John Durham Case Update: Jury Finds Michael Sussmann NOT guilty of lying to the FBI

[meaner gene]

Yep, because the hack judge refused to allow the text message confirming Sussman lied to the FBI.

Not sure why this is so hard for you to understand............oh wait........it you.

Nevermind.

If tweets and texts to government officials that contain lies constitute criminal offenses, every Qnut writing his congressman would be in jail.

 

[meaner gene]

There was testimony under oath that Hitlery was behind all of it.

Hillary wasn't on trial.
And unless you didn't realize, the 5 year statute of limitations for acts from 2016 ran out in 2021.

 

[Faun]

Yep, because the hack judge refused to allow the text message confirming Sussman lied to the FBI.

Not sure why this is so hard for you to understand............oh wait........it you.

Nevermind.

LOL

Fuckbubble, that text message was inadmissible because Durham obtained it after Sussmann was indicted.

But don't worry, no one expects you to comprehend the implications of that. That would require thought.

 

[Nostra]

Once again you post no links to support Trumps lies. You have no clue about anything, period. Inside the USA or OUTSIDE.

Trump Tax Cuts Helped Billionaires Pay Less Taxes Than The Working Class In 2018

For the first time ever, America’s 400 wealthiest people paid a lower tax rate in 2018 than any other group of people, according to a new study completed by economists Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman.

www.forbes.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/01/02/trump-tax-cuts-action-socialism-rich/

The GOP tax law showers benefits on the wealthy and large corporations while abandoning middle-class Americans and Main Street businesses

One year after President Trump and congressional Republicans enacted their tax cut for the wealthy and large corporations, none of their promised results are happening. On February 27, the Committee will hear testimony from four expert witnesses on the real-world implications of the GOP tax cut.

budget.house.gov

Secret IRS Files Reveal How Much the Ultrawealthy Gained by Shaping Trump’s “Big, Beautiful Tax Cut”

Billionaire business owners deployed lobbyists to make sure Trump’s 2017 tax bill was tailored to their benefit. Confidential IRS records show the windfall that followed.

www.propublica.org

"So STFU about America and go fix your shithole country that locks people up and seizes their property for disagreeing with the government. Third World Banana Republic."

Again you're lying. These people were locked up and their property seized because they broke the law, and refused to abide by court orders obtained by the citizens of Ottawa, to end their illegal protests.

Canada, which is more than 80% vaccinated, resented these assholes partying all week on their CERB benefits (read "taypayer's dollars"), while keeping working people from sleeping at night. Drunken parties, defacing national monuments, and flying swastikas and Confederate flags doesn't go over well in Canada.

We believe in law and order.

Tell us again how Trump's tax cut was just for the rich, Dumbass.


Standard Deductions Double

The plan calls for a sizable increase to the standard deduction Americans can take when filing taxes, potentially allowing taxpayers to keep more of their income – to the tune of a couple thousand dollars.

Under the proposal, tax breaks for individuals and married couples filing separately will increase from $6,300 to $12,600. The standard deduction for a married couple filing jointly will jump from $12,700 to approximately $24,000, “so that a married couple will not have to pay taxes on the first $24,000 it earns,” said Cohn

Details of the Plan​

Individual Income Tax Changes​

• Consolidates the current seven tax brackets into four, with a top marginal income tax rate of 25 percent (Table 1).
• Taxes long-term capital gains and qualified dividends at a top marginal rate of 20 percent.
• Creates a substantial zero bracket for lower income individuals.

Distributional Impact​

On a static basis, Donald Trump’s tax plan would increase the after-tax income across all taxpayers by 10.2 percent, on average, and taxpayers in all income classes would see higher after-tax income.

Taxpayers in the bottom deciles (the 0-10 and 10-20 percent deciles), would see increases in after-tax adjusted gross income (AGI) of 1.4 and 0.6 percent, respectively. Middle-income taxpayers with incomes that fall within the 30th to 80th percentiles would see larger increases in their after-tax AGI, of between 3.0 and 8.3 percent.

Conclusion​

Donald Trump’s tax plan would enact a number of tax reforms that would both lower marginal tax rates on workers and significantly reduce the cost of capital. These changes in the incentives to work and invest would greatly increase the U.S. economy’s size in the long run, leading to higher incomes for taxpayers at all income levels.

Details and Analysis of Donald Trump’s Tax Plan | Tax Foundation

The Trump tax plan and tax reform plan would reduce individual income tax rates, lowering the top rate from 39.6% to 25% and a large zero bracket.

taxfoundation.org

Trump's Tax Plan: Doubles Standard Deductions, Ends ‘Death Tax’

The Trump administration unveiled the outline for its comprehensive tax overhaul proposal Wednesday, which included a simplification of the tax code, a cut to individual and corporate rates and the elimination of all tax deductions on the personal side.

www.foxbusiness.com

 

[Nostra]

Hillary wasn't on trial.
And unless you didn't realize, the 5 year statute of limitations for acts from 2016 ran out in 2021.

Never said she was, Dumbass.

Grow a brain.

 

[Nostra]

LOL

Fuckbubble, that text message was inadmissible because Durham obtained it after Sussmann was indicted.

But don't worry, no one expects you to comprehend the implications of that. That would require thought.

Judge still could have allowed it.

Doesn't matter, it proved he lied to the FBI and the fix was in. This jury still would have let him walk.

 

[bripat9643]

You do realize it's constitutional to have "Shillary donors" sit on a jury, right?

And again, Durham lost because he couldn't prove in court that Sussmann lied.

Michael Sussmann's not guilty verdict wasn't a surprise. Here's why

The trial of attorney Michael Sussman has come to an end. Special prosecutor John Durham's case against Sussman is complicated. Here's why it ended this way.

www.foxnews.com

Not when the trial is about events that occurred during the Shillary campaign.

Durham did prove the charges beyond any doubt, dumbass.

 

[Faun]

Judge still could have allowed it.

Doesn't matter, it proved he lied to the FBI and the fix was in. This jury still would have let him walk.

Let's see your proof a judge can allow evidence against a defendant that the prosecutor didn't have when they had the defendant indicted...

 

[Faun]

Not when the trial is about events that occurred during the Shillary campaign.

Durham did prove the charges beyond any doubt, dumbass.

Oh? What evidence did Durham present in court that proved Sussmann's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

 

[meaner gene]

LOL

Fuckbubble, that text message was inadmissible because Durham obtained it after Sussmann was indicted.

But don't worry, no one expects you to comprehend the implications of that. That would require thought.

None of the emails, protected or not, will be allowed to be entered into Sussmann’s trial, however. Cooper writes that “the Court generally agrees with the defense that the government waited too long to compel production of the withheld emails.”

“The Special Counsel waited some eight months after it was aware of the privilege holders’ final position to seek court intervention,” added Cooper, who said that allowing the emails to be used in the trial “would prejudice Mr. Sussmann’s defense,” because his attorneys would need to devote time to reviewing and preparing for the prosecution’s use of them.

 

[meaner gene]

Judge still could have allowed it.

Doesn't matter, it proved he lied to the FBI and the fix was in. This jury still would have let him walk.

There you go again, confusing a mistrial with an acquittal.

Four jurors can't force the other eight jurors to change their mind, if the evidence proves otherwise.

 

[bripat9643]

Oh? What evidence did Durham present in court that proved Sussmann's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

It's in writing:

James Baker buries Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann in probe​

​

Baker said Sussmann’s assertions — which included a text message the night before that said he’d be “coming on my own — not on behalf of a client or company — want to help the Bureau’ — led him to treat Sussmann as a confidential FBI source.​

 

[bripat9643]

There you go again, confusing a mistrial with an acquittal.

Four jurors can't force the other eight jurors to change their mind, if the evidence proves otherwise.

Sure they can.

 

[Faun]

It's in writing:

James Baker buries Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann in probe​

​

Baker said Sussmann’s assertions — which included a text message the night before that said he’d be “coming on my own — not on behalf of a client or company — want to help the Bureau’ — led him to treat Sussmann as a confidential FBI source.​

LOL

Fucking moron, that text message was not admitted in court. I challenged to show the evidence Durham presented "in court" but you're such a fucking moron, you offer evidence that wasn't presented in court.

 

[meaner gene]

Let's see your proof a judge can allow evidence against a defendant that the prosecutor didn't have when they had the defendant indicted...

Unlike what they see on Perry Mason or Matlock, courts do not allow "surprise" evidence that violates the rules of discovery.

And the judge rules that Durham waited too long to get evidence so close to the trial.

 

[Nostra]

Let's see your proof a judge can allow evidence against a defendant that the prosecutor didn't have when they had the defendant indicted...

Are you ever not a complete dumbass? Ever?


Evidence must also be sufficiently reliable to be admitted at trial. Evidence from expert witnesses, which might be used to establish the validity of or to challenge drug test results, ballistics, or computer forensics, to name but a few, must meet standards defined by the U.S. Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993), and Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999).

Admissibility of Evidence in Criminal Law Cases

Learn about common types of evidence in criminal cases, the hearsay and exclusionary rules, and the constitutional protection against self-incrimination.

www.justia.com

 

[meaner gene]

There you go again, confusing a mistrial with an acquittal.

Four jurors can't force the other eight jurors to change their mind, if the evidence proves otherwise.

Sure they can.

And how do jurors "FORCE" their opinion (unsupported by evidence) onto the other jurors. Especially when the other jurors are basing their opinion on evidence the entire jury can review.

 

[Nostra]

None of the emails, protected or not, will be allowed to be entered into Sussmann’s trial, however. Cooper writes that “the Court generally agrees with the defense that the government waited too long to compel production of the withheld emails.”

“The Special Counsel waited some eight months after it was aware of the privilege holders’ final position to seek court intervention,” added Cooper, who said that allowing the emails to be used in the trial “would prejudice Mr. Sussmann’s defense,” because his attorneys would need to devote time to reviewing and preparing for the prosecution’s use of them.

Thanks for further proving what a hack judge this was.

 

[westwall]

Moron, it takes a unanimous decision by the jury to acquit. Not everyone on that jury was a Hillary donor.

Your brain doesn't work.

No it doesn't. Worst case they could end with a hung jury with ONE holdout.

But the judge refused to allow the key piece of evidence.


DURRRRRR

 

[Faun]

Are you ever not a complete dumbass? Ever?


Evidence must also be sufficiently reliable to be admitted at trial. Evidence from expert witnesses, which might be used to establish the validity of or to challenge drug test results, ballistics, or computer forensics, to name but a few, must meet standards defined by the U.S. Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993), and Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999).

Admissibility of Evidence in Criminal Law Cases

Learn about common types of evidence in criminal cases, the hearsay and exclusionary rules, and the constitutional protection against self-incrimination.

www.justia.com

LOL

You moron, nothing in there speaks about evidence discovered after an indictment.