Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Paul Manafort‘s third day on trial over charges of bank fraud and tax evasion was cut a bit short on Thursday after government attorneys made the same mistake twice in a row.
...
Ayliff was mostly providing foundational testimony regarding the basic functions of a tax-preparation company. Prosecutors then moved on to specifics and attempted to “publish” one of Manafort’s e-file forms. Judge T.S. Ellis III‘s weariness all but amazed the courtroom as he denied the request–complete with an actual and pronounced finger-wag–before shouting:
No! You move it along!
Composing themselves again, the prosecution moved slowly forward before asking Ayliff to define the term “financial interest.” Ayliff began to answer the question but was immediately cut off by Ellis who noted that Ayliff was not a noticed expert. The defense then belatedly objected, prompting a quick and sarcastic dressing-down from the judge–but it was again the prosecution’s turn for scorn.
Basically from the article - the prosecution tried to use a non-expert to redefine what "financial interest" is - even though the two sides had already agreed what the term meant.
The Federal Sentencing guidelines set forth what the sentences are for each crime. What the "average" is has no relevance. The "average" speeding ticket in the US might be $100 but that doesn't help me very much if I'm pulled over doing 150 in a school zone.
If the charges are truly that severe can you tell me what this man was doing free and not behind bars during the 2016 election?
"Philip Ayliff, a tax preparer for Paul Manafort, has testified to the jury that his tax preparation firm received several emails from Mr Manafort and his right hand man Rick Gates assuring the accountants that they had no foreign accounts. "
"Mr Ayliff said Mr Manafort never told him he held foreign bank accounts and a lack of accurate information would lead to an incorrect tax return."
Can someone please explain to me why a 'Special Counsel' is needed to prosecute what appears to be a plain vanilla income tax evasion case?
This is just the first act. Any time you are involved in a production, you want it to build in intensity to a glorious finish. Mueller is a superb stage manager and director.
can you tell me what this man was doing free and not behind bars during the 2016 election?
In America, someone generally has to be charged with a crime before they are jailed. Often when they are charged they don't have to be jailed why they are awaiting trial. Sometimes even when they are guilty they don't go to jail.
In 2016 Manafort wasn't behind bars because he wasn't yet charged with a crime.
"In 1980, Manafort, Charles Black and Roger Stone (all Ronald Reagan campaign officials) opened a lobbying shop in Washington, D.C. One of their very first clients: Donald Trump, who employed the lobbying firm of Black, Manafort & Stone through the early 1990s."
"Philip Ayliff, a tax preparer for Paul Manafort, has testified to the jury that his tax preparation firm received several emails from Mr Manafort and his right hand man Rick Gates assuring the accountants that they had no foreign accounts. "
"Mr Ayliff said Mr Manafort never told him he held foreign bank accounts and a lack of accurate information would lead to an incorrect tax return."
That was not only verbal, but documented by e-mails from the accountant, where in Manafort replied ' we have no foreign bank accounts'.
Double Yeeouch.......
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.