Agreed. But juries can do strange things. I'm not sure if this trial requires a majority vote, but if so then one Trump fanatic could be a problem.
And while this strategy may blow up in their face, I suspect any other would have blown up quicker. It's hard to undermine the documents when there are so many of them and the sums of money are so large. Manafort's own emails don't help him. Claiming the case is unproved may be their best bet.
It will be interesting to see how the judge charges the jury and whether he empathizes the prosecution's duty to fully prove a case.
Their defense is that the prosecution has not proved its case, so no defense is required. It is up to the prosecution to make the case or the defendant is presumed innocent.
I suspect all that documentation will be key. They will try to make Gates the villain, but most juries will understand that Manafort and Gates can both be villains.
I wasn't sure if banks fell under state or federal law, or both. They are regulated by the feds.
I don't know about double jeopardy, but the charges would likely not be identical. I remember a few times that states charged people with violent crimes and the feds later brought charges for the same crime, but under a different statute.
Federal. But the legal-eagle pundits on TV say that Manafort could still be prosecuted in a state court for some of the crimes - namely, money laundering - because a state in which the money was laundered through a bank there, would have grounds for prosecution.
Doesn't know the difference between perspective and prospective, or rolls and roles? Okay, he's a perfect fit for this maladministration. Lock. Them. Up.
I'm a Mets and Jets fan myself, and a true indicator that I'm an "old", I go back to day 1 for each franchise. I grew up on LI and despite having moved all over the country I maintained the allegiances of my youth (sob).
So I know all about small joys, silverlinings and wait until next year/
If they are married and file a joint return, does that change the effective control? Or they file separately, but cross reference each other’s filing, in a way?
I mean, If they are married, do they not each effectively have 100% control? My wife and I had equal memebership in our LLC with us 2 members, and we together exercised effective 100% control in most ways, and if we did not agree, we each exercised full veto power over the other’s decisions, (which I rarely used, as I am not the accountant, she is).
Mmmm. I love perspective rolls with my morning coffee. Slathered with butter and difficult jam.
Agreed. But juries can do strange things. I'm not sure if this trial requires a majority vote, but if so then one Trump fanatic could be a problem.
And while this strategy may blow up in their face, I suspect any other would have blown up quicker. It's hard to undermine the documents when there are so many of them and the sums of money are so large. Manafort's own emails don't help him. Claiming the case is unproved may be their best bet.
It will be interesting to see how the judge charges the jury and whether he empathizes the prosecution's duty to fully prove a case.
I mean, those people want their weekends free, right?
Verdict tomorrow.
sure but it is also a case decided by a jury; their strategy could most definitely backfire and blow up in their Armani arses.
Their defense is that the prosecution has not proved its case, so no defense is required. It is up to the prosecution to make the case or the defendant is presumed innocent.
I suspect all that documentation will be key. They will try to make Gates the villain, but most juries will understand that Manafort and Gates can both be villains.
They would, wouldn't they. I only regret that I live in California and wouldn't get front row seats.
I wasn't sure if banks fell under state or federal law, or both. They are regulated by the feds.
I don't know about double jeopardy, but the charges would likely not be identical. I remember a few times that states charged people with violent crimes and the feds later brought charges for the same crime, but under a different statute.
Federal. But the legal-eagle pundits on TV say that Manafort could still be prosecuted in a state court for some of the crimes - namely, money laundering - because a state in which the money was laundered through a bank there, would have grounds for prosecution.
Seems like somebody is up Sh!t Creek without a paddle besides Mr Manafort.
Doesn't know the difference between perspective and prospective, or rolls and roles? Okay, he's a perfect fit for this maladministration. Lock. Them. Up.
A lascivious ostrich.
I'm a Mets and Jets fan myself, and a true indicator that I'm an "old", I go back to day 1 for each franchise. I grew up on LI and despite having moved all over the country I maintained the allegiances of my youth (sob).
So I know all about small joys, silverlinings and wait until next year/
If they are married and file a joint return, does that change the effective control? Or they file separately, but cross reference each other’s filing, in a way?
I mean, If they are married, do they not each effectively have 100% control? My wife and I had equal memebership in our LLC with us 2 members, and we together exercised effective 100% control in most ways, and if we did not agree, we each exercised full veto power over the other’s decisions, (which I rarely used, as I am not the accountant, she is).
OK, wait: then Perspective Roll = Paradigm Shift?
Perspective Rolls: something to do with film in a camera, and adjusting the swing and tilt of the focus plane? No? then i got nuthin.