The Official Former President Trump thread

[Detournement]

10 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Manafort was probably not on their radar at that point. An American businessman visits the Bolivian Embassy, probably for a visa.

Every single person that goes in and out is recorded. There's also about a zero percent chance it's not bugged.

Bug Merkel. Bug the EU. Don't bug Assange...

[JamieThomas]

1 minute ago, MixuFixit said:

You'd think pulling a plea deal would only make other people of interest redouble their efforts to destroy evidence and whatnot. After all if you're going to be offered a deal what kind of guarantee do you have that it'll be honoured?

In Manafort's case, he had charges dropped in exchange which will now be added back on. You can ask what guarantee someone has, but it's no as if the judge is going to say "Right lad, 5 years for you for that crime and eh... another 15 for, um, reasons"

[welshbairn]

Just now, Detournement said:

Every single person that goes in and out is recorded. There's also about a zero percent chance it's not bugged.

Bug Merkel. Bug the EU. Don't bug Assange...

Doesn't mean anyone was paying attention, and they could have just exchanged envelopes for the dodgy stuff. 

[carpetmonster]

The Manafort meeting with Assange story is weird. There is 24 hour police and high def cameras recording there. It would surely have been leaked already.

The Guardian will have had this for a while and been told to sit on it, I'm sure.

[welshbairn]

9 minutes ago, JamieThomas said:

In Manafort's case, he had charges dropped in exchange which will now be added back on. You can ask what guarantee someone has, but it's no as if the judge is going to say "Right lad, 5 years for you for that crime and eh... another 15 for, um, reasons"

Apparently Manafort's lawyers have been chatting away merrily with Trump's lawyers, strange that it's allowed. He's probably been told what he mustn't tell the Feds if he wants a Presidential pardon. 

Edited November 27, 2018 by welshbairn

[carpetmonster]

Apparently Manafort's lawyers have been chatting away merrily with Trump's lawyers, strange that it's allowed. He's probably been told what he mustn't tell the Feds if he wants a Presidential pardon. 

Which makes it interesting that Trump remarked his take home test was 'very easy'. Can't think Mueller's going to be asking him any questions that Mueller doesn't already know the answer to, so the fact Mueller seems to have definitive proof that Manafort is lying...wonder if they both told the Enquiry the same fibs?

[welshbairn]

3 minutes ago, carpetmonster said:

 

 

Which makes it interesting that Trump remarked his take home test was 'very easy'. Can't think Mueller's going to be asking him any questions that Mueller doesn't already know the answer to, so the fact Mueller seems to have definitive proof that Manafort is lying...wonder if they both told the Enquiry the same fibs?

 

 

He's been even more deranged and freaking out than normal since he saw the questions they were asking.

[Savage Henry]

Which makes it interesting that Trump remarked his take home test was 'very easy'. Can't think Mueller's going to be asking him any questions that Mueller doesn't already know the answer to, so the fact Mueller seems to have definitive proof that Manafort is lying...wonder if they both told the Enquiry the same fibs?

I’ve seen that floated around too. It’s an appealing idea: Mueller gets Manafort to lie, knowing he’ll tell Trumpy the same lie (via his lawyers) and Trumperinho repeats the lies on his tricky quiz. QED collusion.

I think it’s fair to say that if this story is true, Mueller’s known for months about it. I could also be that someone’s setting this Grauniad journalist up to fail.

[carpetmonster]

I’ve seen that floated around too. It’s an appealing idea: Mueller gets Manafort to lie, knowing he’ll tell Trumpy the same lie (via his lawyers) and Trumperinho repeats the lies on his tricky quiz. QED collusion.

I think it’s fair to say that if this story is true, Mueller’s known for months about it. I could also be that someone’s setting this Grauniad journalist up to fail.

Possibly the latter - do you think there's anybody clever enough in Donnie's orbit to set them up? Shouting 'fake news' at things that are demonstrably true, but he doesn't like, has been enough to placate the hordes - it's also kinda throwing stones at glass houses, and it'd be a shame for folks to bring up the fact it's 10 years and counting since Sean Hannity said he'd be happy to be waterboarded to show it isn't torture, and still hasn't - to demonstrate his own propaganda arm is also untrustworthy. I mean, we're talking about a guy who had 'Bond007' as his laptop password, there's not a lot of modesty in Paul Manafort. On a side note, if that is the case, I'd fucking love to see Sean Hannity waterboarded.

[Detournement]

44 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Doesn't mean anyone was paying attention, and they could have just exchanged envelopes for the dodgy stuff. 

Everyone who goes in is logged. The Met have spent £15 million on monitoring him FFS.

For this to be true you need the following things to have happened. (i) Manafort decides to meet with Assange under the noses of the Security Services rather than send a proxy (ii) MI6 don't include the meeting in the Steele dossier (iii) It doesn't leak for two years despite the constant media war (iv) Manafort risks his plea deal by denying the visits despite knowing he is on camera (v) Wikileaks ruin their reputation by denying it.

For it to be false all you need is that Luke Harding and the Guardian are publishing more Fake News about Assange (and funnily enough it happened shortly before a federal judge was due to rule on revealing his charges).

 

[carpetmonster]

Pray tell, what reputation does this Wikileaks you speak of have?

[Detournement]

51 minutes ago, carpetmonster said:

 

.
The Guardian will have had this for a while and been told to sit on it, I'm sure.

While i agree that the Guardian publish what the security services tell them to this all seems a bit convenient.

[Detournement]

1 minute ago, carpetmonster said:

Pray tell, what reputation does this Wikileaks you speak of have?

Nothing they have published has been discredited.

If you can remember back to before the full scale propaganda operation against them began they published evidence of huge numbers of war crimes and assisted in publishing the Snowden files which exposed illegal surveillance and many crimes of lying to Congress by high ranking American officials.

[Savage Henry]

Possibly the latter - do you think there's anybody clever enough in Donnie's orbit to set them up? Shouting 'fake news' at things that are demonstrably true, but he doesn't like, has been enough to placate the hordes - it's also kinda throwing stones at glass houses, and it'd be a shame for folks to bring up the fact it's 10 years and counting since Sean Hannity said he'd be happy to be waterboarded to show it isn't torture, and still hasn't - to demonstrate his own propaganda arm is also untrustworthy. I mean, we're talking about a guy who had 'Bond007' as his laptop password, there's not a lot of modesty in Paul Manafort. On a side note, if that is the case, I'd fucking love to see Sean Hannity waterboarded.

On that note, just because most of the presenters on Fox would struggle to spell their own name, doesn’t mean that the channel isn’t run by media geniuses. There’s no question they’re in cahoots with Trump. Very possible indeed.

On Hannity, to be fair waterboarding is now illegal on US soil. There is footage of Christopher Hitchens having it done. It’s ghastly viewing, and he lasts about three seconds. Of course it’s torture, Sean.

[carpetmonster]

In fairness, no, they didn't publish the Seth Rich bollocks Assange was waffling about given it had been widely discredited prior.

[welshbairn]

19 minutes ago, Detournement said:

Everyone who goes in is logged. The Met have spent £15 million on monitoring him FFS.

For this to be true you need the following things to have happened. (i) Manafort decides to meet with Assange under the noses of the Security Services rather than send a proxy (ii) MI6 don't include the meeting in the Steele dossier (iii) It doesn't leak for two years despite the constant media war (iv) Manafort risks his plea deal by denying the visits despite knowing he is on camera (v) Wikileaks ruin their reputation by denying it.

For it to be false all you need is that Luke Harding and the Guardian are publishing more Fake News about Assange (and funnily enough it happened shortly before a federal judge was due to rule on revealing his charges).

 

I doubt MI6 had the staff to do background checks on every person going into  the Embassy for a visa at a time when the police were paying much more attention to people leaving. This was months before the Democratic Party leaks, and shortly before Manafort took over the Trump campaign, he might have had something pretty juicy to offer. If MI6 picked up in it at the time or later, they could easily have kept hold of it until they were asked by Mueller what they had, or at a time of their choosing. Not everything leaks. This stuff is purported to have come from the Ecuadorians anyway.

Edited November 27, 2018 by welshbairn

[Detournement]

18 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

I doubt MI6 had the staff to do background checks on every person going into  the Embassy for a visa at a time when the police were paying much more attention to people leaving. This was months before the Democratic Party leaks, and shortly before Manafort took over the Trump campaign, he might have had something pretty juicy to offer. If MI6 picked up in it at the time or later, they could easily have kept hold of it until they were asked by Mueller what they had. Not everything leaks.

They have facial recognition technology. They don't need to do background checks on people and someone like Manafort who has been a political operative for 40 years is going to be on file.

The Guardian have had to retract stories about Assange previously. And a couple of months ago they flared up a complete non story about Russia planning to help him "escape" from the embassay which gave the impression he was going to sneak out in dramatic fashion unless you read the article carefully and noticed the "plan" was for him to be allowed to leave the UK on an Ecuadoran diplomatic passport and Assange's lawyers asked the UK authorities if this would be possible.

The Guardian is the publication with a history of Fake News on this topic.

Edited November 27, 2018 by Detournement

[welshbairn]

2 hours ago, carpetmonster said:

 

 

Which makes it interesting that Trump remarked his take home test was 'very easy'. Can't think Mueller's going to be asking him any questions that Mueller doesn't already know the answer to, so the fact Mueller seems to have definitive proof that Manafort is lying...wonder if they both told the Enquiry the same fibs?

 

 

 

1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

He's been even more deranged and freaking out than normal since he saw the questions they were asking.

Carl Bernstein, Watergate hack, is blaming his state of mind on getting info on the Mueller investigation from his new pet Attorney General, Mr Whitaker.

[Detournement]

The Guardian have already started walking back the story.

The headline has been amended to "Sources say".

[carpetmonster]

Carl Bernstein, Watergate hack, is blaming his state of mind on getting info on the Mueller investigation from his new pet Attorney General, Mr Whitaker.

 

More likely he was asking for a big cock toilet in gold, Whitaker managed to stifle his mirth but had to sadly inform him he was no good for tick.