Paul Manafort Thread (2 Viewers)

[Nick Vermeil]

This is direct examination by prosecution.  Cross examination will come later today and possibly tomorrow.

On gates yes. But was there any solid discrediting of the bookkeeper?

 

[-fish-]

I get the anti-establishment gestalt of Trumpites, but why or how they could cheer for thieves & leaches like Manafort I have no idea.

Trump has undermined the process for months, saying that these are 10 year old charges that were investigated and dropped.   Since Gates is guilty and took a plea, this is all Mueller abusing the process to get at Trump.   So the Trump worshipers align with Manafort, just like they cheer for tax cuts that will only hurt them.

 

[Mookie]

On gates yes. But was there any silid discrediting of the bookkeeper?

There chance to cross examine her came and went.  I suppose they could recall her when they put on their case.

 

[roadkill1292]

I get the anti-establishment gestalt of Trumpites, but why or how they could cheer for thieves & leaches like Manafort I have no idea.

It really is a confusing. There is indeed a Swamp in Washington but it's "legitimate." We have a crappy electoral process called for by our creaking old Constitution and which rewards political parties and candidates who can satisfy the richest campaign donors the most. Trump supporters don't believe in that Swamp, the Swamp they are opposed to is any political representative who doesn't side with them on issues.

 

[-fish-]

On gates yes. But was there any solid discrediting of the bookkeeper?

The focus on cross of the bookeeper was to try to show that it was Gates, not Manafort, that directed her.    She said Manafort knew about everything.

 

[Henry Ford]

What is the cross like on these witnesses?   Has the defense team made any progress?  I’m only seeing reporting on testimony in favor of jail time. 

Isn't it true that the only person you actually discussed this with - the only one you know knew about it all - was the liar and admitted thief Rick Gates?

No.

No further questions.

 

[Plorfu]

Isn't it true that the only person you actually discussed this with - the only one you know knew about it all - was the liar and admitted thief Rick Gates?

No.

No further questions.

"Your honor, I move to strike all of my questions from the record. Also the answers to the questions. And any body language that may have been described."

 

[Sinn Fein]

Manafort Judge to Prosecutor: ‘There’s Tears in Your Eyes’

Tensions at the Paul Manafort fraud trial grew so heated Monday that the judge suggested that one of Robert Mueller’s prosecutors was crying during a discussion out of the jury’s earshot, according to a transcript of the proceedings.

“I understand how frustrated you are,” U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III said during the discussion. “In fact, there’s tears in your eyes right now.’’

When Prosecutor Greg Andres protested that he didn’t have tears in his eyes, the judge shot back: “Well, they’re watery.”

The exchange came during testimony by Manafort’s former right-hand man, Rick Gates, who offered dramatic details about how he stole hundreds of thousands of dollars from his boss while helping him hide offshore accounts from U.S. tax authorities and defraud bankers to secure loans.

Mueller’s team has clashed repeatedly with Ellis, who questions the relevance of detailed evidence about Manafort’s work as a political consultant in Ukraine, where prosecutors say he made more than $60 million from 2010 to 2014. Some of those confrontations continued in bench conferences that jurors and dozens of media members couldn’t hear in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia.

Andres complained that Ellis was blocking him from asking important questions while placing an emphasis on moving quickly at the bank- and tax-fraud trial of Manafort, President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman. Ellis disagreed, saying he wasn’t emphasizing speed over substance. The judge continued that delay is unnecessary, and prosecutors should stick to the relevant evidence.

What follows is taken from the transcript:

“Look at me when you’re talking to me,’’ Ellis said to Andres.

“I’m sorry, judge, I was,’’ Andres said.

“No, you weren’t,’’ Ellis said. “You were looking down.’’

“Because I don’t want to get in trouble for some facial expression,’’ the prosecutor said. “I don’t want to get yelled at again by the court for having some facial expression when I’m not doing anything wrong, but trying my case.’’

Ellis said to another prosecutor: “You must be quiet.’’

“I’m sorry, judge,’’ Andres said.

“Well, I understand how frustrated you are. In fact, there’s tears in your eyes right now.’’

“There are not tears in my eyes, Judge,’’ Andres said.

“Well, they’re watery,’’ Ellis said. “Look, I want you to focus sharply on what you need to prove -- to prove the crime. And I don’t understand what a lot of these questions have to do with it.’

The lawyers then returned to open court, and further sniping ensued after jurors left for the day. At the end of the day, Andres apologized to the judge, saying he didn’t mean to be disrespectful. The judge seemed to offer an olive branch.

“Don’t worry about it,’’ said Ellis, a 31-year veteran of the bench. “I’m not concerned about that at all. I remember trying cases.’’

Ellis said he had cases that were important to him and his career.

“I remember the stress and I remember the pressure,’’ he said. “This is a stressful time. So I understand that. But I’m trying to minimize the stress time is all I’m trying to do. And I think we can do it. I don’t think this case is as complex as it could be made to be.’’

 

[whoknew]

Manafort Judge to Prosecutor: ‘There’s Tears in Your Eyes’

Tensions at the Paul Manafort fraud trial grew so heated Monday that the judge suggested that one of Robert Mueller’s prosecutors was crying during a discussion out of the jury’s earshot, according to a transcript of the proceedings.

“I understand how frustrated you are,” U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III said during the discussion. “In fact, there’s tears in your eyes right now.’’

When Prosecutor Greg Andres protested that he didn’t have tears in his eyes, the judge shot back: “Well, they’re watery.”

The exchange came during testimony by Manafort’s former right-hand man, Rick Gates, who offered dramatic details about how he stole hundreds of thousands of dollars from his boss while helping him hide offshore accounts from U.S. tax authorities and defraud bankers to secure loans.

Mueller’s team has clashed repeatedly with Ellis, who questions the relevance of detailed evidence about Manafort’s work as a political consultant in Ukraine, where prosecutors say he made more than $60 million from 2010 to 2014. Some of those confrontations continued in bench conferences that jurors and dozens of media members couldn’t hear in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia.

Andres complained that Ellis was blocking him from asking important questions while placing an emphasis on moving quickly at the bank- and tax-fraud trial of Manafort, President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman. Ellis disagreed, saying he wasn’t emphasizing speed over substance. The judge continued that delay is unnecessary, and prosecutors should stick to the relevant evidence.

What follows is taken from the transcript:

“Look at me when you’re talking to me,’’ Ellis said to Andres.

“I’m sorry, judge, I was,’’ Andres said.

“No, you weren’t,’’ Ellis said. “You were looking down.’’

“Because I don’t want to get in trouble for some facial expression,’’ the prosecutor said. “I don’t want to get yelled at again by the court for having some facial expression when I’m not doing anything wrong, but trying my case.’’

Ellis said to another prosecutor: “You must be quiet.’’

“I’m sorry, judge,’’ Andres said.

“Well, I understand how frustrated you are. In fact, there’s tears in your eyes right now.’’

“There are not tears in my eyes, Judge,’’ Andres said.

“Well, they’re watery,’’ Ellis said. “Look, I want you to focus sharply on what you need to prove -- to prove the crime. And I don’t understand what a lot of these questions have to do with it.’

The lawyers then returned to open court, and further sniping ensued after jurors left for the day. At the end of the day, Andres apologized to the judge, saying he didn’t mean to be disrespectful. The judge seemed to offer an olive branch.

“Don’t worry about it,’’ said Ellis, a 31-year veteran of the bench. “I’m not concerned about that at all. I remember trying cases.’’

Ellis said he had cases that were important to him and his career.

“I remember the stress and I remember the pressure,’’ he said. “This is a stressful time. So I understand that. But I’m trying to minimize the stress time is all I’m trying to do. And I think we can do it. I don’t think this case is as complex as it could be made to be.’’

This is not particularly surprising. I wrote the other day that judges - especially fed ones - are ornery. #### like this happens all the time. I wouldn't read too much into it. 

 

[Sinn Fein]

This is not particularly surprising. I wrote the other day that judges - especially fed ones - are ornery. #### like this happens all the time. I wouldn't read too much into it. 

I think his (Ellis') comments suggest he sees it as a pretty straightforward case, and the prosecution is at risk of overcomplicating it.

 

[Henry Ford]

I think his (Ellis') comments suggest he sees it as a pretty straightforward case, and the prosecution is at risk of overcomplicating it.

Agreed.  And I think he's right.  I can't imagine the pressure Andres is under, though.

 

[badmojo1006]

Don't know if this has been discussed here but Manafort and Carter Page were plants into the Trump administration. Neither of them will have any impact on Trump. Sorry if that was a hope for some. I assume you all know this.

So are you really a liberal plant?

 

[joffer]

Gates is under cross examination now

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

This is not particularly surprising. I wrote the other day that judges - especially fed ones - are ornery. #### like this happens all the time. I wouldn't read too much into it. 

I've been here, albeit in a different "here." It succccccccccckkks.

 

[Sinn Fein]

I don't know how this is playing to the jury - but Gates is a pretty shady character.

I imagine the defense will do their best to pin all the malfeasance on Gates - and it might not be much of a stretch for the jury to buy it - at least enough to create reasonable doubt in 1-2 jurors.

But, I have no idea how tightly the prosecutor tied the financial stuff to Manafort via the accountant and other witnesses.

 

[-fish-]

I don't know how this is playing to the jury - but Gates is a pretty shady character.

I imagine the defense will do their best to pin all the malfeasance on Gates - and it might not be much of a stretch for the jury to buy it - at least enough to create reasonable doubt in 1-2 jurors.

But, I have no idea how tightly the prosecutor tied the financial stuff to Manafort via the accountant and other witnesses.

Gates is a pretty shady character that made hundreds of thousands of dollars being a shady character.   Manafort is a shady character that made tens of millions doing the same.  I don't think a jury is going to believe that Gates was the mastermind and Manafort is just so stupid that he didn't realize that his bookkeeper, business partner and accountant were all lying on his behalf.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Gates is a pretty shady character that made hundreds of thousands of dollars being a shady character.   Manafort is a shady character that made tens of millions doing the same.  I don't think a jury is going to believe that Gates was the mastermind and Manafort is just so stupid that he didn't realize that his bookkeeper, business partner and accountant were all lying on his behalf.

Well, as the judge said in the trial - Manafort was not paying close enough to the finances to notice that Gates was stealing hundreds of thousands (up to $3M) from Manafort...

Like I said, I am not following this closely - prosecutors may well have tied this very tightly to Manafort - but Gates sure opens the door for some wiggle room if a juror is so inclined.  I am assuming the basic defense will be - Manafort was aware of the forrest, but had no idea of the trees - it was Gates who was changing all the financial statements, and poor Manafort thought everything was being recorded properly.

 

[-fish-]

Well, as the judge said in the trial - Manafort was not paying close enough to the finances to notice that Gates was stealing hundreds of thousands (up to $3M) from Manafort...

Like I said, I am not following this closely - prosecutors may well have tied this very tightly to Manafort - but Gates sure opens the door for some wiggle room if a juror is so inclined.  I am assuming the basic defense will be - Manafort was aware of the forrest, but had no idea of the trees - it was Gates who was changing all the financial statements, and poor Manafort thought everything was being recorded properly.

He still signed his tax returns that didn't disclose income from 15 different offshore companies that he created.   It's going to be hard to blame everyone else for that.   The problem with establishing that you're a sophisticated international businessman who legitimately earns $60 million in consulting fees in what is essentially a war zone is that you have a hard time turning around and convincing people that you didn't know what you were doing when you were laundering that money.  

The fact that Gates took a plea and didn't get immunity probably helps.   They know he's going to jail too.

 

[Rirruto]

It really sucks reading news reports of trials and not really knowing what's going on. The big question the defense has to answer is why Gates would falsify everything to Manafort's benefit. Gates ensuring Manafort illegally benefited for millions and millions of dollars doesn't really make any sense. If Gates were just a thief, he'd just steal for himself. Unless Gates is basically just Robin Hood. This isn't ####### Sherwood Forrest or anything like that.

And that's not even considering the mountains of testimony, documents/emails, and wire transfers from the bank accounts he lied about

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I think his (Ellis') comments suggest he sees it as a pretty straightforward case, and the prosecution is at risk of overcomplicating it.

Maybe overnight the Prosecutor will evaluate the Judge's assessment of the case, that it is straightforward, and he will concentrate on that, not all of the interesting sidelights to the case which, while interesting, are not the sum and substance.  Maybe his Honor is trying to do him a favor if he could just see it.  Maybe not.

As a Prosecutor I only cried once in court.  It was not from getting lectured by a Judge, but was during the testimony of an aged victim.  He was a survivor of the holocaust.  He had been interred and had the arm tattoo to prove it.  He and his wife were attacked in their home by some neo Nazi's/white supremicists ####s who beat them severely and trashed their place and then painted swastikas on their home and car.  When he showed his tattoo from the stand and his wife started crying, I did too.  The judge did also and declared a recess.  Several members of the jury did as well.  The defense moved for a mistrial.  Their motion was not granted.

 

[ericttspikes]

He still signed his tax returns that didn't disclose income from 15 different offshore companies that he created.   It's going to be hard to blame everyone else for that.   The problem with establishing that you're a sophisticated international businessman who legitimately earns $60 million in consulting fees in what is essentially a war zone is that you have a hard time turning around and convincing people that you didn't know what you were doing when you were laundering that money.  

The fact that Gates took a plea and didn't get immunity probably helps.   They know he's going to jail too.

Does anyone know if Manafort filed jointly? If so, wouldn't his wife be looking at jail time too?

 

[Mookie]

So Manafort secured fraudulent loans from a little bank in Chicago run by this guy named Calk in exchange for Calk being considered as Secretary of the Army? 

Nothing swampy about that

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

So Manafort secured fraudulent loans from a little bank in Chicago run by this guy named Calk in exchange for Calk being considered as Secretary of the Army? 

Nothing swampy about that

He likes Calk.

 

[Mookie]

He likes Calk.

The biggest.  The best.

 

[SWC]

Maybe overnight the Prosecutor will evaluate the Judge's assessment of the case, that it is straightforward, and he will concentrate on that, not all of the interesting sidelights to the case which, while interesting, are not the sum and substance.  Maybe his Honor is trying to do him a favor if he could just see it.  Maybe not.

As a Prosecutor I only cried once in court.  It was not from getting lectured by a Judge, but was during the testimony of an aged victim.  He was a survivor of the holocaust.  He had been interred and had the arm tattoo to prove it.  He and his wife were attacked in their home by some neo Nazi's/white supremicists ####s who beat them severely and trashed their place and then painted swastikas on their home and car.  When he showed his tattoo from the stand and his wife started crying, I did too.  The judge did also and declared a recess.  Several members of the jury did as well.  The defense moved for a mistrial.  Their motion was not granted.

did they find the skinhead white supremacist garbage guilty or what brohan please tell me they did and sentenced him hard take that to the bank bromigo

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

did they find the skinhead white supremacist garbage guilty or what brohan please tell me they did and sentenced him hard take that to the bank bromigo

They received the maximum sentence allowable by law.

 

[SWC]

did they find the skinhead white supremacist garbage guilty or what brohan please tell me they did and sentenced him hard take that to the bank bromigo

They received the maximum sentence allowable by law.

i hope that was being rocketed into the sun while being eaten by bees and nice work bromigo take that to the bank 

 

[ren hoek]

How have Russiagaters overcome the inconvenient fact that Manafort's Ukraine charges have nothing to do w/ Trump, Russia, or collusion? By claiming, falsely, that Manafort was doing Putin's bidding in Ukraine. On Tuesday, Rick Gates destroyed that myth:

https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1027233777867784192

 

[The Indestructible]

How have Russiagaters overcome the inconvenient fact that Manafort's Ukraine charges have nothing to do w/ Trump, Russia, or collusion? By claiming, falsely, that Manafort was doing Putin's bidding in Ukraine. On Tuesday, Rick Gates destroyed that myth:

https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1027233777867784192

So Manafort wasn't doing Putin's bidding because he took an adverse position to Russian regarding Ukraine?

OK.  

JD Gordon says that Trump directed him to support weakening the GOP's position on supporting Ukraine. 

Doesn't that mean that Trump was doing Putin's bidding because he took a pro-Russian approach regarding Ukraine? 

 

[Rove!]

Some more tidbit from the trial here....it sounds like Gates got roasted in cross examination....not sure how much that really helps Manafort, but having the “star witness” make a fool of himself could turn a slam dunk into a more questionable outcome

https://mobile.twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1027009612002852869

 

[-fish-]

Some more tidbit from the trial here....it sounds like Gates got roasted in cross examination....not sure how much that really helps Manafort, but having the “star witness” make a fool of himself could turn a slam dunk into a more questionable outcome

https://mobile.twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1027009612002852869

You've never seen an actual trial before, have you?

 

[Bruce Dickinson]

You've never seen an actual trial before, have you?

Narrator:  No, he had not.

 

[Henry Ford]

Some more tidbit from the trial here....it sounds like Gates got roasted in cross examination....not sure how much that really helps Manafort, but having the “star witness” make a fool of himself could turn a slam dunk into a more questionable outcome

https://mobile.twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1027009612002852869

It's always tough to have a criminal's credibility be a part of a prosecution, but I don't think Gates got "roasted" in this.

 

[joffer]

It's always tough to have a criminal's credibility be a part of a prosecution, but I don't think Gates got "roasted" in this.

For some reason, nuns are rarely co-conspirators

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

i hope that was being rocketed into the sun while being eaten by bees and nice work bromigo take that to the bank 

I'm fairly sure some ACLU lawyer might have had an 8th amendment argument against such a sentence.  

 

[ren hoek]

So Manafort wasn't doing Putin's bidding because he took an adverse position to Russian regarding Ukraine?

OK.  

JD Gordon says that Trump directed him to support weakening the GOP's position on supporting Ukraine. 

Doesn't that mean that Trump was doing Putin's bidding because he took a pro-Russian approach regarding Ukraine? 

I think it means that Trump preferred a reset with Russia. During the campaign he talked about a mutual opposition to ISIS.  Why can't the simple explanation be the more likely one than the collusion fantasy?  

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

For some reason, nuns are rarely co-conspirators

I had some nuns who chained themselves to the fence at Fort Carson in protest of some activity there. Also at Peterson Air force base.  Others supported them in their endeavor by driving them to the installations, helping them with the chains and locks, and providing them water and food during their protest vigil.

 

[Amused to Death]

I think it means that Trump preferred a reset with Russia. During the campaign he talked about a mutual opposition to ISIS.  Why can't the simple explanation be the more likely one than the collusion fantasy?  

By 'simple' you mean the one where the FBI, CIA, Trump's AG, Acting AG, and the entire media are against him? Not to mention all of our allies?

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

It's always tough to have a criminal's credibility be a part of a prosecution, but I don't think Gates got "roasted" in this.

Roasted or not he was a trusted confidante of the Defendant, and for a reason.

 

[-fish-]

I think it means that Trump preferred a reset with Russia. During the campaign he talked about a mutual opposition to ISIS.  Why can't the simple explanation be the more likely one than the collusion fantasy?  

The one where we ignore the fact that multiple members of Trump's campaign plead guilty to crimes, you ignore Trump's business dealings with Russian banks, ignore the repeated lies about meetings with Russians, and ignore Trump's actions as to Russia, including failing to impose sanctions?   Yeah, that's really a complicated bunch of dots to connect.

 

[-fish-]

Roasted or not he was a trusted confidante of the Defendant, and for a reason.

And both were key members of Trump's campaign.  Huh.   Funny that Trump's lawyer looks like he may be going to jail for a similar type of tax fraud.  

Only the best people.  

 

[TobiasFunke]

I think it means that Trump preferred a reset with Russia. During the campaign he talked about a mutual opposition to ISIS.  Why can't the simple explanation be the more likely one than the collusion fantasy?  

Maybe because the simple explanation doesn't explain why a bunch of people would all lie about the same thing over and over, on occasion risking jail time to do so, while the "collusion fantasy" or some variant thereof (kompromat eg) totally does? 

 

[TobiasFunke]

Luv 2 obstruct justice while already under investigation because I "prefer a reset with Russia" and for no other reason

 

[The Indestructible]

I think it means that Trump preferred a reset with Russia. During the campaign he talked about a mutual opposition to ISIS.  Why can't the simple explanation be the more likely one than the collusion fantasy?  

The simple explanation is collusion. 

Why did Russians try to hack into HRC's office for the first time hours after Trump asked them to do just that?

Why does Trump continue to deny that the Russians meddled in the election or deny that Putin wanted Trump to win?

Why have so many members of Team Trump lied about their contacts with Russia?  

Why did Trump fire Comey?  

Why has he tried to fire Mueller?  

There may be legitimate defensible answers to these questions, but the simplest explanation so far to all of them is collusion.  

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

How have Russiagaters overcome the inconvenient fact that Manafort's Ukraine charges have nothing to do w/ Trump, Russia, or collusion? By claiming, falsely, that Manafort was doing Putin's bidding in Ukraine. On Tuesday, Rick Gates destroyed that myth:

https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1027233777867784192

In what way did Manafort's work for Yanukovych not align with Putin's aims? Are you referring to the movement to have Ukraine join the European Union, or something else?

 

[joffer]

you guys and ren. I’ll never get it.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Didn't he also flee to Russia?

I think he fled to Russia because he was he was removed from office in Ukraine largely because he ended up not joining the EU.

 

[Henry Ford]

Trump: Russia, shoot that cop so I can win this election!

Russia: [shoots cop]

GOP: He didn't mean it, it's not a crime to just tell someone to shoot a cop if you don't really mean it.

 

[Koya]

you guys and ren. I’ll never get it.

I get Ren. It's quite clear where his allegiances lie (and it's clearly with neither the U.S. nor democratic institutions in general).  Why others act as if he even pretends to be objective (not to say, well, pro-U.S.!) I have no idea. 

 

[ren hoek]

Why did Russians try to hack into HRC's office for the first time hours after Trump asked them to do just that?

Trump never asked them to do that.  The suspicion was that they had the emails because of the original Guccifer hack.  Anyone watching Fox News in May might have thought the same thing.  

Why does Trump continue to deny that the Russians meddled in the election or deny that Putin wanted Trump to win?

Because it would delegitimize his victory.  And because it's possible that they weren't the source for Wikileaks.  And frankly because 2016 was over a long time ago and placating his detractors, who will never in a million years accept him as President, is a lose/lose situation.

Why have so many members of Team Trump lied about their contacts with Russia? 

There's different circumstances entailed with each example here.  I don't think Sessions was lying at all in the context of the question Franken asked him if that's what you're referring to.  Another explanation is that they could be trying to avoid the inevitable #### show that would result from acknowledging their interactions with the Russian state.  Is there a specific example you're referring to here?  

Why did Trump fire Comey?  

Why has he tried to fire Mueller?

Because he sucked at his job. 

Because the investigation appears to be founded on a bogus, nonexistent pretense of collusion.  To be fair, it will probably make him and his associates look bad when all is said and done.  I don't doubt that Trump has some financial skeletons there.  But if he isn't a 'traitor' and his campaign had nothing to do with the leaks or a quid pro quo, then it's understandable that he'd want to end the investigation.  Not that he needed much help, but it's clearly been a stain on his presidency. 

There may be legitimate defensible answers to these questions, but the simplest explanation so far to all of them is collusion.  

So I'll ask again, a full two years in now: what exactly was the collusion?