TRUMP, MANAFORT, AND THE "STRAW MAN" ARGUMENT. part 2.

Basically, Judge Ellis was putting on record the nature of the Case that was before the Court: WHAT IT WAS, AND WHAT IT WAS NOT. THIS INCLUDED THE CHARGES THAT WERE BROUGHT AGAINST PAUL MANAFORT, AND THE PUNISHMENT HANDED DOWN.

-  These were Criminal Acts that were Financial in Nature, and involved noone but Paul Manafort.
There were no other Defendents on Trial.

-  Any evidence produced during the Trial, either by the Prosecution or Defense, was related to the
charges brought by the State. What Paul Manafort may have done, or not done, in other areas of his
life were irrelevant, and did not have an impact on the outcome.

- The Sentence handed down was meant to reflect the degree to which the Judge felt furthered the cause of justice, and did not include speculation about what other Criminal Acts Paul Manafort, or anyone else, may have committed.(Whether we agree or disagree with the severity of the punishment is another matter).

- At no time, Before, During, or After the Trial, (Prior to Sentencing), was the investigation interfering with the 2016 Presidential Election even mentioned as relevent to the Matters before the Court.

As to why the Judge felt in necessary to even approach the subject is pure speculation, since it has nothing to do with the sentence he handed down. Perhaps, he wanted to head off criticism that he was
being to lenient, and making it clear that nothing other then the proceedings in court would have a bearing on his sentencing.

However, Donald Trump and Paul Manaforts Lawyers took this part of the Judges Decision to create a BOGUS AND IRRATIONAL SCENARIO THAT WAS EASILY FALSIFIABLE. THE VALIDITY OF THE RUSSIAN TAMPERING INVESTIGATION, OR FOR THAT MATTER ANY PART OF THE ROBERT MUELLER  INVESTIGATION, WAS NEVER CHALLENGED BY THE JUDGE BECAUSE IT WAS NOT HIS PLACE, FROM THE BENCH, TO DO SO.

What should really trouble you is PAUL MANAFORTS LAWYERS MAKING SUCH A STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENT. IT COULD NOT BENEFIT HIM IN THIS CASE, AND WITH DONALD TRUMPS STATEMENTS ON TWITTER, MAKES THEM LOOK DESPERATE TO FIND A WAY TO DISCREDIT ANY INVESTIGATION THAT IS FOCUSING ON DONALD TRUMP, AS EVIDENCED BY THE "STRAW MAN."

TRUMP, MANAFORT, AND THE "STRAW MAN" ARGUMENT. part 1.

Someone should remind Self-Appointed Genuis Donald Trump, and Paul Manaforts Lawyers, that occupying a Political Office, or being a member of the BAR ASSOCIATION, does not exempt you from the RULES OF LOGIC. Specifically, the FALLACIOUS ARGUMENT CALLED THE "STRAW MAN."

On Friday, Donald Trump referred to a Federal Judge’s remarks during the sentencing of Paul Manafort, in a financial crimes case, to again criticize the Russia investigation and falsely declare a finding of “no collusion.”

He said the following on Twitter:

"The Judge and the lawyer in the Paul Manafort case stated loudly and for the world to hear that there was NO COLLUSION with Russia. But the Witch Hunt Hoax continues as you now add these statements to House & Senate Intelligence & Senator Burr. So bad for our Country! " 8:30 AM - Mar 8, 2019.

From Paul Manaforts Attorneys we get the following;

“There is absolutely no evidence that Paul Manafort was involved in any collusion with any government official or Russia.”

It's nice to see the Occupier of the Oval Office, and members of the legal profession using the same LOGICAL FALLACY to support Donald Trumps desperate attempt to divert attention away from his scandal ridden administration.

I am referring to the following:

THE "STRAW MAN" ARGUMENT.

A Straw Man argument takes a proposition or assertion, and refutes it by misstating or misapplying what was said.  Often this is done by claiming to argue against something that was not part of the original content, and attempts to create a position that the opposing side never proposed, endorsed or even addressed.

What do I mean?

(The following was Taken from the N.Y Times Article: "Trump Falsely Claims That Manafort Judge Declared There Was ‘No Collusion’ With Russia." March, 8, 2019. By Eileen Sullivan.

"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.”

There was “no collusion” because Mr. Manafort was not charged with or convicted of any crimes of collusion...

THE "STRAW MAN."-  Donald Trump and the Lawyers took what the Judge said, and Misapplied the Meaning and Intent into a Conclusion that the Judge had made regarding the Truth of the Proposition that there was Collusion between Trumps Presidential Campaign, and sympathetic Russian Allies, that subverted the 2016 Election in Donald Trumps favor.

SEE PART 2.

APPLICATION DEADLINE APPROACHING: MARCH 20, 2019: SUMMER SEMINAR PHILOSOPHY OF STATISTICS.

APPLICATION DEADLINE APPROACHING: MARCH 20, 2019 SUMMER SEMINAR PHILOSOPHY OF STATISTICS Today’s statistical crisis of replication is causing much introspection among practitioners, and serious changes in evidence policies are being debated. The issues cry out for philosophical illumination. We will offer a 2-week immersive seminar on Philosophy of Statistics (PhilStat) for faculty and post-docs in philosophy who wish to acquire or strengthen their background in PhilStat as it relates to philosophical problems of evidence and inference, to today’s statistical crisis of replication, and associated evidence-policy debates. We also invite social scientists and methodology researchers interested in strengthening their philosophical scholarship in this arena. We will consider up to 2 advanced Ph.D. students working on a dissertation directly in this area*. Approximately 12–15 applicants will be selected. Goals for participants: Gain the necessary background in statistical methodology to integrate PhilStat into their research and/or teaching. Study current debates between frequentist, Bayesian, likelihoodist and other methods, as they interrelate to (i) philosophical problems of evidence and inference, and to (ii) today’s data and statistical policy debates. All accepted participants will receive housing and a stipend. Place: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA Dates: July 28–August 11, 2019 Directors: Deborah Mayo (Philosophy) and Aris Spanos (Economics) For more information, see our website: SummerSeminarPhilStat.com Application deadline March 20, 2019: Application Instructions Download flyer *Note FAQs for updates on eligibility and much else. We will have special invited speakers including: Andrew Gelman, Clark Glymour, Dongchu Sun, Stephen Senn, Richard Morey.

The American Philosophical Association University of Delaware 31 Amstel Avenue, Newark, DE 19716

Philosophy without borders: our latest posts, 4-11 march 2019.

Dear Philosopher or Philosophically-Minded Person,

Launched in May 2017, PHILOSOPHY WITHOUT BORDERS, aka PWB, is an  
online mega-project for creating and sharing EIGHT different kinds of  
original philosophy, all of them freely available to anyone, anywhere,  
world-wide.

We’re reaching out to academic philosophers and independent  
philosophers, and to other critically thoughtful, insightful,  
reflective people, everywhere.

PWB is home-based on Patreon, here—
https://www.patreon.com/philosophywithoutborders

Here are our latest posts—

The New Inquisitors.
https://againstprofphil.org/2019/03/04/the-new-inquisitors/

Two Months Later: How The Native Hue of My New Year’s Resolutions Is  
Sicklied O’er With The Pale Cast of Song.
https://againstprofphil.org/2019/03/01/two-months-later-how-the-native-hue-of-my-new-years-resolutions-is-sicklied-oer-with-the-pale-cast-of-song/

Implications of Non-Conceptualism: The Existential Counterpunch.
https://againstprofphil.org/2019/02/27/implications-of-non-conceptualism-the-existential-counterpunch/

And here are our two journals—

BORDERLESS PHILOSOPHY
https://www.cckp.space/

CONTEMPORARY STUDIES IN KANTIAN PHILOSOPHY
https://www.cckp.space/

***

Again, PHILOSOPHY WITHOUT BORDERS is home-based on Patreon, here—
https://www.patreon.com/philosophywithoutborders

Please consider becoming a patron!