Not before this court

Mar 8th, 2019 | By
Category: Notes and Comment Blog

A particularly absurd Trump lie:

President Trump on Friday seized on a portion of a federal judge’s remarks during the sentencing of his former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, in a financial crimes case to again criticize the Russia investigation and falsely declare a finding of “no collusion.”

Except the judge didn’t.

What Judge Ellis actually said Thursday was that Mr. Manafort was “not before this court for anything having to do with collusion with the Russian government to influence this election.”

Which is not the same thing at all. That’s like saying “the judge said there’s no such thing as murder” when the judge actually said that “Mr. Trump is not before this court for anything having to do with murder.” Saying a particular person is not before a particular court for anything to do with a particular crime is not the same thing as saying there is none of that particular crime, or even that Mr. Trump is not suspected of that particular crime. Particular trial is particular.

There was “no collusion” because Mr. Manafort was not charged with or convicted of any crimes of collusion, a word that has no legal definition but has become a term of art for the special counsel’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election.

But has also become Trump’s all-purpose word for everything he absolutely never did and is totally innocent of – it’s meaningless trump-jargon.

Mr. Manafort’s attorneys used the same false talking point as the president on Thursday, saying in a brief statement after the hearing, “There is absolutely no evidence that Paul Manafort was involved in any collusion with any government official or Russia.”

False talking point=meaningless trump-jargon.

6 Responses to “Not before this court”