God,
@babe, it's simple. Mueller has Manafort by the balls. Manafort and his attorney sits down with Mueller's team and says "this is what we can offer by way of information you may find useful in your investigation". Mueller then agrees to drop 6 of 8 charges against Manafort, and also argue for a more lenient sentence. The question then becomes what information would Manafort offer that would cause Mueller to be that generous?
Normally, a prosecutor is using smaller fish to get at bigger fish. It does not have to be the case that that bigger fish is Trump. Could be his son Don Jr. Might be Kushner. Might be both. I don't know. There is no way I can know. But the terms of the plea deal, apparently worded as well in a manner making a Trump pardon more problematic, simply suggests Manafort offered information considered highly valuable by Mueller.
Yet, you cannot admit what is obvious. As for Mueller headed for jail, of course that's absurd. You have one of the most honorable public servants fleeing the country? I wish you would not talk like a crazy man, you make it all but impossible to take you seriously. I'm not even saying Trump will be nailed for anything by Mueller. But for certain Robert Mueller is not going to be charged with anything and he will never be fleeing the United States for any reason.
Well, I guess on that last note, I'm speechless. You're enveloped in the world of conspiracy theories. You are simply not rational. By my own admission, I am overly rational. That can be a problem at times as well. Maybe it makes it harder for me to lighten up at times. But, for sure I can't be expected to discuss any subject with somebody as irrational as yourself. I accept that I can never expect a straight answer from you. I can only expect paranoid delusions. Sorry that's the case, but without a doubt it is the case.
I guess nobody reads your swill. My one-time best girl got me to do a speed reading course, which.... as a wannabe "scientist", I found to be a fraudulent sort of reading..... requires one to pick up about one word per line and fill in the drift with "enlightenment" of some sort, and then pat yourself on the back for knowing everything.
But you did drop the "paranoid delusions" and confirm it as beyond doubt the case. That's a personal attack without any corroboration. But I have so little paranoia my lack of concern for what others think is sometimes mistaken as amounting to having absolutely "no self-awareness". I think that you and bullet, for example, are nice enough guys overall perhaps I should just wonder why you see me in such terms. No doubt, it's not ill-will. You are not enemies of any kind. You are just simple believers in some other ideas.
you have joined bullet in the regular line up of folks whose answer to every dissenting voice or question about facts as some kind of "conspiracy", and of course anyone who doesn't think the way you do is simply "irrational". Such tendencies, I submit, are precursors to liberal paranoia.... the kind that gets Hillary worked up to declare her opposition to be "deplorables" or "a vast right-wing conspiracy" against her personally.
I don't see a basis for believing anything you say is "rational". You believe what you read in a bought-and-paid for yellow journalism clique of "approved" high priests of American culture who have been piling on lie after lie for decades in the pursuit of some "progressive" world view.
You follow a political belief system that has developed from the 1840s in the pursuit of a secular, elitist-managed world. You are driven by fears about climate change, resource depletion, overpopulation, and populist uprisings that can be "bumps in the road" to progress.
It's no great "conspiracy" when there are thousands of books and tons of literature documenting "social progress" along the way, and where the leading lights of the movement have been literally famous for their leadership.
Donald Trump, a one-time donor to the likes of Hillary Clinton, who really does not want to prosecute his opponents even for serious crimes because he considers it "divisive" and he just really doesn't need to do it for any personal interest. I mean he hardly even cares to be President. It's a side-line in his career, in his view. He'd like to do a little to "give back" to the country that made his success possible. He'd like to see us be successful. He'd like our nation to be the leader towards a more prospering world.
In his vision, the possible prospering world begins with traditional American values such as the rule of law, basic human rights, national security, and unfettered opportunity. He want's less government meddling in people's lives. He wants less foreign interest or meddling in our politics, less "globalism" in ways that translate into stupid trade deals and other actions that empower our competitors in various arenas. But he would be pleased as punch to see other countries pick up on our system of successful values.
He sees it as a problem that China has essentially nationalized business interests controlled in a first level analysis by the Chinese military. The Red Army owns it's industrial base, including computer businesses. It has been out for a few years already that the Chinese computer manufacturers were trying to develop a way to spy on everyone. And developing "social media" feedback systems that modulate society towards desired objectives.... objectives desireable to the Red Army, that is.
Chinese social values include duty to country above any personal value, reflexive compliance by individuals with government dictates and no objection to stated national policies or objectives.
The method of working towards these values has included buying stock in managerially-significant proportions in American media.… our newspapers and TV, our entertainment giants, and our social media giants. Today, Chinese representatives sitting on boards of directors are actively influencing all of our mainstream giant media retailers.
I am one who questions, one who analyzes what is happening, and who works on understanding how and why it is happening.
You and others, perhaps many others, are simply reactive tools usefully managed by superior intellects.... elitists.... .
We have our own onshore "globalists", and we are in many ways part of the British "globalist" crowd, with national self-identity of a rather remarkably British Commonwealth set of interests. I think the Russians and Chinese are intellectually superior to our leadership in practical terms, and I see a world to be that is more controlled by Chinese values.
Chinese values ride pretty hard on our ideas, coming from the Magna Carta through our Constitution, about human rights and the way government should work. In China, it's one-man rule. Simple enough for any judicious human to comply with..... but not really all that beneficial to mankind.
I think you and others here in JFC should join me in taking a fresh look at what is going on, and decide to keep America a strong country with an intact political process that encourages freedom.
