Sunday, August 5, 2018


PAUL MANAFORT'S RICHES were on trial last week as the MUELLER TEAM attacked him for not reporting all of his obligation every citizen has per the LAW and the 16th amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Until that amendment is repealed...a goal of every freedom-lover in America...that IMPOSITION OF REPORTING INCOME will remain. Dodging that reporting requirement...Manafort allegedly called $60 million he had received from a Russian big shot a LOAN and hence not income...although...right now...MUELLER is telling the jury that it was not a LOAN but disguised income. To prove his point...MUELLER has paraded Manafort's wardrobe telling the jury therein Manafort was promiscuous enough to display* his riches...but...not honest enough to tell Uncle Sugar in his form 1040 that he received such income.

As this MANAFORT prosecution continues...though...many voters sense a disconcerting difference in treatment under the law. Hillary-the-hag...from 2009 through 2015...received HUGE DONATIONS in a "pay-to-play" scheme and NEVER reported those donations as INCOME although it certainly was INCOME. Using the same rubric MUELLER is employing to blast Manafort...HILLARY-THE-HAG and her consorts are equally guilty of the SAME CRIMINAL ACTS!

Indeed...feeling confident in her insulation...Hillary bragged about how she and Bill had left the White House deeply in was only a miracle that they were able to pilot their RESUME' and grow MONEY from its ROOTS in the form of from loved ones...and...from people who wanted to bring socialism to everyone everywhere. Even though those DONATIONS were disguised income...nonetheless...she wasn't attacked. REASON: She's Democrat...Manafort is a Republican with a brief 4 month connection to the 2016 presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump.
*While the Manafort defense far...has errantly permitted Manafort's accountant to tell the jury that she thinks Manafort lied to her...nonetheless...the jury will be entitled to categorize that LOAN as a LOAN and disregard the INCOME aspect. Before that accountant was permitted to deliver her own CONCLUSION about the allegations of wrongdoing...DEFENSE should have OBJECTED telling Judge Ellis such question/answer invades the province of the jury. The PROSECUTION would then counter with: 803(18)(E) ADMISSIONS OF CO-CONSPIRATORS. The DEFENSE would rejoin: nonetheless...that the "instant" conclusion [Manafort LIED to the accountant] not in any way was in furtherance of or formed in the course of the alleged a mental calculation the ACCOUNTANT-TRIAL WITNESS has since performed. basis...and...denies DEFENDANT a fair trial per 6th Amendment and denies due process per 5th amendment.