Is Paul Manafort headed to jail because CNN said he's guilty? No. He's headed to jail because after an extensive investigation by the FBI and approval by a grand jury and a federal court, he was found guilty.
YES. Paul Manafort IS headed to jail because of CNN and other outlets like CNN. Ditto for Cohen (although he is not really going to jail yet). That is where you are wrong. Those people were actually caught up in a government investigation that only took place because of political pressures mostly created with biased reporting. The whole legal process of their convictions is tainted with the fake Russia investigation which should have never taken place in the first place.
So is it really fair Manafort should go to jail? In a way it is because he really was bad. But in another way it isn't because under normal circumstances he would never have been investigated for in such depth that it took to uncover what took place. And if you think that isn't a good excuse for someone to be getting off from a crime, just ask yourself why guilty people are often set free because the police overstepped legal boundaries. If you dig deep and long enough, the government can find pretty much
everyone guilty of something. Well....maybe not mother Treasa but everyone else. And if the government were to dig deep on Hillary it would be easy for her to go jail as well. Just the whitewashing and the destruction of the hard drives alone are crimes enough for any other person to be in a lot of trouble. But in the end, Hillary probably won't be going to jail because of who she is influenced by our unbiased media. She is untouchable and knows she is untouchable the same way that the mafia bosses are untouchable.
You live in a bleak, confusing world where everyone has political biases that are reflected in their work. This includes the FBI, the entire justice department, the entire set of US attorneys, the court system especially the judges. and all of the media. No wonder you haven't been able to form any coherent set of opinions out of all of this.
I assume then that you are a Trump supporter because most Trump supporters just wanted to shake things up in Washington out of their frustration and confusion. To toss a hand grenade into the works of the hopeless, dysfunctional government How is that working out for you so far?
I can help.
First, consider just the FBI. According to you, the FBI investigates either what they want to investigate in order to satisfy their own political biases or they investigate what the administration in office at the time wants them to investigate in order to satisfy that administration's political aims. I am unclear as to which you are proposing because you seem to be suggesting both in different points in your argument.
But finally, it doesn't matter. Either way, your logic is faced with a contradiction and it is pretty much the same contradiction no matter whose policial aims you think are being met by the investigation, those of the FBI themselves or the administration in power at the time. The contradiction is that both sides were investigated and both sides were found to have had reasonable grounds for starting the investigation, but pretty much in both cases, the overarching political hoped-for result wasn't realized.
Consider the case if the FBI was the dancing monkey of the administration in power. This would mean that the Obama administration would have ordered the FBI to investigate Clinton for her use of a private email server and that the FBI would have stopped the investigation into the Trump's campaign's possible collusion with Russia when ordered by the Trump administration. Obviously, neither happened and neither makes sense.
The proposition that the FBI followed its own political biases to start the two investigations also fails for the same reason. The FBI would have to have made a sea change in political bias between investigating Clinton's emails and Trump's possible collusion with Russia.
Even less likely is the possibility that it was a battle of the pro-red FBI against the pro-blue FBI since Comey would have to be in both at the same time and that none of this battle inside the FBI came to be known at the time or since.
It is hard to believe that the Russia investigation was a political act by the blue team because they would have released the information before the election when it would have hurt Trump rather than after the election.
The only conclusion that doesn't raise these problems with logic is that both warranted the investigation that occurred and that in neither case was prosecution recommended for the crimes committed. Yes, Clinton was reckless in her use of private email server as were many others who used private email servers in both Republican and Democratic administrations but they didn't rise to be crimes. Yes, the Russians did interfere with the 2016 election to elect Trump, Trump's campaign met many times with Russians that they tried to cover up, and yes, Trump tried to obstruct justice but didn't succeed, however, they can't indict a sitting president, he must be impeached first.
In other words that the FBI is the neutral source of information and investigation that you say that you want.
I can help with others too, the media, the courts, etc.
