• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mantafort plea deal bad for Trump/Family/Campaign members

Mantafort plea deal bad for Trump/Family/Campaign members

  • Total voters
    39
Winston said:
Also slim to none chance that the big cheeto himself didn't know about that meeting.

Remember Trump has denied knowledge of the meeting. If history is a teacher, that means he knew about the meeting.
Click to expand...

Just like all of the sudden trump knew about the mistress payoffs, even at one point (and it's on video) he said he didn't.
 
year2late said:
Without a doubt the plea deal will lead to more subpoenas and with possible indictments. Who those people will be, I can only speculate. But I would think the Trump family would be a smidge nervous. If Trump is smart, he will put the twitterbox down and stop looking so guilty.
Click to expand...

To the bolded I say....

Ahem!......

Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, Ha, and...

Ha!
 
Captain Adverse said:
I don't understand why people think this plea deal is "bad" for the Trump Administration. :confused:

According to the plea deal citing the "Conspiracy against the United States" charge here:



Superseding criminal information against Paul J. Manafort - The Washington Post


So on the face of this issue, it has NOTHING to do with Trump-Russian Election Conspiracy.

It is all about Manafort's Ukrainian money laundering, tax fraud, failing to file foreign bank account reports, failing to register as a foreign agent for the prior issues, and lying to the DOJ about this activity. All but the lying occurred prior to 2016.

Recall, several Ukrainian and perhaps some Russian business parties were indicted over these "financial" crimes.

Therefore it is more likely than not whatever cooperation agreement Manafort made would be concerning witness testimony in the prosecution of those indicted foreign co-conspirators in the money-laundering scheme.

I suppose it's possible Trump or some member of his family might have some connection to this pre-campaign period scheme, but I see no allegations as an "unindicted co-conspirator" nor any "singing and composing" of such as of yet.
Click to expand...

Don't forget Manafort was on Ukraine's payroll while working with trump and didn't report it. Manfort, coincidentally was instrumental in changing the GOP platform to favor Ukraine prior to the election.

https://www.npr.org/2017/12/04/5683...d-change-to-party-platform-on-ukraine-support
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Trump is an utterly despicable human being. The problem for despicable people like Trump is they tend to surround themselves with other despicable people and those despicable people are not very loyal when push comes to shove.
Click to expand...

That's how all mob bosses are taken down - someone close to them "rats them out", as they say, "to save their own ass", as they say.
 
Cardinal said:
If I had told you a year ago that Trump's National Security Adviser, campaign director, foreign adviser, deputy campaign director and personal lawyer would all end up pleading guilty and/or serving prison time, would you have believed me?
Click to expand...

I'm going to make this post my new signature. Do you think our trump supporting friends will mind?
 
Is it just me that is craving a “nothing burger” with all the trimmings, right about now?
 
Captain Adverse said:
Therefore it is more likely than not whatever cooperation agreement Manafort made would be concerning witness testimony in the prosecution of those indicted foreign co-conspirators in the money-laundering scheme.
Click to expand...

Wait.

You believe Mueller's team who has handed off numerous cases like Cohen, Butina, etc., but pursued and kept Manafort's case...with two big indictments and what was to be two full criminal trials...everyone has claimed (even the judge in the first trial!) primarily to get a plea deal from Manafort.

Mueller's team, who is supposed to focus on Russian meddling 2016 + ties to Trump campaign...

And you think this was all to get a plea deal on Manafort, so he could implicate some Ukrainians in crimes similar to what Manafort is now likely to get a slap on the wrist for? People who will likely never see a day in a U.S. court. Some Ukrainians who are in no way related to their primary goal of Russian meddling in the 2016 election and ties to the Trump campaign, as Mueller has been directed to focus his investigation on?

Ignoring the fact that what Manafort did for those 10 years in committing those financial crimes, was basically to help Russia "meddle" in the Ukrainian election, by funneling money through Russian oligarch's, and working directly with KK who is believed to be a Russian intelligence asset, which is I don't know, -EXCATLY ****ING LIKE what Mueller is investigating with regards to the 2016 U.S. election?

Ignoring the Trump tower meeting that appears on its face to be the Trump campaign soliciting the undisclosed and covered-up information to help in their campaign, from the Russian government?

I just...well, it seems too absurd to believe you really mean that. Am I missing something?
 
Cardinal said:
If I had told you a year ago that Trump's National Security Adviser, campaign director, foreign adviser, deputy campaign director and personal lawyer would all end up pleading guilty and/or serving prison time, would you have believed me?
Click to expand...

lurchadams said:
I'm going to make this post my new signature. Do you think our trump supporting friends will mind?
Click to expand...
I would love to use it as well.
 
year2late said:
I would love to use it as well.
Click to expand...

We could start a trend.. kind of like the "Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhts uuuuuuuuuup"! of the 90's. Granted Cardinal's post is a little more wise, verbose and articulate than, -ahem- "Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat's uuuuuuuup!", But it's still catchy!
 
Captain Adverse said:
I don't understand why people think this plea deal is "bad" for the Trump Administration. :confused:

According to the plea deal citing the "Conspiracy against the United States" charge here:



Superseding criminal information against Paul J. Manafort - The Washington Post


So on the face of this issue, it has NOTHING to do with Trump-Russian Election Conspiracy.

It is all about Manafort's Ukrainian money laundering, tax fraud, failing to file foreign bank account reports, failing to register as a foreign agent for the prior issues, and lying to the DOJ about this activity. All but the lying occurred prior to 2016.

Recall, several Ukrainian and perhaps some Russian business parties were indicted over these "financial" crimes.

Therefore it is more likely than not whatever cooperation agreement Manafort made would be concerning witness testimony in the prosecution of those indicted foreign co-conspirators in the money-laundering scheme.

I suppose it's possible Trump or some member of his family might have some connection to this pre-campaign period scheme, but I see no allegations as an "unindicted co-conspirator" nor any "singing and composing" of such as of yet.
Click to expand...

That makes zero sense as it pertains to the mutual defense agreement. Think about it: I'm under investigation for insider stock trading, while you're under investigation for robbing liquor stores. What possible sense would it make for our legal team to have a mutual defense agreement?
 
Captain Adverse said:
I don't understand why people think this plea deal is "bad" for the Trump Administration. :confused:

According to the plea deal citing the "Conspiracy against the United States" charge here:



Superseding criminal information against Paul J. Manafort - The Washington Post


So on the face of this issue, it has NOTHING to do with Trump-Russian Election Conspiracy.

It is all about Manafort's Ukrainian money laundering, tax fraud, failing to file foreign bank account reports, failing to register as a foreign agent for the prior issues, and lying to the DOJ about this activity. All but the lying occurred prior to 2016.

Recall, several Ukrainian and perhaps some Russian business parties were indicted over these "financial" crimes.

Therefore it is more likely than not whatever cooperation agreement Manafort made would be concerning witness testimony in the prosecution of those indicted foreign co-conspirators in the money-laundering scheme.

I suppose it's possible Trump or some member of his family might have some connection to this pre-campaign period scheme, but I see no allegations as an "unindicted co-conspirator" nor any "singing and composing" of such as of yet.
Click to expand...

Ah, but it's not. Check out the first sentence of section 8.

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthe...44625ae1d687a0163b2/optimized/full.pdf#page=1

Screenshot_20180914-193259_Drive.jpg
 
If Manafort, as well as Cohen, has information that no crimes were committed then Mueller would have said "Nothing to see here. I'm done," this would all be over.

The investigation continues. Stay tuned.
 
Captain Adverse said:
Again, what charges were leveled that related directly to Mueller's primary investigation goal? :confused:

You have ONE "lying to government investigator's" plea of guilty...14 days in jail and the individual is denying Russia collusion.

ONE other pending "Lying" charge.

Then you have Manafort, convicted of eight counts and pleading guilty to other counts entirely concerned about un-related pre-election issues LISTED in the plea agreement.

Then you have Cohen, also pleading to crimes that had nothing to do with Trump-Russia collusion/conspiracy, along with an admission from his lawyer that Cohen has no knowledge of anything concerning such issues.

Please let me know when Mueller's investigation actually shows what he was appointed to prove/disprove. Then we can talk.
Click to expand...

I imagine we'll all find out at roughly the same time. After Mueller's investigation is over. Then we can talk.
 
Crosscheck said:
If that was to happen it is pretty good odds that trump will pardon them. And surprisingly I think it will only be a bump on the public's attention as there isn't much that could surprise us with this family.
Click to expand...

The power of the pardon has been less than impressive. I think these people all were involved in state crimes.
 
I was reminded today that during Nixon's problems, when articles of impeachment were drawn, one of those articles involved the offer of pardons and hush money being extended to Watergate defendants. If Manafort was directly offered a pardon for his silence, and that offer can be tied back to Trump, big trouble in Cheeto-land. Big, big trouble.
 
Mach said:
Wait.

You believe Mueller's team who has handed off numerous cases like Cohen, Butina, etc., but pursued and kept Manafort's case...with two big indictments and what was to be two full criminal trials...everyone has claimed (even the judge in the first trial!) primarily to get a plea deal from Manafort.

Mueller's team, who is supposed to focus on Russian meddling 2016 + ties to Trump campaign...

And you think this was all to get a plea deal on Manafort, so he could implicate some Ukrainians in crimes similar to what Manafort is now likely to get a slap on the wrist for? People who will likely never see a day in a U.S. court. Some Ukrainians who are in no way related to their primary goal of Russian meddling in the 2016 election and ties to the Trump campaign, as Mueller has been directed to focus his investigation on?

Ignoring the fact that what Manafort did for those 10 years in committing those financial crimes, was basically to help Russia "meddle" in the Ukrainian election, by funneling money through Russian oligarch's, and working directly with KK who is believed to be a Russian intelligence asset, which is I don't know, -EXCATLY ****ING LIKE what Mueller is investigating with regards to the 2016 U.S. election?

Ignoring the Trump tower meeting that appears on its face to be the Trump campaign soliciting the undisclosed and covered-up information to help in their campaign, from the Russian government?

I just...well, it seems too absurd to believe you really mean that. Am I missing something?
Click to expand...

Yes, rampant speculation that Manafort has some "Russia collusion" information Mueller is fishing for.

IMO Mueller kept control of the Manafort case primarily because the issues were based on business activities and representations in the Russian sphere...overseas.

The Cohen issues had nothing at all to do with "foreign interests," and the Butina issue involves failing to file as a "foreign agent" under FARA while seeking connections to exploit within the NRA. A case which seems to be falling apart at least when it comes to the "sex for access" allegations. Maria Butina, accused Russian spy, ordered to stay in jail after feds backtrack on sex-for-access claim | Fox News

As for the "Trump Tower meeting?" :roll:

Who notified them of possible dirt on Hillary from Russia? Rob Goldstone, a British music producer with ties to a Russian Billionaire. All reports show he misled Trump Jr. about who the meeting was with, where the "information" was coming from, and what the information was about. All parties agree Trump's group was seeking dirt...perfectly normal in a political campaign. All parties also agree it was a ruse for the Russian "Representatives" to get a foot in the door and lobby about Russian adoption restrictions.

So yes, I agree that Mueller's team is looking for anything to tie Trump's campaign to a Russian conspiracy, but I doubt Manafort has much to offer, even regarding the above-reference meeting. Time will tell.
 
If Manafort cleared 45 then Mueller would have ended his investigation.
 
Manafort pled guilty.
 
Mycroft said:
"Other"

All the stuff the article says the deal "means" is really nothing that Mueller can't get out of Manafort by using subpoenas, so I don't see how Mueller got anything out of the deal...except saving money since there's no need for a trial.

As far as all this speculation going on that Manafort will give Mueller something to use against Trump...yeah, at this point it nothing but speculation. Not worth my time.
Click to expand...

Worth enough of your time to post about it in an online forum apparently.
 
Mach said:
Wait.

You believe Mueller's team who has handed off numerous cases like Cohen, Butina, etc., but pursued and kept Manafort's case...with two big indictments and what was to be two full criminal trials...everyone has claimed (even the judge in the first trial!) primarily to get a plea deal from Manafort.

Mueller's team, who is supposed to focus on Russian meddling 2016 + ties to Trump campaign...

And you think this was all to get a plea deal on Manafort, so he could implicate some Ukrainians in crimes similar to what Manafort is now likely to get a slap on the wrist for? People who will likely never see a day in a U.S. court. Some Ukrainians who are in no way related to their primary goal of Russian meddling in the 2016 election and ties to the Trump campaign, as Mueller has been directed to focus his investigation on?

Ignoring the fact that what Manafort did for those 10 years in committing those financial crimes, was basically to help Russia "meddle" in the Ukrainian election, by funneling money through Russian oligarch's, and working directly with KK who is believed to be a Russian intelligence asset, which is I don't know, -EXCATLY ****ING LIKE what Mueller is investigating with regards to the 2016 U.S. election?

Ignoring the Trump tower meeting that appears on its face to be the Trump campaign soliciting the undisclosed and covered-up information to help in their campaign, from the Russian government?

I just...well, it seems too absurd to believe you really mean that. Am I missing something?
Click to expand...

Awesome post
 
Captain Adverse said:
Okay...and you think the "first sentence in section 8" is of particular significance because....?

IMO that is pretty standard language in such plea agreements, to insure there is no waffling on what will be required of the Defendant should he accept the plea. :shrug:
Click to expand...

The first sentence of section 8 is particularly significant because you wrongly speculated that:

"Therefore it is more likely than not whatever cooperation agreement Manafort made would be concerning witness testimony in*the prosecution of those indicted foreign co-conspirators*in the money-laundering scheme."

Section 8 is notably broad and does not include "pretty standard language" as you also wrongly speculated. If the purpose of the cooperation agreement was to assist the prosecution of indicted foreign co-conspirators (which is never going to happen), then Manafort and his attorney would have had the agreement stipulate that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom