Criminal law

“A Special Place In Hell”: A Single Juror Prevented Manafort’s Conviction On All Counts

250px-Hortus_Deliciarum_-_HellWhen the jury sent four questions to the judge after a day of deliberations, the defense team of Paul Manafort was buoyant.  It was viewed as a sign of skepticism over the case.  At the time, I took a different view and suggested that such questions can often reflect a single hold out juror and a desire to enlist the court to clarify standards.  After all, Manafort did not appear to be following an acquittal strategy rather than a hung jury strategy.  It was always more likely that he would face convictions across the board than a hung jury on all counts.  It is also interesting that the jury basically discounted anything Rick Gates gave them at trial.  It seems that there was unanimity from the outset that Gates is a dirt bag with no credibility.

It now appears that it was a single hold out on the jury that prolonged the case and resulted in ten hung counts.  In the meantime, a juror who must have been viewed as a defense asset on the jury spoke out in surprising terms regarding the guilt of Paul Manafort.

Juror Paula Duncan, who is a Trump fan, said that she did not want Manafort to be guilty but he clearly is a felon. Indeed, she told Fox News that Manafort “deserves a special place in Hell.”  The jury form repeatedly notes a vote of 11 to 1 and Duncan said that the female holdout would not be persauded by the jurors.  Had it not been for this one juror, there would have been a sweep of the counts in favor of conviction in the first day.

Absent the pardon strategy, that leaves Manafort with little reason for optimism going into the D.C. trial.   With Cohen flipping and David Pecker taking immunity, it is not clear if Manafort’s lawyer’s reference to considering “all options” would now include a plea.  The upcoming charges are a parade of horribles for the defense and, if they came one vote from a sweep in D.C., Manafort could be looking at a nightmare in the District.

150 thoughts on ““A Special Place In Hell”: A Single Juror Prevented Manafort’s Conviction On All Counts”

    1. He was leaving office and both elite and street-level Democrats forgot about it within a matter of months. They also forgot about all the other midnight pardons (including those to Roger Clinton’s cronies), about the finders-fee Hugh Rodham got for the pardon he secured, about Hilary purloining parting gifts from the furniture and tchotchkes at the White House, about the petty vandalism Clinton’s staff engaged in on their way out the door (e.g. pulling the ‘W’ key off computer keyboards), and about Linda Tripp being fired from her job on 19 January 2001. (Tripp opened a gift shop in NoVa and landed on her feet. Monica Lewinsky’s trajectory since 1998 has been mildly dispiriting).

  2. NEW POLL: 6 IN 10 OPPOSE PARDONS FOR MANAFORT (AND COHEN)

    A clear majority of voters say it would be inappropriate for President Donald Trump to pardon Paul Manafort or Michael Cohen, according to a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll.

    Six-in-10 voters, 60 percent, say it would be inappropriate for the president to pardon Manafort, his former campaign chairman. Only 11 percent say a pardon for Manafort would be appropriate. The remaining 29 percent of voters have no opinion.

    Even among self-identified Republican voters, a potential Manafort pardon is unpopular. Twice as many GOP voters call pardoning Manafort inappropriate (38 percent) as say it would be appropriate (20 percent).

    Edited from: “Poll: 6 in 10 Oppose Manafort Pardon”

    Today’s POLITICO

    1. Peter Hill – I think Politico only polls Democrats. See their polls for the 2016 election.

      1. Paul, you think America ‘wants’ Manafort pardoned?

        That seems unlikely since Trump’s approval has never risen above 43%.

    2. LoL. how many “voters’ Know or care who Manafort is? How many of them know the truth, as opposed to skimpy little tid bits they got from their lying MSM News source?

      Y’know who *really* cares about all this? Democrats and Never trumpers. Who all hate Trump – NO MATTER WHAT.

      Trump’s big mistake, which he’s been repeating for over 1 year, is to listen to the Lawyers.

      He should’ve fired Muller six months ago. He NEVER should have cooperated.

    1. inconvenient truth. normal corruption stuff, failure to comply with complicated financial laws, but no Russia collusion.

      Meuller still on the witch hunt.

    2. Spiked, because their guilt is ‘not’ related to Russia, the ‘Deep State’ excuse falls short.

  4. One juror will not stop the train that is coming down the tracks at full speed. Manafort will still have state charges in several states. There is blood in the water, and it will not stop.

    1. The statute of limitations in New York is 3 years except in special circumstances. I believe Virginia is the same. There were hardly any wire transfers after 2013.

      1. IRS is forever……….LOL….. one way or another they will get their money. I do have a question, if Manafort is so broke, how is he paying legal fees? Do attorneys take clothes as payment?

        1. Manafort’s lawyers have dibs on Manafort’s bail. And Manafort’s wife got a $10 million loan from somebody whose name I can’t remember.

  5. Only one juror understood that Manafort was subjected to a political “show trial” of “unfettered power”

    while the guilty communists (i.e. Bill, Hillary, Obama, FBI, Intel) go free entirely unscathed?

    Apparently, a majority of Americans desires the destruction of freedom, the Constitution and the

    subsumption of America by global communism, in which China holds dominion

    (i.e. Google succumbs/censors per orders from China).

    If meager statues are erected in memorium of the death of America,

    they will be torn down by the “Reds” presently.

    The enemy isn’t Russia; the enemy is China.

    Where’s McCarthy when you need him?

    Good night, America.

    1. George: do the “guilty communists” you listed included communist Japan, as claimed by Ainsley Earhart of Faux News? Exactly how does an agency like the FBI engage in communist activities, anyway?

      2. NUTCHACHA, so we can demolish the “Affirmative Action Privilege” you enjoy so much along with welfare, food stamps, quotas, utility subsidies, unconstitutional forced busing, unconstitutional “Fair Housing” laws, unconstitutional “Non-Discrimination” laws, social services, Obamacare, WIC, HAMP, HARP, HUD, HHS, lazy, greedy, striking public worker thug unions, etc., etc. etc.?

        Can we revert to constitutional American freedom?

        You’re not a communist, you just want “FREE STUFF,” NOT “FREE-DOM,” by the ton, funded by the money of all the people who OWE you and your ilk.

        Freedom terrifies you because you’re not equipped to win.

        Right?

        No, no, no, not NUTCHACHA, she don’t want no “free stuff,” she ain’t no communist!

    2. Get out of the day room before the attendants discover you’re out of your room. You know that your internet restrictions aren’t over yet. Now you’ll probably be placed on restriction again; you’ll miss bingo tonight.

      this is to “they found out I was hoarding applesauce again” georgie

    1. Sometimes they have to let some air out of the balloon to avoid bursting it. Weissleberg’s “use immunity” could be “damage control” for Trump–albeit, temporary.

      In any case, when I was a kid, long ago, there used to be a vaudeville act where a guy would try to spin five china plates on top of five pool cue sticks in a rack on a folding table. It was a nerve-racking, eeksie peeksie, white-knuckle-roller-coaster-ride of a sight to see. When you add to that the blonde comb-over, the Bozo boots and the Tweet-storming it becomes . . . [what’s the word?] . . . freakish?

  7. I have to admit, if asked to serve as a Federal juror in a case alleging tax evasion, money laundering, FARA, lying to federal agents, etc.. I would be on the lookout for arbitrary and capricious prosecution. Why? Because only a tiny % of such violations ever come up for indictment. Would a federal prosecutor dare ask during voir dire: “Do you have any problem with the fact that tens of thousands of similar violations go undetected and unprosecuted by the federal government every year?”

    I would have to answer truthfully, “Yes, unless this case was chosen randomly for investigation and prosecution”.

    1. pbinca, it might interest you to know that in recent years Republicans in Congress have dramatically cut the IRS’s budget. For that one reason alone Tax Evasion isn’t being prosecuted to the extent that it should. And Republicans seem okay with that.

      1. Peter Shill, criminal prosecutions are in the hands of the US Attorneys and the Tax division of the Department of Justice. While we’re at it, the IRS workforce declined by 13% over the years running from 2012 to 2017. That’s not all that dramatic.

        1. Spastic, those U.S. Attorneys don’t conduct audits that lead to tax evasion cases. They only prosecute in court.

            1. The numbers on the size of their workforce came from the IRS itself.

              1. Whether the cut is 13% or 23% (adjusted for inflation), why is the IRS’s budget being cut at all..??

                Any smart corporation would want to make sure its Accounts Collectable Department has the staff to ‘collect’!

                And since Republicans love to say how hawkish they are on ‘balancing the budget’, they should want the IRS to collect as much as possible.

                It’s just your basic Republican hypocrisy.

                1. Whether the cut is 13% or 23% (adjusted for inflation), why is the IRS’s budget being cut at all..??

                  First explain what the IRS’s mission is, what the processes are to do that mission and the measures used to determine if they are being efficient and effective. Then you will be prepared to understand whether it was a cut in their budget below what was necessary to operate, a cut to make them optimal, or just a good start to get them there.

                2. you obviously aren’t aware the mandate is not to “collect as much as possible” it is only to collect the correct amount of tax.

                  this is an old policy distinction lost on people today– like you— but CPAs lawyers and Treasury people still get it.

                  1. The IRS has made it well known that their budget is completely insufficient to interpret last fall’s tax cut and all the complexities that tax cut created. And during this year’s tax season, wait times for the IRS’s information line was at an all-time high.

                    1. Your reply is nonresponsive. Just as most of your comments are irrelevant.

                      You have that well tuned skill that many politicians have: use every opportunity to say what you want and unless you like the question, ignore it

                      what’s your day job?

                    2. You’ve never submitted a budget proposal or managed a budget for a government entity then. Every budget is insufficient, every office is understaffed and the workload is too great to meet the needs of the customer. If you’re not asking for more of everything, then you are already behind every agency that is.

                    4. Peter Hill – starving all parts of the government except the military and border patrol is ideal for me. 😉

                    6. Peter Hill – I am glad to hear this. I just did my 2015 taxes. However, when they owe you money they are less concerned about you filing on time. 😉

                    7. For the record I got audited this year. But everything turned out fine, thank God. Still got the return I was hoping for (after a long delay).

    2. That’s sort of like arguing to a traffic court judge after you got caught speeding: “do you know how many people actually speed on that road every single day and get away with it?” See whether such an argument would get you anyplace. You have Trump Derangement Syndrome. You catch it by watching Faux News. If a violation is “undetected”, then, by definition, it would have to go unprosecuted. That does not mean that the ones that are detected and are prosecuted are invalid. Nor is it possible for the IRS to audit every single tax return, just like it’s impossible for traffic cops to catch every single speeding driver. None of this has any relevance to Manafort’s guilt. Perhaps the most interesting thing about Paula Duncan’s comments was her description of the evidence as overwhelming. This is coming from a MAGA-hat wearing TDS victim.

      1. It’s funny when you talk about IRS audits. The only time in my 30 years of tax returns did I get audited just happened to be the same year that I told the census to shove their long form up their you know what. I’m sure it was just coincidence, right?

        1. “Paranoia runs deep
          Into your mind it will seep”

          I am sure the census guy put out an IRS hit on you and Alcoa makes the best hats.

          1. you’re rude. do you always mock people?

            you also have no clue how many taxpayers experience strange coincidences like that. but, I doubt there was a connection nonetheless

            1. You also don’t know if “jim22” is a real person or another of your wackjob-wingnut ilk making up stuff to feel relevant. Pro tip: on the internet, no one knows you’re a dog.

              this is to “sure, made-up, anecdotal evidence is convincing” kurtzie

              1. Marky Mark Mark – we are suspicious of your anecdotal tales of being an aging white male attorney taking sloppy seconds from the Federal Public Defender’s Office. BTW, were you ever brave enough to get you aging white a$$ out on the Federal Courthouse steps, where you supposedly practice and yell “I support Trump”?

        2. yeah it prolly was. life has a lot of strange coincidences like that., there’s something to it in the ether I think, seriously. irs audit teams are usually pretty busy and the computer tells them who to select

      2. you dont say that to the judge but you do say it to the prosecutor when plea bargaining. i have done so successfully numerous times. i am not a T & M lawyer but over the decades one makes it into court for friends and family tickets regularly and i have said something similar to this on several occasions. generally people are concerned about fairness, at least at the local level if not the federal

  8. No sane person, no matter how corrupt or criminal they are, would want to go to jail to cover for Donald Trump and his family. No wonder he’s freaking out about people cooperating with prosecutors.

    When you lose Pecker and the National Enquirer, you’re in some deep s***.

    1. And the Tribune pulled out of the merger with Sinclair that Don McGahn had worked so hard to foist upon what’s-his-name at the FCC.

  9. Correction: I believe Juror Paula Duncan was talking about Gates not Manafort WRT “deserves a special place in Hell.” This post says, “Indeed, she told Fox News that Manafort “deserves a special place in Hell.”” The Fox headline, “Mueller team’s star witness ‘deserves a special place in Hell’” Later in the Fox article, ““He deserves a special place in Hell,” she said. “He was just as guilty as Paul Manafort, maybe even more. I mean he embezzled from his employer.”” JT, love your blog, read your posts and some of the comments daily—thanks to all the reasonable and entertaining commenters (you know who you all are). Fox reference, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/08/23/manafort-juror-mueller-teams-star-witness-deserves-special-place-in-hell.html

    1. Quote the statutes which you believe Trump may have violated. Also, highlight the relevant section, and post the alleged physical evidence (not just “testimony” from convicted felons who lied) confirming the alleged crimes. Mueller is personal friends with Comey, a self-admitted felon who leaked FBI notes to the press, BTW. Comey and his entire family desire to impeach Trump.

      Did you intentionally ignore that no news source lists the above requirement? Do you think the DNC, the Deep State, Soros, and their MSM boot lickers/slave farm hands are not intentionally serving the public a feces sandwich, in which you are over indulging? Are you OK with the NY DA having illegally leaked all this alleged bad “news” about Trump?

      1. Thanks “counselor.” As a well-respected member of the bar (or not) who has toiled in the trenches of criminal defense for the last 30 seconds, I’m sure you realize that testimony from the witness stand is more than sufficient to support a conviction. So, I gather that you don’t actually believe that physical evidence is required before a convictions may be had; just as your irrelevancies based on whimsy later in your contribution are merely a reflection of your frustration that most of the country finds the day glo bozo to be a criminogenic, infantile, buffoon.

        this is to “but hannity made it seem so smarty-like” joey

    2. That particular juror voted guilty on eight counts but had reasonable doubt on the remaining ten counts. A payoff would have been more likely if she voted to acquit on all counts.

      12-0 on eight counts and 11-1 on ten counts? Congrats to the Mueller team – they did a great job.

        1. Yeah, probably, but then Trump makes it even more clear how willing he is to obstruct justice, Manafort will lose his ability to take the 5th so he’ll be called to testify, and he’ll also be indicted on state crimes.

    3. Yeah, because it’s so easy to secretly accept enough money to justify risking 15 years behind bars, dealing with a total stranger who might as well be an FBI plant, right?

      What have you and your MD determined is the best Rx for your case of TDS?

  12. Pingback: Manafort and Cohen | Lawyers on Strike

  13. TRUMP HINTS HE WILL PARDON MANAFORT

    FAILS TO GRASP IT IS ‘HIS’ JUSTICE DEPARTMENT

    White House aides have grown increasingly concerned that Trump will pardon Manafort and are moving to stop it.

    “To suggest Manafort was brave for not making a deal and going to trial in the face of what the president thinks are unfair charges is astonishing when it’s the executive branch that is doing this,” said Mary McCord, a former longtime national security prosecutor at Justice. “Does he realize it’s his Justice Department?”

    Trump has told close advisers he sees the Russia probe and related investigations as a political issue for him and that he needs Republicans to stick close no matter what Mueller finds. He says his frequent “witch hunt!” tweets are sinking into the public vernacular.

    Advisers acknowledged that this week marked a notable escalation of Trump’s fight with Justice and said his anger is likely to increase as he watches the probe continue to expand.

    “The president has not a whit of respect for institutions, whether it’s the DOJ or the Fed or the FBI,” said one former senior administration official. “If you are a threat to him, he is going to try to kill you.”

    Edited from: “Critics Fear Trump’s Attacks Are Doing Lasting Damage To Justice System”

    THE WASHINGTON POST, 11/23/18

    1. “Does he realize it’s his Justice Department?”

      It’s his executive branch agencies and the idiots on the Left want him to stop whining about them and take ownership. Hmmm, I’m not so sure they’ve thought this all the way through.

      There’s already enough evidence of crimes committed by Clinton/Obama/DNC/DWS/FBI/DOJ/IRS, that he instruct his AG to indict and prosecute. If he won’t, then fire him and get an AG that will. Oh, you say prove it? Sure thing. I’m sure with the entanglements with Russian entities with regard to alleged hacking of emails, $500k speeches in Russia and funneling of money in the Clinton Foundation, there should be a way to get something past FISC to spy on these people. Then of course who really needs evidence of actual crimes. All we really need is the idea of a crime and then go fishing. Of course he’ll need to get the FEC and IRS involved. Start looking at all the Democrat donors for violations and stop all the 501c3’s abusing that process. The FCC needs to really crackdown on those entities promoting hate in America, especially towards this administration. He should also take away security clearances of anyone his agencies deem a risk to national security. He’s also got plenty of other agencies that need to do a thorough review of those entities putting our nation at risk. Time for some early morning wakeup calls by the Feds.

      Alrighty then. That should be a good start. Let’s go for it. If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em. We’ll get back to that whole constitution, Bill of Rights, Separation of Powers thingy later when we get back on course.

      Ready, Go.

        1. Really? Would you prefer ALL CAPS? Here’s a reading comprehension tip:
          1. Open your mind
          2. Read one sentence at a time.
          3. Do not move on to the next sentence until you understand the current one.
          4. When you are unable to understand a sentence, then ask for clarity. (be specific about what you don’t understand)
          5. Repeat steps 1 through 4 until you’ve comprehended the entire post.

          Then you’re ready to provide a response.

          1. No, Olly, your writing is just overly general. You’re just throwing at the wall anything you can grab and hoping something sticks.

            1. No Peter, overly general is an intellectually lazy response.

              You had a perfectly reasonable point in your initial response and I addressed how you and I could bring clarity for you. Now what you’ve done is exposed yourself as a narrow-minded buffoon unwilling to do the hard work necessary to arrive at the truth.

              My post didn’t claim the truth; it was an opinion. You see through Q&A, reasonable people are able to get clarity, confirm opinions, or develop new understandings. Unreasonable people however have no desire for clarity, their opinions are formed and their minds closed.

              That Peter would be you. That is pathetic and that makes you an absolute waste of time on this blog.

              1. Well Olly you don’t seem to understand that it ‘is’ Trump’s Justice Department. And you think ‘I’ can’t grasp details..??

                1. Well Olly you don’t seem to understand that it ‘is’ Trump’s Justice Department.

                  Wow! Did you eat paint chips as a child?

                  My original post said the following:

                  It’s his executive branch agencies and the idiots on the Left want him to stop whining about them and take ownership. Hmmm, I’m not so sure they’ve thought this all the way through.

                  Yes, not only do you not grasp details, you blow right by them. Perhaps that’s why you use ALL CAPS in your posts, because you need them to get your attention, so you believe everyone needs them too.

                  Here try this: GFY.

      2. Olly: unlike Faux News, there is no need for any media outlet to promote hate for Trump and his administration. All they have done is report the facts. It is Faux News that is promoting false “alternative facts” about Trump, who is self-destructing before our very eyes. He was so insanely jealous that a black man not only won the Presidency twice, but had high approval ratings and was successful, that he had to go for the big prize. He thought that once he cheated to get the title of “leader of the free world”, that people would bow down to him, kiss his big, fat ass, hold parades and name buildings in his honor and that other world leaders would curtsey to him. Instead, he proves every single day how incompetent he is, how he is lacking in substance and interpersonal skills, and that he is so paranoid and narcissistic that he needs treatment. A blowhard bully, serial cheater on his wives, crooked in his business dealings, nowhere near as wealthy as he would have people believe, ignorant as to how government works or what “separation of powers” means, unable to even maintain U.S. ties to its allies, much less strengthen them, unable to pass any meaningful legislation, unable to handle news conferences, and his spokespeople just plain lie and pivot. He goes after anyone he perceives as a threat by insulting them, falsely accusing them of ulterior motives, and his TDS victims, like you, Olly, eat it up, probably because you perceive his racist, xenophobic and misogynistic rhetoric as “telling it like it is”. That’s the saddest part: Trump feeds into the white paranoia about brown and black people bumping them from what they believe is their position of superiority. Trump has always been a lost cause, but TDS victims will continue whining and being bitter long after Trump goes down.

        1. Do you have a special crystal ball to have such insight into another person’s internal thoughts and motivations?

          Do you have a PHD in psychiatry and have examined him as your patient such that you are qualified to diagnose DSM criteria ?

          1. No need for a crystal ball. mental states may be inferred from a person’s words and actions. Juries do it every day. Pro tip: it doesn’t take a “PHD” (sic) to determine that a person wearing a tinfoil hat has issues.

            this is to “let’s talk ’bout anything but the day glo bozo buffoonish antics” kurtzie

            1. Marky Mark Mark – we have long known from your writing that you have a prostate the size of an orange.

          2. In between prolix emotional outbursts, she claims to be a lawyer / nurse-practitioner. I have a bridge vending business.

      3. Haha. Excellent. Thanks for checking in with today’s talking points regarding the mysterious “crimes” of “Clinton/Obama/DNC/DWS/FBI/DOJ/IRS” as propagated by Pravda Faux News. However–and regrettably–others have beaten you to it. So sorry for your loss.

        this is to “I tried to get hannity to tweet me early, but he won’t respond” olly

  14. I would have held out on every count. I don’t care if he is guilty and neither do Mueller and his partisan prosecutors who gave Gates a deal on a whim. Manafort is a pawn in the establishment witch hunt to get Trump. That juror should have made it a hung jury.

    1. If, as a juror, you failed to disclose during voir dire the fact that your politics would dictate voting for acquittal no matter what the facts, you would be subject to criminal prosecution.

      2. if you lied under oath maybe. if you were not specifically asked then not so much.

        have you ever even watched a voir dire in a courtroom? tv dramas dont count.

        1. Mr Kurtz – I have been through a couple of voir dire. Best one was when I got off a jury because I had a final coming up. 😉

          1. I am not a trial lawyer but I have watched. When my name comes up I just call the clerk and they save everyone the trouble and take me off the list. I don’t know if lawyers are “supposed” to be able to do this but I do it and so do a lot of lawyers i Know and nobody cares.

            Nobody wants me on a jury you can bet on that. Independently thinking people are not well liked for juries. For the reason that you see, they can hang a jury then the system feels pissed.

            1. Mr Kurtz – The last actual jury I was on was by accident. Each side thought the other would strike me, so they didn’t want to waste a strike. Arizona has or had simultaneous strikes then. They were right, I hung the jury.

  15. The article suggests that there is something wrong when one juror holds out against the others. No. This is why there are twelve jurors and not some single judge. Judge not- least you shall be judged. They threw a lot of itShay at the defendant in addition to real evidence. The government has itShay on its ouyeah.

  16. But Professor, what were the options other than a hung jury strategy? This was Alexandria, overwhelmingly Hillary country.

    Now, you’ve got a guy almost 70 years old with no record and suddenly the government is very interested in prosecuting him on 18 felonies. With no record there’s the possibility of him testifying, but with the majority of jurors that’s not going to do any good, never mind the potential downside.

    The motivation for the prosecution is a viable argument, although a bit novel. But that’s not a jury argument, that’s for the judge and an appeal.

    And if you think the prosecutor’s motives are not a potential due process problem, recall Blackledge v. Perry.

    You’re being too hard on the defense here. There were no good options. There often aren’t once the wheels of the relentless prosecutorial machine get to grinding.

    1. And the one holdout juror is more a vindication of the hung jury strategy than the contrary, don’t you think?

      1. JMRJ – I agree with you. I think the defense strategy was to go for a hung jury.

    2. No record simply means that a particular criminal was never caught before.

      1. It would be hard to overstate how rare a criminal prosecution of a near 70 year old with no criminal record is.

        1. Manafort was living out of the country for much of the past 20 years. Besides, white collar criminals often go undetected for long periods of time.

            1. So what is your point, Don’t prosecute old people for crimes. Oh, I know, “It’s a witch hunt”, see how well that works.

              1. I think it can lead to questions about the propriety and motive of the prosecution, sort of my original point when I cited Blackledge v. Perry.

            1. Some major idiots are known as J.J. to their friends. Unheralded because most people are smart enough to see through it, there is the run J.J.

        3. Rare but in this case the charges about FBAR foreign bank accounts sometimes have lead to this, here is the program for amnesty. it’s a big dollar collection sector for the Service.

          https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-to-end-offshore-voluntary-disclosure-program-taxpayers-with-undisclosed-foreign-assets-urged-to-come-forward-now

          Remember Beanie Babies? that guy paid a ton

          anyhow the IRS had already passed on Manafort, probably a weak case, but the Special PRosecutor could plow an unreasonable amount of resources into it so he resurrected the dead case and got his scalp. woo woo Robert Meuller, pathetic jerk!

      2. in the eyes of lickspittle sycophants of the State, guilty until proven innocent i guess

  17. Twelve Angry Men this ain’t. The one lone juror is most likely back patrolling Trump’s rallies, hat and signs and all. The argument that this was not only about Manafort’s crimes but about Trump is valid in that the two are ultimately inseparable, birds of a feather. This lone juror, however, shows a distinct bias unique to Trump fanatics. This is the base upon which Trump has built his Presidency. The question is how many fanatics are there?

    1. You said, “This lone juror, however, shows a distinct bias unique to Trump fanatics…”

      Bias? Unique? Trump fanatics? My God, man, but you live in some weird delusional Universe where Democrats do not put on masks and grab baseball bats to whomp up on conservatives who dare to give a speech, or go to a Trump rally. Where Democrats do not grab the MAGA hats off children in restaurants. Where Democrats do not assault Republicans at restaurants and movie theaters. Where Democrats do not go onto legal websites and post hate filled screeds about Trump is the Antichrist.

      In short, a world where people like you and Nutchacha do not exist. Oh, how I long for such a world!

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      1. I wonder why Manafort’s lawyers didn’t present any of Fromm’s alternative facts at Manafort’s trial? They’re all relevant to the charges; aren’t they, Squeeks?

          1. Are you suggesting that the lone hold-out juror was influenced by alternative facts that were irrelevant to the charges against Manafort?

            If not, then how does your argument refute Mr. Basonkavich’s observation?

            1. Is English your first language??? If not, then I can maybe understand why you do not understand how I responded with facts to Isaacbanutzkovitch’s weird unique bias statement.

              If English is your first language, then I am sticking with the Syphilis Swiss Cheese Brain theory about you.

              Squeeky Fromm
              Girl Reporter

              1. Squeaky typically displays extreme indignation common to Trump supporters. Trump is ‘alway’ the victim. It’s a culture of victimization!

                In this context Trump supporters are morally justified for using the most mean-spirited language in attacking Trump critics.

                1. Thank you, Mr. Hill. You’re a gentleman and a scholar.

                  BTW, Fake School Girl and I have a history going back over a year already. When it comes to ugliness, I’m pretty sure Fromm’s face froze that way long before either you or I showed up here.

                2. Squeeky was reponding to Issac’s off point statements with facts. It is absolutely true Democrats do “put on masks and grab baseball bats to whomp up on conservatives who dare to give a speech”,

                  You must spend too much personal time with Diane for you are as bad as she is.

                  1. Allan, show us statistics documenting all the registered Democrats using baseball bats to bludgeon Trump supporters.

                    3. Some have shown videos on this and it is happening all over. You want me to do your research, but when I did it to show you how the Democratic Party moved further left using JFK and Trump as a metric you ran away after barely responding with garbage arguments that didn’t pass the laugh test.

                      Why should anyone have to prove anything to a coward who runs away as soon as proof is provided?

                      You aren’t called Peter Shill for nothing.

                3. I self-identify as a “caustic b*tch”, so I prefer that to “indignant.” Plus, b*tchiness aside, is what I said true speech or false speech. I prefer that dynamic to the nice speech or mean speech paradigm.

                  Squeeky Fromm
                  Girl Reporter

                  1. If “caustic b*tchiness” were a suitable substitute for sexual gratification, Fake Spinster would still be a frigid nympho, anyhow.

                    1. L4Yoga enables both David Benson and Marky Mark Mark – now that we get to it, since you have opened the door, I do think you are projecting. That description is a better description of you than Squeeky.

                    2. A frigid nympho??? Do those two things even go together? Once again, I question if English is your first language.

                      FWIW, I am happily and most contentedly frigid, and not a nympho in the least. I leave all the emotional and primitive grunting and humping stuff to other people. I prefer reading a good book.

                      Squeeky Fromm
                      Girl Reporter

                    4. From the Wikipedia article on displacement:

                      The aggressive drive – known as mortido – may be displaced quite as much as the libidinal – the sex drive. Business or athletic competition, or hunting, for instance, offer plentiful opportunities for the expression of displaced mortido.

                      In such scapegoating behavior, aggression may be displaced onto people with little or no connection with what is causing anger or frustration. Some people punch cushions when they are angry at friends; a college student may snap at his or her roommate when upset about an exam grade … etc.

                      Displacement can also act in a what looks like a ‘chain-reaction’, with people unwittingly becoming both victims and perpetrators of displacement. For example, a man is angry with his boss, but he cannot express this properly, so he hits his wife. The wife, in turn, hits one of the children, possibly disguising this as a “punishment” (rationalization).

                      Ego psychology sought to use displacement in child rearing, a dummy being used as a displaced target for toddler sibling rivalry.

                    5. L4Yoga enables both David Benson and Marky Mark Mark – yes, we all took Psy 101, so what. What is your displacement coping mechanism?

              2. In the interests of clarification, is little Miss Congeniality now suggesting that the lone, hold-out juror in the Manafort trial refused to find Manafort guilty on ten out of eighteen counts of bank and tax fraud as a counter-protest vote against Antifa, Democrats, Natacha and Mr. Basonkavich?

                  1. You’re a good man, Jay S. I apologize to you for calling Fromm names. The rest of them can go pound sand.

                1. Cute! But, no. Not at all. One of the symptoms of Syphilis Swiss Cheese Brain is believing in weird and delusional things, like say for example, that Trayvon Martin was a victim, and not a victimizer. Or that Michael Brown was a Gentle Giant.

                  Which, other mental disorders, like Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy, present those same symptoms, so it is hard to tell.

                  🙂

                  Squeeky Fromm
                  Girl Reporter

                  1. Fake School Girl said, “One of the symptoms of Syphilis Swiss Cheese Brain is believing in weird and delusional things, like say for example . . .”

                    That Clinton intentionally lost the 2016 election to Trump so that Comey could shove the dodgy dossier in Trump’s face after his historic victory.

                2. bettykath asked, “Are you suggesting that L4D is an alias for DJT?”

                  OMG. That would explain so much about whatever happened to Annie/Inga. Wouldn’t it?

        2. another reason defendants do this: to SAVE MONEY

          Yes, the witch hunt is in part a war of attrition, the Deep State’s unlimited pockets versus well heeled but yet limited resources of private citizens.

      2. What kind of world do you long for squeeky? Blood and soil? TIKI touches blazing in the night? Noose’s hanging from trees?

            1. I guess, if you’re the kind that likes whomping people with baseball bats. I don’t, but whatever floats your boat. Just make sure you don’t get Trayvoned next time you are out there beating up on somebody.

              Squeeky Fromm
              Girl Reporter

              1. Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter says: August 24, 2018 at 1:02 PM

                “One of the symptoms of Syphilis Swiss Cheese Brain is believing in weird and delusional things . . .”

                Like FishWings getting “Travonned the next time [FishWings is] out there beating up on “conservatives who dare to give a speech.”

                1. L4Yoga enables both David Benson and Marky Mark Mark – Squeeky really hit a nerve there didn’t she?

                  1. We’re in the late Summer doldrums, Schulteacher. We have to find novel ways of entertaining one another. Since Fromm broached the subject of psychobabble whilst practicing medicine without a license on a legal blawg, I figured I’d take her up on the psychobabble offer. After all, not even Allaninny could mistake Fake School Girl for a real doctor.

                    BTW, how is it possible that Paul C. Schulte is responding to Squeeky Fromm, Girl Reporter’s email notification thingy, anyhow?

                    1. L4Yoga enables both David Benson and Marky Mark Mark – I get everyone’s notifications. I pick and choose who I wish to engage with.

                    2. “I figured I’d take her up on the psychobabble offer. After all, not even Allaninny could mistake Fake School Girl for a real doctor.”

                      Unfortunately for you Diane, Squeeky knows what she is talking about and you do not. Though she might not be entirely anatomically correct about your brain disorder she is pretty close.

        2. blood and soil refers to ancestry and culture, the shared ties that bind a people. nothing to dislike, unless you’re fixiated on a war that happened over 70 years ago.

          unless you believe it’s better we are all very different, disunified and atomized individuals. so much easier for the powers that be to control, eh?

    2. A lot more than you realize. A good reason for you to retreat to the Great White North and stay in Canada, permanently

      1. Cyber-xenophobia is neither blood [ancestral] nor soil [cultivated]. Cyber-xenophobia is awfully Mopey, though.

  18. So far as we know, there’s no indication that the lone hold-out juror had been tampered with. I mention that only because of Downing’s comment about Manafort “considering all of his options.”

    1. And then there’s that indictment of Manafort for witness tampering coming up at the DC trial.

      1. And then there’s that unproven allegation against an unknown suspect who supposedly threatened Stormy Daniels.

      2. And then there’s the payments of $130,000 to Daniels and $150,000 to MacDougal.

          1. Excerpted from the article linked above:

            In July, Cohen released an audio tape in which he and Trump discussed plans to buy McDougal’s story from the Enquirer. Such a purchase was necessary, they suggested, to prevent Trump from having to permanently rely on a tight relationship with the tabloid.

            “You never know where that company — you never know what he’s gonna be —” Cohen says.

            “David gets hit by a truck,” Trump says.

            “Correct,” Cohen replies. “So, I’m all over that.”

  19. Actually they came 10 votes away from looking more foolish than they are but reached that level when they called in The National Enquirer. And not a damn thing to do with anything. All of that could have been handed off to a local court and removed one more feeble excuse for not doing their job at all. The investigation on the Special Prosecutor on malfeasance is going to be better watching how they get out of this one.

Comments are closed.