Bracing myself for the Manafort verdict
I don’t have a romantic view of our judicial system. I’ve disabused myself of the notion that our judicial system is some high and noble ting. Atticus Finch’s decency, humanity and plain spoken wisdom are not going to lift the courts out of the sewage that is modern American life under corporate hegemony. That’s a lovely fairytale.
No. If watching court proceedings over the past 30 years has taught me anything it is that the job of the court is not to protect us from wealthy fraudsters like Paul Manafort. The court’s job is to protect wealthy fraudsters like Paul Manafort from facing consequences.
The fact that one of the jury’s question to the judge yesterday was a request to clarify the definition of reasonable doubt doesn’t make me optimistic…
Should we assume that, after a week of silence “on Cindy Christensen’s part in the smear campaign in part 3,” that we’re never going to know what the big deal you were making this out to be will ever be revealed?
I have no faith in the courts either, “justice” is anything but “swift and sure”. It’s obvious that the system has one set of rules for the poor and a very different and much more lenient system for the rich and powerful. I also find the juries request troubling, and typical of the courts. If Manafort was poor he’d be in jail by now.
Turns out I was just giving Ralph Taylor oxygen. Also it was hard to know where Cindy Christensen ended and Kirk Abertson began. They are close and both Trumpophiles with multiple loose screws. If you know which is the master and which is the puppet, I’d be eager to hear it.
So you had no information at all on which to base your charge about Christensen? Thoughtful of you to give Ralph oxygen. Your suggestion that Christensen and Abertson are somehow connected is loose-screw land. Don’t ask me to solve your problems.
Maybe we can meet up at one of Cindy Christensen IRL fundraisers for Taylor and sort it out? I’m not on the NRA’s mailing list, but I’m sure you can let me know where and when.
Please remember the talking points:
If convicted: “Trump is next! This totally validates the Mueller investigation.”
If innocent: “Well this actually had nothing to do with Trump so the Mueller investigation needs to continue.:
I have a stupid question. Does the jury’s vote have to be unanimous or a simple majority?
Since it is a criminal case, yes. Unanimous
@anon: What makes you think the Mueller investigation requires “validation”?
“What makes you think…?” Does he though?
I’m not sure people appreciate the clever little box the Russians have constructed here. To convict Trump, Mueller would have to reveal the CIA’s sources inside Russia, which would be even more beneficial to Putin than controlling the U.S. president is. I believe that if push comes to shove, the sources will be protected even at the price of letting Trump walk.
Christiansen shares Albertson/Independent Times posts on her FB Page.
Didn’t they also go to high school together?
But hey it’s probably all a coincidence that old high school buddies are all sharing posts on one another’s facebook pages.
They probably don’t even know each other.