The bank fraud charges should be the easiest decisions for the jury, based on the evidence and testimony. When a defendant fills out a loan application with substantially false financial information, gives falsified income docs / tax docs / asset documents to the loan officer, and then signs the loan application, that is an easy call for a jury to make.Quote:
...there is enough physical stand alone evidence to prove the taxes owed, they will convict him of that fairly easily, but the conspiracy and Bank Fraud will be tougher.
...and so was Hillary's misuse of top secret/classified communiques while Sec. of State, but we all know how the so-called Justice System handled that.etcetera said:The bank fraud charges should be the easiest decisions for the jury, based on the evidence and testimony. When a defendant fills out a loan application with substantially false financial information, gives falsified income docs / tax docs / asset documents to the loan officer, and then signs the loan application, that is an easy call for a jury to make.Quote:
...there is enough physical stand alone evidence to prove the taxes owed, they will convict him of that fairly easily, but the conspiracy and Bank Fraud will be tougher.
Quote:
MINUTE ORDER. The court has considered the parties' respective positions set forth in the July 24, 2018 [36] Joint Status Report, and does not agree with Plaintiff that separate briefing is required to determine the relevance of the President's tweets concerning the redactions made to the Carter Page FISA applications. The parties shall meet and confer about the exemptions claimed to support the redactions and, no later than August 17, 2018, file an additional status report with the court that sets forth how the parties wish to proceed and, if necessary, proposes a summary judgment briefing schedule. Signed by Judge Amit P. Mehta on 08/08/2018. (lcapm3) (Entered: 08/08/2018)
Quote:
The Mechanics of Deception
RoscoePColtrane said:
I wonder if she told them the truth eventually...or left them thinking Trump did it?RoscoePColtrane said:
They wouldn't believe her.Whens lunch said:
I wonder if she told them the truth eventually...or left them thinking Trump did it?
Once Page and Strzok got outed, Bruce Ohr ramped it the eff up. The FBI didn't include exculpatory evidence in FISC application. Congressional investigators are way ahead on this.Ellis Wyatt said:
Highlights? I can't get her site or her twitter to load.
What we already knew Ohr did is sedition. I couldn't want to see him face life in prison any more than I do.Bonfire1996 said:Once Page and Strzok got outed, Bruce Ohr ramped it the eff up. The FBI didn't include exculpatory evidence in FISC application. Congressional investigators are way ahead on this.Ellis Wyatt said:
Highlights? I can't get her site or her twitter to load.
http://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/401007-opinion-top-doj-official-discussed-getting-steele-back-into-fbi-mueller-probeQuote:
Months after being dismissed from the FBI's Russia probe for misconduct, British intelligence operative Christopher Steele discussed being reinstated with a senior official working for Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, so Steele could assist special counsel Robert Mueller.
"Whenever convenient, I would like a chat, there's a lot going on and we are frustrated with how long this re-engagement with the Bureau and Mueller is taking," Steele texted Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr on Aug. 6, 2017. "Anything you could do to accelerate the process would be much appreciated."
"Chris, good to hear from you," Ohr texted back as he proposed times when the two could discuss the idea.
The exchange - one of several in which Steele proposed a return to the Russia probe - has captured the attention of investigators in Congress and the Department of Justice (DOJ). Some of them told me they are stunned that a top Rosenstein aide would even consider restoring Steele to the case, and with good reason.
After all, Steele was paid by a firm working for Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) to dig up Russia dirt on Donald Trump. Then, in November 2016, he was deemed "not suitable" to serve as an FBI informer after being caught leaking information to the media.
Everywhere you look in testimony they all admit to it.Prosperdick said:
As has been said countless times but worth repeating....
They never thought she would lose.
Prosecution hasn't rested yet, might be surprising what the Manafort team pulls out when they start presenting their case.FriscoKid said:
Furthermore, if I were manaforts lawyer I would submit that Ohr letter into the court today. Call that slime ball in to testify. Talk about **** hitting the fan. I think Ellis would lose it.
Quote:
Rosenstein knew there were some old tax issues with Manafort because he didn't charge him 10 years ago.
Been out of pocket for awhile but I haven't seen any. Agree that doesn't appear to be accurate as far as I can tell.BMX Bandit said:Quote:
Rosenstein knew there were some old tax issues with Manafort because he didn't charge him 10 years ago.
Has Napolitano ever given his basis for this claim?
Seems like he said it, then it just went away.
LINKQuote:
On Wednesday, Ellis was at it again, dressing down prosecutors after learning that an IRS agent they called to the stand as an expert witness had been in the courtroom for the entire trial. Ellis argued that witnesses should be present only for their own testimony. Mueller's prosecutors protested that the judge had granted them an exception, but the judge a former fighter pilot who has spent more than 30 years on the federal bench was having none of it.
"I don't care what the transcript says, maybe I made a mistake," Ellis said. "When I exclude witnesses I mean everybody, unless I make a special exception."
