Unprecedented *ruling* by the judge in the Sam Bankman-Fried trial shows fix is in

For those who don't pay attention to things outside their reach, the trial of crypto fraudster Sam Bankman-Fried is still going on.  And yesterday SBF took the stand.

For young Americans: Guilty perps almost never testify in their own defense, because that allows the prosecution to do what's called a "cross-examination," in which the prosecution gets to ask all sorts of devastating questions.  And since the perp volunteered to testify, they can no longer refuse to answer under the protection of the 5th Amendment.

SO...his decision to testify is *extremely* unusual.  And normally his extremely high-paid attorneys wouldn't let him do dat.  And yet...they did.

If you're starting to smell a rat, congratulations.  Because there was something else incredibly unusual about his testimony--and his cross-examination:  the judge didn't let the jury hear ANY of it.

That's right: the judge dismissed the jury, and allowed a "practice run" in which the prosecution played all their cards, which allowed SBF's attorneys to hear everything...and craft evasions to all of it.

If you think that's *totally* unprecedented, congratulations.

Even more astonishing was that the prosecution went along with the obvious charade, agreeing to it.

If you think this is SO bizarre that it proves the fix is in, you're right.

The biden/garland regime can't sentence SBF to anything serious, cuz if it does his attorneys will expose all the totally illegal "donations" his firm made to the Dem party, by name and amount.  And they'll have the bank records to prove it.

So the remedy is to only find him guilty of "failure to file a required report," the sentence for which is 90 days and a $1,000 fine.  He serves 90 days and all is forgotten.

That means the prosecution--with the judge's cooperation--has to blow the case.  Which is exactly what you're seeing.

And of course when SBF is only found guilty of the equivalent of illegal parking, the prosecution won't appeal, since they know the garland regime won't support them--cuz the fix is in.

The top priority of garland's DO"J" is protecting the biden regime.  So back to the article:

As the prosecution called its last witness on Wednesday, the defense filed a motion proposing to have SBF take the stand.  Judge Lewis Kaplan said he "wasn't convinced that the proposed topics for Bankman-Fried's testimony had sufficient cause to be argued in front of the jury."

Didja get that?  So instead of having SBF undergo devastating cross-ex before the jury, Kaplan *ruled* that SBF would testify in an unprecedented "dry-run," without the jury present.  This would allow the defense to hear every bit of the prosecution's cross-exam, and to craft a script for SBF that would parry all the questions.

As their client took the stand, Bankman-Fried was smooth under the gentle, guiding questions of his own lawyers.  As his current attorneys have said in court filings, Bankman-Fried was blaming any wrongs on advice from previous FTX lawyers.

After his smooth direct examination, SBF's Stanford law professor father gave him a grin and a thumbs up.

But on cross-examination Assistant U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon asked him a series of questions that exposed his lies.  Had he discussed with FTX's attorneys the legality of moving customer funds--without telling investors--to his wholly-controlled sister firm Alameda Research?

Bankman-Fried answered in his signature format, a series of misdirections, "yups," and stammers that previous interviewers have described as a "word salad" approach. While that worked well with naive reporters, the judge noted that SBF had an "interesting way of answering questions."  Yeah, well...

Sassoon noted that FTX had set text messages between employees to automatically delete after a short time, which seemed inconsistent with a document retention policy that the defense couldn't even produce.

In one tense moment, Sassoon pulled up a payment agreement between FTX and its trading firm, Alameda Research, and asked Bankman-Fried to find the section that he interpreted as allowing him to use FTX customer funds as he wished.  After a long pause SBF admitted that he had not done a "careful read" of the document.

After the cross-examination ended, the judge said he would decide whether to allow the testimony in front of the jury on Friday morning.

This entire charade of having the defendant testify without the jury present is SO rare, as it obviously reveals every question the so-called prosecution will ask.  And yet the gruberment went along with it.

The fix is in, folks.  It's so obvious.  And if the eventual finding is guilty of illegal parking, the garland regime will NOT appeal.  You just watch.  Again, the fix is in, to prevent SBF from revealing all the $100 MILLION his corrupt firm donated to biden and the Democrats.

Source.

https://fortune.com/crypto/2023/10/26/sam-bankman-fried-cross-examination-stumble-ftx-jury-fraud-trial/