Manafort Trial Updates

[Safety]

Lol, are you guys reading about the same trial I am?

Come on man, you know it is alternative facts and fake news. Manafort isn't even real, just a figment of everyone's imagination.

[MisterVeritis]

Manafort is guilty, guilty as hell.

Nonsense.

[MisterVeritis]

Day Seven:

Former Manafort partner Rick Gates wrapped up his testimony as defense lawyers hinted that he had had four adulterous affairs.
• An FBI accountant testified that $60 million flowed through Manafort’s accounts from 2010 to 2014.
• Prosecutors continued to clash with the judge over the speed of the trial and whether a witness should have been watching the trial.



Next up for prosecutors is IRS Revenue Agent Michael Welch, who was assigned in April to help prosecutors prepare for trial. Welch testified that he examined Paul Manafort’s business and tax records and, as with the last witness, prepared charts summarizing what he had found.
Welch’s appearance on the stand triggered another heated confrontation between Judge T.S. Ellis III and prosecutors. After going through Welch’s qualifications, prosecutors asked whether he could be treated as an “expert” witness — meaning he, unlike other witnesses, will be allowed to offer his professional opinion in court. Ellis said he could do so. Assistant U.S. Attorney Uzo Asonye then revealed that Welch had been seated in the courtroom for the duration of the proceedings.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.8d0ab990d2d5

[MisterVeritis]

"Jurors in the Paul Manafort trial resumed deliberations on their third day as they weigh 18 counts of bank and tax fraud against" ...Paul Manafort.

Things take time.

[MisterVeritis]

"Jurors in the Paul Manafort trial are wrestling with plenty of questions as they consider 18 bank- and tax-fraud counts against President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman. Some are simple –- did that witness tell the truth? Others are mind-numbingly complex -- what is a financial interest in a foreign account? Here are some of the disputed areas that jurors must wade through, and the legal instructions from U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III:"

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-20/manafort-jury-wrestling-with-tough-choices-before-a-verdict''

Many jury watchers say the longer the jury deliberates the better the outcome will likely be for Paul Manafort.

"Manafort’s lawyers say Rick Gates, Manafort’s former right-hand man, is the linchpin to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s case and jurors must acquit if they don’t believe him. Gates, who pleaded guilty and hopes to avoid prison, told jurors how he helped Manafort commit crimes."

Gates was not credible.

The big concern, "in the U.S. legal system, every criminal defendant is presumed innocent, and prosecutors must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Manafort’s lawyers say jurors must acquit because prosecutors failed to meet that burden."

This is why I believe Manafort's lawyers did not offer a defense beyond their opening statements, cross examinations and closing statements.

" a person has a financial interest in an account if they are the owner of record or have title to it, whether it benefits them or someone else."

This is complicated. I wonder how many jurists simply turned off during this part of the trial.

[MisterVeritis]

“Your honor, if we cannot come to a consensus on a single count, how should we fill in the jury verdict form for that count,”

I pondered what this might mean. Does it mean the jury cannot agree on any count or does it mean they agree on every count but one? The second half of the sentence implies they agree on all but one count. Will the jury find Manafort not guilty on every count but one where they do not agree? Or will they find him guilty on every count but one where they cannot agree?

[Peter1469]

“Your honor, if we cannot come to a consensus on a single count, how should we fill in the jury verdict form for that count,”

I pondered what this might mean. Does it mean the jury cannot agree on any count or does it mean they agree on every count but one? The second half of the sentence implies they agree on all but one count. Will the jury find Manafort not guilty on every count but one where they do not agree? Or will they find him guilty on every count but one where they cannot agree?

I am not sure what it means.

[MisterVeritis]

I am not sure what it means.

I don't believe anyone outside the jury members know.

I hope it means not guilty on all charges but one where the jury is deadlocked.

[mamooth]

The judge told the jury that Gates was inconsistent. This judge is going to dismiss the case with predjudice.

So, would you say that's the biggest fail of a prediction you've ever made on this board, or have you ever failed somewhere else even more spectacularly?

And are you sticking with the "It's all a deep state conspiracy against DearLeaderTrump" conspiracy theory, or are you switching to a "Manafort had nothing to do with Trump, so it doesn't matter, and you liberals are all stupid for thinking it does!" line of retreat?

[MisterVeritis]

So, would you say that's the biggest fail of a prediction you've ever made on this board, or have you ever failed somewhere else even more spectacularly?

And are you sticking with the "It's all a deep state conspiracy against DearLeaderTrump" conspiracy theory, or are you switching to a "Manafort had nothing to do with Trump, so it doesn't matter, and you liberals are all stupid for thinking it does!" line of retreat?

What, in your opinion, is the connection between Manafort's trials and President Trump?