Manafort trial
- Thread starter UsualName
- Start date
Can't come to a conclusion equals Mistrial coming. Let the outrage begin. Must be a Russian operative on that jury. Can't be anything else.
Can't say I didn't call it.
Country of laws they said
Might've jumped the gun here... Seems like they can reach unanimity in one of the eighteen counts:
Though the meaning of the note wasn’t entirely clear from its wording, the judge apparently took the panel’s note to mean that they are stuck on a single count, not all of them.
Ellis said the note was “not an exceptional or unusual event in a jury trial,” and he distributed to the lawyers an instruction he proposed giving to jurors.
Country of laws they said
Might've jumped the gun here... Seems like they can reach unanimity in one of the eighteen counts:
Though the meaning of the note wasn’t entirely clear from its wording, the judge apparently took the panel’s note to mean that they are stuck on a single count, not all of them.
Ellis said the note was “not an exceptional or unusual event in a jury trial,” and he distributed to the lawyers an instruction he proposed giving to jurors.
Last edited:
I just can't see that at all. No doubt Manafort committed various flavors of financial fraud. All well before he got involved in the Trump campaign. No way he skates on all 18 counts.
You should wait for the next trial before reaching that conclusion since this trial was not about those at all, Manafort was actively involved in selling off administration posts and there is plenty of public evidence of it already.
Manafort Jury unanimous on 17 counts, hung on 1. Not looking good for him is it.
Does seem unlikely, but this looked like an open and shut case, albeit a political hit job. None the less he does look guilty as hell on most every charge. Could they have screwed up a can't lose case like Clinton screwed up a can't lose election?
Wow, there's no precedent for that in Washington.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...012/03/06/gIQA9y3txR_story.html?noredirect=on
"More than half of Obama’s 47 biggest fundraisers, those who collected at least $500,000 for his campaign, have been given administration jobs. Nine more have been appointed to presidential boards and committees.
At least 24 Obama bundlers were given posts as foreign ambassadors, including in Finland, Australia, Portugal and Luxembourg. Among them is Don Beyer, a former Virginia lieutenant governor who serves as ambassador to Switzerland and Liechtenstein."
Nice try at whataboutism but this is not even remotely close, this is like saying Trump would be prosecuted for employing Betsy Davoes
With his choice of restaurant executive Andrew Puzder to serve as his Labor secretary, President-elect Donald Trump has now tapped six big donors and fundraisers to serve in his administration, lining up an unprecedented concentration of wealthy backers for top posts.
Together with their families, Trump's nominees gave $11.6 million to support his presidential bid, his allied super PACs and the Republican National Committee, according to a Washington Post analysis of federal campaign filings.
One single appointee — WWE co-founder Linda McMahon — contributed $7.5 million to back his White House run before Trump selected her to run the Small Business Administration this week. She and her husband Vince were also the top outside donors to Trump's private foundation.
It’s not unusual for top presidential donors and bundlers to land plum assignments after an election. Ambassadorships to sought-after locales, such as London and Paris, are usually reserved for big money players. In recent administrations, senior campaign fundraisers have been chosen for Commerce secretary: Penny Pritzker under President Obama, Don Evans under President George W. Bush, Ronald Brown under President Bill Clinton, and Robert Mosbacher under President George H.W. Bush.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...their-families-to-his-campaign-and-the-party/
It’s never a cant lose situation when you have millions of dollars for legal representation.
I’ve seen some of the truly weird and bizarre coverage of the manafort charges and trial on Fox News and you’re regurgitating the way they tee it up over there too. It should be a slam dunk but if manafort walks its some kind of indictment of a corrupt justice system. Neither of those two extremes are true.
The truth is the government put on a solid case and I have no doubt Manafort is guilty of many of the charges but as Tree Frog likes to remind us, Manafort does get defend himself and that includes raising objections and poking holes based on technicalities. Also, this judge did show a bias against the prosecution throughout, but that is abnormal.
The point is it is not always a slam dunk, especially when you have top shelf representation.