It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Reuters: Manafort's former son-in-law cuts plea deal

page: 1
14

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 17 2018 @ 06:50 PM
link   
Reuters is reporting that Jeffrey Yohai, who divorced from Manafort's daughter in August of last year and who taken on Manafort as a silent partner in his real estate "business," has taken a plea deal from a federal prosecutor, the details of which are sealed.

Exclusive: Manafort's former son-in-law cuts plea deal, to cooperate with government - sources


NEW YORK (Reuters) - The former son-in-law of Paul Manafort, the one-time chairman of President Donald Trump’s campaign, has cut a plea deal with the Justice Department that requires him to cooperate with other criminal probes, two people with knowledge of the matter said.

Andrew Brown, a federal prosecutor in Los Angeles, had been overseeing an investigation into Yohai’s real estate and bank dealings in California and New York several months before Mueller was appointed to his post in May 2017.

Yohai’s agreement, which was concluded early this year, included him pleading guilty to misusing construction loan funds and to a count related to a bank account overdraft.

While the deal was cut with Brown’s office, the federal government “can ask for help at any time,” said one of the people familiar with the matter.


While there's no word on the specifics, let alone whether he will assist the Mueller team in the prosecution of his former father-in-law, it seems a strong possibility if he has relevant knowledge. And if Manafort was a co-conspirator in his former son-in-law's crimes, there's always the chance that he could have some more legal troubles.




posted on May, 17 2018 @ 07:20 PM
link   
Yeah, this tactic seems underhanded... for all cases.
Take for instance, hypothetically, there are two guys who did the same crime. The difference between them is one of them knows of another crime, and hasn’t reported it, which is kinda shady/wrong, in theory, right? That guy won’t have to serve the same sentence as the other guy, who has done less wrong... Why is this imbalance fair?... Then there’s the idea that something could be composed, because of what is expected to “help,” at any time?

Maybe I’m wrong. (Shrug)



posted on May, 17 2018 @ 07:37 PM
link   
Now the question is...

What kind of deal will Manafort try and make with Mueller. Will he rat out Jared and Trump jr, his co conspirators. Or go for the guy that threw him under the bus?

www.foxnews.com...


edit on 17-5-2018 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2018 @ 07:42 PM
link   


this tactic seems underhanded


Oh but Trump and his entire administration being criminals there's nothing wrong with that? What the hell is wrong with you people?



posted on May, 17 2018 @ 07:53 PM
link   
a reply to: CB328

Nothing.

After all, we didn't support obama or clinton. There are the true criminals.

No go ask yourself what is wrong with you



posted on May, 17 2018 @ 08:12 PM
link   
a reply to: visitedbythem

Obama and Clinton DO NOT CURRENTLY HOLD ANY PUBLIC OFFICE.

If you can prove Obama or Clinton broke the law, put them away. Republicans control the entire government. It shouldn't be that hard.

I hope you feel the same about Trump and his "friends".



posted on May, 17 2018 @ 08:28 PM
link   
The noose is tightening



posted on May, 17 2018 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Trumps guilty, I knew it



posted on May, 17 2018 @ 08:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
Trumps guilty, I knew it


Guilty of what?



posted on May, 17 2018 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: CB328

Straw man and deflection in your first sentence. Insult in your second...

You must NYT.



posted on May, 17 2018 @ 09:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: toysforadults
Trumps guilty, I knew it


Guilty of what?

Squatting.

He lives in the OP's head rent free and just won't leave.



posted on May, 17 2018 @ 11:24 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Personally... I think Mannaforts kind of a dirtbag. He's a money whore... he'll do anything for a buck, and doesn't much care whose side he's on to do it.

I also think it a mistake, to try to ascribe meaning to any of these players Mueller is scooping up. After all this bullcrap is over... they need to change the laws about Special Counsels, and how they do these kinds of investigations.

They way it appears at present, as an example, is Flynn's guilty plea was to get the SC to leave his son alone. It also sounds like there's a good chance there was some hinky shenanigans over at FBI with the Flynn interview FBI 302 forms.

Remember, Flynn was charged with lying to investigators, yet on multiple occasions his testimony was described as unguarded and he was believed by those who interviewed him, to be telling the truth. (Strzok and Special Agent Joe Pientka). What Flynn testified to, and the known fact patterns of his actions, have never been incongruent. (CNN has screwed up epically... and had to walk back some pretty absurd errors in reporting)

Somehow, the 302s appeared to have changed... and now Pientka's name is out there and he will no doubt be asked to give sworn testimony about the particulars of the Flynn interviews.

Mueller's crew are a bone crushing juggernaut. Whether you are innocent or committed crimes won't make much difference. Ask Mike Flynn...

So... ALL that to say... just being looked at by the Special Counsel is enough to get most folks who aren't billionaires to plead to something... because they know they will be, at a minimum, financially destroyed as a target of the SC, or worse.

That's pretty bad, when the penalty of even being looked at by the SC is personal financial destruction.
edit on 17-5-2018 by dasman888 because: edit



posted on May, 17 2018 @ 11:35 PM
link   
a reply to: CB328

...and there it is again.

So... mebbe you can provide some form of evidence about this criminality you speak of? In other words... make Muellers day, would ya? Would love to see some evidence. If there are substantive crimes... I'll be right there with ya yelling "prosecute!"



posted on May, 17 2018 @ 11:41 PM
link   
Manafort's former Son-In-Law? Judge T.S. Ellis III will go hyper ballistic on Mueller, if he gets this case, LOL.



posted on May, 17 2018 @ 11:44 PM
link   
a reply to: visitedbythem

No they aren't. You're being lied to and believing it even though you know your source is a liar. Smarten up.
edit on 5172018 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)

edit on 5172018 by Sillyolme because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 17 2018 @ 11:49 PM
link   
a reply to: dasman888

Pretty sure Mueller has it handled.



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 01:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: dasman888

Pretty sure Mueller has it handled.



Yeah, him and all his dem persecutors.


See how they ruuunnn...







posted on May, 18 2018 @ 04:39 AM
link   
a reply to: burgerbuddy

It's spelled Prosecutors not persecutors and they have a job to do.



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 04:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: toysforadults
Trumps guilty, I knew it


Guilty of what?


Don’t you Americans know anything about Donald Trump and his many years of laundering dirty Russian money?

HIs name kept coming up and names within his close circle of business friends in British Inteligence gathering operations into Russian criminals long before he ran for election

he’s crooked, and the FBI should have stuck hand cuffs on him long before his successful election run obviously due to his winning formula of being a liar and smearing all his oppositions and gullible voters who’s only source of information is social media sites from their mobile phones who eat up fake news daily while pointing at MSN and say they are the enemy

He’s a crook, he takes money from Russian criminals and he is a total embarrassment to everyone apart from rural bible bashing cult who also turn a blind eye to him not behaving like a Christian



posted on May, 18 2018 @ 08:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
a reply to: visitedbythem

Obama and Clinton DO NOT CURRENTLY HOLD ANY PUBLIC OFFICE.

If you can prove Obama or Clinton broke the law, put them away. Republicans control the entire government. It shouldn't be that hard.

I hope you feel the same about Trump and his "friends".

May I ask you a quick question?

DOES THE FACT THAT THEY DON'T HOLD PUBLIC OFFICE MAKE THEM IMMUNE TO THE LAW?




top topics



 
14

log in

join