Quote:

---

Good read. "Gaslighting", that's a new word for me to place in my limited vocabulary.

Gaslighting:
A form of intimidation or psychological abuse, sometimes called Ambient Abuse where false information is presented to the victim, making them doubt their own memory, perception and quite often, their sanity. The classic example of gaslighting is to switch something around on someone that you know they're sure to notice, but then deny knowing anything about it, and to explain that they "must be imagining things" when they challenge these changes.

---

Yes. The way the Democratic Party handles the race baiting is a good example too.

One way to help blunt gaslighting -- keeping relentlessly up to date running record. I wonder if the Trump administration is doing so?

(He grates on people, but that is kind of what Hannity does when he never lets it be forgotten what the MSM said about Obama before and after he became President)

drcrinum said:

---

Good read. "Gaslighting", that's a new word for me to place in my limited vocabulary.

Gaslighting:
A form of intimidation or psychological abuse, sometimes called Ambient Abuse where false information is presented to the victim, making them doubt their own memory, perception and quite often, their sanity. The classic example of gaslighting is to switch something around on someone that you know they're sure to notice, but then deny knowing anything about it, and to explain that they "must be imagining things" when they challenge these changes.

---

From the 1944 movie (and play) Gaslight about a woman whose husband slowly manipulates her into believing that she is going insane.

An example of the stuff they are going after Manafort on in the EDVA, this involves campaign work he did in an election in the Ukraine for Yanukovych. The documents contain everything from the draft text of a speech for Yanukovych's victory night (sent by Devine to Manafort on Feb. 3, 2010) to talking points Devine wrote for Yanukovych in August 2010, to polling and drafts of ads. On June 6, 2014, according to one exhibit, Gates emailed Devine with "goals" for a visit to Kiev ("Messing on the new party," "media training," and "speech") with proposed dates. In the course of the email thread, Gates proposes a "daily rate" for comp; Devine responds that his "rate for something like this would be $10,000/day, including travel days."







Another exhibit is a draft script for a television ad for Yanukovych's Party of Regions.

These are the exhibits that Manafort has listed in his motion in limine to exclude from trial

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4619168/USA-v-Manafort-Motion-in-Limine-Exs-Part1.pdf

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4619176/USA-v-Manafort-Motion-in-Limine-Exs-Part2.pdf

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4619178/USA-v-Manafort-Motion-in-Limine-Exs-Part3.pdf

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4619179/USA-v-Manafort-Motion-in-Limine-Exs-Part4.pdf

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4619183/USA-v-Manafort-Motion-in-Limine-Exs-Part5.pdf

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4619184/USA-v-Manafort-Motion-in-Limine-Exs-Part6.pdf

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4619185/USA-v-Manafort-Motion-in-Limine-Exs-Part7.pdf

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4619186/USA-v-Manafort-Motion-in-Limine-Exs-Part8.pdf


Judge Ellis said Monday that he needed to see the specific exhibits that Manafort wanted excluded from trial before ruling. Jury selection will begin July 31; it was supposed to start this week, but Ellis agreed to a short delay after Manafort's lawyers said they needed more time to review late productions of evidence by the government.

None of this stuff has anything to do with Trump or the Trump campaign. Mainly tax evasion stuff.

Who the frick cares about a speech or a TV commercial? He was a political consultant. That's what they do.

That seems like massive overkill to me.

aggiehawg said:

---

Who the frick cares about a speech or a TV commercial? He was a political consultant. That's what they do.

That seems like massive overkill to me.

---

Oh there are reams of this kind of crap. The prosecutor argues that it supports the fact he made money overseas and didn't pay taxes on it here.

Judge Jackson has orally denied a motion for a gag order blocking Trump from talking about the case of former SIC staffer James Wolfe. Judge found Wolfe didn't show prejudice to his right to a fair trial. So no gag order needed blocking Trump from talking about the criminal charges against former SIC staffer James Wolfe, Judge Jackson ruled orally "Trump's comments, even if they mischaracterized the case, weren't enough to show prejudice, she found."

Here's the motion the Judge denied

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4523823/6-19-18-Wolfe-Motion-Extrajudicial-Statements.pdf

Oh I know what the argument is but they have Gates. He can testify to the amount and scope of the work performed in Ukraine. Getting into minutiae like that will put the jury to sleep.

I admit to not keeping up in depth on the details here but does Mueller have some past grudge against Manafort that we see playing out here? None of this stuff they are going after Manafort for is related to so-called Russia/Trump collusion.

If there's one thing the Feds are good at, it's overkill.

aggiehawg said:

---

Oh I know what the argument is but they have Gates. He can testify to the amount and scope of the work performed in Ukraine. Getting into minutiae like that will put the jury to sleep.

---

Correct. Manafort's lawyers also argued that the evidence was unrelated to the charges Manafort is facing there when he's accused of filing false tax returns, failing to report foreign bank accounts, and bank fraud and would only serve to prejudice the jury. His lawyers said the fact that Manafort was paid for overseas lobbying work wasn't in dispute, and they argued that jurors could get "sidetracked by Mr. Yanukovych's controversial tenure as Ukraine's president."

Prosecutor Greg Andres argued that how much money Manafort earned from his overseas work, how exactly he earned it, and who paid him was contested, and the documents detailing the extent of his work in Ukraine were all directly relevant to the case.

4stringAg said:

---

I admit to not keeping up in depth on the details here but does Mueller have some past grudge against Manafort that we see playing out here? None of this stuff they are going after Manafort for is related to so-called Russia/Trump collusion.

---

Mueller necessarily doesn't but Glenn Simpson and his wife does. Simpson is a key person in this entire mess, and I think most of this garbage that has been dug up on Manafort, came directly from Simpson, especially all this fluff and filler about Ukrainian elections and speeches, TV commercials etc. That's the exact kind of crap an opposition research firm digs up. It's smear crap not evidense of a crime.

Bank records and tax returns are all the evidense they need to get Manafort of tax fraud, propped up by a couple of crooked bankers and CPA's testimony. All the rest of this stuff is just a blizzard of crap to make it appear the Taxpayers got their 40 million dollars worth.

Lot Y Tailgate said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Which is incredibly stupid since he is under a grand jury investigation. He and his lawyers should only be talking in court.

As it stands now, Cohen's credibility is getting shredded and his value as a witness or a candidate for some type of plea or immunity deal is going down the drain.

---

His credibility doesn't matter if he has Trump on tape asking him to do illegal ***** As you know, if you are conspiring with your lawyer to do something illegal then attorney client privilege does not exist.

---

lolololololololololololol

RoscoePColtrane said:

---

4stringAg said:

---

I admit to not keeping up in depth on the details here but does Mueller have some past grudge against Manafort that we see playing out here? None of this stuff they are going after Manafort for is related to so-called Russia/Trump collusion.

---

Mueller necessarily doesn't but Glenn Simpson and his wife does. Simpson is a key person in this entire mess, and I think most of this garbage that has been dug up on Manafort, came directly from Simpson, especially all this fluff and filler about Ukrainian elections and speeches, TV commercials etc. That's the exact kind of crap an opposition research firm digs up. It's smear crap not evidense of a crime.

Bank records and tax returns are all the evidense they need to get Manafort of tax fraud, propped up by a couple of crooked bankers and CPA's testimony. All the rest of this stuff is just a blizzard of crap to make it appear the Taxpayers got their 40 million dollars worth.

---

Thanks Roscoe.

Yeah, I'd like to know what was illegal. The only thing that could remotely be illegal is either using campaign funds to make the payment, or if the National Enquirer made the payment on the Trump campaign's behalf. Trump never made any payment as far as we know, so the only thing left is the catch and kill by the Enquirer.

It's all bulls..t

Except for that minor detail that not reporting campaign contributions is illegal.

Guess you didn't catch former Commissioner Smith on Levin the other day.

Pinche Abogado said:

---

Guess you didn't catch former Commissioner Smith on Levin the other day.

---

Assume for moment that this was a violation of some election financing law.

There's no chance that results in impeachment.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Assume for moment that this was a violation of some election financing law.

There's no chance that results in impeachment.

---

It's just a fine, handled administratively by the FEC, if it indeed was some kind of violation.

Think John Edwards and Bunny Mellon.

HTownAg98 said:

---

Yeah, I'd like to know what was illegal. The only thing that could remotely be illegal is either using campaign funds to make the payment, or if the National Enquirer made the payment on the Trump campaign's behalf. Trump never made any payment as far as we know, so the only thing left is the catch and kill by the Enquirer.

---

I wasn't talking about the tape that we have heard.

If you look back the last three administrations were all fined post election for some level f campaign violations. They are all administrative violations

Barry's
2012 $375,000
2008 $219,000

GWB's
2000 $112,000
2004 $39,500

WJC
1992 $105,000
1996 $134,000

I'm sure after the audit is done on Trump he will have some too. Seems like they all did. I didn't go back any further too many pdf's to dig through, and I didn't pull the losers because they likely did too.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Assume for moment that this was a violation of some election financing law.

There's no chance that results in impeachment.

---

Of course not. As others have said, it's a fine at most, and not worthy of impeachment. I never said he should be impeached over it.

Also, beyond collusion, if there is a tape about Trump and Shera Bechard, it will be like a nuclear bomb.

Even HuffPo has said she's never even met Trump.

LINK

aggiehawg said:

---

Even HuffPo has said she's never even met Trump.

LINK

---

Are we way beyond colluding yet?

Are there pics of Trump and Putin smoking the love pipe?

Interesting look back at the Flynn ordeal.




https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/alimwatkins/former-top-trump-aide-mike-flynn-was-investigated-by-the-fbi

Her "high level intelligence contact" we now know is James Wolfe who she was sleeping with.

Quote:

---

"The FBI was investigating former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn as recently as December, a high-level US intelligence official has told BuzzFeed News."

"The bureau was prepared to close the investigation into Flynn until 'the Logan Act stuff,' the official said, referring to phone calls in late December where Flynn reportedly discussed US sanctions with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak."

"The source brought up the Flynn investigation after BuzzFeed News asked if clear evidence existed tying Trump to Moscow. The official then mentioned the FBI investigation into Flynn. It was not clear if the FBI's probe was a counterintelligence investigation."

---

And the love birds were texting about Flynn the just prior to the story leak. In fact the day after He texted "Launch on Flynn 302" the story broke with Ali Watkins and Buzzfeed, and the rest of the Media piled on citing her story.

Also shows on 2-8-17 that " Heard from [redacted]. he said he went "up to Flynn's office" unable to get valiu" (sic) and a bunch of gibberish. So maybe they went up there twice. Pientka and Strzok, interviewed Flynn on Jan. 24, 2017 the first time. Nothing earth shattering just found it curious. Flynn resigned 2/13/17

Mueller spotted in the DCA terminal in the 35X gate, after getting the next set of questions, calling Pops in the Oval office to give him the low down.

aggiehawg said:

---

Which is incredibly stupid since he is under a grand jury investigation. He and his lawyers should only be talking in court.

As it stands now, Cohen's credibility is getting shredded and his value as a witness or a candidate for some type of plea or immunity deal is going down the drain.

---

Indeed...

HTownAg98 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Which is incredibly stupid since he is under a grand jury investigation. He and his lawyers should only be talking in court.

As it stands now, Cohen's credibility is getting shredded and his value as a witness or a candidate for some type of plea or immunity deal is going down the drain.

---

Indeed...

---

So is Lanny saying Cohen won't take the 5th if called by the grand jury? Sounds like it to me!

Mueller's witness list for Manafort is out.

LINK

No Russians, no Podestas, no Trump people.

aggiehawg said:

---

Mueller's witness list for Manafort is out.

LINK

No Russians, no Podestas, no Trump people.

---

Is that link the right one Dixie?

aggiehawg said:

---

Mueller's witness list for Manafort is out.

LINK

No Russians, no Podestas, no Trump people.

---

Rick Gates almost counts, though? Trump campaign not Trump Org, but the latter would not be expected in this, right?

Gates is Manafort's long term business partner so I don't really consider him more than an appendage of Manafort when he was on the Trump campaign. He was Manafort's assistant, not Trump's.