Charles Tiefer in an article for Forbes points out that this is the same judge who back in 2009 sentenced disgraced Congressman William Jefferson of Louisiana to thirteen years. (That was the case where the Feds found big bundles of cash stuffed into the guy’s freezer.) Judge Ellis did eventually reduce the ex-Congressman’s sentence to “time served” after five years.
Jefferson is a Democrat, not to mention a black guy.
Well, you can I think reasonably argue that a corrupt Congressman is a bigger deal than your run-of-the-mill tax evader/bank fraudster, having a position of public trust and what not.
Not that four years isn’t a slap in the face of justice, of course.
Maybe at the end of his sentence we should turn him over to the Russkies. I’m sure Putin’s version of Club Fed is quite comfy and cozy.
No. Nixon never did, for instance.
But Nixon was never charged with anything, nor did he ever enter any plea. In Manafort’s case, it might be different due to his convictions.
ETA: Scooter Libby might be a better comparison. I’m trying to learn if Libby is still a “convicted felon” despite Trump’s disgusting pardon of him.
Ford at least comforted himself with believing it an admission of guilt. Wikipediaquote that references the book Shadow, by Bob Woodward wherein was an interview with Ford 20 years after the fact.
Ninja’d!
Well, that sucks. 
But thanks – good to know.
I could be wrong. Everything I know about pardons, I learned from “Rockford Files”. Whenever someone mentioned that Rockford was a convicted felon, he would always correct them: “Pardoned.” So I just assumed that the pardon essentially erased the conviction.
It certainly doesn’t seem to be settled because it never came up as the issue in question before a court, but if it did, the ‘dicta’ from the Supreme Court cases would certainly be argued by the side arguing that acceptance means confession.
I actually don’t think that Trump will pardon him. Trump only does anything if there is a direct benefit to himself. Since I don’t see how pardoning Manifort would improve Trump’s popularity with anyone but Manifort and his family, and doing so would link him with a convicted felon, there is no reason for him to do so.
That’s not to say that Trump didn’t promise Manifort a pardon, just that when it comes time to pay up Trump is going to stiff him just like his other contractors.
Also, I believe if Manifort accepts a pardon he’ll no longer be able to plead the 5th. If he refuses to testify that would be a brand new contempt charge if I understand this correctly.
So, not to Trump’s advantage.
You’re right, for sure. I guess I had a notion that Burdick was more settled than it actually is.
Plus there are just some things that one wishes to believe are so beyond the pale, they would never need to be litigated by the Supreme Court. For me, this is one of them. <re-donning the Pollyanna dress>
You and I share exactly the same thoughts on this.
Or it could just be that Mueller already has everything Manafort could give him, and Il Douche knows that. So, Manny has no threat, therefore, no power.
Also, it leaves him a bunker to retreat to. Unbeknownst to him, there were indeed members of his campaign crew who were in contact with Russia in an effort to bolster his chances. But that doesn’t mean he bears any responsibility, nosir! Didn’t know a thing about it.
Could even be true. Trump did not operate by cunning and skulduggery, he operated by force and fraud. Plus, he is a blabbermouth. He is the one man a crafty secret police veteran would not trust. From that perspective, Trump’s stupid joke about asking the Russians to release Hillary’s missing e-mails had Putin desk-banging his head. Fly in that ointment is the ugly fact that they did release a bunch of shit right after.
Sometimes things make a lot of sense, except for one part that doesn’t.
“I don’t see what relation this indictment has with what the special counsel is authorized to investigate. You don’t really care about Mr. Manafort’s bank fraud […] What you really care about is what information Mr. Manafort could give you that would reflect on Mr. Trump or lead to his prosecution or impeachment.” - Judge T.S. Ellis
That was like a year ago. The Judge bought into witch hunt thinking and pretty much openly declared that he was not impartial.
Then how would we explain Trump’s writing Don Jr.'s explanation re the Trump Tower meeting re “adoptions,” in typical Trumpian inane-but-nonetheless-micromanager style? There can be only one explanation for that. He knew the truth, and tried to cover it up.
No word of indictments today, or the sound of a 960-page report hitting a desk. Time to brew another cup of Mueller tea. At least tasseography is a more agreeable method of divining the future than haruspicy.
So, the Ides of March will soon be upon us…
So far, it’s working out for me. I’m off shortly to go pick up the bottle of Mueller Winery pinot noir I ordered for the occasion of the release of the report and have been fighting all week with Fed Ex Ground to get delivered. What gutless jerks. Wouldn’t use the gate code on Tuesday that they’ve used 1,000 times before (no explanation why); couldn’t deliver on Wednesday due to mix-up on a second package; couldn’t deliver yesterday due to a “weather delay,” even though my intrepid postie made it through to deliver a USPS package.
It’s a lovely, special occasion wine in any case, but will be especially apt to have on hand for Mueller’s report. I’d love to have a glass tonight, but any day will be fine.
Does anyone know if this applies if Trump commutes his sentence?