Author Topic: Paul Manafort bank and tax fraud trial  (Read 10115 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Paul Manafort bank and tax fraud trial
« Reply #45 on: August 07, 2018, 07:24:52 PM »

Online mef730

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3412
  • Tommy Points: 653
I think this will all be for nothing. I see an immediate pardon coming for him.
it wouldn't surprise me but 3 questions come to mind:
1. these charges aren't related to collusion/conspiracy but tax evasion.  what excuse would Trump have to pardon him without it looking like he's out to help his buddy?
2. would there be any kind of negative response from the Republicans in Congress?  would seem to be an implicit approval of Trump's actions during the campaign and quite probably give him the green light to pardon everyone connected to him without repercussions.
3. what would be the public reaction?  Sure, Dems in office and those against Trump would be up in arms, and I think justifiably so, but how many people outside that group will speak out against a pardon.

Great points. And my guess is that's why Mueller will keep this trial all about tax evasion/fraud. Nothing about collusion.

It's clear at this point that Trump's base will support him no matter what, including a pardon for Manafort regardless of the charges. And therefore Republicans in Congress won't do anything beyond clicking their tongues and shaking their heads; some would even praise the pardon.

Democrats, of course, would call for impeachment if Trump ate a salad with the dinner fork. Pardoning Manafort will make them completely unhinged, even though they have to expect it by now.

Assuming Independents actually exist anymore, I'd hope this would be the nail in the coffin of their Trump support.

Actually, as an independent, both parties have officially lost me. Some of the Democrats have definitely lost me with the way they handled losing the election and some of the comments that have come out from their side. An olive branch from them has definitely not been offered and it clear that the best interest of the nation is not at the top of their to do list. It is amazing the level of scrutiny Trump has received. The "thing" with Stormy Daniels was classic- Even Bill Clinton had it easier back in the days of Monica and that was while he was in office!  But then again, social media was not around in full force like it is today and some of the news channels were not as biased back in that decade. When someone loses something and cannot own up to it, that is a show of character. For me, the Democrat Party character has been damaged and socialistic candidates will not endear me to them more. The idea that guilty til proven innocent has become the norm, that makes me sickened on so many levels and is truly embarrassing as an American.

Some Republicans also leave a lot to be desired. I am a big proponent on rights for women and other groups who should be allowed the same privileges as "straight" people. I do support tax breaks though and for a business person, my best times have always been under Republican rule. Some of the Republicans definitely scare me though, and would not want to see them in charge of our country. The idea of Pence or Sessions running our country makes me want to get under a heavy dose of anti-depressants! The ironic thing is that if the Democrats had their way, Trump would get impeached and Pence would take over the reigns...You think Donald scares you!

I have voted both parties since 1992 though and did support Clinton in his 2 terms. I also split in 2000 and 2004(one vote one way and one vote the other). I leaned toward Democrat following that but could not support either candidate this last election. I am disenchanted...ready for a change..but not the Socialism type of change! I hope an independent candidate comes out and runs on a moral high ground and shakes everything up but I think we are still not ready although getting closer to that. My biggest fear is that a Socialist candidate gets into the oval house. That kind of government would be the only thing that would seriously give me thought about country of residence.

2020 is coming soon...if in 2 years the Democrats are still trying to blame other's for their loss, they will have a hard time in getting me back on that side of aisle. I will also have 4 years of Trump to analyze then...how is the economy doing in 2020? Is our country more safe or less safe then before? Have they enacted any regulations that I am utterly opposed to? and then my hope of someone in the middle appearing on the scene and challenging both sides which as we know in this day and age of controlled media, close to impossible to get elected but trust me, many Americans are disenchanted and Millennials are at the top of the list.....here is hoping the Millennials do not lean Socialist.

TP, thoughtful post.

It would be interesting if someone like Bloomberg ran for president. He ticks a lot of the boxes for me:
-Socially progressive, fiscally conservative.
-Successful in political office (former mayor of NYC).
-Incredibly successful businessman (he's a self-made billionaire).

The biggest knock against Bloomberg's chance of winning has traditionally been concerns that he would be portrayed as "one of those New York billionaires." And by "New York," I mean Jewish. Trump would be dog-whistling from Day 1, encouraging fears about "cosmopolitan globalists" like "George Soros." The "good people" in Charlottesville would be marching in the streets with their tiki torches.

I think Bloomberg would make a fantastic president. I'm just not sure that he could make it to the oval office.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2018, 08:14:11 PM by mef730 »
Want to learn about frequent flyer miles and flying well for free? Check out my blog here: http://frequentflyermiles101.com/

Actually, check it out even if you don't want to. It'll make me feel good.

Re: Paul Manafort bank and tax fraud trial
« Reply #46 on: August 07, 2018, 08:24:54 PM »

Offline Cman

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12686
  • Tommy Points: 88
I think this will all be for nothing. I see an immediate pardon coming for him.
it wouldn't surprise me but 3 questions come to mind:
1. these charges aren't related to collusion/conspiracy but tax evasion.  what excuse would Trump have to pardon him without it looking like he's out to help his buddy?
2. would there be any kind of negative response from the Republicans in Congress?  would seem to be an implicit approval of Trump's actions during the campaign and quite probably give him the green light to pardon everyone connected to him without repercussions.
3. what would be the public reaction?  Sure, Dems in office and those against Trump would be up in arms, and I think justifiably so, but how many people outside that group will speak out against a pardon.

Great points. And my guess is that's why Mueller will keep this trial all about tax evasion/fraud. Nothing about collusion.

It's clear at this point that Trump's base will support him no matter what, including a pardon for Manafort regardless of the charges. And therefore Republicans in Congress won't do anything beyond clicking their tongues and shaking their heads; some would even praise the pardon.

Democrats, of course, would call for impeachment if Trump ate a salad with the dinner fork. Pardoning Manafort will make them completely unhinged, even though they have to expect it by now.

Assuming Independents actually exist anymore, I'd hope this would be the nail in the coffin of their Trump support.

Actually, as an independent, both parties have officially lost me. Some of the Democrats have definitely lost me with the way they handled losing the election and some of the comments that have come out from their side. An olive branch from them has definitely not been offered and it clear that the best interest of the nation is not at the top of their to do list. It is amazing the level of scrutiny Trump has received. The "thing" with Stormy Daniels was classic- Even Bill Clinton had it easier back in the days of Monica and that was while he was in office!  But then again, social media was not around in full force like it is today and some of the news channels were not as biased back in that decade. When someone loses something and cannot own up to it, that is a show of character. For me, the Democrat Party character has been damaged and socialistic candidates will not endear me to them more. The idea that guilty til proven innocent has become the norm, that makes me sickened on so many levels and is truly embarrassing as an American.

Some Republicans also leave a lot to be desired. I am a big proponent on rights for women and other groups who should be allowed the same privileges as "straight" people. I do support tax breaks though and for a business person, my best times have always been under Republican rule. Some of the Republicans definitely scare me though, and would not want to see them in charge of our country. The idea of Pence or Sessions running our country makes me want to get under a heavy dose of anti-depressants! The ironic thing is that if the Democrats had their way, Trump would get impeached and Pence would take over the reigns...You think Donald scares you!

I have voted both parties since 1992 though and did support Clinton in his 2 terms. I also split in 2000 and 2004(one vote one way and one vote the other). I leaned toward Democrat following that but could not support either candidate this last election. I am disenchanted...ready for a change..but not the Socialism type of change! I hope an independent candidate comes out and runs on a moral high ground and shakes everything up but I think we are still not ready although getting closer to that. My biggest fear is that a Socialist candidate gets into the oval house. That kind of government would be the only thing that would seriously give me thought about country of residence.

2020 is coming soon...if in 2 years the Democrats are still trying to blame other's for their loss, they will have a hard time in getting me back on that side of aisle. I will also have 4 years of Trump to analyze then...how is the economy doing in 2020? Is our country more safe or less safe then before? Have they enacted any regulations that I am utterly opposed to? and then my hope of someone in the middle appearing on the scene and challenging both sides which as we know in this day and age of controlled media, close to impossible to get elected but trust me, many Americans are disenchanted and Millennials are at the top of the list.....here is hoping the Millennials do not lean Socialist.

TP, thoughtful post.

It would be interesting if someone like Bloomberg ran for president. He ticks a lot of the boxes for me:
-Socially progressive, fiscally conservative.
-Successful in political office (former mayor of NYC).
-Incredibly successful businessman (he's a self-made billionaire).

The biggest knock against Bloomberg's chance of winning has traditionally been concerns that he would be portrayed as "one of those New York billionaires." And by "New York," I mean Jewish. Trump would be dog-whistling from Day 1, encouraging fears about "cosmopolitan globalists" like "George Soros." The "good people" in Charlottesville would be marching in the streets with their tiki torches.

I think Bloomberg would make a fantastic president. I'm just not sure that he could make it to the oval office.

Trump can dog whistle all he want. I suspect that contingent of Trump voter is relatively small. In contract, Bloomberg should be able to pull a sizable chunk of the traditional Dem vote, and I would guess a good number of the "moderate" Republicans who either held their nose to vote Trump this past election, or sat it out.
Celtics fan for life.

Re: Paul Manafort bank and tax fraud trial
« Reply #47 on: August 07, 2018, 08:32:45 PM »

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji
The biggest knock against Bloomberg's chance of winning has traditionally been concerns that he would be portrayed as "one of those New York billionaires." And by "New York," I mean Jewish. Trump would be dog-whistling from Day 1, encouraging fears about "cosmopolitan globalists" like "George Soros." The "good people" in Charlottesville would be marching in the streets with their tiki torches.

I think Bloomberg would make a fantastic president. I'm just not sure that he could make it to the oval office.

Bloomberg is Jewish? Huh, I honestly never knew that, not that it matters, of course. My problem with him is one of the same problems that I had/have with Trump, and that is that I don't like billionaires, supposed or not, LOL ::) ;D, in the Oval Office, as I certainly do not want to see the Presidency essentially become The Billionaire's Club.

Speaking of possible backlash in such a hypothetical political matchup, btw, oh boy, I can easily see any number of the Q people ;D and the most ardent of Trump supporters turning the whole campaign into a kind of, "See? The media really is controlled by The Jews," thing :o. #ThisIsAsToWhatIGetForReadingTheCommentsOnYouTubeVideos :o

Re: Paul Manafort bank and tax fraud trial
« Reply #48 on: August 07, 2018, 08:35:09 PM »

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji
One of the more amusing parts of this thing is how stupid Manafort was in terms of putting this all in writing via email.

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/manafort-trial/h_92ca067ce38d3c0417fb02f814733199

I think itís a testament to 1) his stupidity and 2) his age. He definitely didnít grow up in an era where digital records were permanent.

I wouldnít be surprised if similar things come back to bite the Trump inner circle, who are all at least stupid or old, if not both.

They busted him on one illegal transaction because he emailed a Word doc with incriminating info to Gates(?) to have it converted to a PDF and sent back. Manafort didn't know how to do it himself.  ;D

Lol, that kind of reminds me of all of those "please print" passages from Hillary's emails ::) ;D.

Man, old powerful people freaking LOVE having their emails printed! It's the most bizarre thing for just about anyone under 45 or so. And a lot just dictate their responses back. It's so absurdly wasteful.


Rick Gates just testified that since flipping in February he's met with Mueller's team at least 20 times. Which seems like a lot.

Please tell me that this is some kind of a joke.

Re: Paul Manafort bank and tax fraud trial
« Reply #49 on: August 07, 2018, 08:56:07 PM »

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji
Manafort's former business partner Rick Gates testified today. A couple things of note:
1) Gates says Manafort had 15 offshore bank accounts, none of which was reported to IRS, all of which was illegal and that Manafort was well aware of this.
2) Gates cheated Manafort out of several hundred thousands of dollars. No honor among thieves, I guess. Note, Gates was Donald Trump's deputy campaign manager....

None of this really has anything to do with Trump, except show that he is clearly a really, really bad judge of character.

Deng, it's practically impossible to keep track of all of the characters in this story, lol ;D.

Well, super short crib notes version:
-Manafort almost certainly broke the law. We will see if the jury finds him guilty or not. At this point it is hard to believe they won’t.
-The fact that Trump had Manafort and Gates run his campaign tells you all you need to know about Trump. If you didn’t already know from Flynn, Zinke, Pruitt, etc...

Honestly, after a while I just couldn't take listening to it, anymore, and for someone as to who grew up in the 90s, the whole thing reminded me of the Oklahoma City bombing, TWA, and the Lewinsky Scandal in that we'd go to watch the evening news and the broadcast would always open with, "It's day x of the Lewinsky Scandal," after which my mom would immediately turn off the television set. At some point, it just becomes too much, imo.

That said, I do know a tiny bit about Manafort, Flynn was the "lock her up" former compromised general who sat next to Putin at some dinner which supposedly proves his guilt ::) (right?), and Pruitt is the now former head of the EPA, although I have no idea as to how he factors into all of this, and until recently I'd never heard of Gates and "Zinke" isn't exactly ringing a bell at the moment, either, lol.

Sorry about all of this, but TP for your efforts, anyway :).
« Last Edit: August 07, 2018, 11:08:00 PM by Beat LA »

Re: Paul Manafort bank and tax fraud trial
« Reply #50 on: August 07, 2018, 08:58:44 PM »

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji
The biggest knock against Bloomberg's chance of winning has traditionally been concerns that he would be portrayed as "one of those New York billionaires." And by "New York," I mean Jewish. Trump would be dog-whistling from Day 1, encouraging fears about "cosmopolitan globalists" like "George Soros." The "good people" in Charlottesville would be marching in the streets with their tiki torches.

I think Bloomberg would make a fantastic president. I'm just not sure that he could make it to the oval office.

Trump can dog whistle all he want. I suspect that contingent of Trump voter is relatively small. In contract, Bloomberg should be able to pull a sizable chunk of the traditional Dem vote, and I would guess a good number of the "moderate" Republicans who either held their nose to vote Trump this past election, or sat it out.

Wasn't that same assumption made in 2016, though?

Re: Paul Manafort bank and tax fraud trial
« Reply #51 on: August 07, 2018, 09:05:30 PM »

Offline Greenback

  • NCE
  • Al Horford
  • Posts: 695
  • Tommy Points: 57
  • Take away love and the earth is a tomb. ~ Browning
Well, this is embarassing...but then again, we have the rule of law versus the rule of mueller:

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/disaster-pic-of-mueller-hanging-with-ukrainian-hes-prosecuting-manafort-over-surfaces/
Everyone wants truth on his side, not everyone wants to be on the side of truth.

Re: Paul Manafort bank and tax fraud trial
« Reply #52 on: August 07, 2018, 11:43:42 PM »

Offline byennie

  • Webmaster
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2255
  • Tommy Points: 2962
Well, this is embarassing...but then again, we have the rule of law versus the rule of mueller:

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/disaster-pic-of-mueller-hanging-with-ukrainian-hes-prosecuting-manafort-over-surfaces/
The source is Jack Posobiec, an alt-right Internet conspiracy theorist with hits such as Pizzagate, who works for One America News Network (pro-Trump propaganda outlet). Same guy who supported Richard Spencer, placed a fake "Rape Melania" sign, tweets about white genocide... he literally makes up fake conspiracies all day long.

Pretty hard to take a guy who tweets 100k times about stuff like secret child sex rings in pizza parlors very seriously. Director of the FBI in the same publicly videotaped meeting as a euro president is supposed to mean... what exactly??

This is how conspiracy theories work. Take random occurrences, mash them together and pretend there's a secret code behind it all... let your followers come up with the crazy conclusions. Sigh.
---
Lucky17 Yahoo! Points League: Jackalopes
Offseason Tracker

Re: Paul Manafort bank and tax fraud trial
« Reply #53 on: August 07, 2018, 11:48:49 PM »

Online blink

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8305
  • Tommy Points: 547
Well, this is embarassing...but then again, we have the rule of law versus the rule of mueller:

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/disaster-pic-of-mueller-hanging-with-ukrainian-hes-prosecuting-manafort-over-surfaces/

This means absolutely nothing except trying to distract from the fact that Manafort broke the law and soon will be serving a whole lotta time.

Re: Paul Manafort bank and tax fraud trial
« Reply #54 on: August 07, 2018, 11:54:05 PM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19432
  • Tommy Points: 2172
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
Well, this is embarassing...but then again, we have the rule of law versus the rule of mueller:

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/disaster-pic-of-mueller-hanging-with-ukrainian-hes-prosecuting-manafort-over-surfaces/
The source is Jack Posobiec, an alt-right Internet conspiracy theorist with hits such as Pizzagate, who works for One America News Network (pro-Trump propaganda outlet). Same guy who supported Richard Spencer, placed a fake "Rape Melania" sign, tweets about white genocide... he literally makes up fake conspiracies all day long.

Pretty hard to take a guy who tweets 100k times about stuff like secret child sex rings in pizza parlors very seriously. Director of the FBI in the same publicly videotaped meeting as a euro president is supposed to mean... what exactly??

This is how conspiracy theories work. Take random occurrences, mash them together and pretend there's a secret code behind it all... let your followers come up with the crazy conclusions. Sigh.

Well-connected people are well-connected, the shocking full story at 11.

Snark aside it really is remarkable how much mileage these grifters get out of just taking benign events and information and breathlessly hyping them up as sinister with a ton of conspiratorial innuendo. Eventually believers wind up with a massive conspiracy framework but instead of the classic huge board covered in information you just have a ton of string endlessly reconnecting like 2 pictures, a mutually attended meeting and 3 out-of-context Tweets.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2018, 12:23:26 AM by fairweatherfan »

Re: Paul Manafort bank and tax fraud trial
« Reply #55 on: August 08, 2018, 12:04:21 AM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 35728
  • Tommy Points: 5898
Well, this is embarassing...but then again, we have the rule of law versus the rule of mueller:

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/disaster-pic-of-mueller-hanging-with-ukrainian-hes-prosecuting-manafort-over-surfaces/
Well, at least you are embarrassed about posting that.....stuff. And well you should be.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2018, 12:11:41 AM by nickagneta »

Re: Paul Manafort bank and tax fraud trial
« Reply #56 on: August 08, 2018, 12:07:25 AM »

Online liam

  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14905
  • Tommy Points: 1031
Well, this is embarassing...but then again, we have the rule of law versus the rule of mueller:

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/disaster-pic-of-mueller-hanging-with-ukrainian-hes-prosecuting-manafort-over-surfaces/

It really is embarrassing....embarrassing has two Rs...

Re: Paul Manafort bank and tax fraud trial
« Reply #57 on: August 08, 2018, 02:30:52 AM »

Online blink

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8305
  • Tommy Points: 547
From what I have read from the descriptions of the trial, I don't see any way in which Manafort isn't convicted.  The defense strategy of making Gates the big baddie just doesn't work.  The defense seems to be - - - > look at that guy he is bad, don't look at our client.  I guess that is what happens when you are desperate and don't really have other options.

There have been multiple witnesses that corroborate Gates version of events and then the massive paper trail that can't even be questioned.

Then he goes onto the 2nd trial...not looking good for him.

The questions I still have are:

1) Why didn't Manafort try and get a plea deal?  his lawyers had to have known how strong the case against him was.  maybe they tried and weren't able to get it done?  Was Manafort one of the prime targets of Mueller's probe?

2) why when he was flat broke did he agree to manage trump's campaign for free?  I have heard reporters saying oh he would leverage that exposure for more work.  BUT he was in desperate need of cash as he was taking on new loans because of how little money he had.
It just doesn't make sense.

3) how do all of Manafort's connections to Russian oligarchs fit in with the other Trump Russia connections.  Manafort reportedly owed a lot of money to Oleg Deripaska, a russian oligarch with close ties to Putin.  He was offering Derisaska 'private briefings' on the 2016 campaign in hopes 'to get whole'.  It seems like all of the juiciest parts of Manafort's involvement are the ones we know the least about right now.  is manafort still at risk of further charges in the russian conspiracy part of the investigation after his two trials?
« Last Edit: August 08, 2018, 03:51:52 AM by blink »

Re: Paul Manafort bank and tax fraud trial
« Reply #58 on: August 08, 2018, 06:42:08 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3775
  • Tommy Points: 626
From what I have read from the descriptions of the trial, I don't see any way in which Manafort isn't convicted.  The defense strategy of making Gates the big baddie just doesn't work.  The defense seems to be - - - > look at that guy he is bad, don't look at our client.  I guess that is what happens when you are desperate and don't really have other options.

There have been multiple witnesses that corroborate Gates version of events and then the massive paper trail that can't even be questioned.

Then he goes onto the 2nd trial...not looking good for him.

The questions I still have are:

1) Why didn't Manafort try and get a plea deal?  his lawyers had to have known how strong the case against him was.  maybe they tried and weren't able to get it done?  Was Manafort one of the prime targets of Mueller's probe?

2) why when he was flat broke did he agree to manage trump's campaign for free?  I have heard reporters saying oh he would leverage that exposure for more work.  BUT he was in desperate need of cash as he was taking on new loans because of how little money he had.
It just doesn't make sense.

3) how do all of Manafort's connections to Russian oligarchs fit in with the other Trump Russia connections.  Manafort reportedly owed a lot of money to Oleg Deripaska, a russian oligarch with close ties to Putin.  He was offering Derisaska 'private briefings' on the 2016 campaign in hopes 'to get whole'.  It seems like all of the juiciest parts of Manafort's involvement are the ones we know the least about right now.  is manafort still at risk of further charges in the russian conspiracy part of the investigation after his two trials?

On (2), if I'm interpreting the case so far, he was working for Trump for free to support selling access/influence/whatever to a Russian who floated him a couple of mil during that time.

Or are you asking for the "innocent" explanation?  I can't help with that.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Paul Manafort bank and tax fraud trial
« Reply #59 on: August 08, 2018, 06:45:17 PM »

Online blink

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8305
  • Tommy Points: 547
From what I have read from the descriptions of the trial, I don't see any way in which Manafort isn't convicted.  The defense strategy of making Gates the big baddie just doesn't work.  The defense seems to be - - - > look at that guy he is bad, don't look at our client.  I guess that is what happens when you are desperate and don't really have other options.

There have been multiple witnesses that corroborate Gates version of events and then the massive paper trail that can't even be questioned.

Then he goes onto the 2nd trial...not looking good for him.

The questions I still have are:

1) Why didn't Manafort try and get a plea deal?  his lawyers had to have known how strong the case against him was.  maybe they tried and weren't able to get it done?  Was Manafort one of the prime targets of Mueller's probe?

2) why when he was flat broke did he agree to manage trump's campaign for free?  I have heard reporters saying oh he would leverage that exposure for more work.  BUT he was in desperate need of cash as he was taking on new loans because of how little money he had.
It just doesn't make sense.

3) how do all of Manafort's connections to Russian oligarchs fit in with the other Trump Russia connections.  Manafort reportedly owed a lot of money to Oleg Deripaska, a russian oligarch with close ties to Putin.  He was offering Derisaska 'private briefings' on the 2016 campaign in hopes 'to get whole'.  It seems like all of the juiciest parts of Manafort's involvement are the ones we know the least about right now.  is manafort still at risk of further charges in the russian conspiracy part of the investigation after his two trials?

On (2), if I'm interpreting the case so far, he was working for Trump for free to support selling access/influence/whatever to a Russian who floated him a couple of mil during that time.

Or are you asking for the "innocent" explanation?  I can't help with that.

lol I don't think there are any innocent explanations for these questions.  thanks for the reply.

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsStrong Forums.

Community

Signup to win FREE tickets

* indicates required