America - The Official Thread

  • Thread starter ///M-Spec
  • 37,974 comments
  • 1,481,706 views
Keef
Brb.

Ah, here they are. Who needs a news article when the sentencing memoranda filed by prosecutors are public record? Here are the sources.

Michael Flynn sentencing memo from Special Counsel Mueller, 12/4/18. (Very heavily redacted)

Michael Cohen sentencing memo from US Court of the Southern District of New York, 12/7/18 (Long one, read it)

Michael Cohen sentencing memo from Special Counsel Mueller, 12/7/18

Paul Manafort sentencing memo from Special Counsel Mueller, 12/7/18 (also heavily redeacted)

Short summaries:

Michael Flynn was Trump's National Security Advisor for less than a month. Now, he's been a fully cooperating witness to Mueller's investigations and has given so much information that Mueller recommended no prison time in his sentencing. Flynn was so helpful that he just got off felony charges with a zero-time recommendation. Let that sink in.

Michael Cohen has been Trump's personal lawyer for many years. The SDNY's sentencing memo is very long because it details a long history between him and Trump, and many mistakes during that time. The biggest takeaway is his involvement in the "Storm Daniels" affair scandals. There were two sexual scandals with two different women, and Cohen's role was to pay off these women to buy their silence so their stories didn't effect the election. The details of these transactions are explained in the filing, but ultimately they amount to felony campaign finance violations. These two felonies were committed at the direction of "Individual-1" which you'll see in several places in all these filings. There was a lot of speculation before this filing about who that was, but this filing specifically cites "Individual-1" as a person who was President of the United States during 2017. What that means is that Cohen committed felonies at the direction of Donald Trump, meaning Trump is liable for those felonies. That's impeachable right now, before any more evidence comes out. We'll see what happens. There are also bits about Russian involvement in this memo. It's a lot but you need to read the whole thing. Ultimately, SDNY was not impressed by Cohen's coooperation, especially given he'd previously lied about all this. They recommended sentencing in line with regulations, 4-5 years.

Mueller was more impressed with Cohen's cooperation and recommended an appropriate sentence to be co-served with the previous one.

Paul Manafort has a very complex and extremely dirty history. He was convicted of felonies back in August, and in November got in trouble again for violating the plea deal he made with Special Counsel Mueller. This guy is a walking piece of garbage he's so dirty. Just read the thing. It's an absolute miracle that a snake traitor like Manafort could even exist. There are public documents available concerning his previous troubles as well.

_____

The Russian Interference investigation by Mueller is ongoing but reports have come out recently saying that Mueller's team "knows everything" about Russia, and many analysts believe it's just a matter of time until the whole thing is pieced together and the bomb is dropped on some extremely high-level people in our government. The President himself has already been named indirectly, and the Vice President is probably involved along with previous employees of the administration and campaign, and possibly even members of congress (recently the CIA briefed some senators about ongoing investigations but they hand-picked 8 senators to brief which seems like an odd tactic). This briefing was about Saudi Arabia's assassination of the journalist, after which at least one Republican senator was convinced that Saudi's Crown Prince ordered the assassination himself.

Somehow, various investigators, even State investigators, and especially Mueller, are going to half to piece together the three guys from last week, Trump, other people, Russia, and Saudi Arabia into one big giant cluster of a conspiracy. All of it seems very closely related, with zero coincidence. I mean hell, even the new acting Attorney General appointed a month ago (because the previous dude resigned due to these investigations) just had a private meeting with Jared Kushner in Marine 1. Jared Kushner is the guy who has been telling the Saudis to stay calm, and telling Trump that the Saudis didn't kill anybody, all the while our own intelligence agencies and senators know for a fact that the Saudis assassinated that journalist.

This whole thing is a nightmare conspiracy scenario. Trump being elected, Russian interference, and Saudi's assassination are all related.

Now we can add substantial evidence of Republican election fraud in North Carolina, and some pretty aggressive legislation tactics in Wisconsin and Michigan on the part of Republicans to the mix.
Click to expand...

I just hope that Martin Scorsese or Francis Ford Coppola (or Roman Polanski, that creep who makes incredible movies) are still around to make the film when everything is out in the open.
 
Eunos_Cosmo
I just hope that Martin Scorsese or Francis Ford Coppola (or Roman Polanski, that creep who makes incredible movies) are still around to make the film when everything is out in the open.
Click to expand...
laughslap.gif


I'm calling it right now...

Kevin James as Trump.

Edit: And this guy should help bring Stephen Miller to the screen.
 
Eunos_Cosmo
I just hope that Martin Scorsese or Francis Ford Coppola (or Roman Polanski, that creep who makes incredible movies) are still around to make the film when everything is out in the open.
Click to expand...
Ron Howard directed Frost/Nixon so he's got some experience too.
 
In my youth, I was more interested in cars, girls and mountain climbing than politics. But in the days prior to Nixon's resignation, I purchased a 12" B&W TV so I could watch the historic event. I still recall the final words this very odd and miserable little man ever said in public while he still served as President. "Those who hate you don't win, unless you hate them, and then you destroy yourself."

Though the Mueller investigation - and congressional investigations yet to come in the new congress - will hopefully reveal new and juicy facts, I do wonder if the House Democratic leadership will choose to impeach while the Republicans still hold the Senate? Perhaps they will hang fire until they control the Senate, or perhaps until Trump leaves office and can be indicted at the state level? Either way, it will be an interesting if long-winded and enduring spectacle, starting in earnest just as soon the new congress is seated in the new year.
 
Keef
Brb.

Ah, here they are. Who needs a news article when the sentencing memoranda filed by prosecutors are public record? Here are the sources.

Michael Flynn sentencing memo from Special Counsel Mueller, 12/4/18. (Very heavily redacted)

Michael Cohen sentencing memo from US Court of the Southern District of New York, 12/7/18 (Long one, read it)

Michael Cohen sentencing memo from Special Counsel Mueller, 12/7/18

Paul Manafort sentencing memo from Special Counsel Mueller, 12/7/18 (also heavily redeacted)

Short summaries:

Michael Flynn was Trump's National Security Advisor for less than a month. Now, he's been a fully cooperating witness to Mueller's investigations and has given so much information that Mueller recommended no prison time in his sentencing. Flynn was so helpful that he just got off felony charges with a zero-time recommendation. Let that sink in.

Michael Cohen has been Trump's personal lawyer for many years. The SDNY's sentencing memo is very long because it details a long history between him and Trump, and many mistakes during that time. The biggest takeaway One takeaway is his involvement in the "Storm Daniels" affair scandals. There were two sexual scandals with two different women, and Cohen's role was to pay off these women to buy their silence so their stories didn't effect the election. The details of these transactions are explained in the filing, but ultimately they amount to felony campaign finance violations. These two felonies were committed at the direction of "Individual-1" which you'll see in several places in all these filings. There was a lot of speculation before this filing about who that was, but this filing specifically cites "Individual-1" as a person who was President of the United States during 2017. What that means is that Cohen committed felonies at the direction of Donald Trump, meaning Trump is liable for those felonies. That's impeachable right now, before any more evidence comes out. We'll see what happens. There are also bits a lot of stuff about Russian involvement in this memo, such as a business deal for a Trump Tower in Moscow, for which "political synergy" would be offered from Russia. It's a lot but you need to read the whole thing. Ultimately, SDNY was not impressed by Cohen's coooperation, especially given he'd previously lied about all this. They recommended sentencing in line with regulations, 4-5 years.

Mueller was more impressed with Cohen's cooperation and recommended an appropriate sentence to be co-served with the previous one.

Paul Manafort has a very complex and extremely dirty history. He was convicted of felonies back in August, and in November got in trouble again for violating the plea deal he made with Special Counsel Mueller. This guy is a walking piece of garbage he's so dirty. Just read the thing. It's an absolute miracle that a snake traitor like Manafort could even exist. There are public documents available concerning his previous troubles as well.

_____

The Russian Interference investigation by Mueller is ongoing but reports have come out recently saying that Mueller's team "knows everything" about Russia, and many analysts believe it's just a matter of time until the whole thing is pieced together and the bomb is dropped on some extremely high-level people in our government. The President himself has already been named indirectly, and the Vice President is probably involved along with previous employees of the administration and campaign, and possibly even members of congress (recently the CIA briefed some senators about ongoing investigations but they hand-picked 8 senators to brief which seems like an odd tactic). This briefing was about Saudi Arabia's assassination of the journalist, after which at least one Republican senator was convinced that Saudi's Crown Prince ordered the assassination himself.

Somehow, various investigators, even State investigators, and especially Mueller, are going to half to piece together the three guys from last week, Trump, other people, Russia, and Saudi Arabia into one big giant cluster of a conspiracy. All of it seems very closely related, with zero coincidence. I mean hell, even the new acting Attorney General appointed a month ago (because the previous dude resigned due to these investigations) just had a private meeting with Jared Kushner in Marine 1. Jared Kushner is the guy who has been telling the Saudis to stay calm, and telling Trump that the Saudis didn't kill anybody, all the while our own intelligence agencies and senators know for a fact that the Saudis assassinated that journalist.

This whole thing is a nightmare conspiracy scenario. Trump being elected, Russian interference, and Saudi's assassination are all related.

Now we can add substantial evidence of Republican election fraud in North Carolina, and some pretty aggressive legislation tactics in Wisconsin and Michigan on the part of Republicans to the mix.[/S]

EDIT: On the Politics subreddit there have been megathreads about this news, compiling dozens of news stories throughout last week. It's hard to miss. You're already on the internet, you might as well set your forum aside to visit "the front page" which centralizes the entire process.
Click to expand...
I read through much of the second link. IMO the problem with Cohen is credibility. I don't think on his own, he's credible enough to be a good witness for any kind of prosecution. For example, if all of this "direction" surrounding the payoff to bury the stories of the two women was done verbally, and I understand that is Trump's favourite way of doing things, then it's the word of a felon, motivated by "greed" and "personal gain" in order to live an "opulent lifestyle" vs. the sitting President. He repeatedly lied under oath and the disdain for him is dripping right off the pages of the sentencing memorandum. Someone who is on record as saying, "If you do something wrong, I'm going to come at you, grab you by the neck, and I'm not going to let you go until I'm finished", doesn't make for someone a jury or group of people is going to see as an honest, sympathetic and trustworthy witness. In the absence of overwhelming corroborating evidence I think Trump can just deny the motivation for the payoff being campaign related, claim it was done for personal reasons and to protect his family, businesses and reputation.
 
Johnnypenso
I don't think on his own, he's credible enough to be a good witness
Click to expand...
The reason these sentencing memos have been issued is because prosecutors have corroborated these testimonies from other sources. Of all the legal and analyst opinions I've read, the general consensus is that investigators have already had the info they needed quite some time, and were merely waiting to corroborate it at the source to form water-tight arguments. For example, Cohen had already lied about literally everything several months ago. Investigators already knew he was lying when he did it. The ultimate proof when you already know everything is having the suspect give up their fight and admit to all of it. Don't sound like such a Trump supporter when the prosecutors have already covered these bases.

You didn't think federal prosecutors skipped that step, did you?

EDIT: Today, the Russian spy girl signed a plea deal. She's going to change her plea to guilty and assist in the investigation. This expands the entire campaign conspiracy to include top brass at the NRA and other politically powerful people she influenced since 2015.

Fox New's own analyst, the venerable judge Napolitano, says Trump could be indicted for three crimes due to his direction of Cohen. The crime itself, conspiracy to commit a crime, and procuring somebody to commit a crime.

Dotini
In my youth, I was more interested in cars, girls and mountain climbing than politics. But in the days prior to Nixon's resignation, I purchased a 12" B&W TV so I could watch the historic event. I still recall the final words this very odd and miserable little man ever said in public while he still served as President. "Those who hate you don't win, unless you hate them, and then you destroy yourself."

Though the Mueller investigation - and congressional investigations yet to come in the new congress - will hopefully reveal new and juicy facts, I do wonder if the House Democratic leadership will choose to impeach while the Republicans still hold the Senate? Perhaps they will hang fire until they control the Senate, or perhaps until Trump leaves office and can be indicted at the state level? Either way, it will be an interesting if long-winded and enduring spectacle, starting in earnest just as soon the new congress is seated in the new year.
Click to expand...
Part of the reason Mueller redacted and "sealed" parts of these documents is because those sealed parts are now in the hands of a judge instead of his. So even if congress shuts down these investigations, some amount of evidence important enough to redact from public view is in the hands of a judge, which means congress can't touch it. That means it's still available to release. I think we can assume Mueller redacted some very important parts. He basically did that as an insurance policy that the investigation will be able to continue in some way regardless of if he gets shut down, which honestly is kind of likely.
 
Last edited:
So, on the same page that you decry blanket accusations:

Johnnypenso
Republicans have always been "evil", the party of the wealthy, stuck in the 1700's, as far back as I can remember and Democrats the party of virtue who supports all that is good and right with the world. All that has changed in the last 40 years is the language used to express it.
Click to expand...

You trot out your favorite blanket accusation:

Johnnypenso
It's hard to talk about when the story is constantly changing and the media narrative is so biased it's hard to decipher what is legitimate and what is not.
Click to expand...

I think for once, I'd like to see you actually substantiate this. So, what has the media lied about concerning Mueller's investigation? What concrete examples exist, showing that reporting on Mueller can't be trusted?
 
huskeR32
So, what has the media lied about concerning Mueller's investigation? What concrete examples exist, showing that reporting on Mueller can't be trusted?
Click to expand...
Sounds like neither of you are asking the right questions so you're never going to come to an answer.

You can't trust the word of any media. It's your job, as the consumer, to verify everything you're reading through multiple sources, especially source documents like those I posted. So I'm not sure why either of you are arguing about any of this because it's all of our jobs to sift through the muck and find the key facts. Everybody has a spin, especially those who can profit off it. Part of America's problem today is that all these assholes are too lazy to verify anything, instead blindly trusting what they hear on TV. Hell, even 60 Minutes, a show known for good investigative journalism, butchered a quote by Elon Musk. Instead of being honest about an innovative American business attempting to advance technology, they're spinning it to make the inventor seem crazy and cocky.
 
Keef
Sounds like neither of you are asking the right questions so you're never going to come to an answer.

You can't trust the word of any media. It's your job, as the consumer, to verify everything you're reading through multiple sources, especially source documents like those I posted. So I'm not sure why either of you are arguing about any of this because it's all of our jobs to sift through the muck and find the key facts. Everybody has a spin, especially those who can profit off it. Part of America's problem today is that all these assholes are too lazy to verify anything, instead blindly trusting what they hear on TV. Hell, even 60 Minutes, a show known for good investigative journalism, butchered a quote by Elon Musk. Instead of being honest about an innovative American business attempting to advance technology, they're spinning it to make the inventor seem crazy and cocky.
Click to expand...

I don't see what any of this has to do with what I asked him. I'm certainly not suggesting that we should blindly believe everything we hear, and I absolutely keep an eye on several sources of news to try and have a good idea of what seems to be widely agreed upon, and therefore is probably more likely to be true.

What I want to know from Johnny is what reason there is, at this point, to doubt what we know so far about Mueller's probe when, more or less, most major outlets are reporting similar things, and I can't really recall having encountered any blatantly false reporting on the topic.
 
huskeR32
I don't see what any of this has to do with what I asked him. I'm certainly not suggesting that we should blindly believe everything we hear, and I absolutely keep an eye on several sources of news to try and have a good idea of what seems to be widely agreed upon, and therefore is probably more likely to be true.

What I want to know from Johnny is what reason there is, at this point, to doubt what we know so far about Mueller's probe when, more or less, most major outlets are reporting similar things, and I can't really recall having encountered any blatantly false reporting on the topic.
Click to expand...
My opinion is that pretty much all reporting on the subject has been referencing the original documents that I posted. So I agree that everything seems to line up. The only speculation seems to be about what options exist now. Obviously we don't know what will happen, but even what could happen is complex and there are many opinions.
 
huskeR32
I don't see what any of this has to do with what I asked him. I'm certainly not suggesting that we should blindly believe everything we hear, and I absolutely keep an eye on several sources of news to try and have a good idea of what seems to be widely agreed upon, and therefore is probably more likely to be true.

What I want to know from Johnny is what reason there is, at this point, to doubt what we know so far about Mueller's probe when, more or less, most major outlets are reporting similar things, and I can't really recall having encountered any blatantly false reporting on the topic.
Click to expand...
@Keef answered it well enough for me. The MSM has been so distorted and wrong about so much that they can't be trusted to report on anything accurately. Maybe they do, maybe they don't in a particular circumstance but finding impartial sources of information or sources that are not highly edited is getting more and more difficult.
 
Johnnypenso
The MSM has been so distorted and wrong about so much that they can't be trusted to report on anything accurately.
Click to expand...

Thing is, you've provided "MSM" sources to corroborate your own points many times on this site. So, how do you determine when it can and can't be trusted? Surely you don't just use "Do I agree with it or not?" as your barometer? And if you don't, then whatever you do use, surely you can apply it to any other situation, right? So again, I'm left wondering why, exactly, you think the evil liberal media can't be believed on the topic of Mueller's investigation, when by all appearances, they all seem to be saying the same thing, and it seems to be consistently lining up with official sources.
 
huskeR32
Thing is, you've provided "MSM" sources to corroborate your own points many times on this site. So, how do you determine when it can and can't be trusted? Surely you don't just use "Do I agree with it or not?" as your barometer? And if you don't, then whatever you do use, surely you can apply it to any other situation, right? So again, I'm left wondering why, exactly, you think the evil liberal media can't be believed on the topic of Mueller's investigation, when by all appearances, they all seem to be saying the same thing, and it seems to be consistently lining up with official sources.
Click to expand...
I use MSM sources frankly, because I think they are most palatable to many members here. I also tend to use them only to link to barebones factual information that is not in dispute. X people dead, Y people arrested etc. When I use MSM links no one questions the source. Using them for legal opinions, or opinions of any kind, however, is not something I would do on a regular basis.

In terms of the Meuller report I don't trust any MSM "expert" because, for the most part, they all buy into the same leftist political philosophy and simply repeat what those who sign their paycheque want them to say. The one or two right leaning MSM sources just do the same thing but in the other direction. I can't recall the number of times Trump has been proclaimed finished, or the walls were closing in or there was a new bombshell to report. The "experts" have been wrong on Trump so many times, their "expert" opinions are virtually meaningless these days, to me anyway. I see them as shills not experts. I don't see any reason why their "expert" opinions should be trusted on the Meuller investigation.
 
Johnnypenso
In terms of the Meuller report I don't trust any MSM "expert" because, for the most part, they all buy into the same leftist political philosophy and simply repeat what those who sign their paycheque want them to say.
Click to expand...

So now we're back at the beginning of the circle. This is what I wanted examples of in the first place.

Provide something, anything, that shows a member of the "MSM" reporting "leftist political philosophy" about Mueller, that is demonstrably false.
 
Johnnypenso
I use MSM sources frankly, because I think they are most palatable to many members here. I also tend to use them only to link to barebones factual information that is not in dispute. X people dead, Y people arrested etc. When I use MSM links no one questions the source. Using them for legal opinions, or opinions of any kind, however, is not something I would do on a regular basis.

In terms of the Meuller report I don't trust any MSM "expert" because, for the most part, they all buy into the same leftist political philosophy and simply repeat what those who sign their paycheque want them to say. The one or two right leaning MSM sources just do the same thing but in the other direction. I can't recall the number of times Trump has been proclaimed finished, or the walls were closing in or there was a new bombshell to report. The "experts" have been wrong on Trump so many times, their "expert" opinions are virtually meaningless these days, to me anyway. I see them as shills not experts. I don't see any reason why their "expert" opinions should be trusted on the Meuller investigation.
Click to expand...

You are buying too much in to trump's Fake News rhetoric.
 
huskeR32
So now we're back at the beginning of the circle. This is what I wanted examples of in the first place.

Provide something, anything, that shows a member of the "MSM" reporting "leftist political philosophy" about Mueller, that is demonstrably false.
Click to expand...
It's all fruit from the same poisoned tree. This is a generalized condemnation of the MSM:
It's hard to talk about when the story is constantly changing and the media narrative is so biased it's hard to decipher what is legitimate and what is not. At this point it's like a whole lot of noise to me and it'll only come into focus once the Mueller report is released
Click to expand...
I'm clearly stating an opinion I don't trust the MSM in general and that it'll take time to clear the fog on the Meuller investigation. I'm not sure that needs any specifics concerning the Mueller case.

PocketZeven
You are buying too much in to trump's Fake News rhetoric.
Click to expand...
Trump is done, finished, kaput, the game is over, you heard it here first folks!! You love YT comedy, here's a funny one for you:
 
PocketZeven
Thanks, but what does the video have to do with fake news?

This is what I consider real fake news:

Click to expand...
You don't think proclaiming Trump as done, finished, turning point, walls closing in etc. has been fake news for 3 years?:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
 
Johnnypenso
You don't think proclaiming Trump as done, finished, turning point, walls closing in etc. has been fake news for 3 years?:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
Click to expand...

This is a compilation of snippets. Without context you cant just claim that it is Fake news. This example clearly isnt fake news. Clickbaity perhaps, but definately not fake news.

Speculating an outcome is not by definition false. Making false statements and presenting them as facts is Fake News.
 
I find it hard to give credibility to anyone who earnestly uses the term, especially the casual-ized acronym form, "MSM". That acronym is just loaded with conspiratorial ********. It also forces a toxic false dichotomy between the different spheres of honest journalism. Just because an editorial has a left or right-leaning viewpoint doesn't mean it doesn't have integrity.

Also, the media has had a pretty good track record with this administration in terms of conveying the atmosphere inside the white house. Usually when there is a report characterizing the feelings/attitude of a member of the admin, it eventually proves true. That goes for Tillerson, Preibus, Kelly, Hicks, Scaramucci, Bannon and others. I'm inclined to believe most of the media reporting about this administration.
 
Last edited:
The problem for Trump and his family are will they hold off on charges while he is the president and is there any state charges he cant be pardoned on ?

Trump has committed crimes that if he were not the president he would be charged and jailed . That is not up for debate
What is up for debate is what can be done to a sitting president
 
There is a difference between News and opinion segments, how long till people here recognize that.

Cable news in general in America has got a signifcant amount of opinion segments compared to actual real news segments.
 

Latest Posts

Back