Jurors in Manafort trial send judge four questions

[easyt65]

Of course you don't see it as strawmen posts are your specialty.

You do realize that you completely dodged my question and came back with an insult so you did not have to answer, right? Everyone else saw it...just wanted to point it out in case you yourself missed it....

 

[OldLady]

You stressin', iceberg?
Don't want Manafort found guilty? How come, if he broke the law?

you seem to like to "pick a fight" then get all pissed off when i hand you your ass cause you never back up what you say, just FEELZ more.

not stressin at all. i have zero stock in manafort or gates. if they're guilty, fry 'em. that's how the laws work in our country. or at least they did until the dems decided they were above such reproach.

so - you're dead wrong on what im saying. again. yet you feel the need to come in and stomp around like a king kamayamaya ***** who's emo-side of things rules whatever form of common sense you think you were gifted with at birth.

if you want to talk the issue, trial and so forth please dive in and talk about it. you wanna ***** at me and fight, take it to PM where i can kick your ass in private.

You really seem to be building me up into something I couldn't/wouldn't be in my wildest dreams. I asked if you are stressin' it. Why would you start a thread sweatin the jury asking a standard question if it weren't worrying you?
I don't see what this has to do with Dems either way. The guy broke laws or he didn't. His defense is that Gates did it and he didn't know. It will come down to whether there is evidence Manafort DID know. Hard case, probably. Neither of them are exactly Boy Scouts.
I don't really see where a guilty plea by Manafort will matter much one way or the other as far as Trump goes, unless Trump pardons him. As Trump says, he barely knew the guy and this stuff happened way before he worked for the campaign.
If it relates to Trump at all, it is in the fact that Trump seems to keep surrounding himself with crooks and liars. Just bad luck, I take it.

and you coming in with "you stressin" isn't building me into something i'm not? my not allowing you to box me into your own definition of things seems to upset you. all i can say about that is good. stop doing that and our conversations would go much better.

i asked to learn about why the would be asking and what it could mean. have you seen me take a side to say "this proves he's innocent" yet?

no you have not. not in reality anyway but since you've made me something i'm not, to you i *HAVE* said that, which is the most annoying part of talking to you. you're replying to a stereotype you've created 90% of the time, not to me.

my only trump comment was that if this *does* fall through for mueller, it does hurt the rest of his case.

am i wrong?

the fact you've pre-determined the outcome doesn't come across as a problem to you? it does to most rational people. maybe that explains it.

if this *does* fall through for mueller, it does hurt the rest of his case.
Okay, I get it now. THAT'S why you're stressin' it!

oh good god woman - you accuse me of trying to make you something i'm not then run around doing this.

if i paypal you $20 will you stop being such a *****?

$50

 

[easyt65]

BOTTOM LINE:

The jury asked the judge 4 questions. Any attempt to read into that is JUST THAT - an attempt to read into it.

As they say, the jury is still out.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

No, dope. Manafort knew he had overseas accounts because he bought things with wire transfers. That was in the evidence, fool.

You don't even understand the charges let alone the case made in the trial.

So what, that isn't "illegal".

So what, that isn't "illegal".

Obviously it is, dope.

Sorry, no. He can put his money anywhere he wants.

Sure. But foreign accounts with a balance of more than 10k must be reported to the IRS.

To deliberately not report it is tax fraud.

Of course, nut I think what you're going to find here is the prosecution simply tried to bury the jury with information hoping that they'd be overwhelmed and unable to sift through it correctly.

Huh?

The prosecution has his taxes. Two of Manafort's tax preparers testified that they were not informed of overseas accounts. As Manafort was paying with wire transfers from those accounts, he's cooked.

It's pretty straight foreward.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Of course you don't see it as strawmen posts are your specialty.

You do realize that you completely dodged my question and came back with an insult so you did not have to answer, right? Everyone else saw it...just wanted to point it out in case you yourself missed it....

I made the point I wanted to make. Everyone saw that as well.

 

[iceberg]

you seem to like to "pick a fight" then get all pissed off when i hand you your ass cause you never back up what you say, just FEELZ more.

not stressin at all. i have zero stock in manafort or gates. if they're guilty, fry 'em. that's how the laws work in our country. or at least they did until the dems decided they were above such reproach.

so - you're dead wrong on what im saying. again. yet you feel the need to come in and stomp around like a king kamayamaya ***** who's emo-side of things rules whatever form of common sense you think you were gifted with at birth.

if you want to talk the issue, trial and so forth please dive in and talk about it. you wanna ***** at me and fight, take it to PM where i can kick your ass in private.

You really seem to be building me up into something I couldn't/wouldn't be in my wildest dreams. I asked if you are stressin' it. Why would you start a thread sweatin the jury asking a standard question if it weren't worrying you?
I don't see what this has to do with Dems either way. The guy broke laws or he didn't. His defense is that Gates did it and he didn't know. It will come down to whether there is evidence Manafort DID know. Hard case, probably. Neither of them are exactly Boy Scouts.
I don't really see where a guilty plea by Manafort will matter much one way or the other as far as Trump goes, unless Trump pardons him. As Trump says, he barely knew the guy and this stuff happened way before he worked for the campaign.
If it relates to Trump at all, it is in the fact that Trump seems to keep surrounding himself with crooks and liars. Just bad luck, I take it.

and you coming in with "you stressin" isn't building me into something i'm not? my not allowing you to box me into your own definition of things seems to upset you. all i can say about that is good. stop doing that and our conversations would go much better.

i asked to learn about why the would be asking and what it could mean. have you seen me take a side to say "this proves he's innocent" yet?

no you have not. not in reality anyway but since you've made me something i'm not, to you i *HAVE* said that, which is the most annoying part of talking to you. you're replying to a stereotype you've created 90% of the time, not to me.

my only trump comment was that if this *does* fall through for mueller, it does hurt the rest of his case.

am i wrong?

the fact you've pre-determined the outcome doesn't come across as a problem to you? it does to most rational people. maybe that explains it.

if this *does* fall through for mueller, it does hurt the rest of his case.
Okay, I get it now. THAT'S why you're stressin' it!

oh good god woman - you accuse me of trying to make you something i'm not then run around doing this.

if i paypal you $20 will you stop being such a *****?

$50

sure. but if you're a ***** after that point, you give me back $100.

still a go, chief?

 

[Hiryuu]

not at all. but if the jury is asking for clarification then it would guess it's to apply to how they are interpreting the facts, one way or the other. add in the other 3 questions and you've got (4) very good questions to show this jury is doing their job and i'm thankful for that and want justice, not revenge, to come out of this.

Any deal the jurors may get after the trial, can only get better if they fight about it for a little while. Suspense, intrigue and probably a lot crying by one side or the other after the verdict is what I predict.

 

[easyt65]

As Manafort was paying with wire transfers from those accounts, he's cooked.

'ALLEGEDLY' crooked.

The Jury Is Still Out....

 

[Obama2020]

this is a question of mine - what does this case have to do with trump and russia collusion? i get that "hey we found a crime we must prosecute" - go for it. put it in the system and let the system do their job. but why is mueller so heavy into this when it doesn't appear to have a thing to do wit russia or his core role today.

Surprised you're asking that question...

Mueller referred the case to the eastern court of Virginia because tax fraud is not part of his mandate.

Manafort might still be useful in the Mueller's investigation (district of Columbia).

is mueller trying the case himself?

T.S. Ellis III

Why Paul Manafort 'better be prepared' for judge TS Ellis

"In both working for him and appearing before him, he's a very bright, no nonsense judge who runs a tight court room," David Boelzner, who met Mr Ellis III as a lawyer when the two worked at the Hunton and Williams law firm in 1986, told The Independent. "He expects counsel to be thoroughly prepared, and I think the reputation is that if they're not, there will not be good consequences for the lawyers."

 

[DrLove]

You really seem to be building me up into something I couldn't/wouldn't be in my wildest dreams. I asked if you are stressin' it. Why would you start a thread sweatin the jury asking a standard question if it weren't worrying you?
I don't see what this has to do with Dems either way. The guy broke laws or he didn't. His defense is that Gates did it and he didn't know. It will come down to whether there is evidence Manafort DID know. Hard case, probably. Neither of them are exactly Boy Scouts.
I don't really see where a guilty plea by Manafort will matter much one way or the other as far as Trump goes, unless Trump pardons him. As Trump says, he barely knew the guy and this stuff happened way before he worked for the campaign.
If it relates to Trump at all, it is in the fact that Trump seems to keep surrounding himself with crooks and liars. Just bad luck, I take it.

and you coming in with "you stressin" isn't building me into something i'm not? my not allowing you to box me into your own definition of things seems to upset you. all i can say about that is good. stop doing that and our conversations would go much better.

i asked to learn about why the would be asking and what it could mean. have you seen me take a side to say "this proves he's innocent" yet?

no you have not. not in reality anyway but since you've made me something i'm not, to you i *HAVE* said that, which is the most annoying part of talking to you. you're replying to a stereotype you've created 90% of the time, not to me.

my only trump comment was that if this *does* fall through for mueller, it does hurt the rest of his case.

am i wrong?

the fact you've pre-determined the outcome doesn't come across as a problem to you? it does to most rational people. maybe that explains it.

if this *does* fall through for mueller, it does hurt the rest of his case.
Okay, I get it now. THAT'S why you're stressin' it!

oh good god woman - you accuse me of trying to make you something i'm not then run around doing this.

if i paypal you $20 will you stop being such a *****?

$50

sure. but if you're a ***** after that point, you give me back $100.

still a go, chief?

I'd like in on this please - but who determines if someone is "being a *****"?

 

[easyt65]

I made the point I wanted to make. Everyone saw that as well.

You completely dodged a question by insulting me. If the point you were trying to make is that when asked a question you prefer to doge, avoid, spin, and insult rather than answer the question, I agree - you made your point.

 

[Avatar4321]

The weak-kneed from the Trump camp are terrified that Manafort, when convicted, will flip on Trump for a lighter sentence.

Yes Jake that’s clearly what’s going on. People who don’t believe Trump has committed a crime are scared that a man who was barely involved in his campaign somehow knows of a crime and once the prosecution destroys his credibility as a witness by prosecuting him, that he will give information that will give us Mike Pence as President.

I need to invest in tin foil. You guys will buy anything

 

[Avatar4321]

Spoofing Marty's material is so easy.

The jury will do a good, I believe, with the case that has been presented.

I am willing to accept the outcome if it goes for or against Manafort, but the Alt Right want and will support only one verdict.

The Alt right doesn't care, they are too busy being WP morons.

Regular people on the right (i.e. most people, even the ones you try to smear as alt right) know this is nothing more than a witch hunt.

Some do, yes, and most know that Manafort is a bad dude getting his day in court. Will you accept the verdict?

What do mean by accept the verdict?

Even if he gets convicted it doesn't lead to anything else. If he gets acquitted Muller will continue on anyway.

this is a question of mine - what does this case have to do with trump and russia collusion? i get that "hey we found a crime we must prosecute" - go for it. put it in the system and let the system do their job. but why is mueller so heavy into this when it doesn't appear to have a thing to do wit russia or his core role today.

As a cop so to speak, he can't just ignore crimes he finds committed while looking into Trump's campaign's dealings. You ever seen a cop go into a home and ignore a meth cook because they were there on a dv charge? No? Same difference.

He didn’t have a problem ignoring Manaforts “crimes” while he was the FBI director

 

[Erinwltr]

If Gates was really pulling the strings Manfort's personal tax filings relied on information from Gates and the corporations.

Fruit of the poisoned pill.....

No, dope. Manafort knew he had overseas accounts because he bought things with wire transfers. That was in the evidence, fool.

You don't even understand the charges let alone the case made in the trial.

So what, that isn't "illegal".

So what, that isn't "illegal".

Obviously it is, dope.

Sorry, no. He can put his money anywhere he wants.

Sure. But foreign accounts with a balance of more than 10k must be reported to the IRS.

To deliberately not report it is tax fraud.

Holy Baby Jebuz, dude didn't even read the article. It clearly states that anything over 10K must be reported.

 

[Avatar4321]

even so i'm still waiting for someone - ANYONE on any side to tell me what this tax evasion has to do with RUSSIA to begin with. potential crime yes. prosecute and give him his trial like we'd all get. no issues. but even if he's found guilty, what impact does *this* have to do with RUSSIA? can someone link that up for me?

His innocence or guilt has nothing to do with Trump and Russia. That's the point.

Which is precisely why no one on the right is invested in an outcome from this trial

 

[mudwhistle]

Jurors in Manafort trial send judge four questions, including asking him to redefine reasonable doubt

asking to define/redefine "reasonable doubt". now each side will twist this to mean he's guilty/innocent depending on what you thought before this question from the jury was asked, but what does it really mean?

to me it sounds like someone or some people in the jury want to know how to put that against what meuller presented. does it apply or doesn't it? there must be some concerns around whether or not he did or this wouldn't come up. if some jurors were saying there was "reasonable doubt" it would come up. someone else would have to say "no there wasn't" - hence the clarification.

that alone says someone is questioning that on the jury.

if manafort is failed to be charged with a majority of the 18 charges, mueller's case against trump takes a huge it and things start falling apart. i'm glad to see the jury take this seriously and ask these questions for their own clarification. we'll see what they decide hopefully soon so we can at least get this behind us.

All it takes is one person to change a jury.
One person set on a guilty verdict and just one person to change everyone from guilty to not guilty. A refusal to change your vote causes a mistrial. Sometimes it's easier just to go along with the crowd. I think it all depends on whether you like the prosecution more than the man being accused.

I think it's going to be harder than ever to find objectivity in a jury.

 

[Hiryuu]

Which is precisely why no one on the right is invested in an outcome from this trial

Pfft, brisket, ribs, fried fish and maybe some adult beverages, whatever happens with the trail is good enough reason to throw a backyard barbecue.

 

[mudwhistle]

Jurors in Manafort trial send judge four questions, including asking him to redefine reasonable doubt

asking to define/redefine "reasonable doubt". now each side will twist this to mean he's guilty/innocent depending on what you thought before this question from the jury was asked, but what does it really mean?

to me it sounds like someone or some people in the jury want to know how to put that against what meuller presented. does it apply or doesn't it? there must be some concerns around whether or not he did or this wouldn't come up. if some jurors were saying there was "reasonable doubt" it would come up. someone else would have to say "no there wasn't" - hence the clarification.

that alone says someone is questioning that on the jury.

if manafort is failed to be charged with a majority of the 18 charges, mueller's case against trump takes a huge it and things start falling apart. i'm glad to see the jury take this seriously and ask these questions for their own clarification. we'll see what they decide hopefully soon so we can at least get this behind us.

All it's gonna take is one braindead tRumpkin who will refuse to believe anything bad about Cheeto Jesus and his associates to get us a hung jury.

I pretty much expect that to be the result.

Then mayne we can get a retrial with an unbiased and presenile judge.

Oh, is Trump on trial here.....you lying ****???

No he is not.

Do you lying ***** think he is???

You bet your ass!!!

 

[iceberg]

Jurors in Manafort trial send judge four questions, including asking him to redefine reasonable doubt

asking to define/redefine "reasonable doubt". now each side will twist this to mean he's guilty/innocent depending on what you thought before this question from the jury was asked, but what does it really mean?

to me it sounds like someone or some people in the jury want to know how to put that against what meuller presented. does it apply or doesn't it? there must be some concerns around whether or not he did or this wouldn't come up. if some jurors were saying there was "reasonable doubt" it would come up. someone else would have to say "no there wasn't" - hence the clarification.

that alone says someone is questioning that on the jury.

if manafort is failed to be charged with a majority of the 18 charges, mueller's case against trump takes a huge it and things start falling apart. i'm glad to see the jury take this seriously and ask these questions for their own clarification. we'll see what they decide hopefully soon so we can at least get this behind us.

All it's gonna take is one braindead tRumpkin who will refuse to believe anything bad about Cheeto Jesus and his associates to get us a hung jury.

I pretty much expect that to be the result.

Then mayne we can get a retrial with an unbiased and presenile judge.

Oh, is Trump on trial here.....you lying ****???

No he is not.

Do you lying ***** think he is???

You bet your ass!!!

many on the left seem to equate getting manafort on old taxes proves trump is guilty. of what they really don't care as long as he's guilty enough to keep their rage alive til something better comes along.

 

[OldLady]

You really seem to be building me up into something I couldn't/wouldn't be in my wildest dreams. I asked if you are stressin' it. Why would you start a thread sweatin the jury asking a standard question if it weren't worrying you?
I don't see what this has to do with Dems either way. The guy broke laws or he didn't. His defense is that Gates did it and he didn't know. It will come down to whether there is evidence Manafort DID know. Hard case, probably. Neither of them are exactly Boy Scouts.
I don't really see where a guilty plea by Manafort will matter much one way or the other as far as Trump goes, unless Trump pardons him. As Trump says, he barely knew the guy and this stuff happened way before he worked for the campaign.
If it relates to Trump at all, it is in the fact that Trump seems to keep surrounding himself with crooks and liars. Just bad luck, I take it.

and you coming in with "you stressin" isn't building me into something i'm not? my not allowing you to box me into your own definition of things seems to upset you. all i can say about that is good. stop doing that and our conversations would go much better.

i asked to learn about why the would be asking and what it could mean. have you seen me take a side to say "this proves he's innocent" yet?

no you have not. not in reality anyway but since you've made me something i'm not, to you i *HAVE* said that, which is the most annoying part of talking to you. you're replying to a stereotype you've created 90% of the time, not to me.

my only trump comment was that if this *does* fall through for mueller, it does hurt the rest of his case.

am i wrong?

the fact you've pre-determined the outcome doesn't come across as a problem to you? it does to most rational people. maybe that explains it.

if this *does* fall through for mueller, it does hurt the rest of his case.
Okay, I get it now. THAT'S why you're stressin' it!

oh good god woman - you accuse me of trying to make you something i'm not then run around doing this.

if i paypal you $20 will you stop being such a *****?

$50

sure. but if you're a ***** after that point, you give me back $100.

still a go, chief?

I'm not being a *****.