Manafort defense will call no witnesses (even Manafort)

[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.

There are two things that the defense is probably banking on. Either acquittal or the judge throwing out the case as you said or him throwing out the conviction.

At that point will Mueller bother to retry.

Mueller has no legal authority to ask for a retrial.
This is what's going to happen:
There will be a hung jury.
Case Closed!
There are more than one jurors who have made it clear they are NOT going to indite

And at that point Mueller will be admitting the trial was never about justice.

 

[Avatar4321]

I assume the closing arguments and the jury instructions will be done today. Which means we could theoretically have a verdict tonight

 

[Claudette]

I assume the closing arguments and the jury instructions will be done today. Which means we could theoretically have a verdict tonight

We sure could.

I've seen juries come back in fifteen minutes. I've also seen them come back at 2AM.

Depends on how good or bad a case was presented.

Should be interesting.

 

[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.

But does it prove that a crime was committed.

Being in trouble with the IRS is a separate issue.

Manafort had numerous foreign bank accounts that he never reported. Failure to File Reports of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts is a felony. And Manafort is charged with 3 counts of it.

Worse for Manafort, his defense team admitted to these foreign accounts and millions of dollars within them that Manafort failed to report. They just tried to blame Gates for it, claiming that Manafort was hands off.

The paper trail shows Manafort's *deep* involvement with these accounts, loans, taxes, and the movement of funds. Along with extensive eye witness testimony from the banks, his accountant, and his former business partner Gates.

Conspiracy to Launder Money is also a very serious crime. And the paper trail, emails and eye witnesses show Manafort playing a shell game with bankers, loan officers and even his own son in law......buying property with 'loans' from Russian backed Ukrainian government officials that he never paid back.

And Manaforts defense? There was none. He called no witnesses. He didn't testify.

 

[Cecilie1200]

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.

But does it prove that a crime was committed.

Being in trouble with the IRS is a separate issue.

Manafort had numerous foreign bank accounts that he never reported. Failure to File Reports of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts is a felony. And Manafort is charged with 3 counts of it.

Worse for Manafort, his defense team admitted to these foreign accounts and millions of dollars within them that Manafort failed to report. They just tried to blame Gates for it, claiming that Manafort was hands off.

The paper trail shows Manafort's *deep* involvement with these accounts, loans, taxes, and the movement of funds. Along with extensive eye witness testimony from the banks, his accountant, and his former business partner Gates.

Conspiracy to Launder Money is also a very serious crime. And the paper trail, emails and eye witnesses show Manafort playing a shell game with bankers, loan officers and even his own son in law......buying property with 'loans' from Russian backed Ukrainian government officials that he never paid back.

And Manaforts defense? There was none. He called no witnesses. He didn't testify.

Which means the defense doesn't think the prosecution's case has sufficiently convinced the jury. YOU are convinced, but you're not on the jury.

 

[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.

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

Greg

He apparently wasn't hands on enough. But Manafort was deeply involved in his taxes, his foreign bank accounts that he never declared, moving funds between them, transferring funds to his accounts as 'loans' from foreign governments that he never paid back and setting up fraudulent loans to fund his life style.

The evidence against Manafort is overwhelming. I can understand the logic of team poliics where you defend someone out of course because they're on your 'team'. But Manafort is not a hill you want to die on. The man was engaged in extensive criminal activity for a very long time. And worse for him, there's loads of evidence to prove it.

 

[Skylar]

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.

But does it prove that a crime was committed.

Being in trouble with the IRS is a separate issue.

Manafort had numerous foreign bank accounts that he never reported. Failure to File Reports of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts is a felony. And Manafort is charged with 3 counts of it.

Worse for Manafort, his defense team admitted to these foreign accounts and millions of dollars within them that Manafort failed to report. They just tried to blame Gates for it, claiming that Manafort was hands off.

The paper trail shows Manafort's *deep* involvement with these accounts, loans, taxes, and the movement of funds. Along with extensive eye witness testimony from the banks, his accountant, and his former business partner Gates.

Conspiracy to Launder Money is also a very serious crime. And the paper trail, emails and eye witnesses show Manafort playing a shell game with bankers, loan officers and even his own son in law......buying property with 'loans' from Russian backed Ukrainian government officials that he never paid back.

And Manaforts defense? There was none. He called no witnesses. He didn't testify.

Which means the defense doesn't think the prosecution's case has sufficiently convinced the jury. YOU are convinced, but you're not on the jury.

That would be true of any case, ever. I'm citing the extensive evidence, Manafort admitting that the undeclared foreign accounts were his, Manafort admitting that there were millions in unreported income in those accounts, and Manafort's complete lack of defense.

Plus the exhaustive paper trail and eye witness testimony of Manafort's fraud.

All indications are that Manafort is well and truly fucked at this point.

Watergate Prosecutor: Paul Manafort case is 'a slam dunk'

Watergate Prosecutor: Paul Manafort case is 'a slam dunk'

When your own client won't testify in his own defense, and you've already admitted you did the things they're charging you with, that's ridiculously bad for you.

 

[Skylar]

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

The judge said that they wouldn't be able to prove conspiracy without Gates. There were a whole host of other charges that they didn't need Gates for.

 

[Ted Frazier]

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

How many years do you think he'll get and will Trump jr be his neighbor?

3 months before Trump pardons him. Trump Jr. will be convicted after Manafort is pardoned; then Trump will pardon his own son.

 

[Ted Frazier]

Show us the charges against Trump, Jr.

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

How many years do you think he'll get and will Trump jr be his neighbor?

He didn't say Trump Jr. has been charged yet.

 

[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

How many years do you think he'll get and will Trump jr be his neighbor?

3 months before Trump pardons him. Trump Jr. will be convicted after Manafort is pardoned; then Trump will pardon his own son.

Trump has asserted he has the authority to pardon himself of any crime.

Which isn't a great sign for his innocence.

 

[Ted Frazier]

I assume the closing arguments and the jury instructions will be done today. Which means we could theoretically have a verdict tonight

They will deliberate for 15 seconds.

 

[martybegan]

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.

But does it prove that a crime was committed.

Being in trouble with the IRS is a separate issue.

Manafort had numerous foreign bank accounts that he never reported. Failure to File Reports of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts is a felony. And Manafort is charged with 3 counts of it.

Worse for Manafort, his defense team admitted to these foreign accounts and millions of dollars within them that Manafort failed to report. They just tried to blame Gates for it, claiming that Manafort was hands off.

The paper trail shows Manafort's *deep* involvement with these accounts, loans, taxes, and the movement of funds. Along with extensive eye witness testimony from the banks, his accountant, and his former business partner Gates.

Conspiracy to Launder Money is also a very serious crime. And the paper trail, emails and eye witnesses show Manafort playing a shell game with bankers, loan officers and even his own son in law......buying property with 'loans' from Russian backed Ukrainian government officials that he never paid back.

And Manaforts defense? There was none. He called no witnesses. He didn't testify.

His defense was in the cross examinations of the documents and the witnesses.

 

[Ted Frazier]

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.

But does it prove that a crime was committed.

Being in trouble with the IRS is a separate issue.

Manafort had numerous foreign bank accounts that he never reported. Failure to File Reports of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts is a felony. And Manafort is charged with 3 counts of it.

Worse for Manafort, his defense team admitted to these foreign accounts and millions of dollars within them that Manafort failed to report. They just tried to blame Gates for it, claiming that Manafort was hands off.

The paper trail shows Manafort's *deep* involvement with these accounts, loans, taxes, and the movement of funds. Along with extensive eye witness testimony from the banks, his accountant, and his former business partner Gates.

Conspiracy to Launder Money is also a very serious crime. And the paper trail, emails and eye witnesses show Manafort playing a shell game with bankers, loan officers and even his own son in law......buying property with 'loans' from Russian backed Ukrainian government officials that he never paid back.

And Manaforts defense? There was none. He called no witnesses. He didn't testify.

Which means the defense doesn't think the prosecution's case has sufficiently convinced the jury. YOU are convinced, but you're not on the jury.

You're not the defense, yet you are pretending to know what the defense thinks.

 

[Skylar]

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.

But does it prove that a crime was committed.

Being in trouble with the IRS is a separate issue.

Manafort had numerous foreign bank accounts that he never reported. Failure to File Reports of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts is a felony. And Manafort is charged with 3 counts of it.

Worse for Manafort, his defense team admitted to these foreign accounts and millions of dollars within them that Manafort failed to report. They just tried to blame Gates for it, claiming that Manafort was hands off.

The paper trail shows Manafort's *deep* involvement with these accounts, loans, taxes, and the movement of funds. Along with extensive eye witness testimony from the banks, his accountant, and his former business partner Gates.

Conspiracy to Launder Money is also a very serious crime. And the paper trail, emails and eye witnesses show Manafort playing a shell game with bankers, loan officers and even his own son in law......buying property with 'loans' from Russian backed Ukrainian government officials that he never paid back.

And Manaforts defense? There was none. He called no witnesses. He didn't testify.

His defense was in the cross examinations of the documents and the witnesses.

Not a very good defense. Especially when you open with admitting to many of the most serious charges.

Again, the evidence against manafort is extensive. As is the paper trail. All indications are he's thoroughly fucked. Even former federal prosecutors have admitted as much.

Seriously, Marty.......this isn't a hill to die on.

 

[Skylar]

I assume the closing arguments and the jury instructions will be done today. Which means we could theoretically have a verdict tonight

They will deliberate for 15 seconds.

Probably longer than that. There are just so many charges to review.

 

[martybegan]

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.

But does it prove that a crime was committed.

Being in trouble with the IRS is a separate issue.

Manafort had numerous foreign bank accounts that he never reported. Failure to File Reports of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts is a felony. And Manafort is charged with 3 counts of it.

Worse for Manafort, his defense team admitted to these foreign accounts and millions of dollars within them that Manafort failed to report. They just tried to blame Gates for it, claiming that Manafort was hands off.

The paper trail shows Manafort's *deep* involvement with these accounts, loans, taxes, and the movement of funds. Along with extensive eye witness testimony from the banks, his accountant, and his former business partner Gates.

Conspiracy to Launder Money is also a very serious crime. And the paper trail, emails and eye witnesses show Manafort playing a shell game with bankers, loan officers and even his own son in law......buying property with 'loans' from Russian backed Ukrainian government officials that he never paid back.

And Manaforts defense? There was none. He called no witnesses. He didn't testify.

His defense was in the cross examinations of the documents and the witnesses.

Not a very good defense. Especially when you open with admitting to many of the most serious charges.

Again, the evidence against manafort is extensive. As is the paper trail. All indications are he's thoroughly fucked. Even former federal prosecutors have admitted as much.

Seriously, Marty.......this isn't a hill to die on.

No need to die on it, I just found it interesting the defense didn't provide a case, even other witnesses.

Again, when it comes to blue collar crime taking a jury from point A to B with regards to criminality is a tough trip.

Now when this eventually goes to a Tax Court and he's in front of a Tax Judge, that's a different story.

 

[Skylar]

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.

But does it prove that a crime was committed.

Being in trouble with the IRS is a separate issue.

Manafort had numerous foreign bank accounts that he never reported. Failure to File Reports of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts is a felony. And Manafort is charged with 3 counts of it.

Worse for Manafort, his defense team admitted to these foreign accounts and millions of dollars within them that Manafort failed to report. They just tried to blame Gates for it, claiming that Manafort was hands off.

The paper trail shows Manafort's *deep* involvement with these accounts, loans, taxes, and the movement of funds. Along with extensive eye witness testimony from the banks, his accountant, and his former business partner Gates.

Conspiracy to Launder Money is also a very serious crime. And the paper trail, emails and eye witnesses show Manafort playing a shell game with bankers, loan officers and even his own son in law......buying property with 'loans' from Russian backed Ukrainian government officials that he never paid back.

And Manaforts defense? There was none. He called no witnesses. He didn't testify.

His defense was in the cross examinations of the documents and the witnesses.

Not a very good defense. Especially when you open with admitting to many of the most serious charges.

Again, the evidence against manafort is extensive. As is the paper trail. All indications are he's thoroughly fucked. Even former federal prosecutors have admitted as much.

Seriously, Marty.......this isn't a hill to die on.

No need to die on it, I just found it interesting the defense didn't provide a case, even other witnesses.

Again, when it comes to blue collar crime taking a jury from point A to B with regards to criminality is a tough trip.

Now when this eventually goes to a Tax Court and he's in front of a Tax Judge, that's a different story.

Again, the charges against him are pretty straight forward. Undeclared foreign accounts is a serious crime. Manafort has already admitted to that one. And the paper trail on his Conspiracy to Money Launder is extensive. As all the 'loans' that he received from the Ukrainian government that he never paid back.

And Manafort lied his ass off to loan officials, lied about the use of his property (claiming it as a second resident while putting it up for rent), and lied to accountants and banks. All of which are crimes.

As for working as an unregistered foreign agent, Manafort admitted to that by registering as a foreign agent in 2017.....for 17 million in consulting work he'd done years before. Some as early as 2012.

Disclosure after the fact, years after the fact, doesn't work. He's guilty as sin.

 

[martybegan]

But does it prove that a crime was committed.

Being in trouble with the IRS is a separate issue.

Manafort had numerous foreign bank accounts that he never reported. Failure to File Reports of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts is a felony. And Manafort is charged with 3 counts of it.

Worse for Manafort, his defense team admitted to these foreign accounts and millions of dollars within them that Manafort failed to report. They just tried to blame Gates for it, claiming that Manafort was hands off.

The paper trail shows Manafort's *deep* involvement with these accounts, loans, taxes, and the movement of funds. Along with extensive eye witness testimony from the banks, his accountant, and his former business partner Gates.

Conspiracy to Launder Money is also a very serious crime. And the paper trail, emails and eye witnesses show Manafort playing a shell game with bankers, loan officers and even his own son in law......buying property with 'loans' from Russian backed Ukrainian government officials that he never paid back.

And Manaforts defense? There was none. He called no witnesses. He didn't testify.

His defense was in the cross examinations of the documents and the witnesses.

Not a very good defense. Especially when you open with admitting to many of the most serious charges.

Again, the evidence against manafort is extensive. As is the paper trail. All indications are he's thoroughly fucked. Even former federal prosecutors have admitted as much.

Seriously, Marty.......this isn't a hill to die on.

No need to die on it, I just found it interesting the defense didn't provide a case, even other witnesses.

Again, when it comes to blue collar crime taking a jury from point A to B with regards to criminality is a tough trip.

Now when this eventually goes to a Tax Court and he's in front of a Tax Judge, that's a different story.

Again, the charges against him are pretty straight forward. Undeclared foreign accounts is a serious crime. Manafort has already admitted to that one. And the paper trail on his Conspiracy to Money Launder is extensive. As all the 'loans' that he received from the Ukrainian government that he never paid back.

And Manafort lied his ass off to loan officials, lied about the use of his property (claiming it as a second resident while putting it up for rent), and lied to accountants and banks. All of which are crimes.

As for working as an unregistered foreign agent, Manafort admitted to that by registering as a foreign agent in 2017.....for 17 million in consulting work he'd done years before. Some as early as 2012.

Disclosure after the fact, years after the fact, doesn't work. He's guilty as sin.

Most of this relies on the testimony of a guy who also admits he broke the law and is getting off due to his testimony.

 

[Claudette]

It should be interesting. That's for sure.