• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Manafort Verdict

When Will The Jury Decide?

  • By COB 17AUG18

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Continue Into Wk of 20AUG

    Votes: 4 44.4%

  • Longer than Wk of 20 AUG-into 27 AUG

    Votes: 5 55.6%
  • Total voters
    9
  • Poll closed .
slick said:
What "bank fraud"? Has he missed any payments? Has any lending institution filed against him?
Mueller may get him found guilty of "something", but it will be overturned on appeal. Mueller may think
he can break anyone to his will, but he has failed with Manafort. And very publicly!
Click to expand...

Excuse me, but you said "Manafort's dealings with Ukraine were supported by the Feds at the time." Again, do you have any evidence to support this?
 
Xelor said:
1421247963451.jpg
Click to expand...

That's a lot of laughing.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
OK, but so what? It had nothing to do with election rigging or meddling.
Click to expand...

I just tire of people misstating when he allegedly committed the crimes. It's almost invariably used to somehow discredit the prosecution, and saying they were "old" charges dredged up presumably for a political hit job serves the purpose. Fact is he has engaged in just massive financial fraud for an unbroken period of a decade or more, including WHILE campaign manager for Trump. There is nothing inappropriate whatsoever with the DoJ prosecuting those crimes.

Furthermore, we don't yet know whether there is a link. It's been widely reported he was 8 figures in debt to some Russian oligarchs, his consulting money had dried up, and he was living a lavish lifestyle. Then he takes an unpaid job with the Trump campaign, and his correspondence indicates he wants to use that position/access to square things with his thug lender. So there is strong circumstantial evidence or at least suggestions that there is a direct link between his finances and the campaign, and perhaps between his finances and "collusion." We just don't know, yet.
 
slick said:
What "bank fraud"? Has he missed any payments? Has any lending institution filed against him?
Mueller may get him found guilty of "something", but it will be overturned on appeal. Mueller may think
he can break anyone to his will, but he has failed with Manafort. And very publicly!

This will still be seen for what it is. Malicious prosecution for political reasons.
Click to expand...

If you're really interested, you can read the indictment. No reason for anyone to explain what's in the plain language in the attached document. It's only 28 pages, and the sections detailing the various crimes are written in simple language. Read it and you'll find the answer to your question.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/document-manafort-superseding-indictment
 
JasperL said:
If you're really interested, you can read the indictment. No reason for anyone to explain what's in the plain language in the attached document. It's only 28 pages, and the sections detailing the various crimes are written in simple language. Read it and you'll find the answer to your question.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/document-manafort-superseding-indictment
Click to expand...

Not interested in reading it. My take about this case is that if Manafort wasn't a member of the Trump campaign
he never would have seen the possibility of jail time as most of these infractions happened over a decade ago &
as I hear it, they were looked into without a criminal proceeding.
 
Linc said:
Throwing in CNN and the Jurors ruined your post. As if GOPutins at RT, Fox and Sinclair aren’t doing this.

Stop with the Dishonest False Equivalence of the GOP. CNN hasn’t threatened the Lives of the Judge and Jurors as GOPutins have.
Click to expand...

And you are certain that the threats are coming in from GOP’ers how? By magic? Intuition?

It sure isn’t proof at this point....

And do you really think it would be good for jurors name to be released?
 
humbolt said:
Well, they have to decide before the formal football season starts. There are priorities after all, and Manafort's fate is small potatoes when football approaches.
Click to expand...

One of the first rational posts on this matter that I have seen.
 
slick said:
Not interested in reading it. My take about this case is that if Manafort wasn't a member of the Trump campaign
he never would have seen the possibility of jail time as most of these infractions happened over a decade ago &
as I hear it, they were looked into without a criminal proceeding.
Click to expand...

LOL, of course you're not interested in the FACTS. :lamo

And lots of the infractions happened through at least 2016. He's a crook, who committed bank fraud, tax fraud (extensive!) and money laundering, over a period of at least a decade. I don't understand this idea that he's somehow being unfairly prosecuted.

It's possibly true that if he didn't join the Trump campaign, none of this stuff would have been investigated. So what? Either he's a crook or he isn't. Should he get a pass because he's rich? Well connected? Does tax fraud not matter if you're part of a campaign?

A teacher of mine in college reached the highest career position at IRS and he had great stories about how they caught a bunch of people. Lots of times it was disgruntled girlfriends and ex-wives who turned them in. Why does it matter how he came under the radar. There's no reason to think the prosecution violated DoJ or constitutional guidelines.
 
gdgyva said:
And you are certain that the threats are coming in from GOP’ers how? By magic? Intuition?

It sure isn’t proof at this point....

And do you really think it would be good for jurors name to be released?
Click to expand...

Greetings, gdgyva. :2wave:

No! Who wants them released, and what reason is being given for doing so? :confused:
 
polgara said:
Greetings, gdgyva. :2wave:

No! Who wants them released, and what reason is being given for doing so? :confused:
Click to expand...

The people who want the names of the jurors released are probably the same people who are sending threats against the life of the Judge.

What reason is being given? Absolutely none (except, possibly, "The Public Has A **R*I*G*H*T** **T*O** **K*N*O*W**!!!!").
 
Rexedgar said:
Will the jury come to a conclusion by COB 17Aug18 or continue into the week of 20Aug?
Click to expand...

It will be very difficult to get a jury consensus. I hope they do though. The political polarization in the juror's room must be extreme to the nth degree. I've been on a couple juries, and it's often difficult to get some people to come over, regardless of how much evidence there is.
 
Media_Truth said:
It will be very difficult to get a jury consensus. I hope they do though. The political polarization in the juror's room must be extreme to the nth degree. I've been on a couple juries, and it's often difficult to get some people to come over, regardless of how much evidence there is.
Click to expand...

all it will take.is.one obstinate trumpy to hang the jury

they have 18 counts to consider. surely they can convict on some of them even with a rightie.
 
My question is: Why was this jury not sequestered?.....
 
Logician Man said:
My question is: Why was this jury not sequestered?.....
Click to expand...

The question of the day. The question of the week. There are some explanations, but I would agree with you.
 
Logician Man said:
My question is: Why was this jury not sequestered?.....
Click to expand...

Because they promised not to look at, listen to, or read anything about the case except the evidence which had been tendered in court and also because they had promised not to discuss the case except with each other?
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Because they promised not to look at, listen to, or read anything about the case except the evidence which had been tendered in court and also because they had promised not to discuss the case except with each other?
Click to expand...

Oh thank goodness; I was a little worried for a bit.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Because they promised not to look at, listen to, or read anything about the case except the evidence which had been tendered in court and also because they had promised not to discuss the case except with each other?
Click to expand...

And Trump promised he would unite the country,and we all know how that is working out.:lamo
 
Cardinal said:
Oh thank goodness; I was a little worried for a bit.
Click to expand...

FAITH - The belief that a person will comply with their requirements more reliably because of a promise than they would if a gun were pointed at their head.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom