I answered it. Post #16
So you will, in no way, find it problematic that two men who allegedly engaged in criminal conduct almost identical - the democrat close to the clintons and a republican who worked for Trump - one walks and the other is tried?
Without your hyperbolic diatribe, can you please explain WHY you believe this okay.
You are only partially correct about Mueller’s directive. It is open ended and he can go after whomever he so chooses. Pay close attention to b ii and iii
And C.
So as you can clearly see, Rosenstein gave Muller open ended authority … That’s one reason Mueller was able to bring p 10 year old state charges in his efforts to go after Manafort.
Mueller needs to be taken from his office in shackles. Libs are looking for treason? There it is.
1 Like
What crime do you suspect Mueller has committed?
No, I would not find it problematic. The hypothetical suggestion is that Podesta committed an identical crime, singular, to one crime Manafort is accused of committing. Manafort has been charged with committing many, many, many, many crimes. So if Podesta is granted immunity for this one crime, in order to secure a conviction against Manafort for his many crimes committed, I have no problem with that whatsoever.
Now look at the memorandum Rosenstein provided to Mueller in August, which narrowed the scope of his investigation to specific crimes committed by specific individuals. Not the over-reaching broad mandate that everyone who is uninformed presumes that the situation actually is.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4429989-Rod-Rosenstein-memo-outlining-scope-of-Mueller.html
His directive is specific to the prosecution of potential crimes committed specifically by Paul Manafort. They are clearly lined out. Anything that is not specifically detailed in this memorandum is outside of Mueller’s scope. Therefore it makes sense for him to use whatever available means he has to secure a conviction for the multitude of crimes committed by Manafort. Including offering immunity to someone who may have committed a single crime like him.
Which, from researching and following this story, the likelihood of this potential crime by Podesta was a failure to register as a foreign lobbyist. Assuming that is the crime being discussed, then it furthers my resolve that this is 100% acceptable to grant him immunity for this, in exchange for his testimony.
Now can you explain why you would disagree with this?
Dude, most of it’s blacked out. Howver, what you showed did in fact focus solely on Manafort.
Interesting notes (of coincidence, I’m sure)
This clarification you posted was marke2018d April
A few months later Podesta is resigning and his office closed not long after that.
What “high crimes and misdemeanors” do you suspect Trump committed?
I don’t suspect he committed any. I’ve said so repeatedly. I’ve also said I oppose attempts at impeaching Trump.
On the other hand, you’ve stated here that Mueller should be arrested.
For what?
Tucker Carlson’s sources implicated Podesta, his brother, Manafort, and Clinton in October. If this latest allegation Carlson states proves to be true there may be credence to what he reported in october.
The source tells Tucker Carlson that Paul Manafort worked extensively with the Podesta Group as far back as 2011 on behalf of Russia. Manafort’s Russian associates wanted to influence Washington and sought the Podesta brothers because of their ties to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
He said then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton held a meeting with the Podestas that included a representative of the Clinton Foundation that specifically was about how to assist Uranium One in a deal that reportedly netted the foundation $100 million in donations.
“Sometimes, our source said, ties between The Podesta Group and the Clintons were explicit,” Carlson explained. “Tony Podesta spoke regularly to Hillary Clinton while she ran the State Department. Our source remembers Podesta’s assistant announcing that ‘Secretary Clinton is on the line.’”
Now, IF this proves to be true do you still have no problem with Podesta being granted immunity?
The reason for the public redaction is because the other targets and potential crimes are still being investigated.
I’m not sure what you mean here? This was filed in the criminal case against Manafort on 04/02/18, to defend against Manafort’s claims that Mueller did not have the authority to investigate and prosecute him. What makes that interesting or a coincidence? 
The Podesta firm closed in November of 2017. So I am again not following your point here.
Additionally, none of this provided an explanation as to why you disagree with my analysis and response to your questions.
I still would not have a problem of Podesta being given immunity for failure to register as a foreign lobbyist, to secure testimony against Manafort for his multitude of crimes committed.
Additionally, having spent a lot of time researching Uranium One, and understanding just how bogus that conspiracy theory actually is, it furthers my belief that what Carlson is promoting here is hogwash. And his secret source is a moron to boot. The problem with these right-wing fever dreams of some massive Clinton conspiracy is that the facts always get in the way. Which is why the CEC is constantly engaged in one giant pie to the face after another, as each of their “Bigger scandal than Watergate” fall flat time and time again.
Show me evidence and indictments, and I may change my mind. The Republicans control every single part of government. Period.
So just for the record, Podesta was not one of the people offered immunity to testify against Manafort. I’m sure Carlson will apologize tonight.
1 Like
Beat me to it. I was just in the process of doing the same thing. Well done sir!
@AlwaysRight Thoughts? Will you stop buying into the conspiracy garbage coming from the likes of the source in the OP?
LOL at using Tucker Carlson as a source. That guy’s a joke.
"Our source remembers Podesta’s assistant announcing that ‘Secretary Clinton is on the line.’”
Well, if that isn’t the final nail in the coffin on the upcoming Uranium One conviction, I don’t know what else could do it.
What more does anyone, Tucker Carlson included, need after that?
1 Like
I mean, you walked right into this one while yelling “oh ■■■■■ I’m walking right into this one!”
Who is is on the night’s fail list?
Tucker,
Whatever the hell pj media is
gateway frumpit
washington times
Who am I missing?
Manafort appeared in person at Monday’s hearing, wearing a green jumpsuit with a rumpled collar.
Rumpled? No no no. It was bespoke.
Yeah I see that. Let see if they go after Podesta.
