Quantcast
Connect with us

Jury in Paul Manafort trial asks judge about consensus issue

Published

on

Jurors in the trial of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort on Tuesday asked the judge in his bank and tax fraud trial how to fill out a verdict form for a single count if it cannot come to a consensus on that count.

“If we cannot come to a consensus on a single count, how should we fill out the verdict form for that count?” jurors asked the judge, who read the question aloud in court.

ADVERTISEMENT

The judge said if they were not able to reach a unanimous conclusion on any count, he would ask them if they could reach a consensus on other counts.

Reporting by Karen Freifeld and Nathan Layne; Writing by Doina Chiacu; Editing by Tim Ahmann


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

CNN

White House lawyers’ Trump defense ‘deteriorated’ as they tried to make the case for the president: CNN’s Toobin

Published

on

As President Donald Trump's legal team put forward their defense of the president's Ukraine scheme at the impeachment trial on Saturday, CNN chief legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin weighed in on the effectiveness of what they had presented.

"There was information put forth today that would allow Republicans to vote against witnesses and to vote for an acquittal," acknowledged Toobin, offering as an example that the team did a good job at creating doubt over when the Ukrainians knew the foreign aid was cut off. However, "after that I thought it deteriorated."

"I was surprised that Jay Sekulow, who I think is a very fine lawyer, seen him argue in the Supreme Court several times, wandered in the wasteland of the Mueller report, that didn't seem relevant," said Toobin. "Mr. Philbin, who is not a spellbinding performer, went on about how it was legitimate in their view not to respond to subpoenas, not to provide any witnesses by the Trump administration. I thought that was a particularly weak performance. But, you know, if you are inclined to the defense point of view, there were facts and arguments to justify your position this morning."

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

White House attorneys’ defense of Trump debunked and discredited by nearly everyone with readily available facts

Published

on

After three days of House impeachment managers’ brilliant prosecution of President Donald Trump – and “prebuttal” of the arguments the president’s team was expected to make – White House attorneys Saturday morning began their defense of President Trump.

It’s not going well.

Deputy White House Counsel Mike Purpura (photo) has been making the majority of today’s arguments – they have decided that not enough people will be watching on TV so Saturday’s defense will last not eight but just two hours.

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

GOP lawmaker ridiculed for sniveling about Schiff’s ‘heads on pikes’ comment: ‘You sound so scared’

Published

on

Republicans have seized on a new excuse to be angry about the Democratic impeachment case against President Donald Trump: Now they are claiming umbrage over the reference, in the closing argument of Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), to an anonymous source telling CBS News that Trump would have the 'head on a pike' of any Republican who voted to convict him.

One such Republican is Mitch McConnell's right-hand man, Senate Minority Whip John Cornyn (R-TX), who tweeted out a Politico story referencing Republicans' supposed rage at this remark:

Republicans livid after Schiff cites supposed threat to GOP senators https://t.co/KlkbWLVXbV via @politico

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image