Jump to content

Manafort Trial

Grandioso

By Grandioso
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Homercles

Homercles 10206

Posted
Posted
If we're discussing mind-blowing acid/mushroom trips, y'all need tp hear my story about going to FAO Swartz whilst tripping HARD on a couple tabs. It was...interesting.


My favorite was back in 2000 when I had access to mycelium cakes from someone’s grow op. Decided to boil them for tea under the assumption nothing would happen...so I decided to go to COBOL class.

In my recollection the code leapt off the swirling hurricane that used to be the chalkboard and into my brain, Matrix-style. When I raised my hand to answer a question, the earth stopped rotating and the entire universe was focused on me...though I do recall getting the answer right the prof was probably curious why my pupils were the size of dinner plates.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 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

Huckleberry

Huckleberry 34743

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

 


Except that the order says he can go after whatever crimes he finds leading from his investigation. So he’s doing exactly what he’s been charged to do.

 

You know you're a good citizen when you're arguing "sure he committed crimes against our nation and enabled the morally reprehensible invasion of a separate sovereign nation resulting in the murder of innocents BUT HE SHOULDN'T BE ON TRIAL BECAUSE THIS INVESTIGATOR SHOULDN'T BE LOOKING AT THAT STUFF!"

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HOOK'EMHOOAH

HOOK'EMHOOAH 1610

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, EMAWesome said:

Then why is he trying it?  If it has nothing to do with the Russian investigation Mueller should not have the authority to have anything to do with it.

In addition to what Chad Fuck said, Manafort signed on to the trump campaign to work for free while briefing a Russian oligarch - to whom he owed a large sum of money - on the status of the campaign and bid in the election.

So, while this specific trial deals only with the financial aspects of Manafort's shady-as-fuck history with Ukraine, the conclusions of this trial will lead directly into the following trial for Manafort and others.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TexArcher

TexArcher 39076

Posted
Posted (edited)
55 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

You know you're a good citizen when you're arguing "sure he committed crimes against our nation and enabled the morally reprehensible invasion of a separate sovereign nation resulting in the murder of innocents BUT HE SHOULDN'T BE ON TRIAL BECAUSE THIS INVESTIGATOR SHOULDN'T BE LOOKING AT THAT STUFF!"

I've got a Republican friend saying exactly this, and that the whole investigation into Trump et al is a waste of money.  

But the Hillary investigation wasn't.  Apparently.

He also claims to not watch Fox News.  Sure.

Buncha fucking mockingbirds.

Edited by TexArcher
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tuco

Tuco 5094

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:
 

Perhaps Trump shouldn't be allowed to be in the Executive Branch while the Executive Branch is investigating him. 

And, I could buy the Dershowitz was just pushing an angle that it's an abuse of power to just have open ended investigations without a crime.  I don't agree with it, and I think the logic has been shaky because there was indeed a crime, but I can see being biased against investigative abuse enough to make that leap.  But if he's now saying that an investigation alone - prior to any findings - should be enough to remove an agent from the FBI...Yeah, he's a fuck stain.  There is no consistent logic there.  The idea that Congress can push an investigation for partisan reasons and that should be enough, in and of itself, to remove an FBI agent is absolutely fucking insane. 

Edited by Tuco
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Longhorn_Fan68

Longhorn_Fan68 34108

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, Party_Taco said:

Winter on Fire is one compelling piece of cinema. Highly recommended viewing, especially because it gives even greater context to Manafort’s misdeeds. 

He’s a corrupt piece of shit with the blood of the Ukrainian people literally on his hands.

literally?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ollie Slatt

Ollie Slatt 295

Posted
Posted

I watched Winter on Fire last night based on this thread.  

Really interesting to see Putin's strategy of keeping the Ukraine from the EU and then to think about how that compares to Brexit and our own current situation in the US (trade wars, Nato, etc.).  Pretty consistent strategy for weakening the west.  Also, I went from hoping Manafort flips on Trump to hoping they throw everything they can at Manafort. No mercy for that guy.    

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DixonHur

DixonHur 11970

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, TexArcher said:

I've got a Republican friend saying exactly this, and that the whole investigation into Trump et al is a waste of money.  

But the Hillary investigation wasn't.  Apparently.

He also claims to not watch Fox News.  Sure.

Buncha fucking mockingbirds.

Let me guess, he didn't vote for Trump, nor does he support him

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lemonlime

lemonlime 5503

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, TexArcher said:

I've got a Republican friend saying exactly this, and that the whole investigation into Trump et al is a waste of money.  

But the Hillary investigation wasn't.  Apparently.

He also claims to not watch Fox News.  Sure.

Buncha fucking mockingbirds.

So, a Gary Johnson voter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 47298

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Chad Fuck said:

Except that the order says he can go after whatever crimes he finds leading from his investigation. So he’s doing exactly what he’s been charged to do.

 

I feel like we answer this question at least once a week.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grandioso

Grandioso 2592

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I watched Winter on Fire last night based on this thread.  
Really interesting to see Putin's strategy of keeping the Ukraine from the EU and then to think about how that compares to Brexit and our own current situation in the US (trade wars, Nato, etc.).  Pretty consistent strategy for weakening the west.  Also, I went from hoping Manafort flips on Trump to hoping they throw everything they can at Manafort. No mercy for that guy.    


Ollie, you are my man. EVERYONE ELSE, watch this movie!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted

Judge is taking a quick recess in Manafort's trial. A few updates:

- Before the jury came in, the judge admonished the lawyers not to use the term "oligarch" to describe wealthy Ukrainians who allegedly paid for Manafort's work. Has "pejorative" meaning, he said

More on "oligarch" — judge said the term implied Manafort was being paid by criminals, and there wouldn't be evidence about that. Judge: Case will not be tried that "he associated with despicable people, and therefore he is despicable. That's not the American way."

We heard from political media consultant Daniel Rabin, who made TV ads for Manafort for Ukrainian candidates/parties, incl. former president Viktor Yanukovych. Rabin talked about Manafort being good at what he did, extent to which he oversaw the work and ran things

Over Manafort objection, govt was allowed to introduce into the record (but not to put up on a screen in the courtroom) one of the photos taken of Yanukovych while he was meeting people on a TV ad set.

As he did yesterday with Tad Devine, Manafort's lawyer asked Rabin about how, regardless of what political party consultants handled in the US, they sometimes came together for int'l campaigns. Rabin agreed — but Qs didn't explicitly get into who was Dem and who was Republican

We're in the middle now of hearing from an FBI special agent who was involved in searching Manafort's condo in Alexandria. The govt is using this testimony to get a lot of financial documents introduced that were seized, incl. invoices for pricey home upgrades

The agent also said that it was not a "no-knock" search — he said they knocked and announced themselves three times, waiting 30 seconds in between each time, before entering the apartment

Heading back into the courtroom, but I will leave you with an Ellis-ism from this morning. At one point, he asked Rabin to speak up as he testified: "My hearing is not what it once was," the judge said. "Nothing is what it once was."

 

Lunch break. A few key takeaways:

- Govt lawyer said they may call Rick Gates, they may not. That caused a stir — blaming Gates is a big part of the defense. But the lawyer clarified that he meant they're reevaluating witnesses as the evidence is introduced, not just re: Gates

The judge has been limiting the govt from introducing evidence about Manafort's luxury lifestyle. Some info about his purchases may be relevant, the judge said, "but enough is enough — we don't convict people because they have a lot of money to throw around."

Before the jury came in, the judge warned the lawyers about rolling their eyes or making faces in the courtroom. There has been tension as the judge has criticized the govt for how much evidence they're trying to introduce about Manafort's puchases and work in Ukraine

A major issue was about the govt having the FBI special agent involved in searching Manafort's home read the contents of docs — the judge seemed frustrated by that approach, since the agent didn't know about the contents, but was just there to say where they were found

We did see a few documents taken from Manafort's condo that appeared to show some communications about wire transfers to Manafort's alleged accounts in Cyprus, and transfers from those accounts to US vendors (like an antique rug dealer)

We saw one memo from April 2013, purportedly from Manafort to "SL", described as a summary of accounts overdue. The doc said a $4.4M wire was needed ("I need all of this now," it said) and there were entries referring to "Hapsburg" (see: buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetil…) and US lobbying

There has not been testimony/evidence about who "SL" is. However, the govt did ask Daniel Rabin this morning if he knew Sergey Levochkin, who was chief of staff under former Ukrainian prez Viktor Yanukovych and has been linked to Manafort elsewhere:

- Govt says they plan to get through a number of witnesses this p.m. The judge has been pushing the govt to be speedy — he's been skeptical of how much evidence they need to show re: what Manafort did in Ukraine, in addition to the issues he raised about the lifestyle evidence

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 32104

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Tuco said:

This is the bank fraud case, correct? I'm surprised that the nature of his work is being included in the level of detail it is.  I would have expected it to be more accounting/technical.

Yes.  From most of what I read, the government is trying to taint him a bit with rooskieness and oligarchness and the judge is not having it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 32104

Posted
Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Yes please.  Her book was decent too. 

The judge seems to want to move the Manafort trial along as fast as possible. 

That is this judge's reputation, for the most part.  Hurry.  Up.  Don't waste this jury's time.  Kind of typical of federal judges because their trial time in a given year is very circumscribed compared to state court judges (where it is also circumscribed, but not nearly as much).  Also, the idea of having to blow another three weeks of trial time on a retrial because of permitting prejudicial evidence is completely repellent to any judge.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pods

Pods 7637

Posted
Posted

That seems kind of bullshit on the judges part. Oligarch is a word with a defined definition that can include anything from benevolence to malice. It's not the govt's fault the opulence of Russian oligarchs is so ridiculous, they are the subject of a Taco Bell commercial. 

Opulence, Manafort had it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 32104

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Pods said:

That seems kind of bullshit on the judges part. Oligarch is a word with a defined definition that can include anything from benevolence to malice. It's not the govt's fault the opulence of Russian oligarchs is so ridiculous, they are the subject of a Taco Bell commercial. 

Opulence, Manafort had it. 

Eh, I think he has a valid point.  It has a highly negative connotation and little or nothing to do with whether he committed bank fraud or tax evasion.  The money laundering case is a better venue for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:
Lunch break. A few key takeaways:

- Govt lawyer said they may call Rick Gates, they may not. That caused a stir — blaming Gates is a big part of the defense. But the lawyer clarified that he meant they're reevaluating witnesses as the evidence is introduced, not just re: Gates

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tuco

Tuco 5094

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, triplehorn said:
 
-Spicey tweets
 

 

That seems fairly tortured logic.  I mean, the "prosecution has enough evidence without Gates" logic is sound, but the rest of it seems just trying to paint any item as a win.  It's not like the defense can't discuss Gates if the prosecution doesn't call him.  They can claim it was aliens if they want to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 32104

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Tuco said:

That seems fairly tortured logic.  I mean, the "prosecution has enough evidence without Gates" logic is sound, but the rest of it seems just trying to paint any item as a win.  It's not like the defense can't discuss Gates if the prosecution doesn't call him.  They can claim it was aliens if they want to. 

Yeah, that series of tweets is bizarre and stupid. "Opening the door" has no relevance here.  The government is free to call Gates if they want to.  I think the strategy is, if the defense blames Gates, and he takes the stand and gets cut up both as a general witness and as an informant, that only hurts the governement's case and plays into the defense's hand.  If they can make their case without putting a snitch on the stand, they're probably better off doing so.

There is a notion, valid, that if you advertise to the jury in your opening, that they will hear something from a witness, or evidence on a topic will be presented, and you fail to produce that evidence, that creates juror dissonance and hurts credibility.  However, the defense didn't advertise that Gates would confess on the stand.  There's no issue there with the defense calling him.

Spicey sounds like a third year law student with too much time on her hands.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Spicey sounds like a third year law student with too much time on her hands.

Not defending Spicey, but I get the point made about the defense opening the door by raising Gates and his role as a pillar to defend Manafort.  If defense doesn't deliver on that, looks like a failed smokescreen.  Prosecution likely doesn't need Gates to prove their paper trail criminal charges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted

 

Just before break, the judge asked the jury if their lunch was satisfactory, and they nodded (this is a judge with strong feelings about the importance of lunch). He also said earlier he would grant their request to bring in a birthday cake on Friday (it's not the judge's bday)

We should have at least one more witness this afternoon, possibly more. The judge previously said he plans to go until around 5:30/6 most days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TexArcher

TexArcher 39076

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

No, whoever said Hallie Jackson won by a country mile. 

That would be me.

I just looked them up and was surprised to see they're the same age.

Katy Tur is sexy, but I have to say it: that's a hard 34.

  • Like 1
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...