No updates from the Manafort trial today?

akm91 said:

---

No updates from the Manafort trial today?

---

Court didn't reconvene until this afternoon.

There was no morning session. Only been going about 2 hours today

Gates will be called late today or early tomorrow

Quote:

---

Defense attorney Kevin Downing made the revelation toward the end of his cross examination of one of Manafort's accountants. As he tried to question the accountant, Cindy Laporta, about what he said was Gates embezzling from Manafort, a prosecutor interrupted, saying he should not be allowed to ask about facts that were not yet in evidence.

---

this could be fun

Got it! I thought it resumed @ 9:30 this morning. Oops!

FriscoKid said:

---

Quote:

---

Defense attorney Kevin Downing made the revelation toward the end of his cross examination of one of Manafort's accountants. As he tried to question the accountant, Cindy Laporta, about what he said was Gates embezzling from Manafort, a prosecutor interrupted, saying he should not be allowed to ask about facts that were not yet in evidence.

---

this could be fun

---

Meh, they can just call her again as a witness in the defense case in chief.

I am a crook and thief, but you should believe these other things I say.

What an incredibly weak, star witness for the govt. Mueller has nothing!

Bonfire1996 said:

---

I am a crook and thief, but you should believe these other things I say.

What an incredibly weak, star witness for the govt. Mueller has nothing!

---

Good point. The government has never used a co-conspirator to convict someone. Mueller clearly has nothing.

Sasappis said:

---

Apparently the only defense at this point will be to claim that gates is the only criminal and that he is flipping on manafort to save his own ass.

That may work except for all of the other people saying manafort directed the tax and bank fraud.

---

Reasonable doubt is all they need. Gates could have easily composed the story to ensure an immunity deal. The defense just has to make that possibility plausible enough for a juror or two and it's done.

Sasappis said:

---

Apparently rick is admitting he stole from manafort and that they were engaged in criminal activity together.

---

Wait a minute. Does Gates plea deal include his embezzlement?

BMX Bandit said:

---

Bonfire1996 said:

---

I am a crook and thief, but you should believe these other things I say.

What an incredibly weak, star witness for the govt. Mueller has nothing!

---

Good point. The government has never used a co-conspirator to convict someone. Mueller clearly has nothing.

---

Sarcasm noted. Yes, most immunity deals involve a crime. What I am reading is that gates admits to the same fraud as manafort, and stealing from him, which this case isn't about. I would imagine that erodes his credibility further.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Bonfire1996 said:

---

I am a crook and thief, but you should believe these other things I say.

What an incredibly weak, star witness for the govt. Mueller has nothing!

---

Good point. The government has never used a co-conspirator to convict someone. Mueller clearly has nothing.

---

Part of Gates' plea deal was to conspiracy, a critical factor in Mueller's favor.

But you have bear in mind that Gates also likely embezzled from Ukrainians/Russians. Or at least they might see it that way. And then he becomes Leo Getz.

So Gates gets a plea deal that will keep him from going to jail for a long time but Muller wants to send Manafort to jail for 100 years? How in the world is this right.

Sasappis said:

---

Bonfire1996 said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

Bonfire1996 said:

---

I am a crook and thief, but you should believe these other things I say.

What an incredibly weak, star witness for the govt. Mueller has nothing!

---

Good point. The government has never used a co-conspirator to convict someone. Mueller clearly has nothing.

---

Sarcasm noted. Yes, most immunity deals involve a crime. What I am reading is that gates admits to the same fraud as manafort, and stealing from him, which this case isn't about. I would imagine that erodes his credibility further.

---

Where did gates get an immunity deal? My understanding is he pled guilty to crimes.

---

Hence my question if he was never charged with embezzlement. I certainly did not see that in any of the three (four? lost count) indictments or superseding indictments. That he was facing an embezzlement charge.

So the assumption is that's the non-public hammer Mueller wielded to get him to flip?

aggie2812-2 said:

---

So Gates gets a plea deal that will keep him from going to jail for a long time but Muller wants to send Manafort to jail for 100 years? How in the world is this right.

---

Manafort could have gotten a plea deal

Yeah, but the only one he had to sell out was Gates. Gates isn't the big fish.

BMX Bandit said:

---

aggie2812-2 said:

---

So Gates gets a plea deal that will keep him from going to jail for a long time but Muller wants to send Manafort to jail for 100 years? How in the world is this right.

---

Manafort could have gotten a plea deal

---

Only if he had something to trade that Mueller really wanted or was willing to accept. You know how that works. If he doesn't? No deal.

Mueller knew he had a losing hand with Flynn, was all a bluff. Why he never even tried to indict him.

Yeah but they both committed crimes. Screw the plea deals. If this is what Muller is building a case on then they just need to get rid of this whole investigation. Just don't see how in the world it went from Russia conclusion to this crap. I lose faith more and more in our government as this thing plays out.

Manafort said he refused to cooperate in any investigation. So we really will never know what kind of deal he could have gotten since he didn't even try

Maybe he just didn't want to make something up and lie about trump. That's what this is all about. I'm sure Manafort is sleazy and he probably deserves what he is gonna get. He knew they had him.

BMX Bandit said:

---

Manafort said he refused to cooperate in any investigation. So we really will never know what kind of deal he could have gotten since he didn't even try

---

Nah, why would he do that if he could get pardoned? He could have played it both ways.

If I had to handicap this, I would put it at north of 95% that Manafort gets tagged for something. The question is what and how hard does he get hit.

scottimus said:

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

Manafort said he refused to cooperate in any investigation. So we really will never know what kind of deal he could have gotten since he didn't even try

---

Nah, why would he do that if he could get pardoned? He could have played it both ways.

---

Not sure if follow you.

Why couldn't Manafort cooperate & still be pardoned?

If guilty without a doubt, I'd rather Trump not pardon him.

Team Mueller member Greg Andres took over the lead when it came to questioning Gates. Established that Gates admitted to embezzling hundreds of thousands of dollars from his boss. Admitted that he lied to bookkeepers and tax preparers, falsified expense reports, and fabricated expenses that didn't exist, in order to "pad his salary". Admitted that he and Manafort failed to report foreign bank accounts.

Then Andres decided to get into a heated back and forth with the Judge over dragging along with irrelevant fluff. Judge told him to move along, Andres argued resulting in drawing out the wrath of Judge Ellis. Eventually Andres caved and moved along, but not sure how many points he scored with the judge, and certainly the back and forth with Ellis was a lot more entertaining than listening to Gates admit how he lied and stole from his boss and embezzled the company for his own gain. If I'm in the jury that's what I leave the day with, the prosecution arguing with the judge and that Gates is a lying stealing scumbag. Manafort's attorney never even had to object once, just sit there and let the show go on.

I personally think under cross, Gates is open and vulnerable, if the cross questioning is done just right. Keep Gates from elaborating and yes and no him to death.

The prosecution filed a late brief requesting the court to allow the FBI witnesses be able to read aloud from Manafort emails during their testimony.

Here is something I see as a misstep by Asoyne

Quote:

---

Asonye totaled up the taxes paid by Manafort between 2005 and 2015 that Cindy Laporta recorded on a spreadsheet as about $31 million.

"Is that less than $60 million?" Asonye asked.

"Yes," she said.

Asoyne said Manafort made over $60 million in Ukraine during that time period

---

To me this shows Manafort made $60MM +/- over ten years and paid over half of it in taxes. When you are trying to tie Manafort to tax evasion, amongst other things, the last thing you want to do is admit he paid over half of what he made in taxes, especially when it's a hug number like $31MM

The omitted sentence before your quote explains why "forgiving" a loan is income

BMX Bandit said:

---

The omitted sentence before your quote explains why "forgiving" a loan is income

---

Has nothing to do with my point.

Putting on the record out load that he paid the government $31MM n taxes, is not a good look. I doubt anyone sitting in that jury box has ever seen that much money and it will stick in their heads that this man paid more money in taxes in ten years than they will ever see in their lifetimes combined.

The fact that he made the money fraudulently I am not disputing. Just pointing out that saying that amount out loud that he did pay in taxes is a misstep.

Manafort making false loans from his own company he defaulted on, means nothing to John Q Public. Paying $31MM dollars in taxes means a lot.

Testimony from her last week said that what Manafort was doing saved him around $500k a year in taxes. It's a drop in the bucket to what he actually paid, despite the source of that income.