Conspiracy is a Gates-way drug (New flip+guilty plea +++WOW+++): Investigation v. 14

Status
Not open for further replies.
Edison Carasio said:
Please provide the number of times Hillary has pled guilty to criminal charges that resulted from investigations

Vs.

The number of people from Trumps campaign who have pled guilty to charges that resulted from investigations.


Which do you think is higher?
Click to expand...



The Clintons admitting guilt?


Do you even politics? Like them or not, they’re political heavyweights. They and their lawyers know better.



It also helps when the fbi Director drafts your exoneration before you’re actually interviewed...
 
Cake4Breakfast said:
LOL, Bob you really are not cut out for this are you? You have been shit posting about Hillary and uranium one on here forever, yet when you have the chance to back it up, once and for all, you don’t even try to connect the dots? And the fact that you tried to bluff like you actually made a case, and then added on a little touchdown dance! <Dany07>



You were challenged to back up your accusations and make a factual case against Hillary and you cut and paste from and drop a link to a Hill article that doesn't even mention her. If you were capable of reading closely though, you would have seen that the Hill article actually states the biggest problem with the "don't look at Trump and Russia case/ look over here at the Hillary and uranium one bullshit:" that Clinton was one of 9 cabinets members who voted, meaning that she didn't have the power to approve the deal on her own.

As for the whole quid pro quo behind the donations to the Clinton foundation argument, it too falls apart when you actually read beyond the Breitbart headlines and Trump tweets about Hillary colluding with Russians in "this generation's Watergate," and actually look at the facts. Of the $145 million allegedly contributed to the Clinton Foundation by Uranium One investors, 90% came from Frank Giustra, the company’s CANADIAN founder who sold off his shares 18 months before Hillary was Secretary of State (which if you recall is when everyone thought she was going to be POTUS), and 3 years before the deal. And of the remaining folks connected with Uranium One who donated to the Clinton Foundation, only one was found to have contributed during the same time frame that the deal was taking place, and that was Ian Telfer, who is also a CANADIAN, is the company’s chairman. From the New York Time article you referenced:

"His donations through the Fernwood Foundation included $1 million reported in 2009, the year his company appealed to the American Embassy to help it keep its mines in Kazakhstan; $250,000 in 2010, the year the Russians sought majority control; as well as $600,000 in 2011 and $500,000 in 2012. Mr. Telfer said that his donations had nothing to do with his business dealings, and that he had never discussed Uranium One with Mr. or Mrs. Clinton. He said he had given the money because he wanted to support Mr. Giustra’s charitable endeavors with Mr. Clinton. “Frank and I have been friends and business partners for almost 20 years,” he said."

Anything else Bob?<Moves>
Click to expand...
<bball2>
 


Seems to indicate Mueller is more than happy with what Gates gave up.
 
Cake4Breakfast said:
LOL, Bob you really are not cut out for this are you? You have been shit posting about Hillary and uranium one on here forever, yet when you have the chance to back it up, once and for all, you don’t even try to connect the dots? And the fact that you tried to bluff like you actually made a case, and then added on a little touchdown dance! <Dany07>



You were challenged to back up your accusations and make a factual case against Hillary and you cut and paste from and drop a link to a Hill article that doesn't even mention her. If you were capable of reading closely though, you would have seen that the Hill article actually states the biggest problem with the "don't look at Trump and Russia case/ look over here at the Hillary and uranium one bullshit:" that Clinton was one of 9 cabinets members who voted, meaning that she didn't have the power to approve the deal on her own.

As for the whole quid pro quo behind the donations to the Clinton foundation argument, it too falls apart when you actually read beyond the Breitbart headlines and Trump tweets about Hillary colluding with Russians in "this generation's Watergate," and actually look at the facts. Of the $145 million allegedly contributed to the Clinton Foundation by Uranium One investors, 90% came from Frank Giustra, the company’s CANADIAN founder who sold off his shares 18 months before Hillary was Secretary of State (which if you recall is when everyone thought she was going to be POTUS), and 3 years before the deal. And of the remaining folks connected with Uranium One who donated to the Clinton Foundation, only one was found to have contributed during the same time frame that the deal was taking place, and that was Ian Telfer, who is also a CANADIAN, is the company’s chairman. From the New York Time article you referenced:

"His donations through the Fernwood Foundation included $1 million reported in 2009, the year his company appealed to the American Embassy to help it keep its mines in Kazakhstan; $250,000 in 2010, the year the Russians sought majority control; as well as $600,000 in 2011 and $500,000 in 2012. Mr. Telfer said that his donations had nothing to do with his business dealings, and that he had never discussed Uranium One with Mr. or Mrs. Clinton. He said he had given the money because he wanted to support Mr. Giustra’s charitable endeavors with Mr. Clinton. “Frank and I have been friends and business partners for almost 20 years,” he said."

Anything else Bob?<Moves>
Click to expand...





And the other millions that flowed to the Clintons from parties with interests in uranium one?



Not to mention...


Moscow routed millions of dollars to the U.S. expecting the funds would benefit ex-President Bill Clinton’s charitable initiative while his wife, Hillary Clinton, worked to reset relations with Russia, an FBI informant in an Obama administration-era uranium deal stated.

The Hill reported on Wednesday.

Campbell said Russian nuclear officials expected APCO to apply its $3 million annual lobbying fee from Moscow toward the Clintons’ Global Initiative. The contract detailed four $750,000 payments over a year’s time.


“APCO was expected to give assistance free of charge to the Clinton Global Initiative as part of their effort to create a favorable environment to ensure the Obama administration made affirmative decisions on everything from Uranium One to the U.S.-Russia Civilian Nuclear Cooperation agreement,” Campbell stated.
 
HomerThompson said:
Are we talking about the dismissing all charges brought against him? Even the one's he pled guilty to?
Click to expand...

Doesn't look like it.

https://www.axios.com/mueller-dismi...ort-943f1e3c-9ab7-4064-b7eb-84f6bf3fcb8b.html

Why it matters: Mueller's decision to drop the more expansive charges against Gates suggests that he may have provided good information for Mueller's probe. Gates still faces an advisory sentence of 57 to 71 months under his guilty plea, per Bloomberg, but it's worth nothing that the "prosecution can request a shorter sentence but isn't required to do so." Gates pled guilty last week to charges filed in the District of Columbia on counts of conspiracy against the United States and lying to the FBI and the Special Counsel.
 
PolishHeadlock said:
Doesn't look like it.

https://www.axios.com/mueller-dismi...ort-943f1e3c-9ab7-4064-b7eb-84f6bf3fcb8b.html

Why it matters: Mueller's decision to drop the more expansive charges against Gates suggests that he may have provided good information for Mueller's probe. Gates still faces an advisory sentence of 57 to 71 months under his guilty plea, per Bloomberg, but it's worth nothing that the "prosecution can request a shorter sentence but isn't required to do so." Gates pled guilty last week to charges filed in the District of Columbia on counts of conspiracy against the United States and lying to the FBI and the Special Counsel.
Click to expand...
Ok, that makes more sense. I was thinking, "What the fuck!?!".
 
Also dismissing without Prejudice means Mueller can refile the charges if Gates doesn't live up to the deal.
 
So they finally nailed one dude, who will maybe spend a year in jail?
 
Armbars said:
So they finally nailed one dude, who will maybe spend a year in jail?
Click to expand...
He's the fifth guilty plea so far, and will spend far more than a year in jail despite a sweetheart plea.

There are also 14 other people awaiting trial who have not pleaded guilty. And there's no reason to assume that that everyone who will be indicted has been indicted. Papadopolous was under investigation for approximately a year before he flipped, and it was another 3-4 months before his guilty plea was public.
 
bobgeese said:
The Clintons admitting guilt?


Do you even politics? Like them or not, they’re political heavyweights. They and their lawyers know better.



It also helps when the fbi Director drafts your exoneration before you’re actually interviewed...
Click to expand...


So you are admitting Hillary has been charged with crimes exactly zero times despite all the investigations, including ones led by republicans.
 
Edison Carasio said:
So you are admitting Hillary has been charged with crimes exactly zero times despite all the investigations, including ones led by republicans.
Click to expand...
Why are you discussing Hillary with bobgeese in this thread? You know it's not really relevant.
 
ShoelessRye said:


Trump wants more Putin/Russia help in 2018 and certainly in 2020.
Click to expand...


Trump told Putin to cut it out though! I don't believe that Putin would ignore such a stern request. I mean we were even going to build the bigliest, bestliest US-Russia joint cyber security task force ever!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,275,235
Messages
57,976,478
Members
175,889
Latest member
MEthzale

Share this page

Back
Top