Mueller Was Authorized to Investigate Paul Manafort’s Work for Ukraine

a reply to: shooterbrody

The investigation into collusion has not resulted in charges.

No charges against Manafort. There have been several guilty pleas from campaign staffers for lying to the FBI, etc. The investigation has not yet concluded.

And there is still this hanging overhead...
www.forbes.com...

Mr. Manafort and his team may be investigating the privilege claims they could employ to challenge the Special Counsel’s use of the seized materials.

www.documentcloud.org...

Link to nearly 300 pages of Mueller team submissions.
Key point is at p 9. In a memo from Rosenstein to Mueller dated August 2, 2017, Rosenstein apparently specifically authorised an investigation into allegations that Paul Manafort:

[c]ommitted a crime or crimes by colluding with Russian government officials with respect to the Russian government’s efforts to interfere with the 2016 election for President of the United States, in violation of United States law;

This is very specific. The allegation is that Manafort colluded with Russian government officials, not with Wikileaks or an ex-GRU agent.

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: DJW001

So without disclosing the memo the filing by manafort had standing?
Your source is behind a pay wall , has the judge ruled yet?

No; this news broke this morning. It is clearly targeted at Manafort and his legal team. They are trying to force him to "turn."

That is my concern, I know its a popular thing with the police using jail house informants and its been shown to be a flawed way of getting good intel.

Kind of like waterboarding vs a 6 pack and a pack of smokes, if things get bad enough mantafort will tell Mueller what they want to hear to make it stop, with no regard to truth. That should never be a criteria for impeachment in my opinion.

a reply to: crtrvt

so this has been asked 1000 times here, but I will ask again, what crime is collusion?
could the grand jury that granted indictments for the financial crimes have missed this "collusion"?

a reply to: DJW001

Still not understanding the strategy eh.

You'll get it soon when the Sun comes up.

😎

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: crtrvt

so this has been asked 1000 times here, but I will ask again, what crime is collusion?
could the grand jury that granted indictments for the financial crimes have missed this "collusion"?

Collusion is a word for a variety of actions, many of which are crimes such as criminal conspiracy and subverting election laws.

It's interesting to watch the narrative switch, though. We've gone from, "We never met with Russians" to "Yes, we met with Russians, but there was no collusion" to "Eh, so what if there was a smidge of collusion, is it even a crime??"

a reply to: crtrvt

As I have posted here previously, I would see ANY of these people in jail for their crimes if they broke the law. Justice should not be a r or d thing.
Interesting that the word was used in rosensteins memo as it of itself is not a crime, or is it?
Or again I ask did the grand jury just miss that in their indictments? The charges against manafort did come from the grand jury? Interesting they can indict a ham sandwich but not manafort for "collusion"?

originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: DJW001

lol nobody needs to with your thinly veiled ops...its obvious you connect Manaforts guilt to the sitting Prez, otherwise...who the hell cares if Manafort got caught being the crook we all know him as.[/quot

Manafort obviously a criminal in bed with the Russians is asked to run the campaign of a guy who is obviously in the pocket of the Russians, seems pretty straightforward . Birds of a feather ...

Trump will be charged with Trump's own crimes, no one need impute anything from someone else.

We care bc as Manafort becomes increasingly desperate he will consider cooperating and telling what he knows versus holding out for a pardon that could come from a president wanting to save his own rear.

originally posted by: Irishhaf

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: DJW001

So without disclosing the memo the filing by manafort had standing?
Your source is behind a pay wall , has the judge ruled yet?

No; this news broke this morning. It is clearly targeted at Manafort and his legal team. They are trying to force him to "turn."

That is my concern, I know its a popular thing with the police using jail house informants and its been shown to be a flawed way of getting good intel.

Kind of like waterboarding vs a 6 pack and a pack of smokes, if things get bad enough mantafort will tell Mueller what they want to hear to make it stop, with no regard to truth. That should never be a criteria for impeachment in my opinion.

No, he cannot just "say anything" unlike a murder, there will be a variety of ways to validate what Manafort says, other witnesses, such as Gates, Sessions and Kushner, travel dates, phone records, financial records, etc. The reason you want Manafort to turn is that if you go after a president you want it to be clear, irrefutable, truth, or you don't even bring the case. Mueller knows this better than I ever will.

That is also why the case is taking as long as it is - which isn't that long compared to Watergate and Clinton (Benghazi went too) because the case must be airtight, just like when Mueller prosecuted the Lockerbie bombings.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: crtrvt

As I have posted here previously, I would see ANY of these people in jail for their crimes if they broke the law. Justice should not be a r or d thing.
Interesting that the word was used in rosensteins memo as it of itself is not a crime, or is it?
Or again I ask did the grand jury just miss that in their indictments? The charges against manafort did come from the grand jury? Interesting they can indict a ham sandwich but not manafort for "collusion"?

Manafort cannot be charged with collusion because the crime is actually a campaign violation, taking something of value in pursuit of the campaign and not reporting the value, that crime can only be committed by the candidate.

Your point means nothing.

originally posted by: vinifalou
Pfft, what a novel.

Why aren't people going to jail yet?

Because those running our justice department are a punch of pussies.

Sorry for the unsavory language, but it is what it is.

And, of course, I mean "cats."

originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: DJW001

sure, Manafort may be a scumbag, but just like all the other plants, leakers, spies etc...like Mueller himself....none of this bears witness to a Trump impeachable offense.

What half the country and one party do not get, is that the very practical and more or less non materialistic fly over state folks were finally fed up enough with all of the lying, cheating and stealing going on in governance in this country...that any person that was honestly willing to speak up for their values...would get their vote.

Muller just STARTED looking into trump himself. trump is a liar, and has 0 business in the White House.

As for Muller, let me tell you something, Muller is more of a man than trump has been or ever will be. He has served this country his entire life..while trump was scamming people out of their hard earned Moneyl, with BS scams such as Trump U. And you have the nads to attack Muller? SAD!

originally posted by: Scrubdog

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: crtrvt

As I have posted here previously, I would see ANY of these people in jail for their crimes if they broke the law. Justice should not be a r or d thing.
Interesting that the word was used in rosensteins memo as it of itself is not a crime, or is it?
Or again I ask did the grand jury just miss that in their indictments? The charges against manafort did come from the grand jury? Interesting they can indict a ham sandwich but not manafort for "collusion"?

Manafort cannot be charged with collusion because the crime is actually a campaign violation, taking something of value in pursuit of the campaign and not reporting the value, that crime can only be committed by the candidate.

Your point means nothing.

So if "Manafort cannot be charged with collusion because the crime is actually a campaign violation" then why did rosenstein direct mueller to investigate it? Also why did the grand jury not indict manafort for "campaign violation"?

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Scrubdog

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: crtrvt

As I have posted here previously, I would see ANY of these people in jail for their crimes if they broke the law. Justice should not be a r or d thing.
Interesting that the word was used in rosensteins memo as it of itself is not a crime, or is it?
Or again I ask did the grand jury just miss that in their indictments? The charges against manafort did come from the grand jury? Interesting they can indict a ham sandwich but not manafort for "collusion"?

Manafort cannot be charged with collusion because the crime is actually a campaign violation, taking something of value in pursuit of the campaign and not reporting the value, that crime can only be committed by the candidate.

Your point means nothing.

So if "Manafort cannot be charged with collusion because the crime is actually a campaign violation" then why did rosenstein direct mueller to investigate it? Also why did the grand jury not indict manafort for "campaign violation"?

He was also instructed to investigate Manafort''s work in Ukraine, which would be " acting as an undeclared agent of a foreign power." That is also called "espionage." That's why all the secrecy.

a reply to: DJW001

You confuse"espionage" with a fara violation.
www.washingtonexaminer.com...

One unexpected aftershock of the 2016 election cycle is investigations into whether several key players violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act, a law enacted in 1938 to deal with German propaganda. When it comes to FARA violations, prosecutions are rare. Since 1966, in fact, the Justice Department has only brought seven prosecutions, resulting in just a single conviction.

Nevertheless, the indictment of Paul Manafort and Rick Gates charges both men with two different violations of FARA stemming from their work on behalf of political leaders in Ukraine — failing to register as the agent of a foreign principal and making false and misleading statements on a FARA disclosure.

but hey "espionage" sounds so much more devious.....
Make it sound as nasty as possible so people think there is something there.

I've written about foreign lobbying and Manafort for more than 20 years. During that time, I’ve seen only a handful of cases brought against people or organizations accused of not registering as foreign agents. And it was always some foreign group, or Washington outsider, or foreign group — the Cuban 5 or someone allegedly connected to Irish Republican Army — never a wired Washington lobbyist like Manafort. Yet Manafort, like dozens of other influence peddlers, has been operating in plain sight for years. Silverstein concludes that were it not for the existence of a special counsel probe, Manafort may never have been busted, arguing, "Manafort has been under investigation since 2014, but if the DOJ’s track record is any indicator, it’s quite likely that had he not been Trump’s campaign manager, Manafort would be kicking back and enjoying his allegedly laundered cash at this very moment."

oh was it you that earlier referenced investigating people because of political affiliation?

Using Department resources against potential political enemies? That would look really, really bad for this administration.

or something to that effect......

Surprised at all the folks still reaching deep in their underdrawers looking for the smallest leftover crumb.....
And coming up empty...

originally posted by: DJW001

He was also instructed to investigate Manafort''s work in Ukraine, which would be " acting as an undeclared agent of a foreign power." That is also called "espionage." That's why all the secrecy.

Q: Why would a special and independent counsel have to get "instructions" from somebody ?

🤦‍♀️👋

A: 📰

a reply to: DJW001


Oh a sevret memo from a person working for mueller. sounds legit. like legit as mueller railroading innocent men on whitey bolger case. the
man is known to use unverified and false evidence.


Ineed independent people to verify the veracity of this. muellers track record demands it.

a reply to: DJW001


FBI agent told me one time. never talk to them in a investigation. Because if you dont have perfect memory they will get you for lying. Either write it all down and get copies or let your lawyer speak.