US v Manafort

Post Reply
User avatar
Sean Hayden
Microagressor
Posts: 17879
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:55 pm
About me: recovering humanist
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Sean Hayden » Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:20 pm

Maybe what bugs me is this insistence and my inability to believe you that you're defending these principles rather than using them to avoid harmful political fallout.

I mean it's well known that in the real word innocent people are routinely pressured by the state through their associations with criminals. In fact being found to associate with criminals, especially anything resembling organized crime (..and it's not beyond the state to invent organized crime just so they can abuse this fact...), can be enough to land you in big trouble all by itself. It is not enough evidence or evidence of the right kind to convict in my opinion. But in the real world, it's evidence.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Forty Two » Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:45 pm

Sean Hayden wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:20 pm
Maybe what bugs me is this insistence and my inability to believe you that you're defending these principles rather than using them to avoid harmful political fallout.
Believe whatever you want. I'm consistent in the application of these principles, and they have nothing to do with political fallout. I could speculate that you like to ignore these kinds of principles, in order to rationalize a particular political point of view. However, that would be irrelevant.
Sean Hayden wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:20 pm


I mean it's well known that in the real word innocent people are routinely pressured by the state through their associations with criminals.
Absolutely, and I've made no secret of my staunch opposition to what the FBI does in these situations. If one is a middle class person caught up in a federal prosecution, you're fucked. It's a $100,000 in legal fees, and they make sure that if you don't roll, they'll put you at significant risk by over-charging the case. The truth of that doesn't mean it becomes fair when they prosecute Manafort.
Sean Hayden wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:20 pm
In fact being found to associate with criminals, especially anything resembling organized crime (..and it's not beyond the state to invent organized crime just so they can abuse this fact...), can be enough to land you in big trouble all by itself. It is not enough evidence or evidence of the right kind to convict in my opinion. But in the real world, it's evidence.
I'm glad to hear you acknowledge that the good, hardworking FBI and other federal officials, toiling thanklessly away to keep us all safe, are nevertheless willing to "invent" things in order to gain a prosecution. Might even be that where a big fish or whale can be caught, such inventions are even more likely, and perhaps even politics can play a part....
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
Sean Hayden
Microagressor
Posts: 17879
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:55 pm
About me: recovering humanist
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Sean Hayden » Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:57 pm

Forty Two wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:45 pm
Sean Hayden wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:20 pm
Maybe what bugs me is this insistence and my inability to believe you that you're defending these principles rather than using them to avoid harmful political fallout.
Believe whatever you want. I'm consistent in the application of these principles, and they have nothing to do with political fallout. I could speculate that you like to ignore these kinds of principles, in order to rationalize a particular political point of view. However, that would be irrelevant.
Sean Hayden wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:20 pm


I mean it's well known that in the real word innocent people are routinely pressured by the state through their associations with criminals.
Absolutely, and I've made no secret of my staunch opposition to what the FBI does in these situations. If one is a middle class person caught up in a federal prosecution, you're fucked. It's a $100,000 in legal fees, and they make sure that if you don't roll, they'll put you at significant risk by over-charging the case. The truth of that doesn't mean it becomes fair when they prosecute Manafort.
Sean Hayden wrote:
Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:20 pm
In fact being found to associate with criminals, especially anything resembling organized crime (..and it's not beyond the state to invent organized crime just so they can abuse this fact...), can be enough to land you in big trouble all by itself. It is not enough evidence or evidence of the right kind to convict in my opinion. But in the real world, it's evidence.
I'm glad to hear you acknowledge that the good, hardworking FBI and other federal officials, toiling thanklessly away to keep us all safe, are nevertheless willing to "invent" things in order to gain a prosecution. Might even be that where a big fish or whale can be caught, such inventions are even more likely, and perhaps even politics can play a part....
Hey, you tell me you're a defense attorney in Florida and my opinion changes immediately. :hehe:

I've always associated Republicans with the worst abuses in terms of state power. I could be unfairly judging you based on that.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Forty Two » Mon Aug 13, 2018 8:20 pm

I'm not a Republican. I'm no fan of state power.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
Sean Hayden
Microagressor
Posts: 17879
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:55 pm
About me: recovering humanist
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Sean Hayden » Mon Aug 13, 2018 10:53 pm

You just support everything but their religion then?

User avatar
laklak
Posts: 20981
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:07 pm
About me: My preferred pronoun is "Massah"
Location: Tannhauser Gate
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by laklak » Mon Aug 13, 2018 11:00 pm

I can't believe anyone takes any of this stupid political theater seriously. It's ALL bread and circuses, y'all, the ones we see like Trumpy and that animated mummy Pelosi are just paid players. The real bosses are completely unknown to us lumpen mofos. They keep us distracted with political bullshit while they go about their nefarious business, looting the planet and probably raising us for meat.
Yeah well that's just, like, your opinion, man.

User avatar
pErvinalia
On the good stuff
Posts: 59295
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
Location: dystopia
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by pErvinalia » Tue Aug 14, 2018 12:04 am

Deep State, lak?
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.

User avatar
laklak
Posts: 20981
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:07 pm
About me: My preferred pronoun is "Massah"
Location: Tannhauser Gate
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by laklak » Tue Aug 14, 2018 2:46 am

awiens.jpg
awiens.jpg (47.4 KiB) Viewed 3053 times
Yeah well that's just, like, your opinion, man.

User avatar
Scot Dutchy
Posts: 19000
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:07 pm
About me: Dijkbeschermer
Location: 's-Gravenhage, Nederland
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Scot Dutchy » Tue Aug 14, 2018 8:31 am

pErvinalia wrote:
Tue Aug 14, 2018 12:04 am
Deep State, lak?
Nope Deep Steak. Ask the Koch Bros.
"Wat is het een gezellig boel hier".

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Forty Two » Wed Aug 15, 2018 3:48 pm

Deep State vs. Pure/Good/Right/Just are not the only two options. To suggest that politics doesn't enter into these things is a
Trick-or-Treat_1.jpg
Trick-or-Treat_1.jpg (61.11 KiB) Viewed 3022 times
rather naive view of it.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Forty Two » Wed Aug 15, 2018 5:02 pm

Defense attorneys rested their case without calling witnesses on Manafort's behalf.

"The reason Mr Manafort put on no witnesses in his defense is that his lawyers and he believed that they created doubt through their examination of the government's witnesses," said Jacob S. Frenkel, a former US federal prosecutor and partner at Dickinson Wright law firm.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/lawyers-begi ... 11909.html
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 37953
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Brian Peacock » Wed Aug 15, 2018 9:31 pm

So you're of the opinion that the trial and the investigation that led to it are not legitimate proceedings?
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Forty Two » Wed Aug 15, 2018 9:54 pm

Brian Peacock wrote:
Wed Aug 15, 2018 9:31 pm
So you're of the opinion that the trial and the investigation that led to it are not legitimate proceedings?
I wouldn't say it's black and white. I have no illusions that Manafort may well be a tax evader and money launderer. That's not uncommon in the circles he traveled in. My suspicion is that the investigation is at bottom based, at least in part, on political machinations and political bias.

I don't think the Manafort trial has anything to do with Trump/Russia. It's a money laundering and tax evasion case involving allegations from 2007 to 2014. However, it's portrayed as somehow a problem for Trump. And, I think that has been the intent. I also think that the prosecution was, at the outset, in part at least, a tool to try to get manafort to flip, which is why they went after him, and which is why they turned up the heat and put him in solitary confinement. Such pressure is not a conspiracy theory - it's a time-honored tactic of prosecutors.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
pErvinalia
On the good stuff
Posts: 59295
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
Location: dystopia
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by pErvinalia » Wed Aug 15, 2018 11:15 pm

Forty Two wrote:
Wed Aug 15, 2018 3:48 pm
Deep State vs. Pure/Good/Right/Just are not the only two options. To suggest that politics doesn't enter into these things is aTrick-or-Treat_1.jpg rather naive view of it.
The FBI are and Mueller are apolitical.
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.

User avatar
Brian Peacock
Tipping cows since 1946
Posts: 37953
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:44 am
About me: Ablate me:
Location: Location: Location:
Contact:

Re: US v Manafort

Post by Brian Peacock » Thu Aug 16, 2018 12:03 am

Forty Two wrote:
Wed Aug 15, 2018 9:54 pm
Brian Peacock wrote:
Wed Aug 15, 2018 9:31 pm
So you're of the opinion that the trial and the investigation that led to it are not legitimate proceedings?
I wouldn't say it's black and white. I have no illusions that Manafort may well be a tax evader and money launderer. That's not uncommon in the circles he traveled in. My suspicion is that the investigation is at bottom based, at least in part, on political machinations and political bias.

I don't think the Manafort trial has anything to do with Trump/Russia. It's a money laundering and tax evasion case involving allegations from 2007 to 2014. However, it's portrayed as somehow a problem for Trump. And, I think that has been the intent. I also think that the prosecution was, at the outset, in part at least, a tool to try to get manafort to flip, which is why they went after him, and which is why they turned up the heat and put him in solitary confinement. Such pressure is not a conspiracy theory - it's a time-honored tactic of prosecutors.
But there is a political dimension which can't really be avoided, and it's not a partisan one either. If Manafort or Gates' activities, their dodgy financial practices and tax arrangements, were known by some other party like, say, a Ukrainian or Russia operative, then they'd be ripe for influence and manipulation - compromised - and their respective positions and activities in the Trump campaign, transition, and presidency becomes a matter far more broad and significant than just a couple of potentially criminal fraudsters acting solely in their own interests and on their own behalf. In this regard the source of their income becomes every bit as relevant to the matter as what they actually did with it.
Rationalia relies on voluntary donations. There is no obligation of course, but if you value this place and want to see it continue please consider making a small donation towards the forum's running costs.
Details on how to do that can be found here.

.

"It isn't necessary to imagine the world ending in fire or ice.
There are two other possibilities: one is paperwork, and the other is nostalgia."

Frank Zappa

"This is how humanity ends; bickering over the irrelevant."
Clinton Huxley » 21 Jun 2012 » 14:10:36 GMT
.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests