Paul Manafort, Alexandria, Muller discussed on Opening Arguments
Because I will not hear it? I will not hear, sir. Okay. Well, then we'll move on. On July sixth Manafort moved for a continuance that is to delay the trial. And he also moved to change the venue of the trial from the eastern district of Virginia to Roanoke, Virginia, southern world, Virginia. And the basis for the argument was, hey, Alexandria is DC suburbs. Everybody here is following the Muller investigation. They're all Democrats, and they all hate me. I'm going to get a fair trial and and judge Ellis a couple of days ago slapped that down to and said, you know what the constitution guarantees you a fair and impartial jury. It does not guarantee you a jury of folks who agree with you politically. So sorry, you're gonna stay here in Alexandria. There's no basis to delay. There's no basis to change the venue and and this kind of comes full circle to my. I like this guy point right that that that what the judge was signaling in. That first hearing is, as we pointed out was. Give it to me straight. Don't be asked me, don't waste my time with nonsense arguments. And at that time you know, look, there was a little bit of and and I said this, there's a little bit of a poker face on the Muller team to say, no, we're totally interested in Paul Manafort and we have no interest in bringing down Donald trial. Of course, they're also interested in how high this goes. Right? So so you know, he slapped down a little bit of that and. And yet at the same time when it was manafort's turn to make a, you know, a somewhat misleading argument, eight and have any problem. You know, slapping that down as well. So you know, that's what I mean by no nonsense. What else is what else is still out there? There is. Also adjudicated. And this is literally just a couple of days ago Manafort moved to suppress the evidence that was seized as a result of the search. Warrants argued that it was illegal search and seizure, and both courts have denied that motion to suppress. So the only thing that's left out there now are two pending motions, and I bet that by the time you hear the and those have not been resolved, they will get resolved. By the time we go to trial, they will be resolved by the time you hear this and my bet is that Manafort loses on both of these. So so I'm going to break those down for you really quickly and then talk about what's what's happening. So what is the first category of motions that are still out there are motions in Limone and emotion in lemonade is. Again, the Latin is a true cognate there. It's motion to limit testimony, right? It's it's different than suppression, motion and emotion to the question that that the candidate for for judgeship couldn't get right? Yes. That's exactly right. So emotion and he didn't have to compare and contrast. He just had to define what it was, which anybody who has ever been to a trial knows what emotion lemonade is because you file them at every trial. Right, right. So so let me contrast it with motion to suppress motion suppress says, there is relevant evidence that was illegally obtained and therefore should be suppressed right? That was the stuff that the government seized from manafort's ipad and his electric is electric devices. Emotion limited says, there is evidence that you should not allow the other side to put on because it is inadmissible or irrelevant. Right. And they've indicated we're gonna put this on and you're saying, no, no, no, that that you've legally procured it. There's not a basis for that, but it shouldn't come into the trial and it shouldn't come into the trial because it's prejudice value, you know, greatly exceeds its probative value because it's irrelevant and and prejudicial or because it's inadmissible for other..