Manafort Trial

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

23 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Anyone have any perspective on how this rolls up to Trump?  Beyond the hope he turns after conviction( assuming).  

 

Not trolling or baiting.  Don’t see anything being speculated here or on a quick google.

Because this trial has significant public interest, it gives people a first hand look at how this shady international finance world works. Both Manafort and Gates look like career criminals in this.  These were Trump’s top campaign officials.  It doesn’t look great but everyone has pretty much accepted Trump’s entire outfit is filled with crooks from top to bottom so I don’t see any immediate political damage.

[Brisketexan 107033]

37 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Anyone have any perspective on how this rolls up to Trump?  Beyond the hope he turns after conviction( assuming).  

 

Not trolling or baiting.  Don’t see anything being speculated here or on a quick google.

Person X was Donald Trump's Campaign Chairman.

Person X (presuming conviction) is a convicted of bank fraud, money laundering, and illegal tax avoidance.

And that's just this trial -- there's another one coming.

He was your campaign chairman, Donald.  Come on.  That's how it rolls up to him.  He collected a crew of con men, crooks, and grifters to be part of his team.  That's, ummm, some bad judgment.  At best.

[Biff Tannen 46204]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Person X was Donald Trump's Campaign Chairman.

Person X (presuming conviction) is a convicted of bank fraud, money laundering, and illegal tax avoidance.

And that's just this trial -- there's another one coming.

He was your campaign chairman, Donald.  Come on.  That's how it rolls up to him.  He collected a crew of con men, crooks, and grifters to be part of his team.  That's, ummm, some bad judgment.  At best.

The BEST people.  Did I say best PEOPLE?  I MEANT BEST CRIMINALS.

[HOOK'EMHOOAH 1610]

18 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

The BEST people.  Did I say best PEOPLE?  I MEANT BEST CRIMINALS.

I for one can't wait for those tax returns to be released. But I'm not holding my breath, I'll be satisfied as long as Mueller gets them, which is something I'm confident will happen if it hasn't already. Okay, back to your regularly scheduled trial thread.

[TwiceHorn 32108]

1 hour ago, Ollie Slatt said:

Generally true. But in this case the judge is old AF and on senior status, so I doubt his case load is too heavy.   

Valid point.  He's the same age as Sparks, and some senior judges take on a pretty good load.  Regardless, by force of habit, they tend to force counsel to make "good use" of everyone's time.  Good being solely in the judgment of the judge.

[Incredulity 11882]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Because this trial has significant public interest, it gives people a first hand look at how this shady international finance world works. Both Manafort and Gates look like career criminals in this.  These were Trump’s top campaign officials.  It doesn’t look great but everyone has pretty much accepted Trump’s entire outfit is filled with crooks from top to bottom so I don’t see any immediate political damage.

Yeah, shame isn’t going to work.

[TwiceHorn 32108]

30 minutes ago, HOOK'EMHOOAH said:

I for one can't wait for those tax returns to be released. But I'm not holding my breath, I'll be satisfied as long as Mueller gets them, which is something I'm confident will happen if it hasn't already. Okay, back to your regularly scheduled trial thread.

Tax returns won't be released to the public as a result of litigation unless someone fucks up. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103

Assuming he can prove relevance, Mueller already has them.  Ibid.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Comey’s crew probably had Trump’s tax returns.  Loyalty pledge?  Let Flynn go? This guy is dirty AF.  Time to follow the money. 

CROSSFIRE HURRICANE 

[NameAlreadyInUse 5178]

14 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

The BEST people.  Did I say best PEOPLE?  I MEANT BEST CRIMINALS.

I dunno.  I like my criminals who weren't caught.

[jimmyjazz 47332]

15 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Person X was Donald Trump's Campaign Chairman.

Person X (presuming conviction) is a convicted of bank fraud, money laundering, and illegal tax avoidance.

And that's just this trial -- there's another one coming.

He was your campaign chairman, Donald.  Come on.  That's how it rolls up to him.  He collected a crew of con men, crooks, and grifters to be part of his team.  That's, ummm, some bad judgment.  At best.

Eh.  Manafort only worked on the campaign for "49 days or something".  Just ask Trump.

P.S.  It was roughly 150 days.

[Mdhorn 6166]

17 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Rick Gates admits he may improperly submitted personal expenses to Trump's inaugural committee.

Coming clean helps undermine his lack of credibility issues.

[Incredulity 11882]

There is no doubt Trump is a buffoon who free formed the whole campaign.

Convicting a Tax Cheat is certainly a good thing(overall).  

If this trial gets to a conviction without more than fairly vauge guilt by association on Trump it will be handing Trump a big piece of political capital.

[Tuco 5094]

Perhaps the judge should allow the jury to hear a little compare and contrast between Gates' sex life and Manafort's.  You know, if that shit is relevant.

[jimmyjazz 47332]

I'd put it at 50/50 that Gates fucked Manafort's wife.

[Dahobbs 18399]

22 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

There is no doubt Trump is a buffoon who free formed the whole campaign.

Convicting a Tax Cheat is certainly a good thing(overall).  

If this trial gets to a conviction without more than fairly vauge guilt by association on Trump it will be handing Trump a big piece of political capital.

I think you misunderstand the point of this trial. (1) It isn't about Trump; (2) It isn't even about really anything to do with the election other than exposing how corrupt Trump's campaign manager was; (3) Manafort has a second trial coming up that goes more to the heart of Russia's election meddling and Manafort's role in it. 

Edited August 8, 2018 by Dahobbs

[Tuco 5094]

26 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

If this trial gets to a conviction without more than fairly vauge guilt by association on Trump it will be handing Trump a big piece of political capital.

If the headline reads "Manafort Convicted!", that's not political capital for Trump.  Trumpsters can cry "yeah, but really it means..." all they want, but it's absolutely absurd to think it's anything but a good day for Mueller and shitty day for Trump 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

needs a caption.

[HOOK'EMHOOAH 1610]

21 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

needs a caption.

Rick, run into the store and grab me some pistachios before we head back to my house, will ya? Thanks!

[David Dennison 19570]

51 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

There is no doubt Trump is a buffoon who free formed the whole campaign.

Convicting a Tax Cheat is certainly a good thing(overall).  

If this trial gets to a conviction without more than fairly vauge guilt by association on Trump it will be handing Trump a big piece of political capital.

You mean an association other than Paul Manafort being his campaign manager? That's not really all that vague.

[Incredulity 11882]

47 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I think you misunderstand the point of this trial. (1) It isn't about Trump; (2) It isn't even about really anything to do with the election other than exposing how corrupt Trump's campaign manager was; (3) Manafort has a second trial coming up that goes more to the heart of Russia's election meddling and Manafort's role in it. 

Mea culpa.  I did not understand point 3.  

Is there strategy in seperate trials or some judicial requirement?  Both are federal charges.  

 

 

[Incredulity 11882]

25 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

You mean an association other than Paul Manafort being his campaign manager? That's not really all that vague.

Again, guilt by association or shame isn’t going to impact Trump one bit.

[Brisketexan 107033]

13 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Mea culpa.  I did not understand point 3.  

Is there strategy in seperate trials or some judicial requirement?  Both are federal charges.  

 

 

As I understand it (admit that I haven't read it in depth), the defendant is tried in the district where the crime was committed.  For the historical financial crimes, that was the ED of VA.  For the other charges, he's going to be tried in DC.

[Dahobbs 18399]

16 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Mea culpa.  I did not understand point 3.  

Is there strategy in seperate trials or some judicial requirement?  Both are federal charges.  

 

 

There may be a strategy in it, but if I recall correct there was also jurisdictional or venue issue that prevented both from being tried together. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

46 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

needs a caption.

"Do you think that group of guys over there would be into it?" 

[Gil Bang 26251]

So, if Manafort is convicted in this case, do the surly lawyers think he's more or less likely to try to make a deal on the other charges?

[Kyrie Eleison 9312]

9 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

So, if Manafort is convicted in this case, do the surly lawyers think he's more or less likely to try to make a deal on the other charges?

depends on a multitude of factors...

[Kyrie Eleison 9312]

16 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

Person X was Donald Trump's Campaign Chairman.

Person X (presuming conviction) is a convicted of bank fraud, money laundering, and illegal tax avoidance.

And that's just this trial -- there's another one coming.

He was your campaign chairman, Donald.  Come on.  That's how it rolls up to him.  He collected a crew of con men, crooks, and grifters to be part of his team.  That's, ummm, some bad judgment.  At best.

should've also brought in Jack Abramoff for good measure...

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

37 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

So, if Manafort is convicted in this case, do the surly lawyers think he's more or less likely to try to make a deal on the other charges?

Not a lawyer but I don't think the government will be offering Manafort a deal after this, just a hunch from the things I've read. 

Lock his ass up and throw away the key looks to be the approach going forward. 

[hobbes2702 13509]

What’s the deal with Ellis not understanding what an oligarch is and how that’s different than political contributions? Seriously is he just dense?

[kevwun 16449]

The Judge is an asshole.  I think that sums it up nicely.

[Tuco 5094]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Not a lawyer but I don't think the government will be offering Manafort a deal after this, just a hunch from the things I've read. 

Lock his ass up and throw away the key looks to be the approach going forward. 

I assume there might be some wriggle room around his accommodations in prison and possibly seizure of assets.  On the latter, someone mention this was not tax evasion but filing false tax forms (or something like that.)  Is there the potential to pursue back taxes?  Did those pretty much get zero'd out in losses after his Ukrainian business dried up? Has it been too long?

I could that as leverage the Feds would be willing to use.  I don't see them being okay with Manafort walking, but I can't imagine there would be much stomach for impoverishing his household, despite there being legal and ethical justification to do so. 

[yaqdum 182]

2 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

needs a caption.

i know you're sore, but can you feel my finger?

[brown water 3789]

2 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

needs a caption.

Commie-dians in Cars Getting Coffee

[Degenerate Gardner 4160]

3 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'd put it at 50/50 that Gates fucked Manafort's wife.

Hell, Lumbergh fucked her.

[triplehorn 2664]

According to Magionos, she found 31 foreign bank accounts opened from 2010 to 2014. All of the accounts listed Manafort, Gates, or Konstantin Kilimnik as beneficial owners and/or authorized signatories. (2/3)

Prosecutors asked her how she knew they were connected to Manafort? Simply enough - when opening the accounts, Manafort attached a copy of his passport. (3/3)

 

 

[Loco 3754]

4 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

nvrmnd

Edited August 8, 2018 by Loco

[Loco 3754]

[Gil Bang 26251]

oh shit

 

 

 

Fox News legal analyst Andrew Napolitano criticized U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III on Wednesday for his handling of special counsel Robert Mueller’s case against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

“I’m not happy with this judge,” Napolitano told Fox News’ Dana Perino. “He’s making too much of the case about him and he’s showing an extraordinary bias against the government. If you feel that negatively about the government, you shouldn’t be on the case, or you have to keep those feelings to yourself not manifest them.”

 

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/napolitano-judge-in-manafort-case-has-shown-extraordinary-bias-against-govt?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark

[TwiceHorn 32108]

10 hours ago, Tuco said:

I assume there might be some wriggle room around his accommodations in prison and possibly seizure of assets.  On the latter, someone mention this was not tax evasion but filing false tax forms (or something like that.)  Is there the potential to pursue back taxes?  Did those pretty much get zero'd out in losses after his Ukrainian business dried up? Has it been too long?

I could that as leverage the Feds would be willing to use.  I don't see them being okay with Manafort walking, but I can't imagine there would be much stomach for impoverishing his household, despite there being legal and ethical justification to do so. 

The IRS most certainly is after him for the unpaid taxes and there are very few defenses or exemptions from the IRS' collection efforts.  If he has it, they'll get it, apart and aside from the outcome of the criminal case, although conviction would help them prove their case, acquittal won't destroy it either.

[TwiceHorn 32108]

18 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

oh shit

 

 

 

Fox News legal analyst Andrew Napolitano criticized U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III on Wednesday for his handling of special counsel Robert Mueller’s case against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

“I’m not happy with this judge,” Napolitano told Fox News’ Dana Perino. “He’s making too much of the case about him and he’s showing an extraordinary bias against the government. If you feel that negatively about the government, you shouldn’t be on the case, or you have to keep those feelings to yourself not manifest them.”

 

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/napolitano-judge-in-manafort-case-has-shown-extraordinary-bias-against-govt?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark

Really dumb take.  The judge isn't doing this in front of the jury, for starts.  And, as has been observed on this thread, his treatment of the parties' attorneys has little to no bearing on the outcome of the case and might even reduce the grounds of appeal by Manafort.

Edited August 9, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[JohnnyRage 1617]

I think the separate trials was defendant's choice. Not sure if he thought it made their job more difficult or more likely to win one.

https://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2018/03/01/paul-manafort-two-trial-strategy-433528

[Hornius Emeritus 12815]

18 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Really dumb take.  The judge isn't doing this in front of the jury, for starts.  And, as has been observed on this thread, his treatment of the parties' attorneys has little to no bearing on the outcome of the case and might even reduce the grounds of appeal by Manafort.

 

There was an attorney on NPR yesterday who has tried many cases in front of Judge Ellis. He said that the Judge's sarcasm and withering comments can make you feel really small when you're on the receiving end but that, in the end, the judge always sees to it that justice is done. 

[Tuco 5094]

Really dumb take.  The judge isn't doing this in front of the jury, for starts.  And, as has been observed on this thread, his treatment of the parties' attorneys has little to no bearing on the outcome of the case and might even reduce the grounds of appeal by Manafort.

Some of it has been in front of the jury, including continuing a dress down as the jury was being seated. I’m less wore about hostility towards the government as I am that he is rushing the Feds on technical explanations. Just because he gets it doesn’t mean the jury does. And, as they say, it’s easier to confuse a jury than to convince a judge.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

There have been a number of tense exchanges between the judge and prosecutors — some in front of the jury, some not — but this is the first time the govt has asked for an instruction like this. They argue the court incorrectly suggested to the jury the govt "acted improperly"

During this exchange yesterday, the prosecutor told the judge he had granted permission earlier and that the transcript would show that. The judge had still gotten upset and told the govt not to do it again. In today's motion, they attached the segment of that transcript

 

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3874]

 That is a pretty clean transcript. 

[kevwun 16449]

This is kind of an important case to be going on a power trip while presiding over.  It would be nice if he could keep his fucking ego in check.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

The judge's behavior has been shameful.  I guess he knows he can get away with it because the government can't appeal an acquittal.

[HOOK'EMHOOAH 1610]

This judge needs a review and maybe to be removed from the bench. His role is to ensure the proceedings are done properly; the judge is not the jury.

[TornACL 7797]

Whenever the judge acts up, counsel should just make sure to strenuously object. That's an old law trick I picked up from watchin movies.

[HOOK'EMHOOAH 1610]

23 minutes ago, TornACL said:

Whenever the judge acts up, counsel should just make sure to strenuously object. That's an old law trick I picked up from watchin movies.

But dat gavel and "overruled" tho...