Jump to content

Kyrie Eleison

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    3669
  • Joined

Posts posted by Kyrie Eleison

  1. You'd think a conspiracy loon shitbag asshole like him would have learned the Big Lesson of his craft: It's the cover-up that gets you in the end. He was in pretty deep shit already, but destroying that evidence reminds me of those idiots who eat joints at traffic stops, thus upgrading misdemeanors into felonies. 
     
    He done. 


    http://



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    • Like 4
  2. Fair point.
    I am aware, however, that occasionally the government will whittle down somewhat duplicative charges (I assume here every tax return was a count and every loan and bank defrauded was a count, so not totally duplicative), for the purpose of simplifying for the jury.
    Certainly done in civil cases a lot.
    Just a thought out loud.


    not quite...it’s a strategic thing, yes. but the rules differ from civil cases re: “same transaction or occurrence,” to use the language of civil procedure.

    they could have brought 18 different cases one by one here if they chose to do so.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  3. Hey can become president.

     

    Literally, he most vapid and dim witted among us CAN ACTUALLY BECOME PRESIDENT.

     

    200.gif

     

    English, dude...do you speak it?

     

     

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    • Like 1
  4. The one thing I began to wonder about the day I looked at the counts against Manafort, was, did the government overcharge here?  I believe that they are unlikely to get stacking of the sentences, except for maybe the tax evasion plus the bank fraud, so having all these counts of the same crime serves no purpose and can only confuse the jury.


    i know you’re a lawyer, and by all accounts a helluva P/T lawyer, which means you’ve spent a good amount of time in a courtroom.

    but as a criminal case you’re looking at this wholly and completely wrong.

    they only need a guilty on one count.

    think about it...


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    • Like 1
  5. Outside of there being an undercover Trumper on the jury who deems all of the evidence as "fake news", this should be a pretty quick deliberation, right? 


    no guarantees at all in jury trials. they’ll oftentimes come up with shit you never thought of and wasn’t introduced into evidence.

    the craziest, most unpredictable shit happens in jury rooms.
    • Like 1
  6. gotta say that as a prosecutor who has the white collar crime docket, it’s pretty unusual for the D to not put on any witnesses. it tells me that they’re deathly afraid of cross of their witnesses...which i get knowing how much info the DOJ has...and decided to ride or die on the government’s case in chief.

    it’s a helluva dice roll. we’ll see...

    love this shit.

    • Like 1
  7. I'm going with GOLL.  There's a lot of stuff for them to go through, and I imagine the verdict form is pretty long and complicated too (just a WAG).  I would be shocked if they come back before Thursday.


    this...plus there’s a lot of documentary evidence introduced and i suspect they’ll want to appear to get it right. but normal life calls...

    Friday afternoon.
  8. I'm going with GOLL.  There's a lot of stuff for them to go through, and I imagine the verdict form is pretty long and complicated too (just a WAG).  I would be shocked if they come back before Thursday.


    this...plus there’s a lot of documentary evidence introduced and i suspect they’ll want to appear to get it right. but normal life calls...

    Friday afternoon.
  9. 23 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    Depends. In general, in a criminal case?  Sometimes, it's the smart play.  The prosecution has the burden of proof, and it's a high one -- gotta be beyond a reasonable doubt.  There's plenty of cases where "poke enough holes in their story and evidence" can get you an acquittal.

    I don't think it will be the case here....but it still might have been the best play they had (which means all the other plays were even worse).

    There's three possible outcomes for Manafort going through the criminal process:

    1 - flip and take a good deal.

    2 -- be convicted, sentenced, and die in prison.

    3 -- be convicted, sentenced, and be pardoned by Trump.

    Oh, and of course, option 4 -- be tried and acquitted.  But based on the evidence we've seen, that seems to be a real long shot, and Manafort's team would know that.

    Why wouldn't he take option 1, when he KNOWS the evidence is there to convict him?  It means he prefers options 2 or 3.  You prefer option 2 when option 1 means you die from Polonium tea.  You prefer option 3 when option 1 means you die from Polonium tea, and you don't wanna die in prison.  Which means that my suspicion is that Manafort's long game is to play for the pardon.  But man, I'm still guessing here.  Maybe Mueller didn't offer Manafort a good deal because he doesn't really need Manafort?

    Anyway, closing arguments tomorrow morning at 9:30.  Judge wants them done in 4 hours total, so figure the jury gets the charge mid-afternoon on Wednesday.  When do we get a verdict?

    Friday afternoon...they're not going to want to come back on a Monday.

  10. Ask Bill Clinton where he went to school, and he's gonna say "Arkie" every time, not Oxford.  Guaranteed.  


    besides not being a pig, this is a point well made.

    i own 2 grad degrees from an Ivy equivalent and a terminal degree from another school. hardly anyone knows it.

    look at my avatar. that’s all people need to know.

    as an aside, DAT ASS in that avatar didn’t exist anywhere in grad school either.
    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...