I am not partial to convictions upon unlawfully obtain evidence or upon abuse of prosecutorial powers, ie politically launched investigations based on bogus dossiers provided and developed and by the fbi in collusion with a candidates political opponent. Or maybe I need to lay that out for you another five times so that you can lean over backwards to not get it.
Four years for Paul Manafort is the right sentence https://thehill.com/opinion/crimina...years-for-paul-manafort-is-the-right-sentence “Too light.” “Lenient.” “A slap on the wrist.” “Perverted.” There’s quite a bit of hand-wringing about the 4 year sentence that Judge T.J. Ellis handed down Thursday to Paul Manafort. But Judge Ellis should be commended for doing the right — and hard — thing despite the enormous amount of pressure by the Special Counsel’s Office, the media, and the public to sentence Manafort to 20 years in prison. Judges are meant to be a check on the executive and not just a rubber stamp for oppressive government requests. Twenty years would have been absurd for a 69-year-old, first time, non-violent offender. The sentencing guidelines, which came out to 19.5-24.5 years in this case, are deliberately draconian to induce pleas and discourage trials. They are so over-the-top that when a judge issues a fair sentence as Judge Ellis did, it is viewed as too low even though it isn’t. The system is skewed on purpose, to burden the right to trial. No one will complain when Rick Gates, who pleaded guilty and is cooperating in the same case, is sentenced to far less than 4 years (and very possibly no jail). And no one will complain when Michael Flynn receives little to no jail. Judge Ellis had to balance many competing issues in issuing a fair sentence. But one factor that thankfully did not come into play was jacking up Manafort’s sentence simply for proceeding to trial. Those out there calling for 20 years can’t articulate any good reason for giving Manafort such a lengthy sentence, while no one else from the Special Counsel’s investigation has received anything even remotely close. Four years in prison for a 69-year old unhealthy defendant is not going to be easy by any stretch. That’s real time. And Manafort faces another sentencing next week in D.C. with Judge Amy Berman Jackson. It would be strange for him to receive more time in that matter, where he pleaded guilty and accepted responsibility. The government previously agreed to a concurrent sentence although Judge Jackson is not bound by that agreement. Many have called for Judge Jackson to issue the maximum 10 year sentence and to run it consecutively. The argument seems to be that because sentences are so high in America, it’s not fair that that Manafort is getting a reasonable sentence. This argument is misplaced. Critics should be arguing for criminal justice reform with lower sentences across the board, and not that Manafort should be sent to the moon, effectively a death sentence.
Maybe Mannafort got a reduced sentence based on all the flipping and cooperating that we heard- month after month- was going to happen. GIGGLE!!!!!
Since we're cool with making this shit as we go, the sentencing judge next week can say "fuck it" and quadruple Manafort's recommended sentence.
Manafort’s 47 Months: A Sentence That Drew Gasps From Around the Country https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/08/us/politics/manafort-sentencing-ellis.html ...Scott Hechinger, a public defender in Brooklyn and a pithy presence on criminal justice on Twitter, made a similar point. “For context on Manafort’s 47 months in prison, my client yesterday was offered 36-72 months in prison for stealing $100 worth of quarters from a residential laundry room,” he wrote...
Maybe this public defender needs to discuss his client’s lengthy previous criminal record to provide some proper context.
...Paul Manafort, for perpetrating a decade-long, multimillion-dollar fraud scheme... ...Greg D. Andres, the lead prosecutor on the case, argued that Mr. Manafort was different because the jury had found him guilty not only of hiding his wealth and evading $6 million in taxes, but also of deceiving banks to obtain millions of dollars in loans. The two bank fraud counts were the most serious charges he was convicted of, each carrying a maximum penalty of 30 years in prison. Mr. Andres also urged Judge Ellis to take the broader picture of Mr. Manafort’s behavior into account, including the crimes he admitted to as part of his plea agreement in a related case in Washington. Mr. Manafort acknowledged he was guilty of 10 other felonies on which the Virginia jury had deadlocked 11 to 1, including several more counts of bank fraud. But Judge Ellis seemed to see Mr. Manafort’s case as more strictly about tax evasion...
We don't know what Mannafort's total sentencing looks like yet. Okay? This has been discussed but does not seem to sink in for the usual tard suspects. Judge Ellis has already confirmed that he is coordinating with the sentencing in the other case. So we dont know yet whether Ellis gave him a light sentence because he thinks he deserves a light sentence or whether Ellis has knowledge that Mannafort is going to get twenty years in the other cases and the thought that his four years on top would be about right overall. You worry excessively about Mannafort not getting enough time or Smollette getting too much. Start asking yourself instead why we have several high level government officials who have actively conspired to overturn the results of a valid election and/or participate in a soft coup so to speak- and we have not even gotten to the prosecution let alone the sentencing. Oh, I see, because bank fraud ten years ago by Mannafort takes priority over that. Got it.