The Latest: Trump praises Manafort during jury deliberations

  • Thread starter Thread starter HCTC
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
dvdjs said:
By ruling in favor of the prosecution.
Click to expand...
On the motion to keep the case current, yes. But that had nothing to do with his statement that this is a political trial aimed at Trump. He didn’t rule against the proposition that it’s a political prosecution.
 
Last edited:
And people who have been investigated by the FBI without being charged should not be charged again because of their political activities.

The true “white collar criminals” in this are Strzok, Page, Mueller, Brennan, Comey, Rosenstein, McCabe; the people who abused their offices to advance their political agenda.
 
griz said:
Meanwhile, real families are hurt by white collar crimes
Click to expand...
Yes, like Papadopoulos, who is considering changing his plea because of the pressure that was put on him, and Flynn, whom even Strzok said was telling the truth but is charged by Mueller for lying to investigators anyway.

A thousand Manaforts (assuming he’s guilty as charged) won’t do the harm to this country that criminals like Strzok, Mueller, McCabe, Brennan, Comey, Rosenstein are capable of doing.
 
Would you say the same about a thousand murders, a thousand robberies, a thousand car accidents?
 
jagged said:
I am shocked that you defend someone accused with and admitted to lying to the FBI.
Click to expand...
Which person? If you mean Flynn, Strzok and other FBI people say he didn’t lie at all. It’s only Mueller’s team that makes that claim. They threatened to prosecute Flynn’s son if he didn’t take the fall, so he did.

I don’t know the details of Papadopoulos’ reconsideration of his plea, but it looks like he might.
 
Ridgerunner said:
But that had nothing to do with his statement that this is a political trial aimed at Trump.
Click to expand...
We know that the judge prodded and probed the prosecutors with theses ideas.
We know that in the aftermath of the responses he ruled to proceed.
Whether that ruling was made because he felt that the defense acquitted itself properly in response o a devil’s advocate argument, or that the ideas were simply irrelevant to the justice of the prosecution we don’t know.
To assert that the remarks represent a conclusion oft he judge about the case is just made up stuff.
 
jagged said:
I am shocked that you defend someone accused with and admitted to lying to the FBI.
Click to expand...
But what if he didn’t actually lie?

What if he could not afford the number of lawyers to meet with prosecutors the number of times required.

What if prosecutors threatened a family member?

What if prosecutors used fake data? … like the so-called “dossier” paid for by Hillary Clinton as political campaign material?
 
dvdjs said:
To assert that the remarks represent a conclusion oft he judge about the case is just made up stuff.
Click to expand...
He said it, on the record and in open court. Judges rarely do that unless they mean what they’re saying. He meant it because it’s obvious.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Judges rarely do that unless they mean what they’re saying. He meant it because it’s obvious.
Click to expand...
In case you haven’t notices, This judge has a courtroom demeanor that is a bit unconventional. That includes making statements that were mistaken an required curative undoing.
 
dvdjs said:
In case you haven’t notices, This judge has a courtroom demeanor that is a bit unconventional. That includes making statements that were mistaken an required curative undoing.
Click to expand...
he didn’t “cure” that one. He meant it, and it’s true. Even you don’t deny that the Manafort prosecution is aimed at Trump.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top