Judge Challenges Prosecution Bullshit at Manafort Trial

[mudwhistle]

No the prosecution is presenting evidence that the judge ruled as irrelevant, big difference. Overturned on which grounds? The prosecution was to thorough in presenting their case?

I didn't mention the irrelevant evidence.
If Mueller had a strong case he wouldn't have bothered with prejudicing the jury against Manafort. Instead the judge reprimanded the prosecution and put a stop to it.

if the judge stopped it what are the grounds for the case being overturned?

Some of the irrelevant evidence was presented. It was intended to prejudice the jury against Manafort with irrelevant facts that had nothing to do with the charges. Also, the judge has told the prosecution that its clear that the only reason they're pressing charges in the first place is to get Manafort to testify against the president. Justice doesn't even enter into the equation.

If the judge believes that, how can he let this continue

It seems that Manaforte probably did evade taxes, and they were hoping he would say something about Trump that would help in the midterms at a minimum and maybe help Mueller find something in his useless investigation.

He didn’t, so now he is being prosecuted, like all tax cheats....like Al Sharpton....

When did Al Sharpton get put in solitary confinement???

 

[mudwhistle]

Again, the investigation is about Russia, interfering in American elections in order to cause division & weaken America, its us that have made it about trump. its not Muller's fault that people working for Trump have been caught up by doing illegal things.

But it's just a show trial intended to tarnish Trump, even though the alleged crimes happened in 2005, 10 years before Trump met Paul Manafort. I've heard that Manafort was investigated for these crimes and was cleared of all wrongdoing years ago, but only now Mueller decides to prosecute.

Apparently Manafort's worst crime was working for Trump.

 

[ColonelAngus]

I didn't mention the irrelevant evidence.
If Mueller had a strong case he wouldn't have bothered with prejudicing the jury against Manafort. Instead the judge reprimanded the prosecution and put a stop to it.

if the judge stopped it what are the grounds for the case being overturned?

Some of the irrelevant evidence was presented. It was intended to prejudice the jury against Manafort with irrelevant facts that had nothing to do with the charges. Also, the judge has told the prosecution that its clear that the only reason they're pressing charges in the first place is to get Manafort to testify against the president. Justice doesn't even enter into the equation.

If the judge believes that, how can he let this continue

It seems that Manaforte probably did evade taxes, and they were hoping he would say something about Trump that would help in the midterms at a minimum and maybe help Mueller find something in his useless investigation.

He didn’t, so now he is being prosecuted, like all tax cheats....like Al Sharpton....

When did Al Sharpton get put in solitary confinement???

He never was, he is a multimillion dollar tax cheat and that got him repeatedly invited to Obama’s Whitehouse.

Lessons From Rev. Al Sharpton's $4.5 Million Tax Bill

 

[Lysistrata]

Please back up the assertion that the prosecution's case in the Manafort trial is "bullshit." What do you know about him and Gates and their foreign bank accounts? Are you an insider?

 

[CowboyTed]

Mueller investigation is a crock of shit. Will result in same if charges are brought. Bunch of Keystone Cops amateur hour that can’t get over fact that Hillary lost in 2016. Donald J. Trump is doing a great job as President and you socialist turds will be taught another lesson in 2018 mid-terms. Public is sick of liberal media and campus professoriate trying to tell them how to think and what opinions they should have.
Manafort prosecutors, Judge Ellis engage in 10-minute courtroom spat

I love these kinds of post. You're arguing that a case should be thrown out, not because of the accused not being guilty. Not because of a lack of evidence. Not even because the judge is fundamentally disagreeing with the evidence. No you are claiming that when a judge challenges the way the prosecution is presenting its case in any form, charges should be dropped.

Judge is pointing out that the prosecution case is weak at best, and politically motivated, just like Mueller investigation. Keep on loving my post through 2018 mid-terms and four more years of Donald J.Trump as YOUR President.

You know there is a litany of emails and other communications which basically condemn Manafort... Lawyers in the know say he should have pleaded but he was too arrogant...

 

[CowboyTed]

IMO...

The case should not be thrown out as it does have some Merit, if it were to be tried professionally about the crime that was committed and not tried in an attempt to 'get Trump'.

Mueller and his team should be held in contempt by the judge, as they continually try to get around his obstructions and warnings, attempting to drag others into the truck and attempting to throw dirt at others who are not on trial.

Well you are talkiing a load of shit...

What we know...

Manafort worked for the Russians until recently enough and owed them a lot of money.
Manafort while heavily in debt worked for the Trump Campaign for nothing.
Manafort had a heavy influence in the GOP Russian Policy.

Manafort didn't pay taxes... Manafort is on trail for not paying taxes, not for colluding with Russians in an election.

So you come on here to wanking with your lads on a fellow fantasy.... THAT IS SAD!!!!!

 

[CowboyTed]

What does your thread title have to do with the 2016 election?

The same thing the Manafort trial does...

Isn't Mueller obligated to prosecute any federal crimes he stumbles into while investigating the Russian meddling and interference in the 2016 election?

There is a whole oath about that....

Mueller has to prosecute or hand it to someone who will

 

[iceberg]

No the prosecution is presenting evidence that the judge ruled as irrelevant, big difference. Overturned on which grounds? The prosecution was to thorough in presenting their case?

I didn't mention the irrelevant evidence.
If Mueller had a strong case he wouldn't have bothered with prejudicing the jury against Manafort. Instead the judge reprimanded the prosecution and put a stop to it.

if the judge stopped it what are the grounds for the case being overturned?

Some of the irrelevant evidence was presented. It was intended to prejudice the jury against Manafort with irrelevant facts that had nothing to do with the charges. Also, the judge has told the prosecution that its clear that the only reason they're pressing charges in the first place is to get Manafort to testify against the president. Justice doesn't even enter into the equation.

If the judge believes that, how can he let this continue

It seems that Manaforte probably did evade taxes, and they were hoping he would say something about Trump that would help in the midterms at a minimum and maybe help Mueller find something in his useless investigation.

He didn’t, so now he is being prosecuted, like all tax cheats....like Al Sharpton....

36 Obama aides owe $833,000 in back taxes | Investor's Business Daily
Another Obama pick owes back taxes, but it's OK because, now caught, he'll pay up
Another Obama Nominee Has Tax Issues
Kevin Glass - The Obama Tax Cheats
Tax man nails 5th Obama appointee - NY Daily News

wonder how come none of these went to court at least as far as i know.

 

[mudwhistle]

Please back up the assertion that the prosecution's case in the Manafort trial is "bullshit." What do you know about him and Gates and their foreign bank accounts? Are you an insider?

The point about all of this is Manafort is being prosecuted simply because he worked for Trump for a few days.
That is the only reason they broke into his home.
How many of us would stand up under such scrutiny.
The press and the liars in the Democrat party will repeatedly say that Manafort worked for Trump.
Nothing else matters.
The Clintons had to amend their last tax return because of undeclared income and were allowed to. Manafort wasn't offered that option.

 

[CowboyTed]

The judge in this case is protecting Manafords right to a speedy trial. He rules on what evidence is permitted. What you are talking about is if procedural mistakes are made, evidence is been tampered with or something else egregious. Not something like to much evidence, what he considers irrelevant to the case being prosecuted. I have a question.Will you accept Manaford being convicted in this trial? Or will you then site perceived bias as a reason to not accept the verdict?

Prosecution needs to move beyond political grandstanding.

Not an answer to the question I asked now is it? You claim the prosecution is incompetent. You claim the case is weak. You claim the judge isn't accepting the prosecutions case. You claim the case is politically motivated. Will you accept a guilty verdict from a jury of his peers, if all these things are true?

The case is not weak, it is not even there, the case is against Trump remember

In this case Trump wasn't mentioned. Not a few of the people on here made it a point, to make that an argument for claiming that Mueller doesn't have an actual case against Trump. At this point all the different, often mutually exclusive arguments coming from the right are enough to make anybody doubt his sanity. Something I suspect is the general idea.

The case against Manafort is part of the case against Trump, to make Manafort rat Trump out. The prosecution could do this to every person Trump ever worked with, at some point the peoples rights are being violated by a desperate prosecutor.....As we have now.

So your argument is, Trump is Guilty and if they go into his past they will find plenty of people who will tell you so...

Good arguement but actually need more than that to convict someone in US...

 

[mudwhistle]

I didn't mention the irrelevant evidence.
If Mueller had a strong case he wouldn't have bothered with prejudicing the jury against Manafort. Instead the judge reprimanded the prosecution and put a stop to it.

if the judge stopped it what are the grounds for the case being overturned?

Some of the irrelevant evidence was presented. It was intended to prejudice the jury against Manafort with irrelevant facts that had nothing to do with the charges. Also, the judge has told the prosecution that its clear that the only reason they're pressing charges in the first place is to get Manafort to testify against the president. Justice doesn't even enter into the equation.

If the judge believes that, how can he let this continue

It seems that Manaforte probably did evade taxes, and they were hoping he would say something about Trump that would help in the midterms at a minimum and maybe help Mueller find something in his useless investigation.

He didn’t, so now he is being prosecuted, like all tax cheats....like Al Sharpton....

36 Obama aides owe $833,000 in back taxes | Investor's Business Daily
Another Obama pick owes back taxes, but it's OK because, now caught, he'll pay up
Another Obama Nominee Has Tax Issues
Kevin Glass - The Obama Tax Cheats
Tax man nails 5th Obama appointee - NY Daily News

wonder how come none of these went to court at least as far as i know.

Nobody wants to prosecute them.

 

[Camp]

The point about all of this is Manafort is being prosecuted simply because he worked for Trump for a few days.
That is the only reason they broke into his home.
.[/QUOTE]
"A few days" is a blatant lie promoted by Trump and echoed by his cult. He was a key element for five months, including convention coordinator and manager and Campaign Manager for three months.
Nobody broke into Manafort's home. Just another lie. His home was raided after a judge issued a legal search warrant. Nothing was broken. No doors were kicked down. The door was willingly and peacefully opened to the searchers.

 

[ColonelAngus]

Make him pay his back taxes and time served and let’s move on with our lives and let him move on with his life.

12 people were murdered in Chicago last weekend, how are those investigations going?

 

[forkup]

Not an answer to the question I asked now is it? You claim the prosecution is incompetent. You claim the case is weak. You claim the judge isn't accepting the prosecutions case. You claim the case is politically motivated. Will you accept a guilty verdict from a jury of his peers, if all these things are true?

Does it really matter, we already know you idiots haven't accepted the outcome of the Presidential election. Pretty sure you won't accept the outcome of this trial.

As a matter of fact I will. I'm probably the only person on this board who can prove he was on Comey's side when he made his first speech that claimed no prosecutor would go after Clinton. Who can prove he was on Comey's side when he reopened the Clinton case. And who can prove he still was on Comey's side when he acquitted her again. I would accept the verdict of this trial, I will accept the verdicts of all the trials that will follow, and yes I would accept it if Trump is cleared of any wrongdoing if that would be the conclusion of the Mueller probe. I would even accept if congress would ignore another conclusion for political gain. Accepting that, that is how the founding fathers set up their checks and balances. I would hope they would get punished at the ballot box for it, but I would accept it. My view and the importance of due process and law and order doesn't change depending on the situation.

But accept the outcome of the 2016 election....evidently not.

Hmms, because I don't agree with crappy arguments in defense of someone who broke the law I don't accept the outcome of the elections? I said that I would even accept Trump being president if Mueller would present evidence of criminal behavior on the part of Trump, if congress chooses to turn a blind eye. How much more acceptance do you want?

You are confused. See Trump is the president and you fully accept this, sure your flea brain is fighting this acceptance and as such you have Trump Derangement Syndrome...…………….

Now go feed the illegal immigrants under the bridge, and pick up their poop while you are there

Flea brain? Trump Derangement Syndrom? I just conceded Trumps legitimacy even if it would be proven he's a criminal. A man I despise both for his policies and for his person. Because I believe it's the responsibility off congress to oust a president. It's an act of integrity and respect towards the constitution and Democracy so far removed from your capability to understand that you don't even see it. Let alone acknowledge it. You know what? Call me some more names and see it it does anything beyond highlighting your own surrender of reason on the altar of blind partisanship.

 

[DrLove]

This judge is acting entirely inappropriately, showing his bias for Trump and Crooked Paul protection with every sharp tongued word directed at (ONLY) the prosecution.

Manafort trial judge suggests prosecutor so ‘frustrated’ he’s tearing up
https://splinternews.com/the-judge-in-the-paul-manafort-trial-sounds-like-kind-o-1828167313

Former US attorney Barbara McQuade concurs ...

Judge Ellis behavior in Manafort trial risks helping the defense

 

[DrLove]

Make him pay his back taxes and time served and let’s move on with our lives and let him move on with his life.

12 people were murdered in Chicago last weekend, how are those investigations going?

Sorry, but Crooked Paul is gonna do minimally 10 years - and that's if he cooperates with Mueller.

 

[DrLove]

Mueller investigation is a crock of shit. Will result in same if charges are brought. Bunch of Keystone Cops amateur hour that can’t get over fact that Hillary lost in 2016. Donald J. Trump is doing a great job as President and you socialist turds will be taught another lesson in 2018 mid-terms. Public is sick of liberal media and campus professoriate trying to tell them how to think and what opinions they should have.
Manafort prosecutors, Judge Ellis engage in 10-minute courtroom spat

So right wingers shouldn't have to obey the law?

Of course not - RWNJ's are all immune to pesky laws and may act with absolute impunity.

 

[DrLove]

What does your thread title have to do with the 2016 election?

The same thing the Manafort trial does...

Isn't Mueller obligated to prosecute any federal crimes he stumbles into while investigating the Russian meddling and interference in the 2016 election?

That is correct - Mueller is authorized to follow any and all evidence to its logical conclusion.

 

[DrLove]

I cannot believe anyone on this board would defend his actions.

You've been here since 2011 and haven't figured that out yet?

 

[DrLove]

The case can't be thrown out. There have been multiple witnesses providing evidence that Manafort has committed the crimes he's charged with. There is also documentary evidence to that effect. There is no legal basis for a dismissal.

if that clear cut, then why does meuller keep falling over himself?

He isn't. You are trying to perpetuate fake news.

Where did Ice come up with that butt nugget?
Oh wait - I know