Jump to content
Required Reading for any Longhorn ×

Manafort Trial

Grandioso

By Grandioso
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

retread
retread
Hugo Stiglitz
Hugo Stiglitz
Chooky
Chooky

If Mueller completes this investigation leaving no doubt of criminal activity from this administration while at the same time paying for %80 of it with seized cash from Russian money laundering scheme

Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105408

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, LongestHorn said:

Mueller’s team includes Andrew Weissmann, who no less than former White House strategist Steve Bannon has reportedly dubbed “the LeBron James of money-laundering investigations.”

Popcorn.

Well....better hope that Manafort didn't hire the Steph Curry of money-laundering defense.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, LongestHorn said:

Mueller’s team includes Andrew Weissmann, who no less than former White House strategist Steve Bannon has reportedly dubbed “the LeBron James of money-laundering investigations.”

Popcorn.

He’s the Michael Jordan of witness flipping and organized crime cases too. 

From 1991 to 2002 Weissmann worked in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York. While there he tried more than 25 cases involving members of the Genovese, Colombo and Gambinocrime families.[1] He led the prosecution team in the Vincent Gigante case, in which Gigante was convicted.[3]

From 2002 to 2005, Weissmann was deputy director and then director of the task force investigating the Enron scandal.[1] His work resulted in the prosecution of more than 30 people for crimes including perjury, fraud, and obstruction including three of Enron's top executives, Andrew Fastow, Kenneth Lay. and Jeffrey Skilling. In a follow-up case in U.S. District Court, Weissmann also was successful at arguing that auditing firm Arthur Andersen LLP had covered up for Enron. In that case, which resulted in the destruction of Andersen, he convinced the district judge to instruct the jury that they could convict the firm regardless of whether its employees knew they were violating the law.[3] That ruling was later unanimously overturned by the Supreme Court in Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, in which the court held that "the jury instructions failed to convey the requisite consciousness of wrongdoing."[3]

In 2005 Weissmann worked as special counsel under Mueller at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, then went into private practice at Jenner & Block in New York. In 2011 he returned to the FBI, serving as General Counsel under Mueller.[4] Since 2015 he has headed the criminal fraud section at DOJ. Weissmann has taught at NYU School of Law, Fordham Law School, and Brooklyn Law School.[2]On June 19, 2017 he joined Special Counsel Mueller's team in investigating the Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections.[5][6]

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HOOK'EMHOOAH

HOOK'EMHOOAH 1610

Posted
Posted

This trial being about his financial interests is all pertinent to tracking down the money specifically. The first rule of any investigation is to follow the trail of money and you will find the source. So these proceedings will play directly into the trial(s) that are to follow for Manafort and possibly a few others as well since the conclusion of this trial will then be closed and can be later used in other trials without having to revisit the defense of the proceedings, provided the accused is found to be guilty of the alleged crimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31541

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

Thanks, and I guess that it where my head is at. It feels like if you are guilty, you want to use every tactic to delay the inevitable, and if you are innocent, you want to get the show on the road (factoring in enough time to present your case obviously). 

I have asked several pretty sophisticated criminal practitioners about the "delay favors defendants" shibboleth.  The best answer is something like this.  A trial scenario is always barely controlled chaos and this goes double or triple for a criminal trial, where neither side gets a lot of access to the other side's evidence or case theory/trial strategy until they are right in the middle of it.  Consistent with this is the general notion "you never know what's gonna happen."  Delay creates more time for the "never know" to happen and there's a 50-50 chance or better of that "never know" to favor the defendant.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grandioso

Grandioso 2592

Posted
  • Author
Posted

If only Manafort's OWN CHILDREN could be character witnesses in this trial.

Quote

“Poor mom”

“Dad is a sex addict”

 

“he has too many skeletons, he can’t have a public divorce.”

“the issue was he wanted her to WANT to have the group sex and got upset she didn’t”

“Has mom been tested for STDs?”

 

“mom thinks the power went to his head”

“with Ukraine”

“Right…that it has turned him into a moral-less ethic-less person”

“he is just power crazed…controling. obsessive.”

“He has no moral or legal compass”

 

“You know he has killed people in Ukraine? Knowingly”

“What?! No”

“Don’t fool yourself. That money we have is blood money”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grandioso

Grandioso 2592

Posted
  • Author
Posted

"moral-less ethic-less" [sic]

Needs to be "amoral, unethical" but even then, there's some redundancy. Regardless, Paul Manafort was paid tens of millions for helping install a Kremlin puppet president in Ukraine that was eventually chased out of the country by unarmed protesters, some of whom were killed by their own government's orders. And then he cheated the US government out of the taxes he owed on his ignominious blood money. 

He seems like he sucks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grandioso

Grandioso 2592

Posted
  • Author
Posted
20 hours ago, tantric superman said:

01dc-weissmann-articleLarge.jpg?quality=

 

Seven savage Jews that won't leave a scrap on Manafort's bones.

If Weissmann et al don't privately joke about them being the "Inglourious Basterds" that's a real missed opportunity. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grandioso

Grandioso 2592

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Christian?!? I didn't see that on wiki but I did enjoy this:

Quote

Weissmann has a bachelor's degree from Princeton University. Following a Fulbright scholarship to the University of Geneva, he attended and graduated from Columbia Law School. He then clerked for Judge Eugene Nickerson in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

Quote

rom 1991 to 2002 Weissmann worked in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York. While there he tried more than 25 cases involving members of the Genovese, Colombo and Gambino crime families.[1] He led the prosecution team in the Vincent Gigante case, in which Gigante was convicted.

Quote

From 2002 to 2005, Weissmann was deputy director and then director of the task force investigating the Enron scandal.[1] His work resulted in the prosecution of more than 30 people for crimes including perjury, fraud, and obstruction including three of Enron's top executives, Andrew Fastow, Kenneth Lay. and Jeffrey Skilling. In a follow-up case in U.S. District Court, Weissmann also was successful at arguing that auditing firm Arthur Andersen LLP had covered up for Enron. In that case, which resulted in the destruction of Andersen, he convinced the district judge to instruct the jury that they could convict the firm regardless of whether its employees knew they were violating the law.[3] That ruling was later unanimously overturned by the Supreme Court in Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, in which the court held that "the jury instructions failed to convey the requisite consciousness of wrongdoing."[

Weismann is really good at making criminal enterprises not exist anymore. Gambino crime family, Enron, Arthur Andersen... *poof*

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gil Bang

Gil Bang 26045

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Grandioso said:

Christian?!? I didn't see that on wiki but I did enjoy this:

Weismann is really good at making criminal enterprises not exist anymore. Gambino crime family, Enron, Arthur Andersen... *poof*

So he worked under Rudy?  Interdasting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tuco

Tuco 5084

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Grandioso said:

Like with Al Capone being charged for tax evasion, the point of this is not to demonstrate Manafort being a tax cheat - it's to show his ill gotten gains. 

I think there are multiple purposes:

1. To send him to prison.  It's not all about Trump.

2. To demonstrate (read into the record) his relationship with powerful Russians and the Russian government. That will be used later to demonstrate why he would have motivations for working on Russia's behalf in the election.

3. To demonstrate how the Russians pay Americans, in some instances. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

So is he guilty yet?

In all honesty, what are the implications here?  Does it just make dotus look bad when/if Manafort is found guilty?  Could he still flip?

If my information is correct: 

Sentencing guidelines if convicted in this trial is 10 years in prison. 

Sentencing guidelines in his other trial due to start Sept 17 is 15 years.

Doesn't make Trump look good.

Could flip yes but outlook not so good if flip. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grandioso

Grandioso 2592

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Honorable people sometimes hire campaign managers who previously worked with warlords, psychopaths, and puppets. I mean, Hillary’s most trusted campaign operative ran a child sex trafficking ring out of a pizza parlor.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89812

Posted
Posted

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2018/07/31/paul-manafort-trial-live-coverage/?utm_term=.e87b68e0bbe8

Quote

For months we have heard pieces of the government’s case against Paul Manafort. Now we know his defense: Blame Richard Gates, his former business partner and deputy.

“This case is about taxes and trust,” defense attorney Thomas Zehnle told the jury. “Mr. Manafort placed his trust in the wrong person … Rick Gates.”

Gates, Zehnle noted, has already pleaded guilty to lying to the U.S. government, yet prosecutors are now telling a jury to believe his testimony.

“There are two sides to every story; it’s an old adage but it’s true,” Zehnle said.

Zehnle sought humanize Manafort, asking him to stand and saying he was “proud” to represent him.

He said Manafort was a “talented political consultant” and  second-generation immigrant and the first in his family to go to college. He has been “at the pinnacle of U.S. politics for forty years,” Zehnle said, and a “driving force in the candidacy of multiple U.S. presidents.”

For that, he said, “Paul Manafort has rendered a valuable service to our system of government.”

At that point Judge T.S. Ellis III interrupted Zehnle as he had Assistant U.S. Attorney Uzo Asonye, asking, “I take it you plan to offer evidence?” Ellis told the defense attorney to stick to what would be shown.

Yes...turn on each other...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...