Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Options
1…172173175177178…335

Comments

  • Options
    #5222
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,236 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    everlast75 wrote: »

    Manafort gets 47 months.

    FFS


    On the bright side, it makes it a little more difficult for Trump to pull the "He was treated unfairly" card. Not that it'll stop him.


  • Options
    #5223
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,236 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    Should've planted some weed on him.


  • Options
    #5224
    TomOnBoard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,109 ✭✭✭TomOnBoard


    everlast75 wrote: »
    Sentencing guidelines - 19 to 24 years.

    He doesn't apologise.

    Prosecution says there is no mitigating factors.

    Manafort gets 47 months.

    FFS


    FFFFFFS!!!

    Feffing outrageous!!


  • Options
    #5225
    TomOnBoard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,109 ✭✭✭TomOnBoard


    mcmoustache wrote: »
    Just under 4 years for Manafort.

    He has the DC trial next week where he will be sentenced by Berman Jackson.

    Will that sentence run concurrently or consecutively?

    47 months!

    Jeez! What an absolute crock!:eek::eek::eek:


  • Options
    #5226
    EltonJohn69
    Registered Users Posts: 4,208 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    Jaysus !!!
    Ha ha what a joke


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5227
    TomOnBoard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,109 ✭✭✭TomOnBoard


    On reflection, this implies that the judge believed that Manafort did in fact adhere to the deal he had with prosecutors and that their assessment was incorrect (as far as he was concerned). Perhaps Judge Ellis felt that the defendant in the 3-piece suit deserved better treatment than would be allocated to a 19-year old African American from Washington ghettos charged for felony possession of weed!

    Judge T.S. Ellis III opined that Manafort had lived “an otherwise blameless life,” and that the probation office’s guideline sentence of 19 to 24 years would be “excessive,” according to CNN’s Shimon Prokupecz. Instead, Ellis gave Manafort just under four years.

    FFS! An Otherwise Blameless Life???? Like, sucking up to Putin is blameless?? Like, clear and obvious treasonous dealings with a foreign enemy is blameless? OMG! This country's society is waaaay more FUBAR than Venezuela, Saudi Arabia or whatever the worst, most evil country on earth actually is..

    Contrast all that with information provided via a post from Laura Coates that "FYI in 2018, #JudgeEllis sentenced Frederick Turner, 37, to a mandatory minimum of 40 years in prison for dealing methamphetamine: "I chafe a bit at that, but I follow the law. If I thought it was blatantly immoral, I'd have to resign. It's wrong, but not immoral." #PaulManafort"

    Mmmmmmm! Different strokes??? Like, Manafort's 19-year minimum guideline is excessive and Turner's minimum 40 is OK....?? WTF!

    Note: Paragraphs 2 and 4 above are straight lifts from tweets..


  • Options
    #5228
    KyussB
    Registered Users Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭KyussB


    mcmoustache wrote: »
    More Great News from Trump who just can't stop WINNING!



    Trump has fulfilled another milestone in his quest to be the most awesome God Emperor President ever by boosting the trade gap by 20% in just two short but unprecedentedly successful years.



    Trump promised us the bigliest trade gap ever and true to his word, he has achieved this in his most winningest display ever.





    I'm sure some of you anti-Trumpers will view this as insignificant or somehow misrepresented but that's only because you've been brainwashed by the mainstream leftist media and I don't care because I'm too busy winning.

    GO TRADE DEFICIT!
    Heh, first the budget deficit now the trade deficit...

    The US has only run a trade surplus for 5 years, out of the last 50 years. Its current account tells a more accurate story:
    https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/current-account-to-gdp

    It's the most powerful economy on the planet, and the whole point of maintaining that economic power is to be able to extract resources/wealth from other economies, without that costing a whole lot.

    That it does, quite successfully, and will continue to do so as long as its hegemonic economic dominance remains.


  • Options
    #5229
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,293 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    TomOnBoard wrote: »
    On reflection, this implies that the judge believed that Manafort did in fact adhere to the deal he had with prosecutors and that their assessment was incorrect (as far as he was concerned). Perhaps Judge Ellis felt that the defendant in the 3-piece suit deserved better treatment than would be allocated to a 19-year old African American from Washington ghettos charged for felony possession of weed!

    Judge T.S. Ellis III opined that Manafort had lived “an otherwise blameless life,” and that the probation office’s guideline sentence of 19 to 24 years would be “excessive,” according to CNN’s Shimon Prokupecz. Instead, Ellis gave Manafort just under four years.

    FFS! An Otherwise Blameless Life???? Like, sucking up to Putin is blameless?? Like, clear and obvious treasonous dealings with a foreign enemy is blameless? OMG! This country's society is waaaay more FUBAR than Venezuela, Saudi Arabia or whatever the worst, most evil country on earth actually is..

    Contrast all that with information provided via a post from Laura Coates that "FYI in 2018, #JudgeEllis sentenced Frederick Turner, 37, to a mandatory minimum of 40 years in prison for dealing methamphetamine: "I chafe a bit at that, but I follow the law. If I thought it was blatantly immoral, I'd have to resign. It's wrong, but not immoral." #PaulManafort"

    Mmmmmmm! Different strokes??? Like, Manafort's 19-year minimum guideline is excessive and Turner's minimum 40 is OK....?? WTF!

    Note: Paragraphs 2 and 4 above are straight lifts from tweets..

    Was this not the judge that asked the Prosecution if they should not be charging Manafort with treason?????


  • Options
    #5230
    TomOnBoard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,109 ✭✭✭TomOnBoard


    everlast75 wrote: »
    Was this not the judge that asked the Prosecution if they should not be charging Manafort with treason?????

    I just don't know. Judge Ellis has been something of a enigma since Day 1.. He was adamant that the Mueller team and the Manafort prosecution would be separated early on. He insisted on separation of Mueller probe strategy from the actual Manafort prosecution. From an early date, he said that he had not seen a need for the convergence between them. Ellis was adamantly against the use of unfettered power by the Special Counsel and regularly railed against its use in the case against Manafort, on the grounds of disrupting the checks and balances built into constitutional protections against one person having onerous powers in litigation (i.e. Mueller).

    So, this could be seen as Judge Ellis adhering to the law but using his judgement on punishment to smack Mueller in the face on an over- reach challenge...


  • Options
    #5231
    TomOnBoard
    Registered Users Posts: 5,109 ✭✭✭TomOnBoard


    Enjoyable and enlightening interview with Chris Cuomo and D.L. Hughley about R. Kelly..

    In the course of which, DL opined that the thing about the Manafort sentencing is that, in his experience, 47 months is what's handed down to "the black guy for selling a packet of gum!"

    Yeah, and they say the USA is the Leader of the World in terms of fairness and this is the "Democracy" that they want to inflict on the '****-hole countries' all over the world...

    Yeah, Right!!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5232
    Christy42
    Registered Users Posts: 7,931 ✭✭✭Christy42


    If you care about financial crimes you will try to stop them.

    It sends a clear message that the justice system does not care about them. It cares about low level offenders and punishes accordingly.

    It has been compared with the case of a black woman who votes in 2016 without realising she was ineligible (her vote was cast provisionally and never counted) and gets 5 years. Crystal Mason is the name if you want a google.


  • Options
    #5233
    kilns
    Registered Users Posts: 3,525 ✭✭✭kilns


    Again yesterday just proves how corrupt a country the US is. Plus Fox buried the sentencing, you have to scroll way down to find it past the many AOC stories which they seem to obsess about.
    The country needs a total reboot, starting with getting rid of PAC money.
    If the US continues to go this way, could we see a brexit type event in the USA. Why should California prop up the red low tax states who seem to hold more federal power


  • Options
    #5234
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,123 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Incredible, but not entirely surprising; there's no plainer axiom in the First World than the reality that white-collar crime does pay. There are certainly plenty of examples in this country of criminals getting away with paltry sentences because they were ... well, the 'civilised' kind of criminal.

    The only caveat is that I believe Manafort has another sentencing hearing next week, that's correct? If so, perhaps that informed the judge's decision as well.


  • Options
    #5235
    Gbear
    Registered Users Posts: 12,775 ✭✭✭✭Gbear


    pixelburp wrote: »
    Incredible, but not entirely surprising; there's no plainer axiom in the First World than the reality that white-collar crime does pay. There are certainly plenty of examples in this country of criminals getting away with paltry sentences because they were ... well, the 'civilised' kind of criminal.

    The only caveat is that I believe Manafort has another sentencing hearing next week, that's correct? If so, perhaps that informed the judge's decision as well.

    Given that he argued that he lead an otherwise blameless life with a hearing for sentencing from being convicted of conspiracy coming up next week, and his partisan behaviour during the trial, it sounds well beyond the realms of normal soft touch sentencing for rich people, and into the realms of outright corruption.

    It will surely be appealed.


  • Options
    #5236
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,307 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Gbear wrote: »
    Given that he argued that he lead an otherwise blameless life with a hearing for sentencing from being convicted of conspiracy coming up next week, and his partisan behaviour during the trial, it sounds well beyond the realms of normal soft touch sentencing for rich people, and into the realms of outright corruption.

    It will surely be appealed.

    Light sentence- why appeal it? You can't appeal sentence length in the US if you're unhappy with how short it is.

    The judge has also said his time spent in jail so far count towards the sentence, so drop another 9 months, I think that makes it 38 months total, a bit over 3 years.


  • Options
    #5237
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,444 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Such a f*cking joke. With any luck, his sentencing next week for his other crimes will be harsh, or at the very least not allowed to run concurrently, and it may be possible that Mueller retries Manafort on the 10 counts which previously resulted in a mistrial (which Mueller had agreed not to retry based on the co-operation agreement which Mueller says Manafort then reneged on).

    Either way, insane that that's all he got considering what the charges should have amounted to.


  • Options
    #5238
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users Posts: 14,368 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    Penn wrote: »
    Such a f*cking joke. With any luck, his sentencing next week for his other crimes will be harsh, or at the very least not allowed to run concurrently, and it may be possible that Mueller retries Manafort on the 10 counts which previously resulted in a mistrial (which Mueller had agreed not to retry based on the co-operation agreement which Mueller says Manafort then reneged on).

    Either way, insane that that's all he got considering what the charges should have amounted to.

    There was an American law professor on the radio this morning discussing Manafort's sentence. Yesterday, in court, he pleaded for leniency based on his current mental and physical condition. However, the judge noted that at no time did he express any remorse. The prof said that he is basically a broken man and that this may have been due to having been in solitary confinement for the past nine months. Interestingly, given Manafort's particular crimes, he said the judge had to follow precedence and went right down the middle in terms of leniency versus severity.


  • Options
    #5239
    aloyisious
    Registered Users Posts: 11,580 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    TomOnBoard wrote: »
    Oh, wait!! there's not going to be anyone standing against tRump in the Rep Primaries.... So there won't be any Rep Primary debates... Yes/No?

    So if it's a given (almost) that the presidency will (probably) switch to the Dems either next year - or in 2024, what will Mike Pence do? He - & his fellow believers - and the GOP have to have him in mind as a nominee to make the US MAGA in a way that Don Trump didn't/doesn't have in mind. Mike has to have presidential ambitions himself after 4 years of being a heartbeat away from the job.

    Will the GOP push him on Don as V/P again if there are no other GOP runners next year if Don keeps to his word to run again or will there be a backroom deal with Don to stand aside shortly after re-election and let Mike succeed him in office? The risk in that last is that Don may not honour any promise or deal he agrees to, leaving the GOP elders up ****s creek on the double.

    There's one thing I've learned about elections and that it's not over till the swearing-in is done and dusted.


  • Options
    #5240
    aloyisious
    Registered Users Posts: 11,580 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    Gbear wrote: »
    Given that he argued that he lead an otherwise blameless life with a hearing for sentencing from being convicted of conspiracy coming up next week, and his partisan behaviour during the trial, it sounds well beyond the realms of normal soft touch sentencing for rich people, and into the realms of outright corruption.

    It will surely be appealed.

    You mean by prosecutor?


  • Options
    #5241
    Hande hoche!
    Registered Users Posts: 7,528 ✭✭✭Hande hoche!


    Good for Manafort, I suppose. Imagine he will get a harsh sentence from the next verdict. Still Judge Ellis is an interesting character.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5242
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,293 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    Interestingly, given Manafort's particular crimes, he said the judge had to follow precedence and went right down the middle in terms of leniency versus severity.

    How did he claim that the judge followed precedent?

    And how is 47 months "right down the middle" when sentencing guidelines said 19-24 years?

    Just curious how he squared that circle is all.


  • Options
    #5243
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,236 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    It's somewhat straight down the middle if you take a logarithmic scale using powers of around 5 as a base (5^0, 5^1, 5^2).


  • Options
    #5244
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users Posts: 14,368 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    everlast75 wrote: »
    How did he claim that the judge followed precedent?

    And how is 47 months "right down the middle" when sentencing guidelines said 19-24 years?

    Just curious how he squared that circle is all.

    Dunno. I'm not a law professor. Essentially, he was saying that the judge's hands were tied. It was at the start of the PK show today on Newstalk - you might get it on podcast?


  • Options
    #5245
    Professor Moriarty
    Registered Users Posts: 14,368 ✭✭✭✭Professor Moriarty


    mcmoustache wrote: »
    It's somewhat straight down the middle if you take a logarithmic scale using powers of around 5 as a base (5^0, 5^1, 5^2).

    What he actually said was that "the baby was cut down the middle" in terms of sentencing. Rather gruesome Solomon reference.


  • Options
    #5246
    Oryx
    Subscribers Posts: 19,425 ✭✭✭✭Oryx


    Professor Moriarty wrote: »
    What he actually said was that "the baby was cut down the middle" in terms of sentencing. Rather gruesome Solomon reference.

    An interesting analogy to use, given that this judgment of solomon was given to root out the true mother by forcing a moral rather than legal decision. In other words, its not the morally right decision here, even if legal.


  • Options
    #5247
    amandstu
    Registered Users Posts: 3,464 ✭✭✭amandstu


    A high profile sentencing such as this seems to bring the legal system into disrepute and encourages little moral compunction in those who get comparable sentences for nonviolent crimes of far lesser monetary value .

    It would be interesting for such a like for like comparison to be shown.

    What was included in this judge's list of crimes? Did it include Manafort's part in sharing polling information with foreign (Russian) government agencies?That seems close to treasonous behavior to me and serious abuse of the democratic electoral system for monetary gain..

    Have I got that right?


  • Options
    #5248
    amandstu
    Registered Users Posts: 3,464 ✭✭✭amandstu



    "President Donald Trump has revoked a policy set by his predecessor requiring US intelligence officials to publish the number of civilians killed in drone strikes outside of war zones."
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47480207

    Is that counterproductive? If they can't be bothered to record efforts to limit civilian deaths in drone strikes the (1) it has the effect of indirectly relaxing the rules of engagement and

    (b) handing more credibility to the other side who can make specious (or genuine) claims and drum up extra support.


  • Options
    #5249
    Stallingrad
    Registered Users Posts: 4,159 ✭✭✭Stallingrad


    Interesting timing, with Isis using human shields in their last enclave. You just know that T wants to drop some shock and awe on them and obliterate everyone.


  • Options
    #5250
    kilns
    Registered Users Posts: 3,525 ✭✭✭kilns


    More good news for the US Ecomony just released. If Trump is to win in 2020 the economy is going to be his main playbook. So expect between now and then for him to do everything in his power to keep it trucking along.

    However in his second term he will most likely hit a huge bear market/recession and leave a huge huge mess for the 2024 winner but people dont think that long term they react whats in their pocket today


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5251
    Gbear
    Registered Users Posts: 12,775 ✭✭✭✭Gbear


    aloyisious wrote: »
    You mean by prosecutor?

    Yes.

    But with SDNY holding on to their prosecution because it might not be necessary, and a conspiracy charge to come, they might not bother.

    He's far from out of the woods yet.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement