is the justice department.

You mean like people in the government who said that there were "weapons of mass destruction". Or like people in the government who said Assad gassed his own people?

Or how about these examples of people in the US government lying?

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chapman/ct-cia-james-clapper-spying-steve-chapman-oped-080-20140807-column.html

A diplomat was once defined as someone whose job is to lie for his country. That's apparently what makes diplomats different from intelligence officers, whose function is to lie to their country.

How else can you explain why CIA Director John Brennan still has his job? Or how Director of National Intelligence James Clapper remains on the federal payroll? Or why Keith Alexander stepped down as head of the National Security Agency only when he was good and ready?

Each of them lied flagrantly to the American people about vital matters of public concern. None paid a price.

You will have to forgive me if I'm a little skeptical.

...proceeds to quote CNN.

You would have been better off quoting buzzfeed or the guardian.

CNN is a legitamite source of news regardless of what nonsense republicans spew about it.

@sn0man: dude. I'm quoting cnn who is quoting the justice department. Understand how sources work. Not like who says it does not mean what ever source they use it wrong. In the end it's the justice deparment who is saying everything you are trying to discredit.

@Damedius: the us govermenr is not the only ones who are saying he is a spy. Sorry but the holes you trying to make are only dicrediting yourself.

Using a straw man to get out of admitting and obvious truth.

*your just jumping to conclusions. You have no valid source.

* you have a source but it's told by a biased news channel.

*So the source is from the federal government....well they lied before.

*So other governments can confirm it....maybe they are lying ,too.

Dude, stop there is a clear reason why they Manafort tried to cover it up and he has long time been caught lying and convicted for fraud. This dude literally is a criminal and is currently in jail for lying.Sorry but all the proof hear that there is obvious collusion.

@Serraph105: @dreman999: Why do you guys bother trying to use reason and logic with trump supporters? trump wasn't lying when he said he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose any votes.

I honestly don't have an answer for this question.

Manafort was convicted of five counts of tax fraud, one count of failure to file a report of foreign bank and financial accounts and two counts of bank fraud.

None of those are collusion and all were prior to his involvement with the Trump campaign.

I think you should actually read the OP. And if you did then you just blew reading comprehension.

@Damedius: someone need to understand the difference to someone pointing out someone is a lier and they were not using as proof of collusion.

Regardless my aource and proof that collusion happen is still the statement and facta giving out by the state department.

You have yet to prove they are lying on this.

Add on that.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/fox-news-legal-analyst-says-150653763.html

Fox News Anchor, Legal Analyst See Evidence of ‘Collusion’ Between Trump Campaign and Russia

"This shows that Bob Mueller can demonstrate to a court without the testimony of Paul Manafort that the campaign had a connection to Russian intelligence and the connection involved information going from the campaign to the Russians,” Napolitano said. “The question is, was this in return for a promise of something from the Russians, and did the candidate, now the president, know about it?”

From a legal expert on fox news.

So if I write down some of my own conclusions based on an article linked, you will consider them fact as well without reading the article?

Most of what the OP said is not in the article they linked. That says a lot about you because you made your first statement in the thread before the link actually worked.

So, you are basically one of Damedious or Jackanucks alt accounts in order to add more conservative to these boards. Come clean.

Come on the only reasonable explanation is that he is a Russian bot who infiltrated these forums to subvert the American Republic.

Any person who has viewpoints that differ from your own has to be an agent of the Kremlin, there is no other explanation.

@Damedius: their are in other articles on the net. You have to be blind or stuck in a box not to see them.

Not everyone is obsessed as you are and spends all day looking for articles proving that Trump is literally Hitler.

That also doesn't take anything away from my point that several people took what the OP said at face value without checking the link and also decided to comment on it, again without checking the link.

Since you obviously have done all the research, please provide the evidence for the collusion you claim.

bro, don't even bother. I'm starting to see how it's pointless to debate these people. Instead of refuting your points, they switch the topic. All i have seen this ENTIRE thread is ALLEGATIONS, he said/she said, etc....

Saying Russian collusion happened because of an American diplomat speaking to Russians is the same argument as Barack Obama colluding with China because he said they are great allies....

Did they exchange polling data for money to a known russian agent?

Error 401: Bot Confirmed. Cannot comprehend difference of opinions. Must continue screeching irrelevant stuff to win argument

Of course Trump knew about it.

It amazes me that everyone around him are dropping like flies, making deals, being found guilty, singing like canaries, yet his followers still believe he is completely absolved of any wrongdoing. You mine as well try to make the argument that Pablo Escobar was a shining beacon on the hill that held admirable values that's never done wrong in his life while everyone around him placed bombs on planes, slaughtered people in the streets like animals, and created havoc. The degree of cognitive dissonance to believe such a thing about Trump is mind boggling and, at this point, predicates itself solely on technicality of law. Especially if you know anything about his corrupt past and hold an inkling of human decency, basic powers of observation, and common sense.

With Trump, any reasonable person knows this guy is guilty as sin. For his followers, they need to have the dots connected by others for them and shoved in their faces again and again, because it's really not about Trump's guilt at all, it's about their resistance to being shown that they have been wrong all along in their judgement. Which they have.

Who needs evidence when we can just rely on your feelings?

I wonder how long it took for him to come up with this emotional drivel haha

@nattydaddy604: there ia a difference between talking and exchanging election data

@Damedius:

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/fox-news-legal-analyst-says-150653763.html

Fox News Anchor, Legal Analyst See Evidence of ‘Collusion’ Between Trump Campaign and Russia

"This shows that Bob Mueller can demonstrate to a court without the testimony of Paul Manafort that the campaign had a connection to Russian intelligence and the connection involved information going from the campaign to the Russians,” Napolitano said. “The question is, was this in return for a promise of something from the Russians, and did the candidate, now the president, know about it?”

From a legal expert on fox news

He's clearly using facts.

@Damedius: dude this literal is a topic about Manafort's idiot lawyers accidently giving out info proving collusion with Russia.

And on that point.

Add on that.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/fox-news-legal-analyst-says-150653763.html

Fox News Anchor, Legal Analyst See Evidence of ‘Collusion’ Between Trump Campaign and Russia

"This shows that Bob Mueller can demonstrate to a court without the testimony of Paul Manafort that the campaign had a connection to Russian intelligence and the connection involved information going from the campaign to the Russians,” Napolitano said. “The question is, was this in return for a promise of something from the Russians, and did the candidate, now the president, know about it?”

From a legal expert on fox news

@MirkoS77: I think this was from Ohio some 6 months ago I think.

Look at the twitter picture. Normally I would just post the picture here... But I don't want that shit on my profile.

Edit:

This about sums up the Republican party right now. pic.twitter.com/Kh1G3QocZD

— Noah Smith (@Noahpinion) 5. august 2018

So, no evidence, just opinions?

Again, technicality of law.

How do you believe investigations are started? Intuition, suspicion, and gut feelings based on observation and circumstance. There are many people behind bars due to nothing but something that began as such. The proceeding of legal inquiry and evidence accrued in substantiating what granted it impetus is initially based on the unsubstantiated, but not the unreasonable. Legal proceedings at this point are a pure formality, yet you and your ilk act like there's no reason at all to hold suspicion when you see people all around Trump dropping like flies not to mention his past actions that paint a character prone to corruption. You not only defend him on legal premise, amazingly, you genuinely believe there's no cause for the pursuit of him in the first place.

So go ahead, hide behind legal standards. Again, any person in the world existing in reality and not blinded by and beholden to ideological and partisan conviction (not to mention alternative facts) can recognize the rotten before its stench is proven to exist.