Senate has uncovered no direct evidence of conspiracy between Trump campaign and Russia

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

12 hours ago, refugee said:

No , but oddly at the hub of these folks . Just bad luck in picking friends, lawyers and campaign officials I suppose. 

Do you feel that your reputation should be tarnished if your friends and family do something wrong/illegal/immoral?  What if your kids do drugs?  Are you guilty of doing something illegal?

[refugee 169]

22 hours ago, jg121783 said:

Funny that chart doesn't show the outcome for the thirteen Russian nationals. In case you didn't know they showed up for court much to Mueller's surprise, made him look like a moron and demanded discovery which Mueller fought tooth and nail. The bigger question is what does any of it have to do with Trump and the non existent non crime of Russian collusion?

The Russians cannot be tried in absentia. Putin is not going to let them come to the west to defend themselves,  they are his intelligence operatives. But Putin denies it, strongly,  so I guess that settles it.

What does the convictions of his campaign officers have to do with Trump? Can you honestly say that if you replace Hillary Clinton for Donald Trump you would not be screaming collusion?  

 

[refugee 169]

9 hours ago, ALFKAD said:

Do you feel that your reputation should be tarnished if your friends and family do something wrong/illegal/immoral?  What if your kids do drugs?  Are you guilty of doing something illegal?

I just said bad luck, really bad luck, all correlating with the intervention of Russia in his behalf....totally bad luck.

[refugee 169]

10 hours ago, TBoneTX said:

Didn't anyone's automobile insurer sell them collusion insurance?

That is a pun, backwards,  anup. That is anup.

[refugee 169]

17 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

You do realize that the FBI and DOJ can pretty much create a process crime against anyone if they want.  Heck, if they had actually interviewed Hillary properly back in 2016, she could have been prosecuted for lying to the FBI.  So in the end, what you posted was simply an example of the political bias that is in the DOJ.

Conspiracy,  fraud, bank fraud, wire fraud, tax evasion. ..are those process crimes?

[Dashinka 23,246]

7 hours ago, refugee said:

The Russians cannot be tried in absentia. Putin is not going to let them come to the west to defend themselves,  they are his intelligence operatives. But Putin denies it, strongly,  so I guess that settles it.

What does the convictions of his campaign officers have to do with Trump? Can you honestly say that if you replace Hillary Clinton for Donald Trump you would not be screaming collusion?  

 

Actually folks get tried in abstensia all the time.  Besides the Russians indicted are represented by legal counsel.

 

6 hours ago, refugee said:

Conspiracy,  fraud, bank fraud, wire fraud, tax evasion. ..are those process crimes?

4 of the eight on your list plead guilty of lying to the FBI which is a process crime.  Also wondering just who Richard Pinedo is?

[TBoneTX 43,058]

20 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

wondering just who Richard Pinedo is?

One of the Russians with whom collusion was committed.   

[millefleur 5,035]

[Neonred 3,446]

2 hours ago, millefleur said:

You know, I am studying this picture and I am not happy with the alignment of the lower anterior teeth.....

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

On ‎2‎/‎13‎/‎2019 at 10:29 PM, refugee said:

The Russians cannot be tried in absentia. Putin is not going to let them come to the west to defend themselves,  they are his intelligence operatives. But Putin denies it, strongly,  so I guess that settles it.

What does the convictions of his campaign officers have to do with Trump? Can you honestly say that if you replace Hillary Clinton for Donald Trump you would not be screaming collusion?  

 

On ‎2‎/‎14‎/‎2019 at 6:03 AM, Bill & Katya said:

Actually folks get tried in abstensia all the time.  Besides the Russians indicted are represented by legal counsel.

4 of the eight on your list plead guilty of lying to the FBI which is a process crime.  Also wondering just who Richard Pinedo is?

I was about to say on this as well is that people do get tried and convicted all the time. It seems that if the defendants are there initially during preliminary hearings but do not show up later they can be found tried in absentia in federal court. So since the defendant's lawyer was there initially that counts as them being there in person. I went digging and found this nugget as well:

 

CROSBY v. UNITED STATES(1993)

No. 91-6194

Argued: November 9, 1992    Decided: January 13, 1993

 

Although petitioner Crosby attended various preliminary proceedings, he failed to appear at the beginning of his criminal trial. The Federal District Court permitted the proceedings to go forward in his absence, and he was convicted and subsequently arrested and sentenced. In affirming his convictions, the Court of Appeals rejected his argument that his trial was prohibited by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 43, which provides that a defendant must be present at every stage of trial "except as otherwise provided" by the Rule, and which lists situations in which a right to be present may be waived, including when a defendant, initially present, "is voluntarily absent after the trial has commenced."

Held:

Rule 43 prohibits the trial in absentia of a defendant who is not present at the beginning of trial. The Rule's express use of the limiting phrase "except as otherwise provided" clearly indicates that the list of situations in which the trial may proceed without the defendant is exclusive. Moreover, the Rule is a restatement of the law that existed at the time it was adopted in 1944. Its distinction between flight before and during trial also is rational, as it marks a point at which the costs of delaying a trial are likely to increase; helps to assure that any waiver is knowing and voluntary; and deprives the defendant of the option of terminating the trial if it seems that the verdict will go against him. Because Rule 43 is dispositive, Crosby's claim that the Constitution also prohibited his trial in absentia is not reached. Pp. 258-262.

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

On ‎2‎/‎14‎/‎2019 at 6:03 AM, Bill & Katya said:

Actually folks get tried in abstensia all the time.  Besides the Russians indicted are represented by legal counsel.

4 of the eight on your list plead guilty of lying to the FBI which is a process crime.  Also wondering just who Richard Pinedo is?

 

On ‎2‎/‎13‎/‎2019 at 10:29 PM, refugee said:

The Russians cannot be tried in absentia. Putin is not going to let them come to the west to defend themselves,  they are his intelligence operatives. But Putin denies it, strongly,  so I guess that settles it.

What does the convictions of his campaign officers have to do with Trump? Can you honestly say that if you replace Hillary Clinton for Donald Trump you would not be screaming collusion?  

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_43

 

 

Rule 43. Defendant's Presence

 

(a) When Required. Unless this rule, Rule 5, or Rule 10 provides otherwise, the defendant must be present at:

(1) the initial appearance, the initial arraignment, and the plea;

(2) every trial stage, including jury impanelment and the return of the verdict; and

(3) sentencing.

(b) When Not Required. A defendant need not be present under any of the following circumstances:

(1) Organizational Defendant. The defendant is an organization represented by counsel who is present.

(2) Misdemeanor Offense. The offense is punishable by fine or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, and with the defendant's written consent, the court permits arraignment, plea, trial, and sentencing to occur by video teleconferencing or in the defendant's absence.

(3) Conference or Hearing on a Legal Question. The proceeding involves only a conference or hearing on a question of law.

(4) Sentence Correction. The proceeding involves the correction or reduction of sentence under Rule 35 or 18 U.S.C. §3582 (c).

(c) Waiving Continued Presence.

(1) In General. A defendant who was initially present at trial, or who had pleaded guilty or nolo contendere, waives the right to be present under the following circumstances:

(A) when the defendant is voluntarily absent after the trial has begun, regardless of whether the court informed the defendant of an obligation to remain during trial;

(B) in a noncapital case, when the defendant is voluntarily absent during sentencing; or

(C) when the court warns the defendant that it will remove the defendant from the courtroom for disruptive behavior, but the defendant persists in conduct that justifies removal from the courtroom.

(2) Waiver's Effect. If the defendant waives the right to be present, the trial may proceed to completion, including the verdict's return and sentencing, during the defendant's absence.

[refugee 169]

On 2/14/2019 at 3:03 AM, Bill & Katya said:

Actually folks get tried in abstensia all the time.  Besides the Russians indicted are represented by legal counsel.

I have not heard of folks getting tried in absentia,  unless they are a corporation. 

Quote

 

4 of the eight on your list plead guilty of lying to the FBI which is a process crime.  Also wondering just who Richard Pinedo is?

Richard Pinedo was just an innocent small time seller of fraudulent and stolen identification. ..too bad for him he sold them to these innocent russian technicians that just wanted to make a career in Americas political online  advertising industry. Such zeal to take down innocents will surely be the downfall of many in this country.

Edited February 15, 2019 by refugee

[Dashinka 23,246]

2 hours ago, refugee said:

I have not heard of folks getting tried in absentia,  unless they are a corporation. 

Richard Pinedo was just an innocent small time seller of fraudulent and stolen identification. ..too bad for him he sold them to these innocent russian technicians that just wanted to make a career in Americas political online  advertising industry. Such zeal to take down innocents will surely be the downfall of many in this country.

So what you are saying is that everyone should be against illegal immigration?  Btw, you chart did not detail all that, but if this guy was trafficking in fraudulent identification, then he along with anyone that provides any illegal alien with fraudulent documents should be fully prosecuted.  Not really sure what that has to do with President Trump unless you still believe the Trump/Russian collusion narrative.

Edited February 15, 2019 by Bill & Katya

[refugee 169]

6 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

So what you are saying is that everyone should be against illegal immigration?  Btw, you chart did not detail all that, but if this guy was trafficking in fraudulent identification, then he along with anyone that provides any illegal alien with fraudulent documents should be fully prosecuted.  Not really sure what that has to do with President Trump unless you still believe the Trump/Russian collusion narrative.

What does illegal immigration have to do with the accused and convicted criminals? Unless you are bringing up the illegal immigrants that built and supported the Trump golf courses.

[Póg mo 1,749]

On 2/12/2019 at 7:44 PM, ALFKAD said:

 

Poor Jim must be winding himself up in knots tonight.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/senate-has-uncovered-no-direct-evidence-conspiracy-between-trump-campaign-n970536

So these people are just incompetent, then? Trump sure knows how to pick the best people.