Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Hill)   "NY's political prosecution of Manafort should scare us all" says guy who seems to be admitting that he too is guilty of bank fraud and tax evasion   (thehill.com) divider line
    More: Strange, Prosecutor, Donald Trump, U.S. state, New York City, United States, Fordham University, United States Constitution, Manhattan  
•       •       •

2121 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Mar 2019 at 12:05 PM (8 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



121 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2019-03-14 10:38:36 AM  
You know, I have been told, again and again, that if you just don't commit any crimes, you have nothing to fear.

You scared, bro? You sound scared.
 
2019-03-14 10:46:50 AM  
Who knew that crime was illegal?
 
2019-03-14 11:02:58 AM  
While I agree that dual sovereignty somewhat waters down the concept of double jeopardy, there are problems with abolishing it, too.

What if there are federal crimes which apply to part of the act, but there are state crimes which apply to the others?

For example, let's say someone runs a dog-fighting ring, and that is prosecutable federally for illegal gambling, but not for animal cruelty (I don't know that this is true, but let's pretend for the sake of argument), it would be an injustice to have to choose which to prosecute the offender for, and let them skate on the other. Furthermore, it would lead to even more ugly jurisdictional fighting than there already is as prosecutors fight over who has the better claim to try the acts in question in there jurisdiction, since if they lose they'll never get a chance.

On the other hand, using the above gambling ring example, it would undermine the concept of double Jeopardy if every state in which the gambling ring had bank accounts or gamblers who sent them money decided that they would try the suspect consecutively. Then you could have a federal trial, and up to 50 individual state trials strung together which could keep you in court for decades.

There are things one can do, short of abolishing it, which remedies some of the problems. Like attaching a strict statute of limitations after the first charges are brought. If each jurisdiction only has a year to file charges after the first indictment is filed, then you may have a lot of indictments to fend off, but you won't be in jeopardy for years and years, you just have basically two rounds to worry about, which is essentially what we have now with dual sovereignty.
 
2019-03-14 11:09:19 AM  
Cheating on STATE taxes is always a state issue. I don't think feds have standing.

So dual sovereignty doesn't even apply.

Also, he could have NOT cheated on his taxes.
 
2019-03-14 11:22:33 AM  
The only thing I'm scared of is the possibility that Manafort might get off light for a third time.  Otherwise, nail the farker to the wall!
 
2019-03-14 11:40:07 AM  
The "enforce the law" types get all fuzzy when it actually happens.
 
2019-03-14 12:05:48 PM  
What...attorneys sometimes prosecute criminals??  Since when?
 
2019-03-14 12:07:39 PM  
So crimes that are uncovered during the investigation of other crimes should be ignored?

Huh.

upload.wikimedia.orgView Full Size
 
2019-03-14 12:07:41 PM  
I didn't collude with a foreign power, so no.
 
2019-03-14 12:08:29 PM  
Works for the National Review as an editor and is a Fox News contributor? What's next, why we need to build the wall by David Duke?
 
2019-03-14 12:09:50 PM  
So we're going with the "white collar crimes aren't crimes" angle today?
 
2019-03-14 12:10:29 PM  
He's just repeating his FOX bosses' talking points.  He has to keep his FOX contributor gig.  What's that worth?  $50-100K a year?
 
2019-03-14 12:10:44 PM  
The state prosecutors have brought a case they otherwise never would waste time on - not because the case should be done, but to try to block a pardon.

Prove it.
 
2019-03-14 12:11:04 PM  

edmo: The "enforce the law" types get all fuzzy when it actually happens.


Because almost to a person they want the law to keep minorities in jail, poor (relative) people from sight, and protection for their property but not bindings to their actions.
 
2019-03-14 12:11:32 PM  
A couple of talking heads on CNN were clucking their tongues at "politicization" of the NY district attorney bringing charges in this way. District attorneys are supposed to be apolitical, they lamented.

Which is, of course, utter horseshiat. District attorneys are elected, and are every bit as political as any other politician. Like this is the first time a DA has made a prosecutorial decision based on what the voters want. Stop the farking presses.
 
2019-03-14 12:11:39 PM  

nmrsnr: While I agree that dual sovereignty somewhat waters down the concept of double jeopardy, there are problems with abolishing it, too.

What if there are federal crimes which apply to part of the act, but there are state crimes which apply to the others?

For example, let's say someone runs a dog-fighting ring, and that is prosecutable federally for illegal gambling, but not for animal cruelty (I don't know that this is true, but let's pretend for the sake of argument), it would be an injustice to have to choose which to prosecute the offender for, and let them skate on the other. Furthermore, it would lead to even more ugly jurisdictional fighting than there already is as prosecutors fight over who has the better claim to try the acts in question in there jurisdiction, since if they lose they'll never get a chance.

On the other hand, using the above gambling ring example, it would undermine the concept of double Jeopardy if every state in which the gambling ring had bank accounts or gamblers who sent them money decided that they would try the suspect consecutively. Then you could have a federal trial, and up to 50 individual state trials strung together which could keep you in court for decades.

There are things one can do, short of abolishing it, which remedies some of the problems. Like attaching a strict statute of limitations after the first charges are brought. If each jurisdiction only has a year to file charges after the first indictment is filed, then you may have a lot of indictments to fend off, but you won't be in jeopardy for years and years, you just have basically two rounds to worry about, which is essentially what we have now with dual sovereignty.


Double jeopardy doesn't apply, because illegal gambling and animal cruelty are separate acts.
 
2019-03-14 12:12:15 PM  

bloobeary: Who knew that crime was illegal?


I thought it was like flammable - illegal means legal
 
2019-03-14 12:12:50 PM  
It should absolutely scare the wealthy criminal class, since it's a clear sign that we don't intend to put up with their shiat anymore.
 
2019-03-14 12:13:14 PM  
This is just another attempt by liberal politicians to destroy strong conservative voices just because those conservative voices committed criminal acts of fraud.
 
2019-03-14 12:13:16 PM  

edmo: The "enforce the law" types get all fuzzy when it actually happens


to one of their people. They are still quite fine with it happening to "those people".

FTFY
 
2019-03-14 12:13:24 PM  
Fark this jerkoff.

He cut his teeth under Ghouliani and has claimed that Jamal Khashoggi was an operative of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Somebody just need to beat the everlovin' shiat out of this tool.
 
2019-03-14 12:13:58 PM  

NateAsbestos: Cheating on STATE taxes is always a state issue. I don't think feds have standing.

So dual sovereignty doesn't even apply.

Also, he could have NOT cheated on his taxes.


Not cheating on his taxes would have created a serious injury to Mr. Manafort by way of making him have less money.
 
2019-03-14 12:15:39 PM  
I used to look down on countries that had political prisoners. I thought it couldn't happen here. And yet, here we are.
 
2019-03-14 12:15:41 PM  
States Rights!

Nevermind!
 
2019-03-14 12:15:45 PM  

NateAsbestos: Cheating on STATE taxes is always a state issue. I don't think feds have standing.

So dual sovereignty doesn't even apply.

Also, he could have NOT cheated on his taxes.


Once you cheat on your taxes once, it's like smoking the crackliest crack. Even if it's just one penny. That's how it starts. First a penny and then you're hooked. Uncle Sam is gonna make you his biatch, but man what a rush!
 
2019-03-14 12:15:56 PM  
Anyone, regardless of political affiliation, should want the prosecution of this man. Not for political reasons, but because he is a really awful human being. I didn't know much about him until I heard this podcast's episodes on him. He really is scum.

https://www.behindthebastards.com/
 
2019-03-14 12:16:37 PM  
This makes total sense if you understand "double jeopardy" to mean "you can only be convicted of a crime once in your entire life and then you subsequently get immunity for all crimes".
 
2019-03-14 12:17:08 PM  

Tricky Chicken: I used to look down on countries that had political prisoners. I thought it couldn't happen here. And yet, here we are.


He isn't a political prisoner. He is a person who committed actual crimes, lots of them.

Words mean things.
 
2019-03-14 12:17:30 PM  
Nakedly political prosecution? Go fark yourself all of the way until it bleeds. He did crimes, now he's gotta pay.

farkin republicans. Jesus.
 
2019-03-14 12:18:38 PM  

jst3p: Anyone, regardless of political affiliation, should want the prosecution of this man. Not for political reasons, but because he is a really awful human being. I didn't know much about him until I heard this podcast's episodes on him. He really is scum.

https://www.behindthebastards.com/


By 'scum' I assume you mean 'otherwise blameless'

/s, cause we live in this farked timeline
 
2019-03-14 12:19:01 PM  
Protip: If the URL contains thehill.com/opinion, it's your drunk, racist uncle who can typing.
 
2019-03-14 12:19:13 PM  

NateAsbestos: Cheating on STATE taxes is always a state issue. I don't think feds have standing.

So dual sovereignty doesn't even apply.

Also, he could have NOT cheated on his taxes.


I was told by people voting for Trump that its smart to pay the least amount of taxes as possible by any means necessary
 
2019-03-14 12:19:53 PM  
Why are the folks at The Hill pro-crime?
 
2019-03-14 12:21:04 PM  
Obligatory...

Liar Liar Movie Quote - Stop breaking the law!
Youtube BJF-wVW1F2o
 
2019-03-14 12:21:29 PM  

Psychopusher: The only thing I'm scared of is the possibility that Manafort might get off light for a third time.  Otherwise, nail the farker to the wall!


1st Judge argued that Manafort led a "blameless life" which is why he only got 4 years.

He's no longer blameless. He's got federal convictions.
 
2019-03-14 12:22:04 PM  

the_innkeeper: For example, let's say someone runs a dog-fighting ring, and that is prosecutable federally for illegal gambling, but not for animal cruelty (I don't know that this is true, but let's pretend for the sake of argument), it would be an injustice to have to choose which to prosecute the offender for, and let them skate on the other. Furthermore, it would lead to even more ugly jurisdictional fighting than there already is as prosecutors fight over who has the better claim to try the acts in question in there jurisdiction, since if they lose they'll never get a chance.

On the other hand, using the above gambling ring example, it would undermine the concept of double Jeopardy if every state in which the gambling ring had bank accounts or gamblers who sent them money decided that they would try the suspect consecutively. Then you could have a federal trial, and up to 50 individual state trials strung together which could keep you in court for decades.

There are things one can do, short of abolishing it, which remedies some of the problems. Like attaching a strict statute of limitations after the first charges are brought. If each jurisdiction only has a year to file charges after the first indictment is filed, then you may have a lot of indictments to fend off, but you won't be in jeopardy for years and years, you just have basically two rounds to worry about, which is essentially what we have now with dual sovereignty.


Double jeopardy doesn't apply, because illegal gambling and animal cruelty are separate acts.


But it is all related to the single crime of dog fighting. You are just picking out different parts of the single crime that are also illegal.

If you rob a bank, thwy don't also come after you for illegally parking in front. Or for wearing a mask when it is not Halloween (yes this is illegal in places), or for a civil rights crime if customers present are minorities.
 
2019-03-14 12:22:26 PM  
It's sad that all the democracy checks and balances are smashing up against the oligarch checks and balances :(   They used to play so nicely together when everything was low key and not so in your face.
 
2019-03-14 12:23:03 PM  
Won't anyone think of the poor traitors?!
 
2019-03-14 12:23:24 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2019-03-14 12:25:30 PM  

jst3p: Tricky Chicken: I used to look down on countries that had political prisoners. I thought it couldn't happen here. And yet, here we are.

He isn't a political prisoner. He is a person who committed actual crimes, lots of them.

Words mean things.


As have most political prisoners. because words do mean things
 
2019-03-14 12:26:03 PM  

Tricky Chicken: the_innkeeper: For example, let's say someone runs a dog-fighting ring, and that is prosecutable federally for illegal gambling, but not for animal cruelty (I don't know that this is true, but let's pretend for the sake of argument), it would be an injustice to have to choose which to prosecute the offender for, and let them skate on the other. Furthermore, it would lead to even more ugly jurisdictional fighting than there already is as prosecutors fight over who has the better claim to try the acts in question in there jurisdiction, since if they lose they'll never get a chance.

On the other hand, using the above gambling ring example, it would undermine the concept of double Jeopardy if every state in which the gambling ring had bank accounts or gamblers who sent them money decided that they would try the suspect consecutively. Then you could have a federal trial, and up to 50 individual state trials strung together which could keep you in court for decades.

There are things one can do, short of abolishing it, which remedies some of the problems. Like attaching a strict statute of limitations after the first charges are brought. If each jurisdiction only has a year to file charges after the first indictment is filed, then you may have a lot of indictments to fend off, but you won't be in jeopardy for years and years, you just have basically two rounds to worry about, which is essentially what we have now with dual sovereignty.


Double jeopardy doesn't apply, because illegal gambling and animal cruelty are separate acts.

But it is all related to the single crime of dog fighting. You are just picking out different parts of the single crime that are also illegal.


"Dog fighting" is not a crime, animal cruelty is and so is gambling.

If you rob a bank, thwy don't also come after you for illegally parking in front. Or for wearing a mask when it is not Halloween (yes this is illegal in places), or for a civil rights crime if customers present are minorities.

They could, they just generally choose not to. Although that last one is complete bullshiat.

For example: In this case they were charged with kidnapping and armed robbery in scenario you are trying to say is "one crime".

https://www.wltx.com/article/news/cri​m​e/2-charged-with-kidnapping-armed-robb​ery-after-standoff/101-434964338
 
2019-03-14 12:26:16 PM  

red230: Works for the National Review as an editor and is a Fox News contributor? What's next, why we need to build the wall by David Duke?


He also used to promote Birtherism and has claimed that Bill Ayers ghost wrote Obama's book Dreams of My Father. Also accused the Obama administration of secretly being infiltrated by Islamists. Dude is a scumbag authoritarian.
 
2019-03-14 12:28:09 PM  

jst3p: The state prosecutors have brought a case they otherwise never would waste time on - not because the case should be done, but to try to block a pardon.

Prove it.


I'm sure NY lets tax evasion slide all the time!
 
2019-03-14 12:31:29 PM  

Tricky Chicken: the_innkeeper: For example, let's say someone runs a dog-fighting ring, and that is prosecutable federally for illegal gambling, but not for animal cruelty (I don't know that this is true, but let's pretend for the sake of argument), it would be an injustice to have to choose which to prosecute the offender for, and let them skate on the other. Furthermore, it would lead to even more ugly jurisdictional fighting than there already is as prosecutors fight over who has the better claim to try the acts in question in there jurisdiction, since if they lose they'll never get a chance.

On the other hand, using the above gambling ring example, it would undermine the concept of double Jeopardy if every state in which the gambling ring had bank accounts or gamblers who sent them money decided that they would try the suspect consecutively. Then you could have a federal trial, and up to 50 individual state trials strung together which could keep you in court for decades.

There are things one can do, short of abolishing it, which remedies some of the problems. Like attaching a strict statute of limitations after the first charges are brought. If each jurisdiction only has a year to file charges after the first indictment is filed, then you may have a lot of indictments to fend off, but you won't be in jeopardy for years and years, you just have basically two rounds to worry about, which is essentially what we have now with dual sovereignty.


Double jeopardy doesn't apply, because illegal gambling and animal cruelty are separate acts.

But it is all related to the single crime of dog fighting. You are just picking out different parts of the single crime that are also illegal.

If you rob a bank, thwy don't also come after you for illegally parking in front. Or for wearing a mask when it is not Halloween (yes this is illegal in places), or for a civil rights crime if customers present are minorities.


Common law says that double Jeopardy applies to an "episode" of offense where prosecutors get one crack at everything that happens during the episode.

In America we have the Blockburger test which limits trials by saying that you can only ever use the same evidence in one trial.
 
2019-03-14 12:31:34 PM  

HMS_Blinkin: jst3p: The state prosecutors have brought a case they otherwise never would waste time on - not because the case should be done, but to try to block a pardon.

Prove it.

I'm sure NY lets tax evasion slide all the time!


Sure. Just ask anyone moving out of state.

https://www.bna.com/leaving-new-york-​n​73014481734/
 
2019-03-14 12:31:36 PM  

HMS_Blinkin: jst3p: The state prosecutors have brought a case they otherwise never would waste time on - not because the case should be done, but to try to block a pardon.

Prove it.

I'm sure NY lets tax evasion slide all the time!


static.highsnobiety.comView Full Size


"Don't get me started!"
 
2019-03-14 12:32:26 PM  

jst3p: Tricky Chicken: the_innkeeper: For example, let's say someone runs a dog-fighting ring, and that is prosecutable federally for illegal gambling, but not for animal cruelty (I don't know that this is true, but let's pretend for the sake of argument), it would be an injustice to have to choose which to prosecute the offender for, and let them skate on the other. Furthermore, it would lead to even more ugly jurisdictional fighting than there already is as prosecutors fight over who has the better claim to try the acts in question in there jurisdiction, since if they lose they'll never get a chance.

On the other hand, using the above gambling ring example, it would undermine the concept of double Jeopardy if every state in which the gambling ring had bank accounts or gamblers who sent them money decided that they would try the suspect consecutively. Then you could have a federal trial, and up to 50 individual state trials strung together which could keep you in court for decades.

There are things one can do, short of abolishing it, which remedies some of the problems. Like attaching a strict statute of limitations after the first charges are brought. If each jurisdiction only has a year to file charges after the first indictment is filed, then you may have a lot of indictments to fend off, but you won't be in jeopardy for years and years, you just have basically two rounds to worry about, which is essentially what we have now with dual sovereignty.


Double jeopardy doesn't apply, because illegal gambling and animal cruelty are separate acts.

But it is all related to the single crime of dog fighting. You are just picking out different parts of the single crime that are also illegal.

"Dog fighting" is not a crime, animal cruelty is and so is gambling.

If you rob a bank, thwy don't also come after you for illegally parking in front. Or for wearing a mask when it is not Halloween (yes this is illegal in places), or for a civil rights crime if customers present are min ...


Yep. Assualt with a deadly weapon, attempted murder, battery.

No one who robs a bank is never not convicted of a single crime.

IT is multiple crimes in a single instance.
 
2019-03-14 12:32:41 PM  
BY ANDREW C. MCCARTHY, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR

img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2019-03-14 12:33:33 PM  

jst3p: For example: In this case they were charged with kidnapping and armed robbery in scenario you are trying to say is "one crime".

https://www.wltx.com/article/news/crim​e/2-charged-with-kidnapping-armed-robb​ery-after-standoff/101-434964338


They were charged with two counts related to one crime. They did not rob, then come back at another time and kidnap.  Did they go to trial once for both charged crimes?  Then it is one crime with multiple counts.  What is happening here is a guy was implicated in a crime that never occured, and in the process of investigation they found a completely unrelated crime. And now they are court shopping to get as many punishments as they can for a single crime.
 
2019-03-14 12:36:35 PM  

jst3p: HMS_Blinkin: jst3p: The state prosecutors have brought a case they otherwise never would waste time on - not because the case should be done, but to try to block a pardon.

Prove it.

I'm sure NY lets tax evasion slide all the time!

[static.highsnobiety.com image 480x320]

"Don't get me started!"


That happened in my town, Ocala, Florida.  Where there is a whacka doodle who conned a bunch of people into thinking paying tax is illegal.

My cousin(who is a judge, but former undercover narco officer) is the one who went got the Wesley.    The cops thought he was gonna go all blade on them.

I dunno what he said to Wes but he went along calmly.

But this is the cousin who was undercover busting drug dealers for a year, who caught a guy trying to sneak his daughter out of her window. He ran out of the garage with a running chainsaw while wearing his cpap mask.
 
Displayed 50 of 121 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report