I was only speaking of the 8 and yes he was convicted on all 8.
lol. Well yes, if you remove all the charges that he was
not found guilty of, then he was found guilty on 100% of charges!
And in the new deal he will be pleading guilty to 2 of them with the prosecutors dropping or not pursuing the other 6 but he will be admitting to them.
For the third time, admitting to the underlying allegations for purposes of allowing the prosecution to secure a conspiracy charge is not the same as admitting to the charges themselves. For example, Manafort will admit to money laundering, but not as a formal charge.
Also, it's 5 extra, not 6 extra.
The new charges mean that prosecutors have agreed to drop five counts, including money laundering, failing to register as a foreign agent and making false statements. Manafort appears set to admit to those allegations as part of the umbrella conspiracy-against-the-U.S. charge, but the individual charges and the potential prison time they carry are being dismissed.
And yes you suggested confessions were not proof of guilt because of the pressure or coercion that can be applied by the prosecutor.
I plead innocent. You misunderstood.
Of course confessions are not "proof" of guilt. They are highly suggestive of guilt. Pressure/coercion is just one vehicle that could create such a discrepancy. Anyway, this is not relevant.
You suggested a conviction was needed to ensure guilt.
No. I said that a plea to a minor charge under the cloud of a potential cooperation agreement and in the face of evidence of unprosecuted, more serious crimes is less convincing than a finding of guilt by a jury.
then when Manafort was convicted you stated that does not mean he is guilty and you cited an instance where someone was wrongly convicted to say 'see convictions can be wrong'.
I think you are missing the forest for the trees. Of course we can never "prove" anyone guilty of anything in the sense of a mathematical proof. But in the case of Manafort, there is no good reason to believe he is innocent of tax evasion and money laundering.
Therefore you set up a scenario that whether Trump cronies confess or are convicted you will dismiss it meaningless.
That's obviously false. I already stated that it seems clear that Manafort didn't pay his taxes and created illegal schemes to avoid detection. That's not "meaningless".