This guy is a clear and present danger. He has constantly injected himself into the Paul Manafort case. Why Special Counsel Robert Mueller hasn't ask that he recuse himself I cannot fathom. Yesterday, Ellis made remarks with the jury present that cast doubt on the honesty of the prosecutors about whether Rick Gates would be called as a witness. "You can't prove conspiracy without him," said Ellis. Today when prosecutors called him on it he responded like a child...
..that he had not brought the matter of Gates testifying or not testifying up.
This is a tax fraud case, okay? Prosecutors have to show that Manafort lived beyond his means as reported to the IRS. Yet, when prosecutors attempted to introduce photographs of Manafort's homes, furnishings, clothes, Ellis said:
“Enough is enough. "It could engender bias against rich people. We don’t convict people because they have a lot of money and throw it around.” Don't “gild the lily.”
Gild the lily: That is what the prosecution contends Manafort did.
Enough is enough: So if prosecutors have ten eyewitnesses to a homicide, they can't call all ten? Maybe two? How enough is enough when you alone have the burden of proving the case beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt?
According to the Washington Post,
"Ellis...has expressed annoyance about the volume of evidence they have attempted to introduce at various points."
Ellis, in his dotage (he is 78 years old) styles himself a wordsmith. He is T.S. Ellis not T.S. Eliot and he don't know it. He became fatally confused between a "pergola," about which there has been testimony, and a "pagoda," about which there has been this here testimony.
"Most of us don't have [expensive] suits, don't have pagodas. It kind of engenders resentment against rich people generally,"
-“There’s plenty of slips between the cup and the lip.”
Especially when your lips are where your hips is.
..that he had not brought the matter of Gates testifying or not testifying up.
This is a tax fraud case, okay? Prosecutors have to show that Manafort lived beyond his means as reported to the IRS. Yet, when prosecutors attempted to introduce photographs of Manafort's homes, furnishings, clothes, Ellis said:
“Enough is enough. "It could engender bias against rich people. We don’t convict people because they have a lot of money and throw it around.” Don't “gild the lily.”
Gild the lily: That is what the prosecution contends Manafort did.
Enough is enough: So if prosecutors have ten eyewitnesses to a homicide, they can't call all ten? Maybe two? How enough is enough when you alone have the burden of proving the case beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt?
According to the Washington Post,
"Ellis...has expressed annoyance about the volume of evidence they have attempted to introduce at various points."
Ellis, in his dotage (he is 78 years old) styles himself a wordsmith. He is T.S. Ellis not T.S. Eliot and he don't know it. He became fatally confused between a "pergola," about which there has been testimony, and a "pagoda," about which there has been this here testimony.
"Most of us don't have [expensive] suits, don't have pagodas. It kind of engenders resentment against rich people generally,"
-“There’s plenty of slips between the cup and the lip.”
Especially when your lips are where your hips is.
