I think the Manafort judge is compromised

[helpisontheway]

He is probably a Trump supporter. I keep reading about his behavior as he attempts to undermine the prosecution. It is just strange. I understand that he will have to bend over backwards so Manafort can’t say his trial was unfair. However, that does not mean he should be allowed to take shots at the prosecutor. I’m concerned because the prosecutor can’t get a new shot at Manafort if the judge deliberately harms their case.

[spooky3]

1. It will be interesting to see if Judge Ellis does the same things to the defense that he did

to the prosecution.

It sounds as if the case is so strong (documentation as well as witnesses) that nothing the judge did will prevent a conviction.

And, the jury is likely not going to be influenced in the way that the judge MAY have hoped. Alexandria citizens are generally very well-educated and vote blue. They will put aside biases, etc.

[Jersey Devil]

2. You will see tomorrow when he rules on the defense motion to dismiss bank fraud charges

The judge has stated that if one of the banks was going to give Manafort a loan (in exchange for a cabinet post for its president) regardless of Manafort's fraudulent loan submissions, it may not be a violation bank fraud laws. The prosecution has objected and rumors are this was the subject of Friday's secret court conferences. If the judge does dismiss the charge his bias may exist. If he denies the motion then you can safely say he is just a curmudgeon.

[Loki Liesmith]

3. This is his usual behavior

[H2O Man]

4. True.

[Grasswire2]

5. I have heard pundits say that his actions protect the case from appeal...

....that if he were more supportive of the prosecution, an appeal would be easier.

[former9thward]

9. What you have heard is from "pundits" who don't know the appellate system.

Appellate courts don't care about personal remarks from a judge. That happens in every trial in every court. What they look at is legal issues and how the judge ruled. Either those followed the law and precedent or they didn't. If the ruling didn't the appeals court then looks at whether the issue was important to the verdict in the case. If a violation was not important it is not considered.

[Grasswire2]

14. Sorry, but NBC "pundits" are the most highly qualified and experienced former prosecutors and...

....defense attorneys and officials that can be found. With massive courtroom experience. I am inclined to trust the information they provide.

[former9thward]

17. No they aren't.

The "most highly qualified and experienced former prosecutors and defense attorneys and officials" are not on TV. TV commentators are there to drive ratings and fill airtime 24/7.

[Grasswire2]

24. well, maybe you would like to post your credentials here...

....so we can see how they compare to the career FBI and US Attorneys and other commenters.

[former9thward]

25. It is a TOS violation on DU to post personal information.

Why are you asking posters to violate the Terms of Service for this website? BTW do you ever see retired US Supreme court justices giving flack commentary on TV?

[Kali]

27. It isn't against the ToS to post your own info,

but it could be stupid to do so. Lots of DUers have posted personal info about themselves.

[former9thward]

29. The TOS says differently.

Don't post anyone's private or personal information

Don't post private or personal information about any person (including public figures) even if that information is available elsewhere on the Internet.

It does not give an exception for yourself.

[Kali]

31. Uh huh, sure thing.

So there is a parenthesis to include public figures but no mention of including one's self.

I guess that would be one major violation DU never enforces then, as a hell of a lot of us would be banned (or maybe even been given a warning). LOL

[former9thward]

33. There is a parenthesis for publics figures

so people can't claim they saw the information somewhere else on the internet. If no one alerts then no one cares. The owners don't look at every post and posting personal information is a stupid act which is pretty much self enforcing. I will not take the poster's bait.

[Kali]

35. I agree it is likely stupid and you have no obligations. (though to be fair, when making claims of

based on some expertise one might want to back it up to an extent - though again, no obligation to divulge anything personal)

I just disagree that it is a ToS violation. Heck we have had actual public figures post here and there are a number of minor celebrities/bloggers/writers etc. You are even permitted to promote yourself in your sig line and in posts (so long as you actually participate and not just spam the site).

[Grasswire2]

30. LOL

I think we're done. But your segue is noted.

[RockRaven]

6. He sounds like an arrogant jerk. But maybe that's OK b/c the jury will think he's a jerk too.

And then whomever he's giving a hard time to (like the prosecutors) becomes a more sympathetic party in the eyes of they jury. I dunno.

[nycbos]

26. You don't get to be a federal judge if your not a little arrogant.

I am sure a lot of them are like that.

[Grasswire2]

32. plus he's 78 years old

...and the rocket docket adds its own pressures.

[blueinredohio]

7. The Manafort thing was so widely publicized

I don't see how they could find anyone who didn't know about it or be impartial.

[former9thward]

10. Really?

So you know what elements of the law were broken? What were they? What was the evidence which lead you to that conclusion? Do you think if someone is arrested they are guilty of "something"? Please stay out of the jury pool.

[Grasswire2]

15. Why so overbearing?

Geez. Settle down.

[former9thward]

18. The poster said they know all about the case and could not be impartial.

Yet they don't know what the charges are or what they legally mean. Is that the type of person we want deciding cases? I don't.

[blueinredohio]

16. Are you always so sarcastic when something is said about a right winger?

[former9thward]

20. Who is the "left winger" here?

The judge? Manafort?

[Cicada]

8. Manafort faces a second trial with a different judge

Manafort May face state prosecutions also

[former9thward]

11. No.

He was charged with federal crimes -- not state crimes. The statute of limitations would have run on any state crimes in the time period.

[Cicada]

13. Manafort is alleged to have committed bank fraud and tax fraud in 2016 and 2017

A state tax return due April 15 2017;probably has a statute of limitations running at least until 2020. The federal statute runs seven years for understatement of income exceeding 25%.

For bank fraud of millions of dollars the statute of limitations is probably more than 3 years.


Predictit has the odds Manafort will be convicted by dec 31 2018 at 91%.

Looks bad for Manafort. A trump pardon may save him though.

[former9thward]

19. Bank fraud is a federal crime.

Not a state crime. State prosecutors do not file on state tax charges since state tax forms piggyback on the federal tax form.

[Cicada]

21. States in some states absolutely prosecute tax laws separately

In New York they have a double jeopardy law where they do not prosecute for crimes identical under Fed law. But state tax laws differ from fed tax laws so they always prosecuted under state law as well. But Leona Helmsley won on appeal citing their double jeopardy statute. That pissed off the state so they passed the “Leona Helmsley” law explicitly permitting state prosecution on top of Fed prosecution. I imagine there is variation among the states.

I did not know bank fraud is fed only. But I guess that makes sense.

[Cicada]

23. Illinois has separate bank fraud and wire fraud laws, kellyanne hubby says they can try him

Michael Conway, kellyanne’s husband, is a lawyer in one of the nations top law firms. He said Manafort can be tried and pardoned in fed court but still be prosecuted in states. The defrauded bank is in Illinois. They have their own bank fraud law. I do not know if they have a double jeopardy statute which saves Manafort.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

28. Minor point, but Virginia taxes are due on May 1 of any given year.

Yes. After you do your federal taxes, you can take a breather before completing your Virginia return. Your work is mostly done once you have your adjusted gross income from the federal form. Put that in the Virginia form and turn the crank. It's not much additional work.

[kentuck]

12. Also, if he would tamper with a witness....?

...why wouldn't he try to tamper with a juror?

Some people believe money can buy anything.

[bluestarone]

22. MY fear is

Someone on the jury bought and owned?????? Very possible for sure!!!

[ecstatic]

34. Yep. I pray that the jury members aren't being swayed

by his outbursts.