You can't hide 30 formally secret bank accounts overseas.
You can't hide 60 million dollars after they've found it and identified it.
You can't hide the FACT you never paid taxes..
If the evidence was obtained by an improper search warrant or fraudulent information on the search warrant application, the evidence is excluded at trial.
Further, the facts are that a lot of people had a lot bigger disputes with the IRS than this little bit of cash. Warren Buffett had or has a billion dollar dispute. If mistakes are made, the IRS can say you owe them money, but it isn't a criminal offense unless you had a suitable mens rea.
Fuk Warren Buffett. He's not on trial.
Manafort is. By professionals who don't make mistakes.
Manafort is fuked.
They don't make mistakes?
Andrew Weissmann: Robert Mueller's dirty cop
- In 1997 Andrew Weissmann was officially reprimanded by a judge in the Eastern District of New York for withholding evidence
- Weissmann was reported to the Department of Justice Inspector General and Senate Judiciary Committee for alleged “corrupt legal practices.
- A formal letter from U.S. Attorney Eastern District of New York Zachary Carter requested the judge to remove Weissman’s name, according to documents.
- Civil rights and Criminal Defense Attorney David Schoen said Weissmann needs to be investigated for alleged past misconduct in court cases.
More specifically, Weissmann withheld evidence to a court that would have helped the other side in a criminal case, which is required by law. In that previous case:
Evidence suggested that Scarpa was involved in a personal relationship with his FBI handler, Lindley DeVecchio. DeVeccio, who was also a witness in a case connected to the Persico case. Weissmann had DeVecchio testify against Michael Sessa, a captain in the Colombo family, despite knowing DeVecchio was under investigation by the FBI for his relationship with Scarpa. Weissmann and his team failed disclose that to the courts and presented him as a solid witness in the case, according to Schoen and court documents.
Then there was the Arthur Andersen case, which with Weissmann, shows a pattern of malfeasance. According to the Daily Beast:
During his years at the Justice Department, Weissmann built a reputation as a prosecutor willing to push the envelope – sometimes with disastrous results. He worked on the Justice Department’s Enron probe from 2002 to 2005. And while he was there, he helmed the prosecution of Arthur Andersen, Enron’s accounting firm, arguing that it had obstructed justice by destroying documents investigators would have needed.
Weissmann and his team took the aggressive step of indicting the entire accounting firm. According to a source familiar with the case, the firm’s defense attorneys met with them [and asked Weissmann and his team] not to do so before the indictment, arguing that the firm would be certain to dissolve if it were indicted, leaving thousands of people jobless.
“Their response indicated they didn’t care,” said the person familiar with the case.