Paul Manafort Convicted in Fraud Trial. (NYT)

[elleng]

ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Paul Manafort, President Trump’s former campaign chairman, was convicted on Tuesday in his financial fraud trial, bringing a dramatic end to a politically charged case that riveted the capital.

The verdict was a victory for the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, whose prosecutors built a case that Mr. Manafort hid millions of dollars in foreign accounts to evade taxes and lied to banks repeatedly to obtain $20 million in loans.

Mr. Manafort was convicted of five counts of tax fraud, two counts of bank fraud and one count of failure to disclose a foreign bank account. The jury was unable to reach a verdict on 10 of the 18 counts and the judge declared a mistrial on those charges.'>>>

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/21/us/politics/paul-manafort-trial-verdict.html?

[YessirAtsaFact]

1. Guilty on 8 counts, facing another trial on the other 10

No acquittals.

Not a good day for Manafort or Trump.

[elleng]

2. NOT facing another trial on the other 10,

'Mistrial' declared.

On the other trial, coming up soon:

Mueller's team has 3 times the evidence for Paul Manafort's next trial than his current trial.

'The Special Counsel's Office has almost three times the number of exhibits it wants to show a jury in Paul Manafort's next criminal trial compared with what it used in his Virginia case.

The evidence for the two trials largely doesn't overlap, according to a court filing Thursday from Manafort's legal team.
The two criminal cases that President Donald Trump's former campaign manager faces do overlap in how they hinge on his alleged political consulting work in Ukraine. But the filing on Thursday shows just how expansive an investigation Robert Mueller's team has conducted on Manafort, and how the next trial could be just as revelatory as the first.

In Manafort's Virginia trial, which began on July 31, prosecutors presented nearly 400 financial records, emails and other documents to the jury. Manafort's team says the prosecutors have "well over" 1,000 pieces of evidence lined up for the DC federal case, set to go to trial in September. The judge in DC told the prosecutors on Thursday to "review" their evidence collection "with an eye towards streamlining the presentation of its case."'>>>

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/16/app-politics-section/mueller-manafort-evidence-next-trial/index.html


https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/16/app-politics-section/mueller-manafort-evidence-next-trial/index.html

[YessirAtsaFact]

4. A hung jury doesn't preclude a retrial

This wasn’t a mistrial due to misconduct, it was due to a deadlocked jury.

[gratuitous]

3. A politically charged case?

No, this was a simple criminal case involving bank fraud and foreign bank account shenanigans. If the Times wants to claim that's "politically charged," are they saying that it's the sole province of one political party to commit criminal acts involving shady business deals and tax evasion?

Don't get me wrong, I'm okay with that, if it means that from now on the Times will treat that sort of criminality as the trademark of the Republican party. But I'm guessing they won't go there. They just want to salve some butthurt with the "politically charged" descriptor.