Manafort defense will call no witnesses (even Manafort)

[Dragonlady]

Ex-Trump aide Paul Manafort faces trial in September

Manafort is facing two separate indictments on an array of charges, including conspiracy to launder money, filing false tax returns and failing to register as a foreign agent for lobbying work for the pro-Kremlin Ukrainian government of former President Viktor Yanukovych.



Manafort is never getting out of the woods.

What’s wrong with working for the rightfully elected leader of a country?

Nothing, as long as you declare the income, pay the taxes, and register as an agent of a foreign government. None of which Manafort did.

All caught up now?

Unless you are a Democrat, then you get immunity.

Democrats never go to trial. Their fate is decided before the investigation begins.

Anthony Weiner, Corinne Brown, Elliott Spitzer, Jesse Jackson Jr. and Laura Richardson would all disagree with you. All are Democrats who were arrested and convicted of crimes while in office.

Below is a list of policiticans who were arrested and convicted while in office.

List of American federal politicians convicted of crimes - Wikipedia

Going through the Clinton, Bush 43, Obama and Trump Administrations the numbers are pretty close: 20 Republicans and 18 Democrats. Of course, if you want to really skew the numbers, you have to go back to the Reagan Administration. Abscam, Iran-Contra, the Savings and Loan Scandals. What a mess!

 

[Mr.Blonde]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Or they may argue the prosecution did not meet it's burden of proof and ask for summary dismissal.

That's going to be very hard, given the number of documents and the testimony of his tax men seems to be very damaging.

My guess, the Defense Attorney's are seeking a plea deal with the prosecution. However, if the Judge is as he has been depicted, he is not likely to receive such an agreement with a wink and a nod.

Given the prosecutor's history of subordinating perjury Manafort's lawyers might have something on them.

 

[g5000]

Ex-Trump aide Paul Manafort faces trial in September

Manafort is facing two separate indictments on an array of charges, including conspiracy to launder money, filing false tax returns and failing to register as a foreign agent for lobbying work for the pro-Kremlin Ukrainian government of former President Viktor Yanukovych.



Manafort is never getting out of the woods.

What’s wrong with working for the rightfully elected leader of a country?

Nothing, as long as you declare the income, pay the taxes, and register as an agent of a foreign government. None of which Manafort did.

All caught up now?

Unless you are a Democrat, then you get immunity.

Democrats never go to trial. Their fate is decided before the investigation begins.

Anthony Weiner, Corinne Brown, Elliott Spitzer, Jesse Jackson Jr. and Laura Richardson would all disagree with you. All are Democrats who were arrested and convicted of crimes while in office.

Below is a list of policiticans who were arrested and convicted while in office.

List of American federal politicians convicted of crimes - Wikipedia

Going through the Clinton, Bush 43, Obama and Trump Administrations the numbers are pretty close: 20 Republicans and 18 Democrats. Of course, if you want to really skew the numbers, you have to go back to the Reagan Administration. Abscam, Iran-Contra, the Savings and Loan Scandals. What a mess!

Don't waste your time. In the bizarro brains of pseudocons, convicted Democrats are evidence all Democrats are crooked. Convicted Republicans are evidence no Democrats are ever punished.

These strange creatures never experience cognitive dissonance.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Manafort is facing life in prison, my guess ... Trump's goose is cooked. Trump is faced with a Hobson's Choice.

His only choice is to commute any further jail or prison time, and leave the conviction in tact.

That maybe the best last hope for Manafort. And I suspect Trump will wait until the November Election is over, or possibly, until the 2020 election is over. Which may make Manafort uneasy, and willing to tell all for some considerations.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Or they may argue the prosecution did not meet it's burden of proof and ask for summary dismissal.

That's going to be very hard, given the number of documents and the testimony of his tax men seems to be very damaging.

My guess, the Defense Attorney's are seeking a plea deal with the prosecution. However, if the Judge is as he has been depicted, he is not likely to receive such an agreement with a wink and a nod.

Given the prosecutor's history of subordinating perjury Manafort's lawyers might have something on them.

What history is that? Any lawyer who engages in the Subornation of Perjury would have been disbarred.

 

[mudwhistle]

What’s wrong with working for the rightfully elected leader of a country?

Nothing, as long as you declare the income, pay the taxes, and register as an agent of a foreign government. None of which Manafort did.

All caught up now?

Unless you are a Democrat, then you get immunity.

Democrats never go to trial. Their fate is decided before the investigation begins.

Ipse dixit.

Republicans never bring a Democrat to trial, they decide by chanting "lock her up" which does not require evidence.

Actually Republicans need hard evidence to start chanting "lock her up".
Democrats simply ignore the evidence and make unsubstantiated counter-accusations.
Democrats know that their voters are either too stupid, can't speak English, or too dishonest to believe anything other than what they're told to believe.
Imagine an entire platform that is totally based off of swelled headed liberal pundit's opinions.

 

[Mr.Blonde]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Or they may argue the prosecution did not meet it's burden of proof and ask for summary dismissal.

That's going to be very hard, given the number of documents and the testimony of his tax men seems to be very damaging.

My guess, the Defense Attorney's are seeking a plea deal with the prosecution. However, if the Judge is as he has been depicted, he is not likely to receive such an agreement with a wink and a nod.

Given the prosecutor's history of subordinating perjury Manafort's lawyers might have something on them.

What history is that? Any lawyer who engages in the Subornation of Perjury would have been disbarred.

Andrew Weissmann "intimidated witnesses by threatening indictments, created crimes that did not exist and, in one case, withheld evidence that could have aided the accused."

Andrew Weissmann, Robert Mueller’s top prosecutor, known for hardball tactics

He had convictions over turned in the ENRON cases because of his conduct.

 

[WaitingFor2020]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Makes your head spin.
I think they couldn't make their case.
If that's what happened, Trump will be shitting his sizeable panties.

 

[grainbely]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Yep. And this is a chance for Republicans to show how tough on crime they are...wait not THAT crime..the real crime.

 

[Skylar]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Or they may argue the prosecution did not meet it's burden of proof and ask for summary dismissal.

They can ask for whatever they'd like.

But when Manafort's attorney's open with admitting that there is millions in unreported income.......summary dismissal is ludicrously unlikely.

 

[Skylar]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Or they may argue the prosecution did not meet it's burden of proof and ask for summary dismissal.

What people who watch too many bad movies and TV shows (like Ted) tend to forget is that the accused doesn't have to prove himself innocent; the prosecution must prove him guilty . . . beyond a reasonable doubt. To that end, if they feel that hasn't happened, they're much better off just making THAT case, and keeping their mouths shut otherwise, to avoid giving the prosecution anything to dig at.

And except in extreme cases, the defense lawyer is a damned fool if he allows his client anywhere near the witness stand.

In their closing argument they will hammer across the point that the prosecution has to prove 1) something happened and 2) what happened was illegal.

Far easier to prove murder than white collar crime.

Um......Manafort's people already admitted that there were millions in unreported income. Manafort's only defense is that he can't be responsible because he was very hands off and didn't know what was going on.

Problem is.....he wasn't hands off. And personally orchestrated the fraud with many lenders. With witness after witness confirming Manafort's personal involvement, Emails affirming the same.

The paper trail on this one is ridiculous.

 

[WaitingFor2020]

Nothing, as long as you declare the income, pay the taxes, and register as an agent of a foreign government. None of which Manafort did.

All caught up now?

Unless you are a Democrat, then you get immunity.

Democrats never go to trial. Their fate is decided before the investigation begins.

Ipse dixit.

Republicans never bring a Democrat to trial, they decide by chanting "lock her up" which does not require evidence.

Actually Republicans need hard evidence to start chanting "lock her up".
Democrats simply ignore the evidence and make unsubstantiated counter-accusations.
Democrats know that their voters are either too stupid, can't speak English, or too dishonest to believe anything other than what they're told to believe.
Imagine an entire platform that is totally based off of swelled headed liberal pundit's opinions.

Yeah, except that Mueller is a Republican.

 

[Skylar]

Unless you are a Democrat, then you get immunity.

Democrats never go to trial. Their fate is decided before the investigation begins.

Ipse dixit.

Republicans never bring a Democrat to trial, they decide by chanting "lock her up" which does not require evidence.

Actually Republicans need hard evidence to start chanting "lock her up".
Democrats simply ignore the evidence and make unsubstantiated counter-accusations.
Democrats know that their voters are either too stupid, can't speak English, or too dishonest to believe anything other than what they're told to believe.
Imagine an entire platform that is totally based off of swelled headed liberal pundit's opinions.

Yeah, except that Mueller is a Republican.

Trivial detail. Hardly worth mentioning.

 

[Skylar]

Ex-Trump aide Paul Manafort faces trial in September

Manafort is facing two separate indictments on an array of charges, including conspiracy to launder money, filing false tax returns and failing to register as a foreign agent for lobbying work for the pro-Kremlin Ukrainian government of former President Viktor Yanukovych.



Manafort is never getting out of the woods.

What’s wrong with working for the rightfully elected leader of a country?

Nothing, as long as you declare the income, pay the taxes, and register as an agent of a foreign government. None of which Manafort did.

All caught up now?

Unless you are a Democrat, then you get immunity.

Democrats never go to trial. Their fate is decided before the investigation begins.

Anthony Weiner, Corinne Brown, Elliott Spitzer, Jesse Jackson Jr. and Laura Richardson would all disagree with you. All are Democrats who were arrested and convicted of crimes while in office.

Below is a list of policiticans who were arrested and convicted while in office.

List of American federal politicians convicted of crimes - Wikipedia

Going through the Clinton, Bush 43, Obama and Trump Administrations the numbers are pretty close: 20 Republicans and 18 Democrats. Of course, if you want to really skew the numbers, you have to go back to the Reagan Administration. Abscam, Iran-Contra, the Savings and Loan Scandals. What a mess!

You're not Mud's audience. You're far too informed.

 

[Avatar4321]

Not surprised by the move. Or the lack of the judges outright dismissal. There is a question of fact for the jury. Namely is gates telling the truth? Or is he lying.

Looks like reasonable doubt to me but who knows what the jury thinks. We may find out in a few hours

You seem to think that this entire case hinges on Gates’ testimony. Do you that without Gates, the state has nothing? If you do, you’re dreaming in technicolor.

The Prosrcution considered not even putting Gates on the stand, because they really didn’t need him to prove their case. The bank account records, tax returns and mortgage loan applications were the proof.

There is no “reasonable doubt” in this case. The case was so air tight, Manafort tried to strong arm witnesses. That just lead to more charges.

Can Manafort wear his ostrich jacket in prison? I’m sure the boys in the shower will love it.

because that's what the prosecution has said and what the judge has said. I'm presuming they are being honest about the case

The prosecution said no such thing and neither did the judge.

it was the basis of their motion against the judge. And they guaranteed that Gates would testify because he was necessary for the case.

no prosecutor would put up a witness with so uncredible if they didn't have to

 

[Dragonlady]

Not surprised by the move. Or the lack of the judges outright dismissal. There is a question of fact for the jury. Namely is gates telling the truth? Or is he lying.

Looks like reasonable doubt to me but who knows what the jury thinks. We may find out in a few hours

You seem to think that this entire case hinges on Gates’ testimony. Do you that without Gates, the state has nothing? If you do, you’re dreaming in technicolor.

The Prosrcution considered not even putting Gates on the stand, because they really didn’t need him to prove their case. The bank account records, tax returns and mortgage loan applications were the proof.

There is no “reasonable doubt” in this case. The case was so air tight, Manafort tried to strong arm witnesses. That just lead to more charges.

Can Manafort wear his ostrich jacket in prison? I’m sure the boys in the shower will love it.

because that's what the prosecution has said and what the judge has said. I'm presuming they are being honest about the case

The prosecution said no such thing and neither did the judge.

it was the basis of their motion against the judge. And they guaranteed that Gates would testify because he was necessary for the case.

no prosecutor would put up a witness with so uncredible if they didn't have to

Financial and paper cases are confusing and boring for juries. Guys like Gates can tie it all together and tell a story.

Gates is far more credible than most criminal conspirators. Witnesses in these types of crimes are generally other criminals. Good, decent people aren’t involved with crooks and liars. Manifort hung around with dictators, bagmen, foreign spies and Russian oligarchs.

The people who helped him commit these crimes have admitted their criminal wrong doing. Manafort has not.

 

[g5000]

Nothing, as long as you declare the income, pay the taxes, and register as an agent of a foreign government. None of which Manafort did.

All caught up now?

Unless you are a Democrat, then you get immunity.

Democrats never go to trial. Their fate is decided before the investigation begins.

Ipse dixit.

Republicans never bring a Democrat to trial, they decide by chanting "lock her up" which does not require evidence.

Actually Republicans need hard evidence to start chanting "lock her up".
Democrats simply ignore the evidence and make unsubstantiated counter-accusations.
Democrats know that their voters are either too stupid, can't speak English, or too dishonest to believe anything other than what they're told to believe.
Imagine an entire platform that is totally based off of swelled headed liberal pundit's opinions.

You didn't read Manafort's indictment, did you, retard. You just puke up bald assertions like a dog who has eaten his own turds.

 

[mudwhistle]

Unless you are a Democrat, then you get immunity.

Democrats never go to trial. Their fate is decided before the investigation begins.

Ipse dixit.

Republicans never bring a Democrat to trial, they decide by chanting "lock her up" which does not require evidence.

Actually Republicans need hard evidence to start chanting "lock her up".
Democrats simply ignore the evidence and make unsubstantiated counter-accusations.
Democrats know that their voters are either too stupid, can't speak English, or too dishonest to believe anything other than what they're told to believe.
Imagine an entire platform that is totally based off of swelled headed liberal pundit's opinions.

Yeah, except that Mueller is a Republican.

Doesn't matter.....Hillary was their establishment candidate.

 

[AZGAL]

Manafort the fast life crashed out on him.

 

[gtopa1]

I knew this was a slam dunk case. But never THIS easy:
Paul Manafort trial Day 11: Defense rests, Manafort will not take the stand

Or they may argue the prosecution did not meet it's burden of proof and ask for summary dismissal.

What people who watch too many bad movies and TV shows (like Ted) tend to forget is that the accused doesn't have to prove himself innocent; the prosecution must prove him guilty . . . beyond a reasonable doubt. To that end, if they feel that hasn't happened, they're much better off just making THAT case, and keeping their mouths shut otherwise, to avoid giving the prosecution anything to dig at.

And except in extreme cases, the defense lawyer is a damned fool if he allows his client anywhere near the witness stand.

In their closing argument they will hammer across the point that the prosecution has to prove 1) something happened and 2) what happened was illegal.

Far easier to prove murder than white collar crime.

Um......Manafort's people already admitted that there were millions in unreported income. Manafort's only defense is that he can't be responsible because he was very hands off and didn't know what was going on.

Problem is.....he wasn't hands off. And personally orchestrated the fraud with many lenders. With witness after witness confirming Manafort's personal involvement, Emails affirming the same.

The paper trail on this one is ridiculous.

Problem: if he was so "hands on" how come he didn't know that Gates was fleecing him for millions??

Greg