that is the judge saying that the fact that it was the special counsel who is prosecuting paul manafort was irrelevant to the question before her. the fact that the special counsel was the prosecuting agency here she s suggesting kept getting brought up in court by manafort s defense not because it mattered to her, not because it would have any influence on the way she was going sentence paul manafort, but it was being repeated for some other audience, meaning it was being repeated for a public audience who might be more inclined toward paul manafort because specifically he s being prosecuted by this no-good very bad special counsel. and then this is how she finishes up. quote, finally, the no collusion refrain that runs through the entire defense sentencing memorandum is similarly unrelated to the matters at hand. the defense told me over and over importantly or it is notable that the defendant has not been charged with any crimes related to the primary focus of
pass, saying i m sorry i got caught is not an inspiring plea for leniency. then she says first of all, it s entirely relevant to the question before the court excuse me, first of all, it s entirely relevant to the question before the court. the number of times the argument was repeated notwithstanding excuse me. first of all, it is entirely irrelevant to the question before the court. the number of times the argument was repeated, not withstanding the fact that it didn t have any bearing on the question at hand, suggests that it wasn t being repeated for the benefit of the person you were trying to persuade he had accepted responsibility, but it was being repeated for some other audience. so forgive my missteps there. that is the judge saying that the fact that it was the special counsel who is prosecuting paul manafort was irrelevant to the question before her. the fact that the special counsel was the prosecuting agency here she s suggesting kept getting brought up in court by ma
was repeated, not withstanding the fact that it didn t have any bearing on the question at hand, suggests that it wasn t being repeated for the benefit of the person you were trying to persuade he had accepted responsibility, but it was being repeated for some other audience. so forgive my missteps there. that is the judge saying that the fact that it was the special counsel who is prosecuting paul manafort was irrelevant to the question before her. the fact that the special counsel was the prosecuting agency here she s suggesting kept getting brought up in court by manafort s defense not because it mattered to her, not because it would have any influence on the way she was going sentence paul manafort, but it was being repeated for some other audience, meaning it was being repeated for a public audience who might be more inclined toward paul manafort because specifically he s being prosecuted by this no-good very bad special counsel. and then this is how she finishes up. quote, finall
these rape victims are under the age of fourteen thirty three percent of them under the age of eighteen so crime rates against women and every single you know it doesn t factor in that way figures after the u.s. and africa and despite these horrific numbers we re seeing that state machinery i think on able to punish most of the rapists and perpetrators leaving in distorters and mothers extreme the wonderful and and see if there s a sense of anger and deep sense of shame among people who are right now so i think a lot of action will have to be taken the fact that the legal system that you mention the victim has to prove offense beyond a reasonable doubt us system still gives the benefit of doubt to go cuse we see that there s only one judge for every one hundred thousand people in our country the investigation agency the prosecuting agency and police for work together instead of working separately this means that their loyalty is not to the law of the land. as i mentioned of the three t
transparency how specifically members of congress are using potential taxpayer dollars to deal with potential harassment allegations of sexual harassment and other forms of harassment. arthel: absolutely. just been clear that i am not certainly saying that i agree or approve of any sort of sexual misconduct or any sort of violations against women. katie, thank you. thank you. eric: they were found guilty but the conviction stressed out. the largest mass exoneration in chicago in recent memory. coming up we will look at by a judge throughout the team penalty drug convictions and what that means for the criminal justice system across the country. we are not a prosecuting agency and we are not an advocate for anything except what is the truth. were much more interested in having a dialogue to determine what happens as opposed to getting to trenches and fighting about what happens.