• Effective immediately we will be deleting, without notice, any negative threads or posts that deal with the use of encryption and streaming of scanner audio.

    We've noticed a huge increase in rants and negative posts that revolve around agencies going to encryption due to the broadcasting of scanner audio on the internet. It's now worn out and continues to be the same recycled rants. These rants hijack the threads and derail the conversation. They no longer have a place anywhere on this forum other than in the designated threads in the Rants forum in the Tavern.

    If you violate these guidelines your post will be deleted without notice and an infraction will be issued. We are not against discussion of this issue. You just need to do it in the right place. For example:
    https://forums.radioreference.com/rants/224104-official-thread-live-audio-feeds-scanners-wait-encryption.html

POTUS, Obstruction, Stormy and Cohen

cpetraglia

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 14, 2003
Messages
771
Location
Fairfax, VA
I wan't the answer to one very important question. Why did Manafort lie to prosecutors 3 times about his meeting with a Rusky in the middle of the campaign where he shared highly sensitive polling data? Who is he protecting? He just sealed the 7 year sentence.

It makes no sense. Everyone has a right to know what exactly went on there.

And wouldn't that meeting be collusion? Along with 100 or more meetings between Russians and campaign aids. What went on here? It's very abnormal in an American election, perhaps unheard of.
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
30
Location
Warning Area W105
I wan't the answer to one very important question. Why did Manafort lie to prosecutors 3 times about his meeting with a Rusky in the middle of the campaign where he shared highly sensitive polling data? Who is he protecting? He just sealed the 7 year sentence.
Judge in Manafort case said no collusion related to the case before her. It's not our fault you refuse to believe it. I bet you still think the moon landing was a hoax. BTW its not illegal to share polling data.

And wouldn't that meeting be collusion? Along with 100 or more meetings between Russians and campaign aids. What went on here? It's very abnormal in an American election, perhaps unheard of.
Go read Lisa Page's testimony if you want to know what went on here.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
5,880
Location
175 DME, HEC 358° Radial
According to zz its all a matter of a prosecutors interpretation of perjury.
That's not what I said. I said prosecution is up to the Department of Justice, not a jury. If a prosecutor comes to the conclusion that there's not enough evidence to get a conviction, which requires a unanimous jury decision, they won't waste the time. If there are mitigating circumstances that would put doubt in a jury's collective mind, they won't prosecute.

Quit being such a simple minded twit, Rob. You KNOW this, just by watching the news on about typical criminal cases that come up. They don't/can't always prosecute just because YOU think they should.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
5,880
Location
175 DME, HEC 358° Radial
And wouldn't that meeting be collusion? Along with 100 or more meetings between Russians and campaign aids. What went on here? It's very abnormal in an American election, perhaps unheard of.
That is the very definition of collusion, which in and of itself is not a crime. But it CAN be a component to a crime, and can appear so, especially when the collusion (which is not a crime in and of itself) is lied about repeatedly.
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
30
Location
Warning Area W105
That's not what I said. I said prosecution is up to the Department of Justice, not a jury. If a prosecutor comes to the conclusion that there's not enough evidence to get a conviction, which requires a unanimous jury decision, they won't waste the time. If there are mitigating circumstances that would put doubt in a jury's collective mind, they won't prosecute.
I was talking about your logic in the discussion about prosecuting Andrew McCabe for perjury a few posts back. But since you bring up Comey and Hillary Clinton there was plenty of evidence of a crime, and it was pre-determined by the Justice Department not to prosecute Hillary before any real investigation by the FBI was ever conducted. #LorettaLynch ;)

Quit being such a simple minded twit, Rob. You KNOW this, just by watching the news on about typical criminal cases that come up. They don't/can't always prosecute just because YOU think they should.
When the law is violated it is law enforcements duty to investigate and arrest. It's the DOJ's duty to prosecute and if they refuse to investigate, arrest or prosecute for political bias reasons of any kind, this is corruption! Now go read the Lisa Page testimony and let it all sink in. The problem with you is your so blinded with rage and termination to destroy this President you don't care about abuse of power or corruption so long as it takes out Trump. ;)
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
5,880
Location
175 DME, HEC 358° Radial
It's the DOJ's duty to prosecute and if they refuse to investigate, arrest or prosecute for political bias reasons of any kind, this is corruption!
Not all decisions whether or not to prosecute are political. You realize that mainstream Republicans aren't calling for Hillary's (or Comey's or McCabe's) head on a stick, right? It's just you alt-right whack-a-doos doing that.
 

CQ

Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
519
Location
Exosphere
If it weren't for ideological ignorance you might have understood what smarter people have understood for two years.

For such a supposedly smart guy, Comey really didn't think things through very well.
What do you expect from inbred frenchies? Almost as bad as the inbred english.
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
30
Location
Warning Area W105
Not all decisions whether or not to prosecute are political.
Correct, but the decisions that are bias and political need to be exposed and prosecuted.

You realize that mainstream Republicans aren't calling for Hillary's (or Comey's or McCabe's) head on a stick, right? It's just you alt-right whack-a-doos doing that.
Well then maybe you should give credit to the alt-right for standing up against government corruption and violations of Americans civil liberties! Remember when democrats used to champion that???.....Probably not. ;)
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
5,880
Location
175 DME, HEC 358° Radial
Well then maybe you should give credit to the alt-right...
No. You alt-right whack-a-doos are wrapping yourselves in the flag while you piss on the Constitution. There's nothing patriotic about how you people are going about things. You ignore potentially serious breaches in security with a White House that's too chummy with Russia, and too critical of the allies that fight alongside us.

That's the credit you get, Rob.
 

cpetraglia

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 14, 2003
Messages
771
Location
Fairfax, VA
Judge in Manafort case said no collusion related to the case before her. It's not our fault you refuse to believe it. I bet you still think the moon landing was a hoax. BTW its not illegal to share polling data.

"To the case before her". She also said that collusion/conspiracy was still part of an open investigation. Why is it that you keep avoiding the question of why Manafort lied three times about that very meeting? Could it be that your very worried what the truth may be? You say it's not illegal to share polling data. I disagree. If you share it with a foreign country that is engaged in a US felony stealing DNC emails and using them to benefit DT, I say it's very illegal.

We'll have to wait and see what the prosecutors think.
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
30
Location
Warning Area W105
Why is it that you keep avoiding the question of why Manafort lied three times about that very meeting? Could it be that your very worried what the truth may be? You say it's not illegal to share polling data. I disagree. If you share it with a foreign country that is engaged in a US felony stealing DNC emails and using them to benefit DT, I say it's very illegal.
Then show me the indictment if it was so highly illegal. To be honest with you I'm sick and tired discussing this stupid Russian collusion delusion. There have been 0 indictments so far after two years of investigating so there's nothing really to discuss anymore. Put it to bed.
 

cpetraglia

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 14, 2003
Messages
771
Location
Fairfax, VA
You put it to bed. Manafort was charged with lying to prosecutors 3 times about the meeting. He plead guilty to those lies and now has seven years in prison. Sorry, but those lies must have been pretty damn important to Manafort to risk prison time and void his plea deal.

You can't or won't discuss it because it goes to the very heart of Mueller's investigation as confirmed by the judge. You people defending 'collusion' are a lot smarter then you want everyone to think. There will come a time you will no longer defend the liar-n-chief. You'll have no choice.

By the way, the house passed a (veto proof) resolution today calling for the Mueller report to be made public. 400 plus-0. Seems republicans are very interested to see what he has to report. We'll see what the senate does with it.

There will be nothing to discuss when all 18 open investigations are concluded. They don't include what's just starting up in the house. Then and only then will I believe there was no collusion. We've seen it already.
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
30
Location
Warning Area W105
By the way, the house passed a (veto proof) resolution today calling for the Mueller report to be made public. 400 plus-0. Seems republicans are very interested to see what he has to report. We'll see what the senate does with it.
Don't worry you'll see the report and nothing will be in it. Maybe then you'll stop foaming at the mouth over nothing. But I doubt it. You will simply move on to some other bogus scandal.

There will be nothing to discuss when all 18 open investigations are concluded. They don't include what's just starting up in the house. Then and only then will I believe there was no collusion. We've seen it already.
I have to ask, why do you hate this guy so much that your willing to totally ignore all the corruption being reveled within our own justice system? If you're so worried about Russia let me ask you this, what is our government doing to prevent this from happening again? How was it allowed to happen in the first place? You're not worried or concerned about any of that. What a pathetic bunch you people are. You could care less about Russia. Its all about getting Trump! And if you really do a drill down its all about losing the 2016 election. You just can't get over it.
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
30
Location
Warning Area W105
Peter Strozk's transcripts reveal that the DOJ made a deal with Hilary Clintons lawyers that limited the scope of a number of areas the FBI could look into like any emails on her server pertaining to the Clinton Foundation. Since when can you negotiate with the FBI as to what they can look at during a criminal investigation? Ooops I mean a matter. The fix was in folks. ;)
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
3,376
Location
San Diego, CA
I have to ask, why do you hate this guy so much that your willing to totally ignore all the corruption being reveled within our own justice system?
In the absence of a vehement hatred for Trump one might have to acknowledge the rampant corruption under the Barack Hussein administration. This might have been a moot point had Hillary Rotten won the election like they planned. Instead of one corrupt administration fading into the open arms of the next, Trump has exposed the lot of them. They have no choice but to despise the man with a passion never before witnessed.
 
Top