- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Judge slaps Mueller AGAIN
Posted on 8/3/18 at 9:55 am to TigerDoc
Posted on 8/3/18 at 9:55 am to TigerDoc
Did Manafort have a contract with the Ukrainian Party of Regions? Yes or no?
If so, how was the consideraion agreed upon, to be paid to Manafort? Is it the government's contention that US Law can dictate to a foreign government how a US citizen working on the foreign country's behalf is to be paid ?
I'm not talking about how the money was repatriated to the US, I'm actually addressing the money laundering charges. The government would have to say that Manafort's money was earned through illegal means, i.e. like drug running or gun running, etc. If all Manafort was doing was political consulting and it was contracted out, spelled out what his services would be, then Manafort can be paid in any manner that he and the Ukrainians see fit for activities done in the Ukraine.
American tax procedures and monetary repatriation, as I said, are a different story. As I said Mueller's case on money laundering, and bank fraud are thin.....a reach. The tax evasion is the best case. The FARA charge is a civil beef at best and lying to the FBI is a gratuitous charge that the government likes to stack on indictments.
If so, how was the consideraion agreed upon, to be paid to Manafort? Is it the government's contention that US Law can dictate to a foreign government how a US citizen working on the foreign country's behalf is to be paid ?
I'm not talking about how the money was repatriated to the US, I'm actually addressing the money laundering charges. The government would have to say that Manafort's money was earned through illegal means, i.e. like drug running or gun running, etc. If all Manafort was doing was political consulting and it was contracted out, spelled out what his services would be, then Manafort can be paid in any manner that he and the Ukrainians see fit for activities done in the Ukraine.
American tax procedures and monetary repatriation, as I said, are a different story. As I said Mueller's case on money laundering, and bank fraud are thin.....a reach. The tax evasion is the best case. The FARA charge is a civil beef at best and lying to the FBI is a gratuitous charge that the government likes to stack on indictments.
1
Posted on 8/3/18 at 10:04 am to TigerDoc
quote:
Right. Prosecutors are alleging that Manafort was paid in "loans" (not expected to be paid back) from money that was essentially stolen from the people of Ukraine (i.e. the money was laundered which is the justification for the money laundering charges he'll face in his Washington D.C. trial next month). The prosecutors are presenting evidence that Manafort banked in Cyprus and created multiple shell companies to both protect the money from Ukrainian authorities and allow him to anonymously finish laundering the money and avoid paying U.S. taxes by paying his expenses through the shell companies. He created fake invoices to justify intentionally overpaying various American vendors (who I assume the government will try to show paid him back), finishing the laundering.
All this financial stuff is going to put the jury to sleep. I'm sticking to my theory the jury cannot convict due to the complexity of the case.
Average jury is average American of ~100 IQ who is more involved and concerned in day to day life. The Cartrashians, movie reviews, music, beer drinking, sports, etc.. The Average American has trouble balancing their own bank account.
Somehow it is thought we can educate and explain all this complicated financial stuff to a jury, while the defense muddies up all the terms, and achieve a conviction.
It only takes 1 to refuse to be a political tool of the State. Manafort might, possibly, a small chance of, get convicted of some ancillary lesser charge: obstruction, FARA, false statement to investigator.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 10:23 am to Sidicous
Manafort is DS so I don't care if he vets convicted. Just shows how backstabbing/blackmailing the DS is. Sacrificing one of their own just to make trump look bad.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 10:57 am to Sidicous
quote:
All this financial stuff is going to put the jury to sleep
I’m pretty sure the jury understood the testimony of the accountant this morning.
“Mr Manafort did not disclose the foreign accounts”
I’m also sure they understand why Manafort lied to his accountant when the accountant was asked If Manafort had foreign bank accounts from 2010-2016
7 consecutive years to come clean with his CPA.... never did.
This post was edited on 8/3/18 at 11:01 am
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:05 am to Kickadawgitfeelsgood
So Manafort didn’t file an fbar. This is the evidence the case is based upon? I sure hope not. I do love your legal analysis, though? Where did you get your legal training? And why did that training fail you when you assured us all Kushner would be indicted?
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:08 am to BBONDS25
Well... there is that pesky bank guy waiting his turn.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:09 am to Kickadawgitfeelsgood
So Manafort didn’t file an fbar. This is the evidence the case is based upon? I sure hope not. I do love your legal analysis, though? Where did you get your legal training? And why did that training fail you when you assured us all Kushner would be indicted?...
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:09 am to Kickadawgitfeelsgood
Next Friday the suspense is building!
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:23 am to KiwiHead
quote:
I'm not talking about how the money was repatriated to the US, I'm actually addressing the money laundering charges.
I am pretty sure the money laundering charges are in the trial in DC, not this trial. It is hard to keep the two trials separate in my mind.
Anyway, Manafort already challenged exactly what you brought up, that a FARA violation wouldn't constitute illegal activity for money laundering. You can read the gov'ts response here
Judge dismisses motion
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:25 am to Sidicous
quote:
All this financial stuff is going to put the jury to sleep.
I don't disagree. And these are complicated charges, and lots of them. THis is why they are bringing in the people that sold manafort stuff, cause that is understandable and certainly more interesting.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:32 am to brian_wilson
Thanks for posting this. Wasn't aware the money laundering charges hinged on his alleged FARA violation. That makes the Regions work he did in the U.S. (and the witness tampering that he did to suborn perjury about it) that much more relevant (and yes, you're right that the laundering charges are in the second trial, not this one).
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:34 am to brian_wilson
quote:
THis is why they are bringing in the people that sold manafort stuff, cause that is understandable and certainly more interesting.
Ellis is keeping the photos of the merchandise (or most of them at least), from the jury, and with that the vendors seem especially important. Plus, the prosecutors have been asking each of them if they knew Gates (and none of them has), which is going to make it hard to argue that Gates was running this scheme and Paul was accidentally along for the ride.
This post was edited on 8/3/18 at 11:36 am
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:36 am to TigerDoc
I think Manafort is guilty. He was working with the friecking Podestas. Lots of people that work with them are dirty.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:37 am to BBONDS25
I think Weissman will come in for a "guilt by association with the friecking Podestas" defense in the closing. 
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:38 am to TigerDoc
quote:
That makes the Regions work he did in the U.S. (and the witness tampering that he did to suborn perjury about it) that much more relevant (and yes, you're right that the laundering charges are in the second trial, not this one).
The witness tampering makes him look guilty as frick. And it was about FARA too, and before the judge ruled on the motion.
quote:
The prosecutors have been asking each of them if these vendors knew Gates (and none of them has), which is going to make it hard to argue that Gates was running this scheme and Paul was accidentally along for the ride.
I thought one of them said they sent the invoice to gates, but the customer was manafort.
Anyway, I suspect he is manafricked.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:46 am to TigerDoc
quote:
guilt by association
Isn’t that what the entire Mueller investigation is really about?
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:48 am to BBONDS25
Nah, Bonds. Judge Ellis is a cranky old bird, but he's not going to put up with that. He's making these guys prove their case.
This post was edited on 8/3/18 at 11:49 am
Posted on 8/3/18 at 4:45 pm to brian_wilson
quote:
Anyway, Manafort already challenged exactly what you brought up, that a FARA violation wouldn't constitute illegal activity for money laundering. You can read the gov'ts response here
Judge dismisses motion
Berman is full of shite here and not following precedent. She knows it and Manafort's lawyers know this as does Mueller. If the statute were to be enforced like it reads, hen 3/4 of K Street and a good number in New York would be going to jail, including Mueller's former employer Wilmer Hale. Only 6 persons have ever been prosecuted under FARA and just 1 ever went to jail....and that guy was not a US citizen if memory serves.
Posted on 8/4/18 at 7:40 am to BBONDS25
quote:
So Manafort didn’t file an fbar. This is the evidence the case is based upon?
Yea. That’s all they got.
For a while there I thought the prosecutors were going to provide witnesses to verify the intentional acts of Manafort and Gates to defraud the US government, as well as, banking institutions inside the US.
Posted on 8/4/18 at 7:41 am to Jjdoc
This is a clown show with actual clowns in this thread defending it
Page 8 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News