Boom!!!! Judge in Manafort case says Mueller only wants to hurt Trump

[JakeStarkey]

It is wonderful to listen to the Trumpers scream in denial.

So sweet!

 

[BULLDOG]

They wrote exoneration papers for her before her and other key witnesses even testified.......One business day after her testimony and they cleared her. The Clinton Foundation got over 90 million in laundered money from HSBC.....Bank........and low and behold............guess who used to be on the board there................COMEY........nice job bro..........sit back do nothing and rake in the dough..........quite there to be the top dog at the FBI.............WOOF WOOF..............

This same bank laundered over a 100 million to the drug cartels...........no one went to jail..........Talk about Corruption and LAWLESSNESS...............no justice..............They freaking funded Drug Cartels..............This country is fucked.

Stop believing RW propaganda. Get a fucking brain.

Nope, lotsa research, and what did I say that was a lie. All facts in evidence. You just aren't paying attention. I watch BOTH sides of the news believe it or not.

So, tell us.........what you got on the collusion/delusion? Tell us 1 thing tied to Trump, anything. They have multiples tied to the Hillary campaign. Now you tell everyone how that statement is a lie!

Did or did NOT the Obama officials DENY their was a FISA warrant pertaining to the Trump campaign? Was that a lie or not-) I can go on, and on, but you already know everything I am going to say........for the most part..........and I know everything you can NOT say, lolol!

You poor silly RWNJ. You still look at the situation as a competition between Trump and Hillary. Here's a news flash for you. That election was over a long time ago. This is about the criminal activity of our current orange president. Try to catch up.

Stop believing RW propaganda. Get a fucking brain.

Use google...............and confirm it your dang self...........He was on that board............They were CHARGED with MONEY LAUNDERING to the drug Cartels..................

He quit and became TOP DOG............and they gave money to the Clinton Foundation.......I've shown that evidence on other threads from multiple sources.............

Now hold your nose and blow as hard as you can and maybe you can dislodge your head from your ass.

Mueller isn't up against Amateurs.............This is a knife fight..................and your side is starting to lose.....Why...because the Truth wins the day..........Only evidence of Collusion is your side.......Lying FBI officials LEAKING everything to the press.................

KARMA...........deal with it.

Ummm, I would like to point out a VERY important point-------->

According to the policy of the DOJ and justice department under BOTH party's, a sitting President can NOT be indicted. He can be impeached, but not indicted. This law/rule, has NOT changed. It was spelled out on multiple occasions that to indict, a President must be out of office.

So you might ask, "so Whosure, you are saying that once Trump leaves office, he is in a world of hurt!"

Maybe yes, maybe no. If they go into his business dealings, I suppose anything is possible.............but I wasn't bringing that statement up thinking about Trump. The key word is "sitting!" Soooooooooo, can you think of any non-sitting Presidents who can now be indicted, possibly for civil rights violations, or money laundering into a foundation-)

Would you mind pointing out which law, or written policy says that?

Sure, and it was decided both in 1972 or 73, and by the DOJ during the Clinton impeachment hearings. The SC will uphold the law, no doubt about it!

And in case you don't like that one, try this one-) It would go to the supreme court, but that is ok-)

You posted a video by Lavin. That's just sad.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Levin? That's pitiful.

 

[eagle1462010]

Mueller breaks the case...........

 

[imawhosure]

Stop believing RW propaganda. Get a fucking brain.

You poor silly RWNJ. You still look at the situation as a competition between Trump and Hillary. Here's a news flash for you. That election was over a long time ago. This is about the criminal activity of our current orange president. Try to catch up.

Use google...............and confirm it your dang self...........He was on that board............They were CHARGED with MONEY LAUNDERING to the drug Cartels..................

He quit and became TOP DOG............and they gave money to the Clinton Foundation.......I've shown that evidence on other threads from multiple sources.............

Now hold your nose and blow as hard as you can and maybe you can dislodge your head from your ass.

Mueller isn't up against Amateurs.............This is a knife fight..................and your side is starting to lose.....Why...because the Truth wins the day..........Only evidence of Collusion is your side.......Lying FBI officials LEAKING everything to the press.................

KARMA...........deal with it.

Ummm, I would like to point out a VERY important point-------->

According to the policy of the DOJ and justice department under BOTH party's, a sitting President can NOT be indicted. He can be impeached, but not indicted. This law/rule, has NOT changed. It was spelled out on multiple occasions that to indict, a President must be out of office.

So you might ask, "so Whosure, you are saying that once Trump leaves office, he is in a world of hurt!"

Maybe yes, maybe no. If they go into his business dealings, I suppose anything is possible.............but I wasn't bringing that statement up thinking about Trump. The key word is "sitting!" Soooooooooo, can you think of any non-sitting Presidents who can now be indicted, possibly for civil rights violations, or money laundering into a foundation-)

Would you mind pointing out which law, or written policy says that?

Sure, and it was decided both in 1972 or 73, and by the DOJ during the Clinton impeachment hearings. The SC will uphold the law, no doubt about it!

And in case you don't like that one, try this one-) It would go to the supreme court, but that is ok-)

You posted a video by Lavin. That's just sad.

1. His name is Levin

2. He worked in the DOJ

3. He has given you proof, like it or not that you can research yourself

4. Prominent Liberal Dershowitz concurs, emeritus from Harvard

Typical response............attack the messenger. People like you, really do not get it, or maybe you do, and do not care. I voted for BILL CLINTON the 2nd time, yes I did! You see, a red hat, or blue hat means NOTHING! What means something is our country, and its laws. We didn't get to where we are by ignoring the laws of the land. It protects ALL of us, red hats and blue hats alike. If we don't like the laws, we collectively change them. Not you people, you IGNORE THEM! Totalitarian in essence.

Your side used to be the champions of civil liberties. Now look at you, just look! You only want to protect people who agree with you, and throw out the rules for people who don't!

This all is going to end badly for your side, if for nothing else, it is a moral issue...........equal protection under the law. One whiff of overstepping by the government in this case, is going to bring your whole political world down on your ears, and it appears that there is not only 1, there are several.

Your side has been working 16 months in the public eye, and has little to nothing. Now watch what happens starting on this side after the IG report. A tsunami is coming purposely designed for the midterms, inspired by you totalitarians, to have the biggest impact at the correct time. And you know what your biggest problem is going to be? WE HAVE PROOF, and not innuendo-)

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Unfreaking real. Awesome development.

"You don't really care about Mr. Manafort's bank fraud," District Judge T.S. Ellis said to prosecutor Michael Dreeben, at times losing his temper. Ellis said prosecutors were interested in Manafort because of his potential to provide material that would lead to Trump's "prosecution or impeachment," Ellis said.

"That's what you're really interested in," said Ellis, who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan.

He repeated his suspicion several times in the hour-long court hearing."

Judge in Manafort case says Mueller's aim is to hurt Trump - CNNPolitics

I guess we know who the next SCOTUS nominee will likely be eh?

 

[BULLDOG]

Ummm, I would like to point out a VERY important point-------->

According to the policy of the DOJ and justice department under BOTH party's, a sitting President can NOT be indicted. He can be impeached, but not indicted. This law/rule, has NOT changed. It was spelled out on multiple occasions that to indict, a President must be out of office.

So you might ask, "so Whosure, you are saying that once Trump leaves office, he is in a world of hurt!"

Maybe yes, maybe no. If they go into his business dealings, I suppose anything is possible.............but I wasn't bringing that statement up thinking about Trump. The key word is "sitting!" Soooooooooo, can you think of any non-sitting Presidents who can now be indicted, possibly for civil rights violations, or money laundering into a foundation-)

Would you mind pointing out which law, or written policy says that?

Sure, and it was decided both in 1972 or 73, and by the DOJ during the Clinton impeachment hearings. The SC will uphold the law, no doubt about it!

And in case you don't like that one, try this one-) It would go to the supreme court, but that is ok-)

You posted a video by Lavin. That's just sad.

1. His name is Levin

2. He worked in the DOJ

3. He has given you proof, like it or not that you can research yourself

4. Prominent Liberal Dershowitz concurs, emeritus from Harvard

Typical response............attack the messenger. People like you, really do not get it, or maybe you do, and do not care. I voted for BILL CLINTON the 2nd time, yes I did! You see, a red hat, or blue hat means NOTHING! What means something is our country, and its laws. We didn't get to where we are by ignoring the laws of the land. It protects ALL of us, red hats and blue hats alike. If we don't like the laws, we collectively change them. Not you people, you IGNORE THEM! Totalitarian in essence.

Your side used to be the champions of civil liberties. Now look at you, just look! You only want to protect people who agree with you, and throw out the rules for people who don't!

This all is going to end badly for your side, if for nothing else, it is a moral issue...........equal protection under the law. One whiff of overstepping by the government in this case, is going to bring your whole political world down on your ears, and it appears that there is not only 1, there are several.

Your side has been working 16 months in the public eye, and has little to nothing. Now watch what happens starting on this side after the IG report. A tsunami is coming purposely designed for the midterms, inspired by you totalitarians, to have the biggest impact at the correct time. And you know what your biggest problem is going to be? WE HAVE PROOF, and not innuendo-)

Levin is a whiny idiot who wishes he was as credible as Alex Jones. What about some proof of that law or written policy, or did you forget about that?

 

[imawhosure]

Would you mind pointing out which law, or written policy says that?

Sure, and it was decided both in 1972 or 73, and by the DOJ during the Clinton impeachment hearings. The SC will uphold the law, no doubt about it!

And in case you don't like that one, try this one-) It would go to the supreme court, but that is ok-)

You posted a video by Lavin. That's just sad.

1. His name is Levin

2. He worked in the DOJ

3. He has given you proof, like it or not that you can research yourself

4. Prominent Liberal Dershowitz concurs, emeritus from Harvard

Typical response............attack the messenger. People like you, really do not get it, or maybe you do, and do not care. I voted for BILL CLINTON the 2nd time, yes I did! You see, a red hat, or blue hat means NOTHING! What means something is our country, and its laws. We didn't get to where we are by ignoring the laws of the land. It protects ALL of us, red hats and blue hats alike. If we don't like the laws, we collectively change them. Not you people, you IGNORE THEM! Totalitarian in essence.

Your side used to be the champions of civil liberties. Now look at you, just look! You only want to protect people who agree with you, and throw out the rules for people who don't!

This all is going to end badly for your side, if for nothing else, it is a moral issue...........equal protection under the law. One whiff of overstepping by the government in this case, is going to bring your whole political world down on your ears, and it appears that there is not only 1, there are several.

Your side has been working 16 months in the public eye, and has little to nothing. Now watch what happens starting on this side after the IG report. A tsunami is coming purposely designed for the midterms, inspired by you totalitarians, to have the biggest impact at the correct time. And you know what your biggest problem is going to be? WE HAVE PROOF, and not innuendo-)

Levin is a whiny idiot who wishes he was as credible as Alex Jones. What about some proof of that law or written policy, or did you forget about that?

It is in the archives for cry sake. I told you, under Nixon and Clintons DOJ, the policy was made, and agreed upon. You are a social justice warrior, look it up! 2 videos by prominent lawyers, 1 conservative, and 1 liberal, if that doesn't pique your "need to know," then you don't NEED TO KNOW, lololol!

 

[BULLDOG]

Sure, and it was decided both in 1972 or 73, and by the DOJ during the Clinton impeachment hearings. The SC will uphold the law, no doubt about it!

And in case you don't like that one, try this one-) It would go to the supreme court, but that is ok-)

You posted a video by Lavin. That's just sad.

1. His name is Levin

2. He worked in the DOJ

3. He has given you proof, like it or not that you can research yourself

4. Prominent Liberal Dershowitz concurs, emeritus from Harvard

Typical response............attack the messenger. People like you, really do not get it, or maybe you do, and do not care. I voted for BILL CLINTON the 2nd time, yes I did! You see, a red hat, or blue hat means NOTHING! What means something is our country, and its laws. We didn't get to where we are by ignoring the laws of the land. It protects ALL of us, red hats and blue hats alike. If we don't like the laws, we collectively change them. Not you people, you IGNORE THEM! Totalitarian in essence.

Your side used to be the champions of civil liberties. Now look at you, just look! You only want to protect people who agree with you, and throw out the rules for people who don't!

This all is going to end badly for your side, if for nothing else, it is a moral issue...........equal protection under the law. One whiff of overstepping by the government in this case, is going to bring your whole political world down on your ears, and it appears that there is not only 1, there are several.

Your side has been working 16 months in the public eye, and has little to nothing. Now watch what happens starting on this side after the IG report. A tsunami is coming purposely designed for the midterms, inspired by you totalitarians, to have the biggest impact at the correct time. And you know what your biggest problem is going to be? WE HAVE PROOF, and not innuendo-)

Levin is a whiny idiot who wishes he was as credible as Alex Jones. What about some proof of that law or written policy, or did you forget about that?

It is in the archives for cry sake. I told you, under Nixon and Clintons DOJ, the policy was made, and agreed upon. You are a social justice warrior, look it up! 2 videos by prominent lawyers, 1 conservative, and 1 liberal, if that doesn't pique your "need to know," then you don't NEED TO KNOW, lololol!

You want me to do your homework for you? Your claim. Prove it or STFU.

 

[dudmuck]

Is the FBI enough? Slimeball, lyin' Comey for starters! Esmeralda, did you graduate high school? If so, where. Just curious.

Did the FBI indict her? Moron. You think she owns the FBI and every other law enforcement agency in the US? You're an idiot. Your brain is nothing but mush.

They wrote exoneration papers for her before her and other key witnesses even testified.......One business day after her testimony and they cleared her. The Clinton Foundation got over 90 million in laundered money from HSBC.....Bank........and low and behold............guess who used to be on the board there................COMEY........nice job bro..........sit back do nothing and rake in the dough..........quite there to be the top dog at the FBI.............WOOF WOOF..............

This same bank laundered over a 100 million to the drug cartels...........no one went to jail..........Talk about Corruption and LAWLESSNESS...............no justice..............They freaking funded Drug Cartels..............This country is fucked.

Stop believing RW propaganda. Get a fucking brain.

In the context of Trump, Russia, collusion, it is over, and everyone knows it, except maybe you. Now, if you want to talk about what Manefort did 10 years ago, that is fine. Let it be known though that he was under investigation BEFORE he became Trumps temporary campaign manager, so is kind of out of the scope of the special counsel. Let it also be known that the scope was set AFTER the raid of his home, which is kind of shaky legal ground.

For you Leftists on here who do not follow this whole fiasco closely, you better understand you now need to change your position. Even most media has had to, as pushing the collusion/delusion has gotten their favorite people (the Dimikrauts) into more hot water than Trump. And do you know why the media has switched gears also? Because the collusion/delusion is going to take a very, very, VERY nasty turn when the IG report drops, now that he has a Utah prosecutor on his team to indict.

I know, I know, if you haven't followed closely or weren't paying attention, you are scratching your head or possibly laughing, mumbling something like, "no way Jose," but you better start looking into it before poop smacks you in the face as you weren't aware you might have to duck soon-)

Lets all be honest with what has happened, and everyone can see it------------->

1.The media started this collusion by using leaks.

2. The leaks they reported on looked very bad for Trump.

3. The Republicans even bought into the notion.

4. Then something AMAZING happened! Someone took all the reports (leaks) from the media, put them together, and realized there was something really wrong there. (and you could do it too if you wanted to for yourself with minimal research, you don't have to take my, or their word, you could prove it to yourself)

5. When the "something is really wrong here" was 1st brought out, every Democrat in congress, the FBI, the DOJ, and the media laughed and said, "conspiracy," remember! Funny thing was----------> it was the medias OWN reporting that was used, and the leaks provided to them by the left-) And so, either the media had to RETRACT what they had written, or stand behind their sources and words. They STOOD BEHIND IT.

6. And that is how YOUR side has screwed itself, lol, because the reporting and facts did not jibe. The timeline was impossible without prior knowledge by the leakers, and everything they said has now opened a can of worms for..........in all honesty.......the LAST administration, thus the Democrat hierarchy. Why do you think people are leaving in droves?

7. And let me be the 1st to tell you this-------------> see all those Republicans resigning or not running for reelection? Know why? Cause Trump is guilty, correct, and they have no chance, right! Nope!!!! Because while there is always turnover, some of these are because they know what is coming. The swamp is NOT just made of Democrats you know, and it wasn't only Democrats who wanted Trump out to keep the status quo.

8. Did you see that Baker and Paige resigned from the FBI? Yes, I mean that PAIGE!!!!!! Gee, wonder why now-) Oh, I know what they said in a statement, but, we all know that is baloney-macaroni-and cheese, lol.

Ummmmmmmm, yeah Lefties, you really need to start paying a little more attention!

And how long did it take for the voices in your head to convince you of all that?

Nope, lotsa research, and what did I say that was a lie. All facts in evidence. You just aren't paying attention. I watch BOTH sides of the news believe it or not.

So, tell us.........what you got on the collusion/delusion? Tell us 1 thing tied to Trump, anything. They have multiples tied to the Hillary campaign. Now you tell everyone how that statement is a lie!

Did or did NOT the Obama officials DENY their was a FISA warrant pertaining to the Trump campaign? Was that a lie or not-) I can go on, and on, but you already know everything I am going to say........for the most part..........and I know everything you can NOT say, lolol!

You poor silly RWNJ. You still look at the situation as a competition between Trump and Hillary. Here's a news flash for you. That election was over a long time ago. This is about the criminal activity of our current orange president. Try to catch up.

Did the FBI indict her? Moron. You think she owns the FBI and every other law enforcement agency in the US? You're an idiot. Your brain is nothing but mush.

They wrote exoneration papers for her before her and other key witnesses even testified.......One business day after her testimony and they cleared her. The Clinton Foundation got over 90 million in laundered money from HSBC.....Bank........and low and behold............guess who used to be on the board there................COMEY........nice job bro..........sit back do nothing and rake in the dough..........quite there to be the top dog at the FBI.............WOOF WOOF..............

This same bank laundered over a 100 million to the drug cartels...........no one went to jail..........Talk about Corruption and LAWLESSNESS...............no justice..............They freaking funded Drug Cartels..............This country is fucked.

Stop believing RW propaganda. Get a fucking brain.

Use google...............and confirm it your dang self...........He was on that board............They were CHARGED with MONEY LAUNDERING to the drug Cartels..................

He quit and became TOP DOG............and they gave money to the Clinton Foundation.......I've shown that evidence on other threads from multiple sources.............

Now hold your nose and blow as hard as you can and maybe you can dislodge your head from your ass.

Mueller isn't up against Amateurs.............This is a knife fight..................and your side is starting to lose.....Why...because the Truth wins the day..........Only evidence of Collusion is your side.......Lying FBI officials LEAKING everything to the press.................

KARMA...........deal with it.

Ummm, I would like to point out a VERY important point-------->

According to the policy of the DOJ and justice department under BOTH party's, a sitting President can NOT be indicted. He can be impeached, but not indicted. This law/rule, has NOT changed. It was spelled out on multiple occasions that to indict, a President must be out of office.

So you might ask, "so Whosure, you are saying that once Trump leaves office, he is in a world of hurt!"

Maybe yes, maybe no. If they go into his business dealings, I suppose anything is possible.............but I wasn't bringing that statement up thinking about Trump. The key word is "sitting!" Soooooooooo, can you think of any non-sitting Presidents who can now be indicted, possibly for civil rights violations, or money laundering into a foundation-)

Would you mind pointing out which law, or written policy says that?

Its actually much more simple than that. We dont have a King in this country. Meaning nobody is above the law.
A good description of the situation is here.
The key point is that impeachment is only for removal from office. The only way to understand it is to know both the "exclusivity argument" and the "functionality argument".

 

[JimBowie1958]

Leave Hillary out of this, we are talking about the crooked Trump, crooked Manafort and bias judge. You seem to be short of knowledge. A bias judge hired by Reagan. Voice voted in.

Crooked Hillary is "all in" on the Hamburger Hill Mueller Witch Hunt! No offense, did you graduate high school by any chance? If so, where?

That judges opinion means nothing and he should not of brought it up, Manafort is crooked, and that is what he should concentrate on, I imagine he had a personal call from Trump, since he seems to be a trumper.

Also the GOP has been through Hillary for what , since 92 and have got nothing. I guess that makes her innocent. They have raked the Clintons over the coals since 92 and nothing.

All of B. Clintons presidency, and you have an issue with Mueller, you have long ways to go.

Thank you Penelope for reminding me how utterly partisan you Democrats can be.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Its actually much more simple than that. We dont have a King in this country. Meaning nobody is above the law.
A good description of the situation is here.
The key point is that impeachment is only for removal from office. The only way to understand it is to know both the "exclusivity argument" and the "functionality argument".

Nobody is above the law but the people that write those laws and enforce them can and do exempt themselves and their friends from those laws or simply refuse to enforce the law against them.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Nope, lotsa research, and what did I say that was a lie. All facts in evidence. You just aren't paying attention. I watch BOTH sides of the news believe it or not.

I watch CNN, FOX and read CNN on the internet, and triangulate from there.

CNN is a good window on the way Democrats are thinking and FOX is for conservative Republicans


Which is why I weep for Dimocrats.

 

[dannyboys]

Mueller's witch hunters went back and dug up a case against Manafort that was settled thirteen years ago. That REALLY pissed off the judge!
Yesterday Crissy Matthews accused the judge of being "too old" to be a judge".
Someone ought to have asked Matthews how old Ruth Ginsberg is.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Mueller's witch hunters went back and dug up a case against Manafort that was settled thirteen years ago. That REALLY pissed off the judge!
Yesterday Crissy Matthews accused the judge of being "too old" to be a judge".
Someone ought to have asked Matthews how old Ruth Ginsberg is.

This is another example of how bad partisanship is consuming the Democrats and libtards.

Matthews is mentally defective if he cannot understand the basis for the judges requests.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The judge has no idea of their motives. He only knows the details of the case before him and not the entirety of the investigation.

your honor, this dossier we're submitting into evidence was used to start this entire preceding. We would like the prosecutor to explain how we got here since this document is not validated. how did a federal judge get a warrant off of this document? we ask to have the case dismissed.

^ Truly dopey.
That is not within the purview of the case before the judge even if it were true.

LOL...now you want to bring up PURVIEW...with Mueller...LOL, dumbass.

It was in regard to the judge, dope.

I understand what you were trying to say, the judge should stay within the lines, but not Mueller....dumbass.

Mueller wasn't mentioned in the post, dope.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The Judge has recognized that Mueller's FBI pulled the raid and Rosenstein issued the expanded realm for Mueller AFTER THE FUCKING RAID.

Correct... they had no legal standing to ask for the raid let alone do it..

Sure, that's why the judge signed off on it.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Judge said what we've been saying all along. He's out of bounds with the scope of his investigation. In this case trying to charge Manafort with so called crimes from a decade before the so called collusion.

The Judge confirmed that none of this has anything to do with Russia, the Ukraine, and Collusion and asked why it was in his court room. Should be handled in a lower court.

The FBI is trying to sentence Manafort for over 300 years for tax evasion and money laundering charges that have nothing to do with the scope assigned to Mueller.

Dirty cops playing dirty and out of bounds with their assignment. They were chastised on that as well.

Judge said what we've been saying all along. He's out of bounds with the scope of his investigation

It's not up to the judge or you to decide what is within Mueller's scope. That decision is made by Rosenstein who decided it was.

 

[eagle1462010]

Judge said what we've been saying all along. He's out of bounds with the scope of his investigation. In this case trying to charge Manafort with so called crimes from a decade before the so called collusion.

The Judge confirmed that none of this has anything to do with Russia, the Ukraine, and Collusion and asked why it was in his court room. Should be handled in a lower court.

The FBI is trying to sentence Manafort for over 300 years for tax evasion and money laundering charges that have nothing to do with the scope assigned to Mueller.

Dirty cops playing dirty and out of bounds with their assignment. They were chastised on that as well.

Judge said what we've been saying all along. He's out of bounds with the scope of his investigation

It's not up to the judge or you to decide what is within Mueller's scope. That decision is made by Rosenstein who decided it was.

It's within his power to send them packing for being in the wrong court of law...........Also within his power to see that scope to make sure he isn't sending them to a lower court for them being out of bounds............Can't decide that without seeing it..........Now can he.

It's his COURT ROOM NOT MUELLERS...............TASTING REALITY YET.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Alt Right Land and its landsers are just so desperate.