Forum: Political Forum - Spirited Political comedy. All serious political and World Event posting is also to be posted in this forum.

Thread: New ruling: Manafort's effort to dodge federal charges just landed him in twice as much trouble, nice CALL, schmucks!

  1. #1 New ruling: Manafort's effort to dodge federal charges just landed him in twice as much trouble, nice CALL, schmucks! 
    RX Wizard
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    bronx, ny
    Posts
    9,573
    https://www.dailykos.com/stories/201...tail=emaildkre

    "We could think of it, albeit imprecisely, as splitting, in Black Jack terms." No, more like splitting 2 fives, lol. Nice CALL, A Sap Sucker, See-less, Sheriff Jagoff, and Witless Willie .

    New ruling: Manafort's effort to dodge federal charges just landed him in twice as much trouble




    Rebecca Pilar Buckwalter Poza
    Daily Kos Staff

    Tuesday May 15, 2018 2:53 PM PDT

    Special Counsel Bob Mueller leveled charges against former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort in federal courts in both D.C. and Virginia. Together, the two cases span 30 charges. The latest development in the D.C. case proves just how unlikely Manafort’s attempt to get the Virginia charges dropped is to succeed. Instead, he’ll likely to have to defend himself in two districts.
    In both cases, Manafort’s argued that Mueller exceeded the scope of his authority. Manafort refused to allow the cases to be consolidated in D.C., where he faces money-laundering and illegal lobbying charges, in hopes that his argument would fare better in the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. We could think of it, albeit imprecisely, as splitting, in Black Jack terms.

    Unfortunately for Manafort, while the Virginia judge indicated he’s receptive to the jurisdictional argument, he was careful to say he’s not decided either way. Problem for Manafort is that the judge’s tirade signaling his hostility to Mueller’s case probably constituted reversible error; an adverse ruling isn’t likely to hold up on appeal.
    Now, the District Court for the District of Columbia’s judge Amy Berman Jackson has not just eviscerated Manafort’s argument but done so in an extensive, extremely quotable salvo equally applicable to his Virginia case.
    Judge Berman Jackson notes that even if “a judge” ruled that Manafort can challenge the scope of Mueller’s authority based on Special Counsel Regulations, which are internal to the Department of Justice and not something Manafort can sue under, those Regulations still don’t help Manafort.
    [T]he Acting Attorney General … exercised his statutory authority to authorize the Special Counsel to investigate not only “links and/or coordination,” but also, “any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.”
    Manafort seems likely to end up fighting charges in two jurisdictions in separate proceedings, which’s gotta be less cost and time efficient, especially if he’s bringing lawyers in from D.C. for every appearance. On the other hand, it could buy him time if his backup goal is to prolong the proceedings as long as possible.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2 Ethics office to doj: cohen payment may be relevant to "any inquiry you may be pursuing" and Dump caught in another lie 
    RX Wizard
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    bronx, ny
    Posts
    9,573
    Lol, still think Mueller is exceeding his powers?

    Trump disclosure of Cohen payment raises new legal questions


    • By BERNARD CONDON AND TAMI ABDOLLAH, ASSOCIATED PRESS

    NEW YORK — May 16, 2018, 3:47 PM ET

    President Donald Trump made no mention in his financial disclosure report Wednesday of a $130,000 payment to porn star Stormy Daniels to keep quiet about an alleged affair, but said in a footnote that he "fully reimbursed" his personal attorney for as much $250,000 for unspecified "expenses."The head of the nation's ethics office questioned why Trump didn't include this in last year's disclosure and passed along his concerns to federal prosecutors."I am providing both reports to you because you may find the disclosure relevant to any inquiry you may be pursuing," Office of Government Ethics Acting Director David Apol wrote to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.Watch Now


    Apol wrote that he considers Trump's payment to Cohen as a payment on a loan, and that it was required to be disclosed in Trump's June 2017 disclosure. Ethics experts said that if that money was a loan and knowingly and willfully not disclosed, Trump could be in violation of ethics laws, a violation for which others have been prosecuted."This is a big deal and unprecedented. No President has been previously subject to any referral by (Office of Government Ethics) to DOJ as a result of having failed to report an item on their public financial disclosure report," said Virginia Canter, a former ethics official in the Clinton and Obama White Houses who is now with the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.How Trump dealt with the Stormy Daniels payment in his disclosure has been closely watched, particularly after his attorney Rudy Giuliani gave interviews earlier this month saying the president had repaid Cohen, a payment that had not shown up in Trump's report last year.In a footnote in tiny type on page 45 of his 92-page disclosure, Trump said he reimbursed Cohen for "expenses" ranging from $100,001 to $250,000. The report said the president did not have to disclose the payment but was doing so "in the interest of transparency."Daniels' lawyer Michael Avenatti tweeted, "Mr. Trump's disclosure today conclusively proves that the American people were deceived." ... "This was NOT an accident and it was not isolated. Cover-ups should always matter."The footnote appears in a report giving the first extended look at Trump's income from his properties since he became president. The report shows he took in $75 million from his Miami golf course and resort last year, $25 million at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida and $15 million from his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey.All those 12-month figures are down from the president's previous report, but that earlier one covered about 14 months so it is not comparable.When Trump took office, he refused to fully divest from his global business, instead putting his assets in a trust controlled by his two sons and a senior executive. Trump can take back control of the trust at any time and he's allowed to withdraw cash from it as he pleases.



    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •