Once again, sleazy influence peddler extraordinaire Paul Manafort claims he can't find a jury of his peers in the home of sleazy influence peddlers.https://twitter.com/MikeScarcella/status/1034810658842394626 …
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Manafort trial needs to be in Roanoke bc: 1) Press correctly reported that he had been indicted for a(nother) crime 2) Trump is an idiot gaslighterpic.twitter.com/rHFdERE7et
Once again, Manafort's lawyers can't find a single citation to support their claim that a guilty verdict resulted in intensely negative media coverage that reached new heights.pic.twitter.com/9ltodDGna2
Give or take 100,000, you mean. I'm surprised Manafort didn't cite Trump claiming Google is biased against his convicted former campaign managers.pic.twitter.com/gk8vsWGoA5
Interjection: Amy Berman Jackson was skeptical about this motion because -- as she noted -- the coverage of Manafort's corruption was national. This (and much of the rest of the argument) actually supports her point. Hell, I bet Roanoke even has access to The Google!!!
Again, on top of not supporting the claim that the most prejudicial coverage was in the last week, Manafort SEEMS to be making the case that Mueller has moved very quickly, contrary to POTUS' claims.pic.twitter.com/kozuZckVC5
Anyway, this is literally just a cut-and-paste from the EDVA motion, w/o any updating to support the new claim (that being convicted of 8 crimes gives you bad press). They are SO dialing things in at this point.
Law twitter: Can we discuss the timing of plea negotiations WHILE on verdict watch in EDVA? https://www.wsj.com/articles/manafort-sought-deal-in-next-trial-but-talks-broke-down-1535404819 … Making a plea deal only makes sense if you're sure Manafort is guilty in EDVA, right?
One more thing abt Manafort's change of venue request; recall that the influence peddling he's on trial for in the DC case is a bipartisan affair, featuring a guy named Podesta. So why should Hillary support in DC matter?
Also, that comma after Kilimnik serves no purpose and therefore shouldn’t be there.
TBF they could have cited like every episode of Maddow for the last forever.
Boston bombing case was fine in Boston
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.