Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Breaking News
posted by takyon on Monday October 30 2017, @07:55PM   Printer-friendly
from the "I-didn't-even-know-the-guy" dept.

Manafort and Gates, were charged with "conspiracy against the United States," "conspiracy to launder money" and other offenses. The two were expected in court in Washington by the afternoon.

The Justice Department indictment on Manafort and Gates contains 12 counts: "conspiracy against the United States, conspiracy to launder money, unregistered agent of a foreign principal, false and misleading FARA statements, false statements, and seven counts of failure to file reports of foreign bank and financial accounts."

Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI.

The Manafort and Gates indictment unsealed on Monday morning does not make any reference to Russia's influence campaign against the presidential election, but it does allege extensive financial ties between Manafort and Gates and powerful Ukrainians.

The Papadopoulos materials, on the other hand, detail the many contacts investigators say he had with Russian-linked operatives. He met at least two people, a man and a woman, who the FBI says were working for the Russian government and had boasted to him about the help it could offer the Trump campaign against Clinton.


Original Submission #1Original Submission #2Original Submission #3

Related Stories

Politics: President Trump Backed Off from Ordering Special Counsel Mueller Fired 59 comments

The New York Times reports "Trump Ordered Mueller Fired, but Backed Off When White House Counsel Threatened to Quit":

President Trump ordered the firing last June of Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel overseeing the Russia investigation, according to four people told of the matter, but ultimately backed down after the White House counsel threatened to resign rather than carry out the directive.

Previously:
Mueller Investigation: Three Former Trump Aides Charged
Michael Flynn Pleads Guilty to Lying to the F.B.I.
UK Election Results; Fired FBI Director's Testimony on Trump; Trump Nominates New FBI Director


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Monday October 30 2017, @08:02PM (11 children)

    by takyon (881) Subscriber Badge <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Monday October 30 2017, @08:02PM (#589625) Journal

    TRIGGER WARNING: Tweeter-in-Chief ⚠

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/924635359480303616
    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/924637600094326784 [twitter.com]
    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/924639422066384896 [twitter.com]
    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/924641278947622913 [twitter.com]

    Never seen such Republican ANGER & UNITY as I have concerning the lack of investigation on Clinton made Fake Dossier (now $12,000,000?),.... ...the Uranium to Russia deal, the 33,000 plus deleted Emails, the Comey fix and so much more. Instead they look at phony Trump/Russia,.... ..."collusion," which doesn't exist. The Dems are using this terrible (and bad for our country) Witch Hunt for evil politics, but the R's... ...are now fighting back like never before. There is so much GUILT by Democrats/Clinton, and now the facts are pouring out. DO SOMETHING!

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/924649059520073730 [twitter.com]

    All of this "Russia" talk right when the Republicans are making their big push for historic Tax Cuts & Reform. Is this coincidental? NOT!

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/924963492645437441 [twitter.com]

    Report out that Obama Campaign paid $972,000 to Fusion GPS. The firm also got $12,400,000 (really?) from DNC. Nobody knows who OK'd!

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/924966722544848896 [twitter.com]

    Great job by MichaelCaputo on @foxandfriends.

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/925005659569041409 [twitter.com]

    Sorry, but this is years ago, before Paul Manafort was part of the Trump campaign. But why aren't Crooked Hillary & the Dems the focus?????

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/925006418989715456 [twitter.com]

    ....Also, there is NO COLLUSION!

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Monday October 30 2017, @08:03PM (6 children)

      by DeathMonkey (1380) on Monday October 30 2017, @08:03PM (#589629) Journal

      Yeesh, the desperate flailing is palpable.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:12PM (4 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:12PM (#589635)

        Sure, but his "DO SOMETHING" at the end is very very troubling. I hope there aren't any unstable Trumpettes who think they need to "do something".

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:32PM (2 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:32PM (#589653)

          The balls deep Breitbarters are talking about a civilizational war. If they aren't already doing something, it just shows they are too pussy to put their guns where their mouths are.

          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Monday October 30 2017, @09:17PM (1 child)

            by c0lo (156) on Monday October 30 2017, @09:17PM (#589695)

            put their guns where their mouths are.

            I think the correct expression is "putting the gun in their mouth"

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @09:49PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @09:49PM (#589712)

              That's why sane people call them "muzzle nuzzlers."

              And no, I'm not anti-gun - I own guns. I'm just anti-idiot.

        • (Score: 2) by Nobuddy on Tuesday October 31 2017, @05:02PM

          by Nobuddy (1626) on Tuesday October 31 2017, @05:02PM (#590090)

          Well, a few have so far. That guy that killed his dad for dissing Trump, and the asshole that drove his car into a crowd of peaceful protesters for daring to protest something he supports.

      • (Score: 5, Disagree) by digitalaudiorock on Monday October 30 2017, @10:37PM

        by digitalaudiorock (688) on Monday October 30 2017, @10:37PM (#589738)

        Yeesh, the desperate flailing is palpable.

        Exactly...and while I'm no fan of HC, anyone who doesn't see what a bullshit, vague smoke screen screen of a non-story this uranium thing is is frankly too far gone for hope.
        I mean let's get real: Trump's own family has admitted their attempts to collude with Russia regarding election propaganda ffs...and you only have to look at many [wikipedia.org] various [wikipedia.org] wikipedia [wikipedia.org] entries to see that the entire family is most likely tied up with the Russian mob ffs! Here's a clue: The emperor has no clothes.

    • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday October 30 2017, @08:25PM (3 children)

      by DeathMonkey (1380) on Monday October 30 2017, @08:25PM (#589647) Journal

      You think Trump's going to try firing Mueller?

      (I hope he does!)

      • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday October 30 2017, @09:12PM

        by bob_super (1357) on Monday October 30 2017, @09:12PM (#589687)

        Trump's dead meat the day after he signs his tax cut.
        Firing Mueller would give the R the excuse they need to start impeachment, or convince him to step down, right after that "victory". (I didn't say it was a good excuse)

      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by captain normal on Monday October 30 2017, @11:32PM (1 child)

        by captain normal (2205) on Monday October 30 2017, @11:32PM (#589757)

        He'll likely just start slinging out pardons.

        • (Score: 2) by Bobs on Tuesday October 31 2017, @02:09PM

          by Bobs (1462) on Tuesday October 31 2017, @02:09PM (#590013)

          True, but that is why Mueller partnered with the NY State Attorney General with the ability to bring state-level charges.
          https://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/30/manafort-mueller-probe-attorney-general-242191 [politico.com]

          Trump can only pardon for Federal crimes, he can't touch state-level ones.

          So Mueller can line up both state and federal crimes on the lower level folks in order to flip them into testifying higher up the food chain and they won't be able to be pardoned away.

          Also, Mueller might wait until Trump is out of office: then Trump can't pardon.

          The Repub's have been pardoning away major crimes for decades (Ford, Reagan, Bush) and they have finally come up with a way to prosecute them anyway.

  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Sulla on Monday October 30 2017, @08:07PM (11 children)

    by Sulla (5173) on Monday October 30 2017, @08:07PM (#589631) Journal

    Others might find it interesting as well

    It may surprise you that the only form considered correct by traditional grammarians is “pleaded guilty” (pronounced PLEE-did).

    https://jakubmarian.com/pleaded-guilty-vs-pled-guilty-which-one-is-correct/ [jakubmarian.com]

    --
    "I'd rather take a political risk for peace rather than risk peace in pursuit of politics" - President Donald J. Trump
    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by stretch611 on Monday October 30 2017, @08:37PM (2 children)

      by stretch611 (6199) on Monday October 30 2017, @08:37PM (#589660)

      Personally, I am not a grammar nazi... I don't give a damn. I understand what a person means when they say "pled guilty."

      • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:48PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:48PM (#589669)

        I'm pretty sure Sulla is Literally Hitler, so can't really hold a little grammar nazism against him. Except for the ridiculously obvious grammar nitpicks I generally like most of them.

      • (Score: 1) by Sulla on Monday October 30 2017, @08:54PM

        by Sulla (5173) on Monday October 30 2017, @08:54PM (#589673) Journal

        I really suck at spelling and decided to try to better myself. I thought it was plead not pleaded so decided to look it up to ensure I use it correctly in the future.

        --
        "I'd rather take a political risk for peace rather than risk peace in pursuit of politics" - President Donald J. Trump
    • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Monday October 30 2017, @09:40PM (7 children)

      by NotSanguine (285) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 30 2017, @09:40PM (#589705) Homepage Journal

      Others might find it interesting as well

      It may surprise you that the only form considered correct by traditional grammarians is “pleaded guilty” (pronounced PLEE-did).

      I seem to recall 'pled' (pl-ehd) as an irregular past tense form of 'plead' (pl-eed) [dictionary.com]

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
      • (Score: 4, Funny) by aristarchus on Tuesday October 31 2017, @12:16AM

        by aristarchus (2645) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 31 2017, @12:16AM (#589780) Journal

        Let us not make the perfect (tense) the enemy of the past (tense). Could I interest you in a future perfect subjunctive verb?

        --
        #Free{nick}_NOW!!!
      • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday October 31 2017, @04:10AM (5 children)

        by FatPhil (863) <reversethis-{if.fdsa} {ta} {tnelyos-cp}> on Tuesday October 31 2017, @04:10AM (#589856) Homepage
        It follows the read/read, lead/led, feed/fed pattern, so isn't so un-normal. Sure there are many more /-i:d/ /-i:ded/ pairs, but the strength of the pull from that smaller set is undeniable.
        I can almost see plead dying out in most contexts as a simple present, apart from just a few set phrases where it's no longer obliged to remain current as language changes arount it. (the proof of the pudding, begging questions, the guilty being hanged, etc.)
        --
        Life is a precious commodity. A wise investor would get rid of it when it has the highest value.
        • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Tuesday October 31 2017, @06:20AM (4 children)

          by NotSanguine (285) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 31 2017, @06:20AM (#589884) Homepage Journal

          It follows the read/read, lead/led, feed/fed pattern, so isn't so un-normal. Sure there are many more /-i:d/ /-i:ded/ pairs, but the strength of the pull from that smaller set is undeniable.

          You're absolutely correct, the usage isn't unusual at all. However, that particular form is common to a subset of English verbs specifically referred to as "irregular" verbs [grammar-monster.com].

          --
          No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
          • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday October 31 2017, @04:47PM (3 children)

            by FatPhil (863) <reversethis-{if.fdsa} {ta} {tnelyos-cp}> on Tuesday October 31 2017, @04:47PM (#590074) Homepage
            I was trying to avoid an "something-adjectival verb" nomenclature (such as "irregular verb"), as I find such descriptions to be putting the focus on the wrong thing[*], but were I forced to in a Germanic language like English, I'd much rather stick to the more traditional "strong verb" moniker, as per Grimm.

            [* For example, is "light" a strong or weak verb? Well, that depends on whether your local population says "lighted" or "lit". So it's a property of the population more than an intrinsic immutable property of the verb itself.]
            --
            Life is a precious commodity. A wise investor would get rid of it when it has the highest value.
            • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Tuesday October 31 2017, @06:50PM (2 children)

              by NotSanguine (285) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 31 2017, @06:50PM (#590145) Homepage Journal

              [* For example, is "light" a strong or weak verb? Well, that depends on whether your local population says "lighted" or "lit". So it's a property of the population more than an intrinsic immutable property of the verb itself.]

              Your point is well taken. At the same time, "strong" and "weak" are just as arbitrary as "regular" and "irregular" when defining subsets of verbs based upon how they are conjugated. It's been a long time since I was in primary or secondary school, so perhaps they teach "strong/weak" instead of "regular/irregular" these days, but that's just grammarian jargon to represent something specific (like we might say "philips-head screwdriver" rather than "cruciform patterned torque fastening device" or the scientific definition of "theory" as compared with the more expansive definition used in general discourse).

              As to your example, I'd think you'd be hard pressed to find English speaking populations that use either "lighted" or "lit" but never use the other form. What's more, even the verb "plead" has both irregular and regular past tense conjugations (pled and pleaded).

              As such, whether you say strong/weak, or regular/irregular, the meanings are quite clear. Which was the point. I was merely being specific. I find that if you can't say what you mean, you can never mean what you say. The details are everything.

              I suppose that disagreements between grammarians on that point might become heated, or even violent. But given that you knew exactly what I meant when i said it, it's clear that, regardless of preference, as long as the meaning is clearly understood, such arguments are best left to those who care enough to fight to the death over them.

              If it makes you more comfortable, mentally replace the words "regular" and "irregular" with "strong" and "weak." I certainly won't mind.

              --
              No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
              • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday October 31 2017, @07:22PM (1 child)

                by FatPhil (863) <reversethis-{if.fdsa} {ta} {tnelyos-cp}> on Tuesday October 31 2017, @07:22PM (#590168) Homepage
                I did use "regular" and "irregular" when I learnt French and Latin, but in those days I didn't give a flying fart about languages. Only over a decade later did I dive into the field again, in the context of English's family tree, and therefore it used Grimm's terminology, so that's what stuck.
                --
                Life is a precious commodity. A wise investor would get rid of it when it has the highest value.
                • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Tuesday October 31 2017, @08:35PM

                  by NotSanguine (285) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 31 2017, @08:35PM (#590198) Homepage Journal

                  I did use "regular" and "irregular" when I learnt French and Latin, but in those days I didn't give a flying fart about languages. Only over a decade later did I dive into the field again, in the context of English's family tree, and therefore it used Grimm's terminology, so that's what stuck.

                  Interesting. I hadn't considered that different branches [wikipedia.org] of linguistics [wikipedia.org] might have different jargon for similar topics.

                  I guess that's just another not-so-subtle reminder that context has a strong impact on semantic value.

                  --
                  No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:09PM (25 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:09PM (#589633)

    Arghhh [bbc.co.uk] Ruskies [cnn.com] No matter how much Clinton denies it, as secretary of state she sold 25% of US uranium to a Russian company while accepting bribes "charitable donations" through her "foundation".

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:14PM (12 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:14PM (#589637)

      Stop deflecting, it is #sad.

      Eat that crow bitch.

      • (Score: 2, Funny) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Monday October 30 2017, @08:24PM

        by MichaelDavidCrawford (2339) Subscriber Badge <mdcrawford@gmail.com> on Monday October 30 2017, @08:24PM (#589645) Homepage Journal

        Filter error: Subject too funny

        --
        Every call you get with blocked ID, answer it with "Hello Mrs Crawford".
      • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:34PM (8 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:34PM (#589655)

        Don't forget the criminal investigation into the Podesta group for FARA violations, discovered because they were involved in pro-Russian Ukrainian lobbying with Manafort.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:51PM (7 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:51PM (#589670)

          Is that some sort of partisan sniping? Cause all those criminal fucks can rot in prison, I don't give a shit if they have a D or R in front of their name.

          • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @09:05PM (6 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @09:05PM (#589683)

            They were *BOTH* in collusion with the Russians, as the fact that Podesta and Manafort were involved in the same foreign antics as was disclosed by the FARA violations.

            I've been saying this since before Trump was elected: We need continuing investigations into *BOTH* of them, because it is just as likely the Russians used economic influence to flip both candidates as it is they just compromised one of them.

            Many of the assumptions made around US politics assumed a Pre-Globalized world, where few traitors would get a chance to escape somewhere else to live their lives as royalty. Today, with the domestic and foreign push for globalization, it is easy enough to work yourself into a position of influence and throw whole corporations or societies under the bus for a foreign government's payout. This whole Trump/Clinton election cycle has just proven American politics needs to both harshly penalize its political representatives both in the government and outside it for illegal and criminal conduct whether domestically or as a proxy for a foreign power. Furthermore we need to take some hard look at assumptions regarding the 'natural born' status of certain elected officials and whether that actually helps or hinders security of the nation, since some immigrants may be *MORE* nationalistic/patriotic than the spoiled brats who had lived in america and couldn't even pass the citizenship tests foreigners are required to pass to become citizens. I know from personal experience with a friend who became a citizen that *I* couldn't remember half ot the shit they were required to memorize and recite as part of their testing to become an american citizen. I imagine 99 percent of naturally born americans couldn't either, and I have no doubt both Clinton and Trump fall within that percentage.

            • (Score: 5, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Monday October 30 2017, @09:27PM (5 children)

              by DeathMonkey (1380) on Monday October 30 2017, @09:27PM (#589700) Journal

              We need continuing investigations into *BOTH* of them,

              Sure, you can have your 10th an 11th Clinton investigations right after the first Trump investigation is over.

              • (Score: 0, Troll) by hemocyanin on Monday October 30 2017, @11:33PM (4 children)

                by hemocyanin (186) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 30 2017, @11:33PM (#589758)

                The fact that the Clintons are adept at remaining above the law should not be a bar to further investigations.

                • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday October 31 2017, @12:03AM (3 children)

                  by Phoenix666 (552) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 31 2017, @12:03AM (#589771) Journal

                  The difficulty in taking down the Clintons lies in taking down all the people they're in bed with, which is literally a who's who of the global elite. That is why they were so sure they had the Whitehouse in the bag last fall.

                  So never fear, we will still get our President Hillary Clinton because the global elites will it and they will bring Trump down or whatever else they have to do to bring it about. (That is, of course, unless someone or something brings all of them down first.) Look at how desperately they want it, so desperate that they're burning down everything to get it. In the end, whoever wins will find the victory quite Pyrrhic.

                  --
                  Washington DC delenda est.
                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @08:54AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @08:54AM (#589925)

                    When you say "global elites" you mean.... who exactly? Is it the illimnati? Or shady billionaires with Russian connections? Or just one billionaire... let me guess, Soros? Names, give us names.

                  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by DutchUncle on Tuesday October 31 2017, @02:01PM (1 child)

                    by DutchUncle (5370) on Tuesday October 31 2017, @02:01PM (#590009)

                    Have you considered that maybe, just maybe, the difficulty in taking down the Clintons is that they were SMART enough to get CLOSE to the line of illegality WITHOUT going over it? and that the multiple investigations have all been legitimate when they all come to the conclusion that their actions were shady and look bad but were not actionable? (that is, not definitive enough that a prosecutor thought a trial would get a conviction)

                    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by linkdude64 on Tuesday October 31 2017, @09:13PM

                      by linkdude64 (5482) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 31 2017, @09:13PM (#590221)

                      Have you considered that maybe, just maybe, the difficulty in taking down the Clintons is that they were SMART enough to get CLOSE to the line of illegality WITHOUT going over it?

                      To be innocent in her email investigation:
                      -Clinton could not recall a specific process for nominating a target for a drone strike.
                      -Clinton did not recall using a flip phone during her time as SoS
                      -She could not recall how any data stored on her Blackberry was destroyed
                      -She could not recall why the State was unable to provide her with a secure Blackberry
                      -She did not recall receiving any emails that she thought should not be on an unclassified system
                      -She could not recall her specific conversations regarding the creation of the clintonemail.com domain
                      -She could not recall receiving guidance regarding email policies outlined in the Foreign Affairs Manual
                      -She could not recall any specific routine for deleting email from her account while SoS
                      -Did not recall receiving an email about securing personal email accounts sent to all employees
                      -Did not recall emails sent to her regarding requests that were made to upgrade the email server
                      -Did not recall contacting Pagaliano for tech support
                      -Did not recall who had access to her Blackberry and email accounts
                      -Did not recall a specific FOIA request made
                      -Did not recall who recommended she change her email address after it was publicly disclosed

                      She HAS crossed the line, she just pleas the fifth for everything, and because again, the courts are fucking stacked in favor of the Ds they don't take her plea as indication of guilt or incompetence.

      • (Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Tuesday October 31 2017, @09:02PM (1 child)

        by linkdude64 (5482) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 31 2017, @09:02PM (#590215)

        "Collusion is okay when women and democrats do it."

        Not to mention that HC's top aide Abedin was literally on the Saudi Arabian government's payroll while she was on the campaign with HC.

        The doublethink is just astounding. Sure, your candidate lost, but she was far more corrupt, from far more harmful regimes than Trump is alleged to be with Russia, even in the most wild of claims.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @10:57PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @10:57PM (#590263)

          So, if HRC was under investigation how would you respond to claims about Trump being a scam artist and corrupt as hell? I bet you'd say "stop with that strawman ya fucking idjit."

          I think you should change your name to Linkdude8

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:16PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:16PM (#589639)

      Pay No Attention To Trump

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Monday October 30 2017, @08:42PM (4 children)

      by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday October 30 2017, @08:42PM (#589665)

      Personally, I'd like to see both Trump and Hillary, and all their top aides and campaign workers, thrown in prison. The whole thing reeks of pot & kettle.

      • (Score: 1) by Sulla on Monday October 30 2017, @08:59PM (2 children)

        by Sulla (5173) on Monday October 30 2017, @08:59PM (#589676) Journal

        Very yes. It appears every last one of them is guilty of some form of corruption or another, and seeing as they already like spending so much time together (outside of when they need supporters to think they hate each other) I think it would be fair to put them all in the same prison.

        I will be highly suspect if Trump doesn't get pulled into all of this if they are going so far as to look at tax evasion. I can't imagine anyone on the Hill being totally clean in that arena.

        --
        "I'd rather take a political risk for peace rather than risk peace in pursuit of politics" - President Donald J. Trump
        • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @09:23PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @09:23PM (#589696)

          They need to be tried and if found guilty, publicly humiliated before being lined up in front of a firing squad, given only .22LR rounds, and shot, before being allowed to cry out in pain and agony.

          These people are worse than military deserters (especially if the deserters were drafted), and the sort of scum America needs to make an example out of if we ever want to prove we stand for 'Truth, Justice, and the American Way' (Which hint hint, doesn't involve wholesale divestment of US interests to China and Russia, while neither country gives reciprocal rights/benefits back.)

          • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @10:22PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @10:22PM (#589730)

            The beauty of the internet is also it's ugliest face, anyone is allowed to post!

      • (Score: 2) by ilsa on Tuesday October 31 2017, @04:51PM

        by ilsa (6082) on Tuesday October 31 2017, @04:51PM (#590078)

        Don't blame me! I voted for Kang!

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:48PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @08:48PM (#589667)

      Two wrongs don't make a right.

      Many agencies reviewed the sale of the ore company, and in general the ore cannot leave the USA anyhow. As far as charitable donations and speech fees as "bribes", politicians have been involved in such for many decades, including Reagan. Why focus on just Hillary? If you want to outright ban it, that's fine, but ban it for all politicians. But since the right-leaning SCOTUS ruled political bribery as "free speech", that's more difficult.

      • (Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @09:03PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @09:03PM (#589682)

        But but EMAILS!

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @10:31AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @10:31AM (#589952)

        But three do!

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @09:14PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @09:14PM (#589691)

      Congress has had the majorities to investigate HRC. for quite some time now. Yet they've done nothing.

      They're investigating the D.t. though. go figure...

    • (Score: 5, Informative) by Nobuddy on Tuesday October 31 2017, @05:10PM

      by Nobuddy (1626) on Tuesday October 31 2017, @05:10PM (#590095)

      Lies make the Baby Jesus cry.

      What was sold is 20% stake in a US uranium production company. It is illegal to sell US uranium outside the US. Or rather, it is done only by license, and that license has never been given to anyone. They were sold a 20% stake in the profits from a uranium company- and sold that stake BY the uranium company. Clinton was head of one of 9 agencies that had to sign off on the deal. She did not sell anything. The State Dept approved a requested sale along with the other 8 agencies.

      Turn off the right wing propaganda and do some research of your own.

  • (Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Monday October 30 2017, @08:23PM (12 children)

    by MichaelDavidCrawford (2339) Subscriber Badge <mdcrawford@gmail.com> on Monday October 30 2017, @08:23PM (#589642) Homepage Journal

    My understanding is that they were requested to turn themselves in.

    There was no possibility of being shot by a frightened cop.

    --
    Every call you get with blocked ID, answer it with "Hello Mrs Crawford".
    • (Score: 2) by takyon on Monday October 30 2017, @08:29PM (11 children)

      by takyon (881) Subscriber Badge <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Monday October 30 2017, @08:29PM (#589649) Journal

      They're not a fight risk.

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by bob_super on Monday October 30 2017, @09:17PM (7 children)

        by bob_super (1357) on Monday October 30 2017, @09:17PM (#589693)

        They're a flight risk. Or more precisely a "run before someone puts a bullet in me because I know too much" risk.

        I expect shameless presidential pardons.

        • (Score: 3, Interesting) by NewNic on Monday October 30 2017, @10:00PM (6 children)

          by NewNic (6420) on Monday October 30 2017, @10:00PM (#589720) Journal

          Trump's problem with pardons is that they void the subject's 5th amendment privilege. If they don't face criminal prosecution, then they can be compelled to testify.

          --
          lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday October 31 2017, @12:11AM (5 children)

            by Phoenix666 (552) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 31 2017, @12:11AM (#589778) Journal

            They'll do what Scooter Libby did when it looked for a moment like Dick Cheney and Karl Rove might go down for their crimes: he took the rap in exchange for a reward later. It's what the mafia does.

            Here's the part that many will not expect: that's what the power elite want, too. They like sacrificial lambs to go down for the crimes they all commit so they can seem innocent and honorable in comparison, and then continue right on blithely looting anything that isn't nailed down. If there actually was a broad-based investigation of all this kind of dealing, most of them would wind up in prison and that they would never allow.

            So while we're making predictions of what's gonna happen next, I'll throw mine in the hat: Kim Jong-Un goes down and wipes all of this stuff off the front pages. Then, if Trump is smart, he seizes war-time powers and goes after the Clintons, Hollywood, and all the people who have it in for him.

            --
            Washington DC delenda est.
            • (Score: 2) by Geotti on Tuesday October 31 2017, @01:28AM (1 child)

              by Geotti (1146) on Tuesday October 31 2017, @01:28AM (#589813) Journal

              I'll throw mine in the hat: Kim Jong-Un goes down and wipes all of this stuff off the front pages. Then, if Trump is smart, he seizes war-time powers and goes after the Clintons, Hollywood, and all the people who have it in for him.

              I believe that might cost the US a lot in terms of concessions towards China und Russia. Maybe too much, so I wouldn't count on it. Probably something Middle-East, or Africa. Again.

              • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday October 31 2017, @02:51AM

                by Phoenix666 (552) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 31 2017, @02:51AM (#589835) Journal

                Maybe, but we don't have 3 carrier battle groups and nuclear bombers and everything else hovering outside Iran at the moment. We do have those things with North Korea. The pump has been primed. If Kim Jong-Un bats so much as an eyelash Trump has no reason in the world now not to flatten him. It would suck for South Korea and maybe Japan, but that's all to the good because they'd instantly be mobilized for the anti-China coalition DC really needs to put together (assuming North Korea is dispatched quickly enough).

                I dunno. A crazy dictator waving threats with nuclear weapons plus an insecure president of the world's sole superpower with a burning desperation to change the narrative adds up to war.

                --
                Washington DC delenda est.
            • (Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday October 31 2017, @03:15AM (2 children)

              by takyon (881) Subscriber Badge <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Tuesday October 31 2017, @03:15AM (#589843) Journal
              • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday October 31 2017, @12:48PM (1 child)

                by Phoenix666 (552) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 31 2017, @12:48PM (#589984) Journal

                Yes, but Trump seems to not know how to go on the offensive. He only knows how to be offensive.

                --
                Washington DC delenda est.
                • (Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Tuesday October 31 2017, @09:16PM

                  by linkdude64 (5482) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 31 2017, @09:16PM (#590223)

                  Yes, he certainly backed down at every opportunity during his campaign. /s

      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Monday October 30 2017, @09:41PM (2 children)

        by Thexalon (636) on Monday October 30 2017, @09:41PM (#589706) Homepage

        However, it does demonstrate the difference between how white collar criminals are treated versus street criminals, as highlighted by Dave Chappelle in his Tron Carter's Law & Order [cc.com] sketch. But yeah, those doughy types don't put up too much of a fight.

        --
        A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of bad gravy.
        • (Score: 2) by edIII on Tuesday October 31 2017, @02:19AM (1 child)

          by edIII (791) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 31 2017, @02:19AM (#589827)

          That was the best fucking sketch ever. Fucking funny as hell, but mostly because Chappelle was just handing us back a reality we all knew to be true, but the elite deny.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @09:02AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @09:02AM (#589926)

            lol elite

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Hartree on Monday October 30 2017, @08:36PM (3 children)

    by Hartree (195) on Monday October 30 2017, @08:36PM (#589658)

    In contrast to the Russians influencing the election as mentioned in a previous article about Twitter today here on Soylentnews, which is rather expected, and probably wasn't all that effective, these are violations of specific US laws by US citizens (Alleged in the case of Manafort. Admitted to in the case of Papadopolous.).

    Quite a different matter.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @01:19AM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @01:19AM (#589812)

      If you look at the people running around the world for high offices, you see a bunch of them are very pro-Putin. Don't discount Russian meddling in other nation's elections.

      • (Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Tuesday October 31 2017, @05:01PM

        by PiMuNu (3823) on Tuesday October 31 2017, @05:01PM (#590088)

        This is clear, Also votes for independence of various devolved regions, etc etc.

      • (Score: 2) by Hartree on Tuesday October 31 2017, @07:31PM

        by Hartree (195) on Tuesday October 31 2017, @07:31PM (#590173)

        I don't discount it. Of course the Russians are influencing the politics of countries all over the world. So is the US. In some cases it can tip the balance.

        My point was that it was unlikely that it was the deciding factor in last year's US election. However, it is sometimes held up as the "reason" for it, and I feel it's being used as an excuse for the failure of many mainstream US political analysts and politicians to understand what was happening and manage campaigns effectively.

        Thus, I rather minimized the importance of Russian influence on Twitter and more generally as I don't think it had a decisive impact.

        This is a very different matter. These are US political consultants who are accused (Manafort and Gates) or who admitted (Papdopoulos) breaking specific US laws (lying to the FBI for example). That's not a gray area or of low importance. That's something you send people to jail for. And it doesn't matter if it was effective or not, it was still illegal.

  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by khallow on Monday October 30 2017, @09:14PM (2 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 30 2017, @09:14PM (#589689) Journal
    It's not hitting the administration directly, but the FBI has bought some time and credibility.
    • (Score: 5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @09:49PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @09:49PM (#589710)

      Long before Trump hired Manafort, the FBI was investigating Manafort for various crimes connected with the Podesta Group. (Note: this is a really weird tie to Hillary via her campaign manager John Podesta) The FBI said nothing when Trump hired Manafort. If anything, the investigation stalled.

      Leaked emails show that Hillary's team preferred to face Trump. They actually wanted him to win the primary. Manafort helped Trump win the primary before getting fired.

      Manafort got fired at an interesting time. He got the "You're fired!" right after two things happened: Trump secured the nomination, and Trump got his first classified security briefing.

      Hmmm.

      • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday October 31 2017, @10:57AM

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 31 2017, @10:57AM (#589965) Journal

        That really is an interesting observation. "Mr. Candidate, you need to know that your campaign manager is dirty, and we're going to take him down soon." To all public appearances, he did what he was supposed to do, after all.

        --
        Keep all chemicals out of the reach of meth heads.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @09:53PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @09:53PM (#589715)

    Suppose you meet and marry somebody in 2016, then quickly get a divorce. You find out latter that they had a relationship in 2014, before you met them. You therefore claim that they had an affair, they cheated on you, they committed adultery... Makes sense, right?

    That's what we have here. Saying the Manafort crimes have anything to do with Trump is that absurd.

    • (Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @10:24PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @10:24PM (#589732)

      You a teenager? Have you even taken "us government" in high school? Your "logic" falls hard, presidents have to disclose their financial ties.

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by tizan on Monday October 30 2017, @10:46PM (1 child)

      by tizan (3245) on Monday October 30 2017, @10:46PM (#589742)

      Ahem....Suppose you marry somebody, in 2016, who everybody in your surrounding knew, in 2014, was sleeping with lots of people in the Russian mafia....you don't think you'll get linked with the Russian mafia in one way or another ?
      Being clueless is your best excuse in that situation ....otherwise the most logical conclusion is stupidity or you want to get ties with the Russian mafia.

      • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @11:02PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 30 2017, @11:02PM (#589746)

        Is that you Melania?

  • (Score: 2) by GlennC on Tuesday October 31 2017, @12:44AM (1 child)

    by GlennC (3656) on Tuesday October 31 2017, @12:44AM (#589793)

    Now we'll just be subjected to someone WORSE.

    It's almost as if they WANT to launch a Second Civil War and World War III.

    --
    The only gods that have ever been truly worshipped are wealth and power. Others are just cover.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @09:07AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @09:07AM (#589927)

      Yes, "they" need to just suck it up. What about them emails, huh?

  • (Score: 5, Touché) by julian on Tuesday October 31 2017, @02:21AM (5 children)

    by julian (6003) on Tuesday October 31 2017, @02:21AM (#589828)

    Hope some of you at least have a first draft saved! I want them in by Friday, midnight, PST. They will be graded.

    • (Score: 4, Funny) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday October 31 2017, @03:05AM (2 children)

      by Azuma Hazuki (5086) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 31 2017, @03:05AM (#589837) Journal

      LOL, I was JUST going to pop in here and go "Do any of you remember Julian's sig.block? Y'all better getcher writin' hands busy."

      --
      I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
      • (Score: 5, Funny) by julian on Tuesday October 31 2017, @04:25AM (1 child)

        by julian (6003) on Tuesday October 31 2017, @04:25AM (#589861)

        I just want everyone to acknowledge how much of a long shot that sig was. There was just no warning that this administration would be stocked with criminals and traitors. There was no warning. No one was warning us that this would happen. There was no group trying to offer an alternative. It was totally, completely, unexpected.

        I'm practically clairvoyant.

        • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday October 31 2017, @05:39PM

          by DeathMonkey (1380) on Tuesday October 31 2017, @05:39PM (#590114) Journal

          That's almost as surprising an outcome as healthcare turning out to be complicated.

          Nobody could've known!

    • (Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Tuesday October 31 2017, @12:23PM

      by realDonaldTrump (6614) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 31 2017, @12:23PM (#589979) Homepage Journal

      The real story is that President Obama did NOTHING after being informed about Russian meddling. With 14 months looking at Russia under a magnifying glass, they have ZERO "tapes" of Trump people colluding. There is no collusion & no obstruction. I should be given an apology!

      --
      #StopTheBias [twitter.com]
    • (Score: 1, Troll) by linkdude64 on Tuesday October 31 2017, @09:19PM

      by linkdude64 (5482) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 31 2017, @09:19PM (#590225)

      When did you claim that Manafort colluded with Clinton's future campaign manager (Podesta) back in 2014?

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by EETech1 on Tuesday October 31 2017, @04:17AM

    by EETech1 (957) on Tuesday October 31 2017, @04:17AM (#589859)

    Time to drain the swamp!

    So he can turn it into a cesspool:)

    Why waste all that storage capacity with water, when you can fill it with shit...

  • (Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Tuesday October 31 2017, @08:12AM (2 children)

    by realDonaldTrump (6614) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday October 31 2017, @08:12AM (#589916) Homepage Journal

    So many totally biased and fake news reports of the so-called Russia story. Such dishonesty! NPR news is #FakeNews and more dishonest than even CNN. They are a disgrace to good reporting. No wonder their news ratings are way down. Sad!

    --
    #StopTheBias [twitter.com]
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @09:09AM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @09:09AM (#589928)

      Warm up the pardon machine, Mr T.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @04:10PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 31 2017, @04:10PM (#590064)

        That won't help him. Reservations have been made for him at Trump GITMO.

  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday October 31 2017, @06:48PM

    by takyon (881) Subscriber Badge <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Tuesday October 31 2017, @06:48PM (#590143) Journal

    Looks like I picked the right dept. line: [bbc.com]

    US President Donald Trump has played down the importance of an ex-campaign aide indicted in the Russia inquiry.

    He said his onetime foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos was a "low level volunteer" and "liar". Mr Trump once called him an "excellent guy".

    [...] "Few people knew the young, low level volunteer named George, who has already proven to be a liar. Check the DEMS!"

    Papadopoulos appears in a photo that Mr Trump tweeted of himself in March 2016 hosting a national security meeting with his foreign policy team.

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
  • (Score: 2) by fritsd on Tuesday October 31 2017, @06:57PM (2 children)

    by fritsd (4586) on Tuesday October 31 2017, @06:57PM (#590148) Journal

    So... what happens next?

    Are the Republicans in Congress going to persuade Trump to quickly sign their "reverse Robin Hood" healthcare/tax law, so that he can have his deserved accident?
    I don't think Trump is very smart, but he's probably smart enough to keep delaying that law as if his life depends on it.

    The clock is ticking... tick tock..

    • (Score: 2) by urza9814 on Wednesday November 01 2017, @01:22AM (1 child)

      by urza9814 (3954) on Wednesday November 01 2017, @01:22AM (#590316) Journal

      Are the Republicans in Congress going to persuade Trump to quickly sign their "reverse Robin Hood" healthcare/tax law, so that he can have his deserved accident?
      I don't think Trump is very smart, but he's probably smart enough to keep delaying that law as if his life depends on it.

      Why would that matter? If they do get rid of Trump I'm sure Pence would have no problem signing that bill...

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Joe Desertrat on Wednesday November 01 2017, @08:35AM

        by Joe Desertrat (2454) on Wednesday November 01 2017, @08:35AM (#590444)

        Why would that matter? If they do get rid of Trump I'm sure Pence would have no problem signing that bill...

        Except if Pence signs it he and the Republicans have to fully own the consequences, which are sure to be quite unpleasant for a large percentage of their base. If Trump signs it, the blame can be assigned to him, especially if he is going down anyway.

(1)