Perhaps Manafort's legal team needs to do some reading, maybe this will help from Rosenstein's order appointing Robert Mueller as Special Counsel and perhaps the GOP congressmen attacking Mueller's scope should read too, from Order No. 3915-2017:
(b) The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confined by then-FBI
Director James 8. Corney in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including:
(i)
any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and
(ii)
any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and
(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).
(c) If the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate, the Special Counsel is
authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters.
(d) Sections 600.4 through 600. l 0 of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations are
applicable to the Special Counsel.
7
In the end the collusion with Russia is going to be just a side note. The real charges against Trump and his co-conspirators are going to be money laundering and tax evasion. We can rest assured that Mueller and his team realize that the government currently is Republican controlled, and that many in Congress are already saying that collusion is not a crime. However, criminal conspiracy is a crime, but we can be sure that the congress will defer to act on that as well. However, financial crimes are prosecutable at a state level, and we can also bet that the state of New York is chumping at the bit to prosecute Trump and his ilk. If the irresponsible and partisan Congress refuses to act and impeach as they should, look for charges to be brought at a state level. We need to do all we can to rid ourselves of this traitorous and corrupt administration.
14
My memory may be getting a bit fuzzy, but I don't recall the Republican outrage when Ken Starr's investigation into an Arkansas land deal branched into salacious charges of an extramarital affair by the President.
10
Well a turn up for the books. Manafort and Trump pursuing legal recourse - one could be forgiven in thinking they were acting in concert; not me though!
It's an interesting scenario; one accused of misdemeanour, attempts to set the legal parameters! Oh, how fortunate to be so privileged that an option to contest due to untold financial assets exists for some people.
1
The Russian election hacking/collusion has found
much money laundering activities. It is with these discoveries that Manafort, and Our Fake So Called President and his grifter family will be indicted because the only reason that Russian operatives reached out to the Trump campaign was to get the financial sanctions lifted.
It was not about joining up and fighting terrorism, that was just a red herring. It was ALWAYS about money.
5
Snidely Whiplash can try to delay, but he will lose. If he committed a crime and they have evidence, he will be prosecuted.
1
The GOP must be feeling the impact of Ken Starr's investigation into Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky's affair. The carousel has come back to haunt them now.
3
Denied, and quickly.
Next!
Manafort and his legal team have probably guessed that Mueller is going to file a superseding indictment against him. Meaning, "So, you don't want to cooperate with us and get a reduction on these current charges? OK, here are the rest of the things we know you're guilty of..." Which means that Manafort will no longer be looking at 10 or 20 years in prison, but life.
Life in prison Paul? Maybe instead of trying to weasel out via inane legal challenges, you should cooperate with the investigation.
Manafort's legal team is probably thinking that if this tactic doesn't work, Paul can still cut a deal later. In this light, I think it would be a good move on Muller's part to let Manafort's legal team know that if they pursue their current course, it will void any possible plea deal for their client in the future.
4
Following the money is a classic investigative technique used thousands of times. If you're suspected of a crime and money is a tool used in the criminal enterprise then your financial records are fair game.
Maybe we'll finally see those tax returns Trump promised way back but he won't like them coming to light because they will show solid business connections between Trump Inc. and Russian banks of ill repute with close ties to Putin.
You need a crooked bank to make a crooked money transfer. And how did Trump get loans about a decade ago when he was up to his eyeballs in debt and no American bank would touch him? Enter Deutsche Bank who has all the necessary characteristics---a shady reputation, accusations of money laundering and connections with the Russians. Putin says: "Hey Don you need $1 billion cash? I've got a least $50 billion. I can loan it to you but...
there will be "requirements" that we'll discuss sometime in the future...I need an ally in the White House...". Fast forward to today and Trump who is Putin's admirer and student is in the White House. Scary. Really scary.
Welcome to the new Trumpocracy---
government of the Trump, by the Trump and only for the benefit of Trump.
4
From day one, my parents taoght me that the Policeman is nice, and that those who have nothing to hide, have nothing to fear.
Spread the net and trawl as much information as possible. If its benign, then shelve it. If it is not, then:
I
M
P
E
A
C
H
1
Where are the Federal tax returns Trump promised to release TWO YEARS AGO?
I am often anti-special/independent counsel. Not them personally, but the job. It's a mistake except when there is a clear crime and it's not a fishing expedition. Watergate and Iran-Contra were necessary. Whitewater was a fishing expedition and a good example of prosecutorial bullying and overreach. So is this one b/c so far, despite all the leaking and all the antipathy for Trump, we've heard no evidence of collusion and it does not seem clear that there would be any crime if there had been. In fact, all of the evidence we have so far is that whatever contacts there were showed there was no collusion unless we consider it talking to Russians about a Clinton. I realize that many readers here are so decidely anti-Trump, his mere existence is cause for impeachment to them, but it seems to me that this is one more example of why our two parties are useless so harmful. If demonstrable facts emerge of crimes, and aren't presented only by those trying to make deals for themselves for other crimes, like Lynch or Papad., I might change my mind.
Naturally, we should investigate whether Russia hacked the election or tried to hack voting. I can't tell yet whether Manafort did anything wrong. Prosecutors frequently exaggerate. But, it may be true and if it is, you'd like to think he'd be treated as those without power. Still, I agree this is overreach.
And, no, not a Trump supporter.
1
So you think that it's overreach because you don't know what an ongoing investigation that has not yet made it's case public has discovered, or what evidence has been presented in secret grand jury proceedings?
3
All the investigations you mentioned, which you're free to include several others,..lasted longer than Mueller's Investigation significantly.
And I think support for or against is irrelevant.
2
But Randy don't omit the KEY component of their Objective, thorough, and CONclusive opinion,.."not a Trump supporter":):):):)
There was a time when organized crime figures tended to prefer the politics of Republicans but they were not involved in leading the party, but Trump seems to have given them a place in to do so. At least it would seem that Trump is bringing in individuals who routinely behave criminally.
It does seem that before all the investigations are done, Trump will be indicted for having participated in money laundering for Russian oligarchs and criminals through his businesses.
9
This lawsuit is going nowhere. A Supreme court decision from the Civil Rights era, holds that federal courts have very limited power to enjoin State criminal prosecutions. There is no reason why Younger should not allow the district court to dismiss a federal on federal injunction request. Or the district judge assigned the case will rule it is related to the criminal case and, under the local rule, transfer the case to the judge presiding over the criminal proceedings -- who will most certainly stay the civil case until the criminal case is resolved.
2
No wonder Manafort wants Mueller's investigation to be limited: the wider it is, the more he's implicated, and you have to go back decades for it all to be clear, as I note here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/think-you-know-how-deep-trump-russia-goes...
4
Many commentators are overlooking a crucial sentence in the New York Times article, which states, "As part of that investigation, prosecutors indicted Mr. Manafort on money laundering charges related to years of foreign lobbying — but not related to Russian election interference or the Trump campaign." The Manafort lawsuit asserts that the Justice Department’s appointment order exceeded statutory limits by expanding the scope of the special counsel investigation to include matters not directly related to the Trump campaign or to the 2016 election. It appears Muller is requesting decades-old financial records of persons associated with the Trump campaign in hopes of discovering indictable offenses unrelated to the 2016 election or the Trump campaign.
3
What you apparently overlooked was that Rosenstein's authorization said that Mueller could prosecute any federal crimes he felt necessary or appropriate.
1
Manafort plays every angle to escape the fate that he has made for himself. He seems to think that only the U.S. government threatens him, so his buddy Trump will pardon him. The question is whether the Congress steps in to make this right and to make it clear that the President is not going to use the pardoning powers to conceal his own wrong doings which Manafort might reveal.
4
Manafort thinks that when a special prosecutor discovers criminal activities in the course of investigating different criminal activities, that special prosecutor should conceal those criminal activities instead of prosecuting them. Only a true criminal mind could think of that. Manafort seems to be a garden variety sociopathic criminal personality. Strange how Trump finds such people so appealing.
4
That's a new one! Sue the prosecutor who is gong to indict you.
Trump just sues everybody.
8
Trump packs Federal judges and leaves vacancies to drive cases through his picks. it feels like the Trump presidency is a soft slow motion coup attempt.
7
This lawsuit may have legs and it is being too easily dismissed by the pundits. It's deep rooted in fundamental fairness. Unfortunately, unmitigated authority creep, up till now, has been the order of the day.
This amounts to Manafort's admission that Mueller really has the goods on him.
7
Manafort trying hard for a pardon.
3
Monica Lewinski had nothing to do with the Whitewater land deal but Republicans used that special counsel for a real "witch hunt."
Republicans held 8-9 hearings to smear Hillary Clinton over the Benghazi attack and found she did nothing remotely inappropriate. They did however find tangentially that she used private email to communicate about government business, like Rice and Powell before her. A mistake to be sure but then they hammered her over that in a pique of hatred.
Today, we now know that various Trumps and associates repeatedly interacted with Russian government officials and surrogates to undermine Clinton, the DNC and release private communications during the campaign. It turns out several Trump officials have profited from assisting countries and leaders who are opposed to US national interests and then lied about it. All these people need to be held accountable for what are serious crimes.
Mueller needs to get to the bottom of this rotten mess.
17
Seriously?
Manafort's East European dealings, and his consulting for Putin's puppet President in Ukraine, are intimately related to the Trump administration's collusion with Russia.
Only a right-wing fanatic (Roy Moore?) could find in favor of Manafort's lawyers.
6
Any Republican who supports these efforts to limit the scope of Mueller's investigation must show us that he also condemned Kenneth Starr's Whitewater investigation expanding to include stains on dresses and the creative use of a cigar.
15
Is that like Democrats who forced Al Franken out of office being forced to criticize Bill Clinton for his "handling" of women?
The U.S. nearly always sacrifices it's President: Nixon, Reagan, Clinton (hubby and lady), Bush Jr...
Trump is by far the most inspiring sacrifice. He merits it the most and is the biggest crybaby.
1
"I am not a crook"!
My God they are all eating the same stew.
6
But Mr. Manafort’s strategy is a clever legal maneuver....
What's "clever" about using your millions to sue anyone who offends you?
5
Show us your taxes Don. Maybe then we can be done with you once and for all.
5
The man doth protest too much, methinks...?
5
The common way to launder money is by taking the payments foriegn governments gave Manafort and buy expensive real estate. Then turn around and mortgage the property making the money legal. Paul Manafort is like the poster child for money laundering. Expensive flashy clothes and lifestyle with lots of inexplicable payments from foriegn governments and mortgaged to the hilt properties. And Trump put this guy in a position of power in his campaign. Trump had to know. I figure Manafort will be testifying against Trump to avoid the rest of his life in federal prison. I mean what where these guys thinking. I dont feel sorry for Kushner and that 185 million dollar loan he didnt report to the FBI. Bunch of crooks.
10
It's goose and gander here, folks. While looking into a real-estate transaction (Whitewater) in the 1990s, Ken Starr decided that a stained blue dress was more interesting. Where was all the Republican outrage then?
12
Throwing good money after bad which is what manafort is getting ready to do. If you did not do anything wrong let the system work for you. On the other hand if you got caught with your hand in the cookie jar be a stand up guy and deal with it. Oh I forgot this is not a group of stand up guys.
3
Funny, that republicans cite that the Russian meddling investigation is not good for the country, so it should stop. Yet they forge on with Trump's declaration that the "Dems" should be investigated. And this sort of generic investigation meant to investigate Trump's political opponents is good for America? This is what the Trump era has brought America, "reversed" lies.
3
Imagine being investigated for criminal activity and telling the prosecutor that they cannot investigate aspects of your behavior!!
4
Seems like a variation of Al Capone suing Elliot Ness for using his tax situation to convict him of all his crimes such as bootlegging, homicide, etc, etc.
6
Seventeen pages and not one citation of any case law supporting it? Good luck with that.
9
From the moment that Trump fired Comey... From the moment that Trump and republicans hired Rosenstein... From the moment republicans chose Mueller... Chaos and blame! BAM! There has been increased effort to discredit the DOJ, the FBI and anyone else who does not run BLOCK and DEFENSE for Trump. Even if Trump is stupid and his lawyers have restrained him, expect the little republicans elves and cronies to be working overtime with Fox, Breitbart, and whoever else will willingly print their lies.
5
Am I crazy or what...a person can sue law enforcement to not investigate you , and the reason is..they're looking at too much ?
I find this absurd...if Manafort committed any crime in any way and it's revealed in any way...good. no foul.
16
On top of that, I am 92.5% sure that Mr. President is fully informed and supportive of the lawsuit.
3
Unimpressed with Mr. Manafort's desperate plan, which will likely uncover new charges against him during the discovery phase. That's why Trump doesn't follow through with his threats to sue.
The entire white house comes across like the reality television series of Jersey Shore--its brawls, obnoxious conversations, mean-spirited hit + run insults, despicable behavior, chain smoking, an open affair or two----utterly trashy.
Televisions blaring, no work getting done. You'll notice in each picture of the oval office Trump has nothing going on but a staged-looking telephone call. Not a note pad, pen or pencil. Not a folder of items to review. No stacks of documents to absorb.
Michael Wolff's observation in his blockbuster book and articles about this White House is there's a constant barrage of young women in short skirts, high boots + long flowing hair in sight all the time within view of offices and meeting rooms.
As to the commotion, Wolff wrote "This included screaming fights in the halls and in front of a bemused Trump in the Oval Office (when he was not the one screaming himself), together with leaks about what Russians your opponents might have been talking to."
9
Manafort was a paid Russian agent who the Ukrainians say received $600K/month for his services. Manafort has helped put dictators in place for a living. He was clearly the Russians' choice to support the bumbling Trump in his campaign for office. The Russians had a lot invested in both Manafort and Trump. Manafort doth protest too much - his ties to both Russia and Trump are not coincidental.
7
Mr. Appuzo starts his article, “President Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, sued the special counsel on Wednesday and asked a federal court to narrow his authority, escalating Republican efforts to discredit an investigation that has stretched longer than the White House expected.”
Mr. Appuzo’s wording suggests that Manafort is conspiring with Republicans against Mueller. Is that so or is Manafort simply using a legal maneuver to strengthen his own position. A significant point.
Later he writes, “Even if Mr. Manafort succeeds at every turn, his problems are not over. He could still face charges if new prosecutors decided to bring them”.
What new charges? Is Appuzo aware of other crimes committed by Manafort? That’s the way he makes it sound. What other potential charges are there. Something to do with Russian collusion?
Mr. Appuzo creates a narrative without offering specifyics. Reading the NY Times is starting to feel like watching an episode of the View. I suggest the Times sticks with the facts and trusts the American people to make intelligent decisions.
3
When guilty, cry foul. How transparent. I say it's time to begin impeachment proceedings, and clear the White House of the stench of corruption.
9
In what world do you defend yourself against criminal charges by suing to disqualify the prosecutor? In the world of special prosecutors, I guess.
Well, what do I know about the law. Has Manafort even taken his request through available channels in the justice department before seeking remedy in court? If not, couldn’t a judge simply disqualify the suit on its lack of merit without yet needing to consider its tenuous basis in law?
5
This suit will come back and bite him and Trump in the backside.
5
Tick tock tick tock
6
Might there be some further shoes to drop? Bet on it.
4
What judge is the case assigned to? Isn't such an assignment made concurrently with the filing of the lawsuit, by way of a blind draw? The identity of the assigned judge and his track record will have an immediate effect on how this case is handled. By way of example, there's a possibility that the lawsuit be immediately dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
4
In 1998 Paul Manafort said Bill Clinton could not be impeached because the Monica Lewinsky affair had nothing to do with the Whitewater investigation. Actually, he never said that but he wish he did. Either way, he is still a loser.
5
I'm guessing that Manafort's frivolous suit is designed to do the same thing as Trump's frivolous lawsuit regarding Wolff book -- provide a cover for not answering any specific questions from congressional investigations.
5
This reeks of desperation.
7
Investigation of the Clinton emails were conducted by Republicans over three years. Mueller has just begun.
7
“[Manafort’s] lawyers argue that Mr. Mueller should be allowed to investigate only matters that directly arise from the Russia investigation. That theory echoes comments made by Mr. Trump, who has said that Mr. Mueller cannot investigate his family’s finances.”
Trump’s potential to prevent Mueller (or subsequent investigators) from investigating Trump’s family’s finances is the most important issue of this story, and a crucial issue for the ongoing health of our democracy. Every potential president’s finances must be publicly scrutinized in order to expose potential leverage that any entity (and especially a foreign government) may have over a president.
The Electoral College elected Trump despite his unprecedented refusal to disclose his finances. If special investigators can be prevented by the president from scrutinizing every aspect of the president’s finances, then our democracy is setup to allow for the existence of a president that is incentivized to act on behalf of entities (including foreign governments) that have leverage over the president, rather than to act on behalf of The People. This would be a fundamental failure of democracy.
9
Here's the rub. Trump and his ilk are accustomed to using NDAs and legal threats to silence opponents and embarrassing details. In the corporate world you can use the law to hide crimes and get away with murder.
But Trump is a Federal employee, Manafort was in the hire of a government employee, as such they're accountable to the American people. Evidence and crimes uncovered through the process of a Federal investigation is part of public accountability. We don't live in a country of Kings, Prince, Princesses and Barons ... yet. The DOJ isn't the sheriff of Nottingham doing the King's bidding. The sooner Trump, his buddies and his supporters realize that the sooner the swamp can be drained.
7
These wheeler dealers lobbying for foreign governments and corporations will do anything for the all mighty dollar even treasonous actions. I don't doubt for a minute any of them have loyalty to America. The 1% of the world wheel and deal on their own interest and have no loyalty to their own country of origin
2
just find a trump appointed judge, and it will stop.
2
Do all rich people think they can solve their problems by siccing their lawyers on people? Sometimes, money can't get you off.
This claim -- like Donald's idiotic defamation claim -- are a complete waste of the court's time. Tedious.
6
If a cop walks into your house, and sees something illegal that has nothing to do with the reason he walked in, he is obligated to act on it.
This latest move by Manafort is nothing more than a rich man by ill gotten gains telling law inforcement that he get to tell them what they can and can not do.
I do not care what side of the political spectrum you are on. If as a republic, we do not support the rule of law, we are all going to be slaves to the 1%.
14
This administration and its cronies are SOOOOO corrupt. It is time to take back our country from these thieves who raid our coffers and strip us of our civil rights. Mid Terms can't come fast enough for me.
5
No surprises here. Most of those who have lived in NYC for some amount of time are aware of the connections between the city’s luxury real-estate moguls and money laundering oligarchs attempting to hide assets in the US. It’s practically an open secret, and one that the president’s businesses likely have some sort of ties to (ones which seem to have recently been referenced by Bannon). Trump’s insistence that Mueller not investigate his finances is likely due to just that, with the lawsuit acting as a not-so-subtle method of hampering the reveal of connections between his family and Russian oligarchs with Federation ties.
8
The best thing about all these lawsuits is the hope that all court findings will be made public, eventually. We deserve to know the truth.
4
This is desperate and pathetic stuff by Manafort.
He's doing all he can to gain some leverage but it won't do him any good.
An attack on the means by which they were found out rather than the substance of the allegations is usually the sign of a guilty person.
Hopefully he takes as many Trumps down with him as possible.
6
The more there is protest from Trump and his cronies the more it looks like they are guilty as charged. I think Mueller has the right to go wherever he wants in his investigation since there seems to be probable cause.
19
Yep, that's what some people said about Ken Starr when he investigated Bubba Clinton.
1
If, in the regular course of the investigation, other unrelated crimes are discovered, Manafort and the Republicans want Mueller to look the other way. That is what they want
Strange position for the self-declared "tough on crime" party to take, huh?
29
Manafort is acting on Trump's behalf when he sues to limit Mueller's authority to investigate financial crimes.
13
If you think this Manafort lawsuit is outrageous just wait until the dirt on Trump is about to be released. You will see him and his GOP toadies attempt to destroy this nations system of laws and governance before they allow that to happen.
Get ready...
21
I would argue they've been working to destroy the nation's system of laws and governance for decades. They're just doing it more openly with no shame now.
7
lawsuit? there must be some good stuff yet to be found.
6
Each day, after his alarm has buzzed and he's finished yawning, I wonder if Manafort does a Reality Check.
1
Question: What have you got to hide, Manafort?
Would be good to have "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth"
9
Another "Trumpian" development: "If it is not investigated, there is no crime" Lol!
15
Yoohoo! Kenneth Starr WAS "a partisan who had run amok" and pretty much admitted that years later. Starr was also fired as president of Baylor University for failure to respond to a...sexual violence scandal in the football program.
15
Let’s hope that Mr. Manafort spend all his illegal money on frivolous lawsuits before he goes to prison for treason.
12
This is pretty amusing. It’s fun to hear Republicans whine when the shoe is on the other foot. For YEARS, Republicans have instigated investigation after investigation against their political opponents, most leading to nothing. Now that they are getting a taste of their own medicine and the investigations are leading to indictments, suddenly they are outraged.
25
You cannot make this stuff up. You can't. When will our collective national nightmare be over?
21
Our collective nightmare ends when there is one man or woman with a shred of credibility that runs for President. Regardless of party, my lifetime has been devoid of decent choices for the office of President.
A crime is a crime is a crime. Unless the statute of limitations has passed, a duly sworn officer of the law has an obligation to act when he or she witnesses or identifies evidence of the commission of a crime. What if evidence of rape, murder or pedophilia are identified, should Mueller look the other way if that were the case? Collusion not good, but money laundering and murder okay?? To try and say that Mueller should be limited in his scope during this investigation is the most ridiculous legal ploy I've ever heard of.
21
Mueller's initial indictment of Manafort and Gates began building the case that Manafort is enmeshed with the Kremlin and has been richly rewarded for corrupting the democratic process and installing dictators in multiple foreign countries. He did it again in the USA and, for the first time, Manafort has a smart powerful team chasing him down. He should have stayed away from the US and his corruption might never have been prosecuted.
The same can be said for the Trump family. They thought they were entitled to run the country into the ground for their own benefit and that of their rich friends, but have found themselves and their long history of corruption and money laundering under the microscope.
16
The hypocrisy is astonishing. During Bill Clintons tenure as president, Ken Star and the republicans launched an investigation into a real estate transition that took place before Clinton was even president.
That investigation led to nothing however during the process Starr discovered that Clinton had an affair with an intern and lied about it, to which the republicans said this was an impeachable event.
Flash forward to today. Trump, his immediate family and cronies are need deep in money laundering, tax evasion, shady deals involving Russia and various satellite countries and yet the GOP continues to remain silent and/or cry foul.
I believe what Muller is uncovering is a cesspool of fraud, and corruption involving Trump and his family going back years and this is what is scaring Trump. There is a reason that all US banks stopped doing business with Trump and his family years ago. They know what crooks this guy and his family are.
26
They are not "knee" deep. They are "up to their necks."
6
This insanity is not surprising because of the egos involved. A court has no authority to limit a criminal investigation and paul's lawyers might want to think about the consequences of filing a frivolous lawsuit and abuse of process.
PROSECUTE RUSSIAGATE!
10
I have to believe that the expect Mueller to come down with a superseding indictment that charges even more serious crimes and they are desperately trying to head that off. Otherwise, they would just file a motion to dismiss the existing indictment.
Also, probably they are making a public case for a pardon, by carrying water for Trump in his campaign to discredit Mueller, the FBI, the intelligence agencies, and law enforcement generally.
I don't think this will end well for Manafort.
But, really, Republicans, isn't it just SO unfair when a special counsel finds evidence of unrelated crimes in the course of investigating another matter? Kind of like stumbling on evidence that someone dissembled under oath about an illicit affair when you are supposed to be investigating a real estate deal in Arkansas?
17
Kenneth Starr was, in fact, a partisan run amok. His pursuit of the Clintons and everyone they knew was probably the worst example of prosecutorial misconduct ever seen. I knew several of the victims. The NY Times never really went after the Starr team because their reporters were regular recipients of illegal grand jury leaks. Simple fairness demands that Trump and his people receive the same scrutiny. It is sad that Democrats just do not have the stomach for that level of unethical behavior.
7
Was Muller supposed to just pass discovered criminal malfeasance by? Isn’t he in fact legally required to take substantive legal action?
13
Only fortune tellers, sci-fi afficianados investigate the future. Everyone else has to contend with investigating the past.
3
"Your honor the Prosecutor doesn't have the time nor resources to cover my client's entire Criminal Enterprises."
10
I agree with Manafort. His actions in Kiev of Yanukovich have nothing to do with this investigation. To be snooping into them Mueller is assuming too broad a mandate and must be reined in and limits must be put on what this man can investigate.
He has no right to investigate matter which did not concern Trump at the time. Manafort's actions in Ukraine have no bearing on the current case. They are nothing but gratuitous snooping which the courts should stop.
3
How do you know Mueller didn't learn if Manaforts activities while investigating his Russian connections? And Mueller is just snooping, not investigating?
5
Beyond noting yeah, we all know what flag that is you're flappng and that, minor technical detail, Manafort's connections in the Ukraine are getting checked out because he seems to have jiggered the Republcan Party platform on behalf of Trump and Putin, heads up--wait'll stuff starts seeping out about Paulie and that Cypriot bank he ran along with Vlad's main money-launderer.
Better buckle up. Rubber mouthguard might also be wise.
7
@judyweller . . . You state "[Manafort's] actions in Kiev . . . have nothing to do with this investigation." This is your opinion, but it does not change the fact that the Justice Department has evidence of a serious crime and a duty to investigate. You may also believe Manafort's crimes are trivial, however, he is one more criminal associated with both Trump and Russia and you should be concerned why so many people associated with the Trump campaign and administration have such relationships. Corruption in Russia is widespread and well documented and, if Americans at the highest levels of Government are involved, that involvement should be rooted out and punished. That you, and others, argue against a fulsome investigation is deeply troubling because it implicitly condones the corrupt nature of this Administration. If we lower the standards we will tolerate from our elected officials to this extent, we aid and facilitate the erosion of democracy and democratic ideals. Once undermined, they are difficult to restore. If the state of democracy in Russia doesn't scare you, then look to South America where there are many examples of failed democracies and how difficult it is to find and walk the road back. These failures all start with corruption and we should push back hard before it becomes more widespread and people just shrug their shoulders instead of being outraged.
7
The Republicans in Congress who now are trying to undermine Mr. Mueller's investigation should not be so foolish as to think this will not come back around and discredit them as well. What goes around comes back around. These Congressmen who are trying to interfere with the Mueller "Russia" investigation may be seen as treasonous since the investigation is about a foreign government's interference with the American electoral system. How Mueller goes about his investigation is not Congress's decision to make. These Congressmen had best beware. They may have something to hide that Mueller may need to investigate.
7
It would seem to be that loans or finances related to Russia would be related to a Russian investigation into interference.
Maybe some tax returns could prove that there's nothing there worth investigating..
7
Are Manafort's attorney's taking orders from Trump's legal team? This is an idiotic strategy that is clearly not in the best interest of their client. This smacks of bad faith.
7
The lawyer who wrote the Special Counsel law called this suit "frivolous" and "silly" claiming it may be a plea for a pardon. He claimed the end result will only be to strengthen the hand of the Special Counsel. But, it does fit the pattern of a concerted attack that's being waged by the President, his Congressional allies, and conservative media against the Mueller investigation into what now appears to be both a clear case of obstruction of justice and collusion. The goal of this disinformation campaign appears to be undermine the credibility of the Russia probe and ultimately prevent articles of impeachment from being drawn up in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.
7
What is really scary is that if this case were in front of judges who do not know the law or have pledged loyalty to the donald, it would tighten his authoritarian grip. Also, it is scary who he has placed as US Attorneys for the same reason. He aims for no separation between himself and the justice department.
And he's being allowed to do this by whom?
4
Manafort is attempting to force the courts to limit the investigation. As a proxy of the Trump administration?
If Manafort gets his way in court, Mueller's work would be stymied. He is apparently getting too close to the Trumps and could likely already have a lot of evidence on DJT Jr which could lead to his father. A look at the finances of the Trump clan, including the President, will conclude if Sr. had any money coming in from Russian sources prior and during the election, as well as during 2017. As in all criminal investigations, the mantra of "follow the money" is the key to concluding this case. If Trump is getting worried, he may have a good reason. I hope we shall see...
2
Unless the judge is bought and paid in advance in cash, it is a waste of time and effort except for lawyers...
2
This won't be a very long trial. The investigation is about collusion with Russia. Manafort's history with Russia is fair game. Motive: money. Means: bank fraud, tax avoidance, laundering fronts. Opportunity: Trump's run for the presidency. Past behaviour: admissible. Crimes were detected. Do the crime, do the time, or make a deal for the trophy head.
6
We already know that Manafort has been charged with a number of serious offenses, and we also know that DJT and his sycophants are trying to discredit the investigation into Russia's meddling. It's not crazy to think that Trump is offering a quid pro quo in the form of a pardon to Manafort for filing this suit once he's convicted.
4
This is a completely groundless lawsuit that should be thrown out.
5
Let's say PM prevails over Mueller.
Another special prosecutor would be appointed to pursue PM's crimes that Mueller couldn't. He's going to get nailed.
2
Congratulations! This latest round of witch-hunting and tit-for-tat guarantees only that shabby politics and and self-serving politicians will continue their mastery over the US. Who is going to step up and put an end to this?
2
Nothing screams 'GUILTY' louder than Paul Manafort's efforts to rein in Robert Mueller by first suing him, then asking the judge to narrow the Russia investigation.
Case closed.
8
Begs the question, If you haven't done anything wrong or illegal, why are you so concerned about limiting the scope of Mr Mueller's investigation???
4
The Con Don is stacking OUR courts with his corrupt brethren.
Rachel Maddow (MSNBC 9 pm ET weeknights) reported last night that yesterday was the deadline for he and his corrupt lackey who heads OUR U.S. Justice Department, Jeffrey Sessions, to appoint new judges to the 146 vacant U.S. attorney seats caused when The Con Don fired them at the beginning of his hostile takeover. Second in command at the offices have been in charge since last night when their "temporary" appointments expired. Now there is no one to run the departments. Sessions did appoint 17 of their corrupt buddies to fill the seats where The Con Don might be convicted.
WE THE PEOPLE must PROTEST the destruction of OUR United States Court System. This must not stand in The United States of America. Not now. Not ever.
WE THE PEOPLE must throw the Mafia out of OUR governments at every level. NOW is the time.
17
My comment should read, " Second in command at the offices have been in charge UNTiL last night when their "temporary" appointments expired."
1
Paul Manafort's lawyers are trying to win the dumbest defense lawyer's award over Donald Trump's buffoon legal team. They have a long way to go.
15
“The lawsuit said Mr. Rosenstein had improperly given Mr. Mueller the authority to investigate “anything he stumbles across while investigating, no matter how remote.””
Interesting how the people who agree with this are also against sanctuary cities, which operate on the on the principle that casting a wide net does more harm than good. But I suppose it’s insane to look for consistency among these nutjobs.
13
Criminals don't get to say what Lawmen can do or look at...The State gives all Law officers the authority to see what criminals have done in the past and are doing now.
11
The L.A. D.A. can't prosecute a criminal for bank robbery in San Fran.
The criminal can tell him that.
The law has tight lids on what prosecutors can do.
3
Of course he can, if the San Francisco DA hires him to prosecute on his behalf. In this case, Muller was hired. Moreover, Mueller's superior has testified before Congress that he doesn't think Mueller has exceeded his mandate. That's all the authority he needs.
1
Back when I played hockey, I got annoyed when the ref called a penalty on me. It didn’t mean that I didn’t deserve the penalty. Manafort needs to go to the box and stop whining about getting caught doing something illegal.
15
"...The case faces an uphill climb because Mr. Rosenstein has said publicly that he has specifically approved every significant step that Mr. Mueller has taken in the investigation...
Whatever Manafort and Flynn may have done, one does have to ask the questions
> Are they the only two people existing within The Beltway, who've done things like this
> Are Republicans disproprortionately corrupt - per statute, not the progressive litmus tests - vs Democrats
> If not, why couldn't Repbublicans make a general argument of "political harassment" by the Deep State Agencies, along one of the very same lines of thinking that're being used for prima-facie evidence of gender inequity
Said another way, if the leadership team of any business is >90% male, it surely follows that some women must've been harassed a/o discriminated against, along the way
Consistent with that zeitgeist, how can Deep State Agents argue that they can be personally very partisan Democrats - and dislike Trump very personally [bigly?] - and yet conduct a fair investigation
To a non-lawyer, it seems that Manafort could not only pursue redress for the Investigation overstepping its bounds, but for doing so with prejudice and malice
...
As far as Rosenstein "approving" everything - sounds more like your crowdsourced shoutdowns that climate science has been expert-settled, than any introduction of fact or objective reasoning
And we don't even talk about the malicious and selective leaks along the way
2
Fusion GPS would disagree with your fairly tail
5
Sounds like the speeders defense that everyone else is speeding, too, so why pick on just lil ol me. He still gets the ticket.
5
Thanks for making my point...
Selective enforcement is barely tolerable - the arguments have been that it's affordable, and an effective deterrent...
But you conflate selective enforcement with selective prosecution - which can be far more personal, partisan - or both...
The problem I have with the idea of a “special prosecutor” being given free reign to investigate any and all potential acts of crime, regardless of any initial credible evidence of a crime, is that this is tantamount to “big brother” style tyranny. I didn’t like it when the Republicans did this to Clinton (to investigate Whitewater), and I think even less of it now, considering that there was never any credible evidence that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians, except for a phony file on Trump that was put together by a former Russian spy and paid for by democrats!
These low level “persecutions” by the special prosecutor should have been investigated by the FBI years ago when the alleged crimes were committed and prosecuted in federal court. That’s usually how it’s done in a Democracy that believes in the rule of law and the rights of a defendant to due process.
2
Mueller's mandate was to investigate "any links" between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign, which had the intent or effect of interference in the election (as well as any other federal crimes of any nature, revealed in the course). Direct collusion by Trump himself may or may not yet be revealed, but it's not necessary to validate the investigation. Indictments and guilty pleas in hand, as well as certain public statements by Trump family members, have already done that.
7
What crimes do you want exempted, is there a list?
8
The evidence we've seen thus far is likely just the tiny tip of the iceberg, so none of us truly knows what evidence Mueller and his team might have. Insisting they wrap it up or hurry the investigation based on that myopic view is just political posturing and has nothing to do with justice, which sometimes takes time to occur.
With all that said, even with the little we've seen (assuming you're actually paying attention), to suggest "there was never any credible evidence that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians, except for a phony file on Trump that was put together by a former Russian spy and paid for by democrats" is at the very least ignorance, if not outright dishonesty, on your part.
3
A brilliant law suit. Courts are limited by their subject matter jurisdiction. A special prosecutor by definition is limited by his subject matter jurisdiction. If this were not the case a special prosecutor would be a never ending star chamber investigation.
4
Actually, that's "Starr" chamber, and there in lies the evidence that your position is incorrect. Any crimes discovered along the way during an investigation are fair game.
5
Since when would a pattern of corrupt money laundering through well known Russian proxies aimed at undermining Ukrainian democracy NOT be relevant to charges (for which there is independent evidence) of meetings of Manafort with Russian officials or proxies in search of illegally obtained information, to be used illegally, for Trump's campaign...all while Manafort was Trump's campaign manager?
4
Another narcissist just like his former "boss" who thinks the "Russia investigation" should be curtailed according to his wants and needs. Any judge who agrees with this suit should resign. This special counsel's investigation is about the American electoral system and how Mueller gets there is for the present Mueller's decision. We've had enough of these oligarchs like Trump and Manafort controlling the lives of all the rest of us peons. Hopefully we are not becoming another Ukraine or Russia, in spite of Trump's desire to be another Putin.
15
The wonders of the US legal system....don't look for the truth if one can loophole out of the investigation. (only if one has the money.)
2
The plot thickens. Based on Bannon’s comments in a soon to be released book, Mueller may well interview Bannon next regarding the “Russian investigation” and obtain hard evidence of Trump’s involvement, which in turn might shed even more light on the fiasco that is the Trump Administration. Every day it is getting closer to proving Treason. Which is why the Republicans are howling to get rid of Mueller. They are giving cover to Trump so that If Trump fires Mueller he can say that “Congress made me do it”. Great strategy.
8
Who is funding this expensive legal maneuver? I thought Manafort was deep in debt to Russians.
6
Given the fact that there has been some evidence of bias on the part of upper FBI personnel it might be an opportune time for Mr Mueller to respond, devastating or not, and put to rest Mr Trumps accusations of a witch hunt.
4
Mueller and Rosenstein need to put the pedal to the metal here. Thorough is one thing but if it takes too long it starts to smack of Whitewater and the Dems don't need that being throw out there.
5
Short and well said
The "collusion" charge is already heavily overused and increasingly dismissed.
1
Ken Starr was appointed to investigate "Whitewater", a failed real estate venture in which the Clinton's were involved, and the death of Vince Foster. The "investigation" lasted from 1994 to 1998, and despite Starr's passionate pursuit, the Clinton's were not charged with any crime regarding Watergate or Foster.
As an aside, however, Starr discovered and investigated the Monica Lewinsky scandal, that brought about Bill Clinton's impeachment by the House and ultimate acquittal in the Senate.
Starr's lengthy and expensive investigations were criticized as political because of the constant drip of strategic "leaks", and of the ultimate "Starr Report" which included salacious but irrelevant details of the Lewinsky episode.
Guess what? Not a peep about overreaching or straying from his initial mandate from the Republicans. They were strongly in favor of any dirt they hoped he could find on Clinton.
So now the party of hypocrisy is enraged, deeply offended, that Mueller's investigation is bringing to light other crimes by those surrounding Trump - maybe Trump himself. What is he supposed to do as a sworn officer of the court? Ignore them? Wouldn't that be a nice little gift to the felons that inhabit this administration and its campaign.
The rest of the country admires the professionalism Mueller's investigation has shown, and we have no reason to think the man himself is anything other than honorable as professed - bipartisan - when he began
16
How can the charges of money laundering even be considered outside scope? Clearly, if Manafort is paid by Russians from their ill-gotten gains, it is entirely possible that he owes them favors. If he owes them, he does their bidding, including changes to the Republican platform to exclude condemnation of Ukraine invasion. Since he demonstrates his value in this way, why would Russians not promote him and his boss through their disinformation campaign? These things are all linked ... quid pro quid everywhere ... all the way back to the 2008 recession, which saw the Don is such sad financial shape, and being rescued by Russian oligarch money and their favorite laundry Deutsch Bank. These people play a long game ... running Don just fanned the flames of racism in the birther charges ... running for President could create some so much more discord.
10
Mueller must be on the right path. He seems to make a lot of people squirm. Fine upstanding types. Let’s face it though, the money that has corrupted politics in this country is the real story here. A flawed Supreme Court that allows eminent domain to be used against private property owners, giving corporations the same rights as an individual. Two Supreme Court judges tainted. Yes mueller is on the right track. To expose how far from the people this government and the republicans in general, have distorted our basic principal of by the people, for the people.
12
So if I understand Manafort's argument correctly, he is suggesting that a criminal investigator should have tunnel vision, and not act on anything other than very specific limited matters that they are first specifically directed to investigate. By that reasoning, if a cop investigating a murder finds that a person of interest in the murder happens to be involved in unrelated criminal activity, they are to ignore that unrelated activity and not charge the criminal in that matter. By this reasoning, the bank robbers at the start of "Dirty Harry" would have argued that Harry had no right to interrupt his lunch break and proceed to interfere with the robbers' getaway.
4
Kenneth Starr went from Whitewater to Monica Lewinsky despite that totally unconnected. Manafort's ties to Moscow and its surrogates are well-established and it has been his business for many years. He also served as Trump's campaign manager so...any judge who doesn't see anything and everything about Manafort's finances as fair game isn't qualified to sit on the bench.
9
"The lawsuit said Mr. Rosenstein had improperly given Mr. Mueller the authority to investigate 'anything he stumbles across while investigating, no matter how remote.'”
So he's suing a law enforcement official for enforcing the law? Now there's a novel legal theory.
8
Funny how conservatives never had any concerns about Ken Starr overreaching
9
Your Honor, I was stopped for speeding but they had no business asking about the dead body next to me on the seat.
9
The old adage applies to here:
"The fox condemns the trap but not himself."
4
Manafort is a traitor to our country. He is a reprehensible being (human?). His lawsuit shows how immoral he really is. I pray that his suit is thrown and laughed out of court.
6
To the contrary, Paul Manafort - Mueller needs more authority, not less.
There was a piece of gossip on "Morning Joe" this morning. It was that on New Year's Eve, at his party, that Trump was incapable of recognizing his "friends".
That should scare the pants off you, Paul.
All that stands between you and the dreaded "full investigation", is a man called Donald J. Trump.
If there is no DJT then you have no protection.
And, don't be counting on those Republicans in Congress.
It's true that they have traded in their Klown Kar shenanigans for the more difficult art of boot-licking, but their only "protection" also resides in the Oval Office, too. The doubts are beginning to come: Who is "in charge"? What happens if Trump loses his ability to write his name?
I understand why you're pushing this lawsuit - but the fact is, Paul, you may be just a hair too late.
The lights are going out in the White House, Paul.
Hope you've got a flashlight.
7
No one needs a mandate to go after people who brake the law. This is another outrageous ploy to try to get himself off. And even if some judge were to agree with him, the information gathered can still go to a regular prosecutor to continue the process. How did we fall into the hands of such unscrupulous and totally unacceptable bunch: Trump, Manafort, Flynn, etc.
11
Interesting how that "mandate" is suspended when it suits political needs, as when they failed to prosecute the known lies of the Clinton computer tech and then his destruction of evidence.
2
This is a man who for a living criminally interferes with elections in other countries. Then comes back to work for Trump to fix his election. Courage!? More like thug, traitor, sell his mother for a buck kind of guy. Incredibly nervie creep. He should be deported, like the rest of this administration.
15
Sam Spade (Humphrey Bogart) to Brigid O'Shaughnessy (Mary Astor) in The Maltese Falcon:
“Don't be silly. You're taking the fall.”
This lawsuit ain't gonna work on Mueller, Paul.
And Trump is not gonna pardon you on account of you showing loyalty to him.
Don't be silly. You're taking the fall.
11
Trying to discredit Mueller, and now, attempting -- primarily, as it seems to me -- to create a protracted diversion, both are new forms of obstruction of justice. Add them to the steaming pile of malfeasance coiling around Donald Trump like something smelly and brown in a toilet bowl.
BTW, Kenneth Starr was appointed to investigate Vince Foster's suicide and the Whitewater real estate matter. That investigation wandered significantly around to give us the Monica Lewinsky affair. Bill Clinton's impeachment was not related in any way to the original scope of Starr's investigation. Add that to the steaming pile of hypocrisy coiling around all things republican.
17
Precisely - again, the republicans have a soft spine given what they like to do to their opposition and what the accept in their own.
4
Learn this vocabulary word: Demurer
Actually, it's "demurrer," and it doesn't apply in Federal Courts.
2
“The lawsuit said Mr. Rosenstein had improperly given Mr. Mueller the authority to investigate ‘anything he stumbles across while investigating, no matter how remote.’”
First, Mueller didn’t ‘stumble across” just anything, he “stumbled across” money laundering, which is one of the types of crimes the FBI is supposed to handle.
Second, Mueller didn’t stumble across it, he pursued it. Money laundering by a high-level Trump campaign operative with deep ties to Russia is anything but “remote” to the investigation (exactly what the lawsuit tries to deny by using the “stumbles across” language). Money could well be a motive, even the prime motive, for possible collusion. This seems likely if, as some suspect, Trump’s (and his family’s) ultimate goal in seeking the presidency was huge business payoffs from Russia post-presidency.
Third, we don’t know what Mueller knows from this Manafort investigation that might directly relate to collusion and election meddling. And he’s not done yet. There could be more forthcoming if Manafort should decide to talk.
12
Oh well - let's just hold up a sign now that says "I'm Guilty" because he's pretty much declared that by instigating a lawsuit.
6
Now it is Russian money v. Mueller.
8
"Your honor this is an outrage,...they were investigating my client for drugs, not the dead bodies they uncovered!!!!"
11
Paul Manafort's lawsuit against Robert Mueller must have the GOP blessing, as spineless Republicans seek to protect Trump. No doubt Steve Bannon's revelations in Michael Moore's new book confirms Mueller's investigations: “This is all about money laundering. Mueller chose [senior prosecutor Andrew] Weissmann first and he is a money-laundering guy. Their path to fucking Trump goes right through Paul Manafort, Don Jr and Jared Kushner … It’s as plain as a hair on your face.”
Bannon is a highly intelligent figure and he must have observed quite a lot during the time he spent with Trump's family. Donald Trump Jr said at a real estate conference in 2008: "We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”
Does a "federal court" the competence to "narrow" Mueller's authority? It's about investigating serious offenses like money laundering and possible collusion with a hostile government.
8
There ya go. The evasive strateg of Trump ally. Manafort who clearly broke many Federal laws with moving undeclared international money and acting as an Unregistered Foreign Agent coming to mind though there are probably many. His goal of limiting the scope of the investigation is bogus and absurd in that a Special Prosecutor must reveal and address any crimes that are uncovered. Manafort is a criminal. There may even be “Crimes Against The United States and complicity in Obstruction Of Justice. He’s a bad person and huge international con with ties to Putin oligarchs here and abroad for sure.
Trump’s people and the GOP are the toxic debris that keeps on smoldering.
11
These Republicans are such cry babies and hypocrites. Kenneth Star was appointed special prosecutor to dig up dirt on the Clinton's Whitewater investments, a real estate deal that they lost money on. But what did he dig up? A one time sexual encounter that occurred in a pantry off the oval office and for which Bill Clinton later lied about. And even though this had absolutely nothing to do with Whitewater, Kenneth Star was allowed to use it to start an impeachment process that went all the way to the brink of removing a sitting President.
Back then, not a single Republican thought that the special prosecutor had overstepped his authority.
17
Ken Star was appointed under the independent counsel statute, which was subsequently repealed by congress because of the over reaching by Star. So any attempt to justify over reaching by Mueller by stating that Star over reached and nobody complained ins entirely misplaced.
4
Every action against Trump unwittingly exposes the hypocrisy of democrats, none more so than their scrambling to find loopholes and tax avoidance strategies in high-tax states.
2
Two words. Kenneth. Starr.
4
“Two wrongs don’t make a right”
So Mueller should ignore evidence of crimes that he uncovers in the course of his investigation? In what world does law enforcement work like that?
4
What's the "Wrong" Part? Just quoting something doesn't make it true.
2
Reined in? I say give Mueller as many trusty steeds as he needs to ride roughshod on this crew.
6
Manafort must have a lot of money to be wasting on this ridiculous suit.
A Grand Jury investigation is exactly that, an investigation. And if evidence of other wrongdoing is revealed that is related - or not related - to the initial target investigation, the prosecutor moves on it. Not to do would be a dereliction of his duty.
What a joke - imaging a GJ investigation into credit card fraud that, during the course of which drug smuggling is revealed. Would the prosecutor ignore that ? Of course not.
i would not be surprised if the judge assesses fess for Manafort wasting the courts time and filing frivolous suits
Prediction? Hands down - DISMISSED.
8
The entire Mueller witch hunt has one purpose -- to cast doubts on the legitimacy of the election and vindicate the idiotic Democrat policy of having no platform other than to oppose the President that about 80 million Americans love or at least support for his agenda.
Idiocy? Yes. Because it will not win a single seat for the party of Harvey Weinstein, Al Franken, and Matt Lauer, the inescapably abusive, disrespectful heart of today's horribly corrupt Democrat party.
Manafort is correct to sue the Chief Biased Witch-Hunter Mueller. His incompetent handling of his duties, his team of biased FBI and Clintonian "investigators", and the Comey-Mueller-Rosenstein manipulation of the whole thing to carry out, they hope, what would amount to a coup d'tat in violation of the will of the American electorate, is reprehensible.
Manafort may have moved money around to minimize taxes, but so what. Flynn, ambushed in a virtual "sting" interview without his lawyer may have technically "lied" to anti-Trump FBI man Strozyk, but he his "crime" is nothing.
Collusion is something we are supposed to be SHOCKED over, but even though nobody in Trump's camp ever did and the REAL criminality is Hillary's, SO WHAT if he talked to, asked for ALL the Hillary dirt emails they had, and promised to have breakfast with them to try to rebuild our relationship with Russia? He didn't, but MORE POWER TO HIM IF HE DID!!
We love the man. We don't care what you say or do. We will not surrender.
2
Here is what I want you know. You are the minority on this. You were in the minority on election day, and that minority has shrunk massively since. I do not care if you love the man or not. You support a man who despises and preys upon minority groups in society...but your insecurity comes from the fact that YOU are the minority now. Only a waning group of people think this is a decent way to run government. Your response that 1) Trump didn't do anything illegal and 2) we don't care if he did, is not something any decent parent would accept from a teenager. If you want to change the laws regarding foreign involvement in elections go ahead and do that...don't break them and then assert that you don't like the laws. Finally, don't use the word "think" as your avatar to support a white house that is systematically flushing thinking out of government. Why not use "racist" or "tantrum" or "bitterness" or "rage" instead?
10
Criminals can sue the cops for investigating them? Who knew?
1
Interesting fishing expedition...Ken Starr started in Whitewater and ended up in a blue dress...good try, Paul.
2
Which led to the repeal of the independent counsel statute.
2
Awww, Paul, you're spoiling all the fun....but don't worry, I'm sure you'll still get the Full Nunes in your investigation...and a whole lot more ugly will be found than Nunes ever did. And to think, treason and corruption investigated, maybe even *punished*! What's the world coming to?
Kenneth W. Starr was a partisan who ran amok. All accusations aren't equivalent. #falseequivalence
1
Frivilous. It will be dismissed and Manfort will go to jail.
6
While Trump calls Bannon crazy and Bannon counterpunches, now we get delusional Paul Manafort. (One of the national pollsters should query us in the electorate about who we think is the craziest person in Trump's circle. Fun, fun!)
Ah, Paul Manafort. If he isn't losing his mind (as Bannon is, according to prez), he certainly must be close, based on his decision to sue Robert Mueller on grounds that the charges Mueller has brought against him (money laundering) have nothing to do with the investigation of the Trump campaign's alleged Russian collusion during the 2016 presidential race. (Great logic there, Manafort.)
Obviously scareder than a banned Trump Tweet, Manafort must be wondering what to do next! -- and inquiring minds want to know! (Probably he'll ask for clemency on a claim that Santa said he was a good boy over the holidays...)
Meanwhile, Manafort -- and Flynn and Papadopoulos and Gates and all the other Deplorables in Trump's circle yet to be indicted for wrongdoing -- should be jailed, above all, for wasting millions of our taxes on their trials.
10
Certain delusions are born of having extraordinary wealth -- one of which being that the rules never apply to you - they are just suggestions that - with enough money and the right connections - you can ignore. Manafort should relocate to Russia or the Ukraine - he has their system down.
7
He's hoping to put this before some corrupt republican judge who also has financial crimes and flimflam in his past. Who realizes how unfair it is. Isn't that how Russian oligarchs buy their positions?
3
I thought Mueller reserved the right to charge Manafort with more crimes if he felt that would be appropriate? The best defense is a good offense?
5
The fact that he's suing shows he has no defense and is grasping at straws. Republicans were never concerned when Kenneth Starr's investigation of Clinton was poking into all kinds of things.
10
No, I want all this corruption rooted and pulled out even if it takes years!
11
Hilarious. The more they scream, the closer Mueller gets.
7
Two words: Blue dress.
Ask Ken Starr about the limits on a special prosecutor.
6
“What goes around comes around” or “as you sow, so shall you reap” is the basic understanding of how karma, the law of cause and effect, works.
Trump, Manafort, Fynn, Donny Jr, Jared, Ivanka- the time has come for you to pay the Piper. All of you have done grave injustices to our society. The chicken is coming home to roost. May you live to regret your actions and how you have harmed so many around you!
7
Dear Paul,
It is extremely hard to put toothpaste back in the tube.
Good luck with that (NOT).
4
In this day and age of electronics, security cameras, and forensic investigations, a person charged who is not guilty is almost non-existent. BTW, am I the only one who thinks Manafort wears a wig?
3
Anyone remember how the Whitewater investigation by Ken Starr led to the impeachment proceedings against Bill Clinton for lying about an affair?
7
If there was any doubt that "legal is a construct of the powerful" imagine if a low level drug offender sued to limit the scope of the prosecutors investigation.
4
Imagine a prosecutor forced to investigate malfeasance in "tax evasion" but can't investigate a murder if discovered.
The Supreme Court, even filled with the usual GOP dunces, would never go for it.
6
The Russia investigation should be narrowed to just those people who tried to share private campaign information with foreign nationals for the purpose of erasing prior debts. Oh, wait, never mind.
10
Laughable nonsense from the long-time criminal Mr. Manafort. He will spend the rest of his life in prison, and not the country-club prison, but elsewhere unless he cooperates with the Mueller group. He has zero basis for the nonsense that he is proposing, which is a clear attempt to garner political, not any kind of judicial decision, from Mr. Trump and Mr. Trump's coterie of incompetents and fellow criminals. Disgusting. I hope to see the entire in prison sooner rather than later. I suspect there is substantial evidence to put the entire Trump coterie, including Mr. Manafort in prison for a long time.
6
I don't know much but I do know this: Manafort's move is the absolute definition of desperation, and if Mueller was, at any time, for any reason, inclined to ask the judge for a reduced sentence for Manafort . . . he sure isn't now.
6
A truly desperate person tries to sue an honorable ex-FBI Director after being indicted on charges of conspiracy against the United States.
Desperate times call for desperate measures.
Plus Manafort's lawyers make tons of money in litigation, whether he's guilty or escapes conviction so.... sue baby, sue!
5
As Bob Loblaw would say, "Why should you go to jail for a crime someone else noticed?"
5
How can a judge throw out ‘“motivation”?
5
We in the outside world are looking on in total gobsmacked bewilderment at what's been unfolding in the USA.
It feels like we are eye witnesses to the rapid fall of a great empire. Rome comes to mind...except Caligula didn't have 'a button' on his desk.
God help America or God help us all.
9
If Manafort has a past he is eager to hide, the Russians will know about it and likely used that knowledge to sabotage America's election. Putin has long known that Trump is a fool who would weaken US standing and power in the world. POTUS is delivering beyond Putin's wildest dreams.
5
When I was a kid im the 1960s we learned in social studies about Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, who were electrocuted for being "traitors" for dealing with Russian communists. They were held up to us kids as examples of what can happen to you if you mess with the Russians.
These days, though, Russians run around in suits making money all over the globe, dealing weapons, drilling oil, mining data, planting targeted political messages -- and they do it in cahoots with American businessmen.
Traitors are starting to look an awful lot like globalist businessmen in suits, making sneaky deals to rig elections and sow discord in countries they want to destabilize. Manfort was an agent for the Russians in Ukraine. He worked behind the scenes to bring down the Ukrainian government in favor of a Russian puppet.
We need to keep an eye on these guys. All of them. Someone has to get these billionaires under control, or they will destabilize the entire world. They make scads of money in weapons dealing, money laundering, drug trafficking, and goodness knows what else. They profit off of chaos and anger.
10
Justice is never served when the investigation drags on with no end in sight. They have been at it for almost a year now. It's time for Mueller to "put up" or "shut up".
1
it took one and a half year for the watergate scandal. like it or not, investigating, as well as judging, doesn't have to conform to the high tempo of 24/7 news.
4
You have no idea about the typical amount of time it takes to assemble a complex federal case such as a RICO investigation. Two years is a short amount of time. Given that Mueller has been at it since only May, I'd say it's time for you to "shut up" and not Mueller.
2
If Manafort can pursue his case all the way to the Supreme Court, he's home free.
1
I lost my political virginity when I heard (on my transistor radio) that President Ford pardoned President Nixon. Nixon would have surely been indicted and convicted of a felony. Ford's reason...Nixon and been through enough. Yea right!
If I've learned anything in my 63 years, it is that justice can be purchased for the right price and/or the right connections. Of course this means that the wealthy are beyond the law. Don't believe me, look at our President.
The worst part of this particular circus is the smirk on Manafort's face. It's has if the whole thing is an inconvenience. I suppose it is.
5
Seems like if the Whitewater investigation can include Monica Lewinsky...
2
I laughed so hard when I saw this news break.
“The you were searching for drugs, you have no jurisdiction over the dead hooker in my trunk” is a bold move. Let see how it plays out. My guess it can be summarized in the near future in one word “Doh”.
4
Poor baby. No one read him his Miranda rights.
2
When it comes to political theater, Manafort's desperate Hail Mary is akin to an over-the-top, off-key amateur troupe belting out "I Dreamed a Dream" at an all-you-can-eat buffet on a tacky river boat stuck in the middle of the Mississippi.
Entertaining, yes, but also quite sad and, in the end, a waste of time.
2
Grasping at straws...
3
“But Mr. Manafort’s strategy is a clever legal maneuver that attempts to force prosecutors to reveal details about the scope of the investigation.”
Not really. Mueller can simply file a motion to dismiss with prejudice and this frivolous suit can go away.
3
"Mr. Trump tries to portray the investigation as a politically motivated witch hunt that has cast a dark cloud over his administration and, in his view, the country"
Not much would cast a darker cloud over Trump's country than if their leaders would succeed in using their power to prevent themselves from being investigated.
2
“Mr. Mueller won the cooperation of Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, for instance, after investigating him for unregistered foreign lobbying and lying to the F.B.I. on matters unrelated to the election.”
That’s clear enough! Mr. Mueller is trying to get at President Trump by frightening various Trump associates with threats of damage. You should have added that the so-called ‘lying’ by Flynn was a matter of failing to repeat verbatim the text of a conversation which had been recorded by the FBI – this sounds more like entrapment to me.
To an outsider – who is wholly disgusted by President Trump and his administration’s actions – what I see is a “destroy at all costs” approach being followed by those who wish to get rid of a duly elected President of the United States. When exactly did the USA become a banana republic? If the disappointed Democrats, and their hangers on, succeed in destroying the Elected President of the United States by these methods, there will be irreversible damage to all the Institutions of the USA.
Of course, Mr. Mueller should be confined to producing evidence which is directly related to the charges being brought against the President and his campaign. So far Mr. Mueller has produced no evidence whatsoever that ties President Trump to ‘matters that directly arise from the Russia investigation’.
5
"So far Mr. Mueller has produced no evidence whatsoever that ties President Trump to ‘matters that directly arise from the Russia investigation’. "
False. The prosecution has not REVEALED any evidence. Flynn was cooperating formoths before his public plea.
2
I agree that Mueller has not REVEALED any evidence. I support that quaint notion of "Innocent until proven guilty". Do you?
1
This is a desperate attempt by Manafort and Trump to do anything they
can to slow down and impede the Mueller investigation.
They know all too well that Mueller is getting closer and closer, step by step to
the truth which goes all the way to the Oval Office and Trump himself.
Mueller is not taking any action outside the scope of the investigation. He is following a tried and true strategy used in organized crime and high stakes finance investigations to follow the money because the money is the major vehicle for the crime. What if Trump and Trump Inc have been working for the Russians for years engaged in espionage for profit? How did Trump get loans a decade ago when no American bank would touch him? Trump a traitor to America for cash? We know how much Trump loves money and loves making the deal. Much more I fear than Trump loves America. We don't know yet if Trump Inc is organized crime but it certainly is high stakes finance---like $1 billion in losses. If Trump had illegal contacts while doing business as CEO of Trump Inc before he was elected those actions are still illegal and subject to investigation and prosecution even if Trump is President. Becoming President doesn't give you a Get Out Of Jail Free Card and absolve you of responsibility for past crimes. Even the President is not above the law. Next Trump will try to pardon himself.
Trump in Prison in 2020. That would truly make America great again.
7
Manafort's claim is the equivalent of a bank robber saying the police had no authority to arrest him while he held up the bank - because at the time the police came to the bank to investigate an individual who passed a bad check.
3
I'm no lawyer and I don't play one on TV, but I do watch a lot of Law and Order reruns. Why don't his lawyers just file a motion for dismissal?
Oh, right, not enough fodder for Breitbart and Fox in that case, the judge tosses it in 5 minutes. This route takes 10 minutes.
1
By Manafortian logic, if I get pulled over by the cops for running a stop sign, and I happen to also have a dead body in the back seat, I can only be cited for running the stop sign.
9
I guess he has given up on not guilty, but claim wrongly prosecuted. His theory is I would never have been caught but for the investigation. Good luck with that.
3
A DOJ that is "tough on a crime" should not set self-imposed limits during criminal investigations, especially those related to electoral integrity.
4
In legal terms the lawsuit is a "sham" pleading. Manafort and his lawyers may be subject to sanctions by the court for filing it.
5
Assume Manafort is successful:
1. Is Mueller then free to hand over any and all evidence to, say, NY's AG?
2. If Mueller is deemed to have had no legal authority to investigate Manafort in the first instance, is the "evidence" forever tainted in the hands of any prosecutor?
Please advise, American legal beagles.
1
Mueller was authorized to prosecute any federal crimes that arose from the investigation if it he felt it necessary and appropriate.
Manafort has no case.
5
This is like asking someone to explain how live theater works but limit the assessment to watching actors on the stage. Behind the curtains, box office, promotions, investors, etc. are off limits. Nonsense.
1
Manafort may get lucky - it all depends on how corrupt our justice system is - who appointed the judge hearing the case.
2
This legal ploy suggests the prosecutors have taken cooperation off the table because they don't need it.
4
The subject of an investigation should not be able to decide which uncovered crimes a special counsel should ignore.
1
The article says:
"Mr. Manafort’s lawsuit gives voice to one of the common grievances Mr. Trump’s supporters have with Mr. Mueller: None of the charges he has brought answer the central question of his inquiry."
Actually, they are related. In fact the charges against Manafort are central to the entire case. They are a roadmap for how Trump's former campaign manager came to be an apparent agent of Russians interests in the first place.
3
The investigation that was supposed to be about Whitewater ended up exposing the Monica Lewisnsky affair. An appointed investigator is free to go wherever the trail leads them. Mueller and Trump will figure that out when this lawsuit is thrown out on such grounds; the GOP and Mueller can't dictate where an investigation can and cannot go.
The surest evidence to date the facts are against him: he’s arguing not the facts, but the statutes.
1
I hope DOJ can weather these types of things enough to bring it all down. This will not be the last grasping effort of entitled rich crass people.
On the other hand, we're well into uncharted territory at this point, so I only have so much interest in how it turns out. Damage done.
Manafort's lawyer in a shocking move announced he was also introducing a case for the Al Capone estate demonstrating the Income Tax Evasion was improper and the case should have been limited to improper labeling of the beer ingredients.
Instead of pleading not guilty to the charges, Manafort denounces the person making the charges.
1
Rosenstein's memo appointing Director Mueller as special counsel describes the special counsel's scope in very broad terms.
The memo notes that a full and thorough investigation of the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 election was to be ensured through the special counsel. And Mueller was charged with investigating “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump” and to look into “any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.” That would obviously include any obstruction of the investigation or perjury related to it.
Lawyers are a dime a dozen in DC....They'll propose anything to keep the billable hours up. But Manafort's lawyers really are reaching here.
Once this matter raised by Manafort and his team of lawyers is dealt with by the courts, the judges should strongly consider civil penalties levied against Manafort and his team of lawyers for bringing frivolous claims under 26 U.S.C. § 6673(a)(1) and other federal statutes.
Sure, Manafort's attorney's will say they acted in good faith. But because addressing the claim is wasting the court's and the government's time and resources, sanctions should be imposed by the court on Manafort and his lawyers for presenting this claim, and the law firms hired by Manafort should be sanctioned and also potentially held in contempt.
2
Weird how the GOP didn’t care when Ken Starr’s Whitewater investigation continued for years diverging into many other subject matters.
3
If there was even a scintilla of substance to this lawsuit or even the mere appearance of it, it would have been filed as a pleading in the criminal case. The thought that this is going to move forward in court is wishful thinking. The Special Counsel will file a Motion to Dismiss without responding to the allegations, which the court will grant, finding that the complaint fails to state a legitimate cause of action.
I once assisted on a case where, after becoming annoyed with a judge’s decision, the Defendant argued the judge was improperly appointed. What the attorney did not initially realize was that the only authority who could decide that issue was the State Supreme Court who had appointed the judge. They had all the authority they needed. Similarly the DOJ has the authority to appoint and set the scope of the special counsel’s work.
1
It is fundamental to any investigation to show motive.
Paul Manaforts direct cash payments from the Kremlin to represent Russian interests in the Ukraine, while "donating" his services to Donald Trump's campaign, is an obvious conveyance from Russia to Trump.
That is a violation of US election laws. The conspiracy to violate US election laws requires the cooperation to launder money from Russian oligarchs to the inner circle of the Trump campaign.
Trump's choice for NSA director accepted funds directly from Russia and Turkey as an unregistered foreign agent to influence US policy. He has been charged and pled guilty.
Records at Deutsche Bank and the Bank of Cyprus have been subpoenaed as they indicate Russian oligarch "mirror trades" may have been placed as collateral to provide direct funding to Trump projects.
Of course, Paul Manafort wants to stop an investigation where he will be found guilty, still acting as a proxy for Trump and Putin.
2
I am certainly no lawyer, but I do have some common sense. If one crime is discovered in pursuit of another, does the investigator just ignore it? For example, if the law is searching for evidence of illegal activity by my boss at work, & it was discovered that in his past activities, he committed a homicide....is that just ignored because it doesn't appear related to that which he is accused of? Can someone answer this for me? Or perhaps I completely misunderstand our criminal justice system.
1
It's heartening that Manafort is pushing back against Mueller's excesses. The Republicans should continue to coalesce around the stance that if Mueller can't arrive at anything more definitive soon, it's time to shut it down. Officially dismiss him if that's what it takes. The Democrats, naturally, advocate revivifying anything in their eternal hope of impeachment, but, like Mueller's investigation, it's a dead-end.
By the time Manafort's lawyers get done with him, they will own all of his Italian suits and any remaining legal proceeds from the properties that he allegedly purchased with laundered funds. If they were serious about this they would have filed the motion in the initial action instead of trooping off to a different civil court to stop the proceeding. Even if they are right on the law (doubtful), the proposed remedy is ridiculous. There has been no double jeopardy and someone else in the DOJ can take these facts and refile. Nothing here but a $100K+ frolic for defense counsel.
3
I'm far from being a lawyer so maybe someone that knows the law could help me figure this out. If a homicide detective uses a warrant to search a house for the weapon and finds a person selling heroin, he has to let him go?
2
If the police pull you over for a traffic violation and find a body in the trunk, you don't get let off the hook for the body because the stop started with traffic. It's that simple.
Manafort's lawsuit is frivolous. He should probably receive a fine actually. The same holds true for Trump's claims that his finances are off limits. If financial infractions surface as a result of the investigation, they're still considered criminal regardless of what the President says. I take Manafort's lawsuit as an act of desperation from a man with few options. Peter Zeidenberg is right. I'll bet someone is having a lot of fun responding to Manafort's allegations.
1
"The lawsuit said Mr. Rosenstein had improperly given Mr. Mueller the authority to investigate “anything he stumbles across while investigating, no matter how remote.” ... But Mr. Manafort’s strategy is a clever legal maneuver that attempts to force prosecutors to reveal details about the scope of the investigation. By filing a separate lawsuit, Mr. Manafort’s lawyer, Kevin Downing, also creates the possibility of a protracted fight over Mr. Mueller’s authority."
This description is so much more sophisticated than the article in the Washington Post. Kudos to Mr. Apuzzo for trying to understand what is going on.
The regulation says the investigation must be limited to specific factual matter:
"The Special Counsel will be provided with a specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated."
So, when Rosenstein wrote the order appointing Mueller and authorized an investigation into "any" matter, he exceeded the scope of his delegated authority to appoint a special prosecutor into a "specific factual ... matter".
That's what this lawsuit is calling out.
The word "any" is not "specific".
They have these documentaries about presidents and presidencies. Fifty years from now I wonder what a Trump documentary would look like.
I was remembering how the Special Counsel limited the Whitewater investigation that went on for 4 years & covered everything imaginable.
1
Manafort just might be on to something. Wonder whether the contrasting handling of Hillary's case will become an issue for the government.
The Independent Counsel Ken Starr started investigating an alleged crooked land sale deal in Arkansas which involved the Clintons and ended up recommending impeachment because Bill Clinton lied in a deposition related to a civil sexual harassment case. If that stretch was acceptable to Congress, the public and the courts, then Manafort's indictment for money laundering in the context of foreign lobbying is on very solid ground.
2
Almost everyone has the wrong take on this lawsuit. Firstly, any one can sue anyone in this country any number of times and in any jurisdiction. They will, however, be dimissed ultimately, but that takes time.
Secondly, from personal experience in the Federal System, I know that this is probably meant as a fishing expedition. The SP and DOJ in their response will have to say why they reached this far back. Which typically means they have to tip their hand, and will have to tell opposing counsel what they have. However, in this case, they will have an in-camera meeting with the judge and the SP and DOJ will show the judge what they have, but will not share it with opposing counsel on the grounds of FISA, National Security, or that it will affect and ongoing investigation. Again I was personally involved in lawsuits where the defendants tried that.
The long and short of it is: even though the defendant/plaintiff I was involved with is as different as day and night from Manafort, the commonality is that all sociopaths think alike. Therefore, like all cases I am aware off, this will not move or the judge will not yield any discovery or deposition requests.
In order to prevail, Manafort's lawyers must establish that the Manafort indictment exceeds the scope of Mueller's authority. They will have to rely on Mueller, his staff, and third party witnesses who don't know much. Those in a position to give the best testimony for Manafort are Manafort himself and his lawyers. There's no way Manafort testifies -- that would undermine his 5th Amendment privilege. If his lawyers testify, that would undermine his lawyer-client privilege. So this case will have to be made primarily on the testimony of Mueller and his staff. That's why Manafort has little chance of winning.
The only justice here is that his lawyers are going to bankrupt him.
1
In one-on-one talks with the Mueller team, Manafort's lawyers allegedly requested that the witch hunt be restricted to witches who are not him. After all, technically speaking, he is a warlock.
2
So after a year of investigations no evidence of Trump/Russia collusion. The bias here is staggering, time to put up or admit Trump/Russia is a bust,
As long as Trump's finances are not transparent, Manafort should have no case.
1
From the perspective of allies - it is REALLY hard. It to consider America.....over.
Using a tried and true expression, mostly by conservatives, if Manafort has nothing to hide and is innocent, then why would he attempt to stop Mueller's work?
4
The mandate given to the special counsel investigation is by the Senate. If Manafort had any grudge about the ambit of the investigation he should have addressed the question to the Senate, instead of going to the court.
5
Hilarious.
And so the tragicomedy is suffered to continue. Manafort's probably got a case.
3
Hail Marys get thrown when there are no other viable options. He's toast and he knows it.
28
Realworld:
Not so sure: fruit of the poison tree and all that.
The Special Counsel's charge covers "any matters" that may arise.
Maybe you could help the brother out and buy one of his expensive suits or rugs.
He won't be needing them where he's going.
Paul Manafort was a smart guy with a fine education, but he couldn't resist the lure of the Mafia, first within his own family, and later with the Russian Mob.
Is it really smart to be going after your prosecutor this way?
But, come to think of it, how many checks on his power and privilege has he ever had? (Like someone else who shall go nameless.)
3
When thieves fall out ...
Don't know if to laugh or cry. Here's hoping we get our democracy back no later than January 2019 (vote vote vote vote vote !!!!! )
24
What should be worrisome to Manafort is that he failed to deliver on one of his last Russian-backed deals; unless getting Trump elected (by hook-and-by-crook) cancelled out the debt. Manafort parked millions he received form his Russian-backed client(s) into U.S. real estate and other luxury goods. Then after exiting the Trump campaign he borrowed more from businesses with Trump ties. If he thinks U.S. justice is unfair, he should worry about what the Russians will do.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/12/us/politics/paul-manafort-donald-trum...
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-manafort/manafort-sp...
9
See them squirm. Wonderful and richly deserved.
47
Couldn't happen to a nicer group of people.
1
seems to me that he is saying that whether guilty or not he gets a free pass. sounds like someone trump would love. guilty or not he walks. h yeah that is trump to a T.
31
Violations of the the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments can result in the guilty getting a free pass. Every day that happens in a U.S. court somewhere. If you disapprove, then you don't really believe in the Bill of Rights.
Welcome to Trump world.
We need to drain this Trump swamp.
Now.
54
Really? An accused crook is trying to sue the prosecutor of his crime?....
99
Good for Mr. Manafort. He seems to be the only person in this entire mess who has courage.
8
If MD stands for medical doctor, you should not be scarfing down your patients' drugs.
108
I guess Manafort has the courage to stand for his god-given, oops did I misspell-- GOP-given right to spend keep millions of dollars in secret off-shore accounts, free of any tax burden. And his GOP-given right to funnel that income tax-free money into purchases of real estate, fancy suits etc.
In the words of Leona Helmsley, "Only the little people pay taxes."
Your choice of courageous role model strikes me as a bit odd. Frankly, I'd rather cite Mueller, a Marine Corps Vietnam veteran (with the Bronze Star Medal with Combat "V", Purple Heart Medal, two Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medals with Combat "V", Combat Action Ribbon, National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, and Parachutist Badge to his credit, according to Wikipedia) as someone in this mess who has certified courage.
6
Or, he should be sharing. I just hope he brought enough for everybody.
So Idiot-45 starts pardoning everybody, what do we do then?
14
Mike C - Trump distanced himself from Manafort early on, I doubt he'd even consider pardoning him at this point. The only person of those in trouble so far that have been called "a nice guy" by the President is Michael Flynn, who's unlikely to get any jail time because of the deal he has made with the DOJ.
13
When the family indictments come, I’m on the side of the bet that says Twitler resigns for health reasons, and RICO charges from NY will roll ‘em all up. They’ve conducted a lot of busienss in a lot of states for a long time. And we don’t know the extent of Mueller’s probes - and importantly - what other agencies and authorities may be assisting, and what they may have found.
The reality that these peripheral players all had what appears to be countless contacts with Russia, as did every senior member of the team. The extent of the whole klan’s engagement with Russians is astounding on its own.
What I’m speculating is that many more indictments are coming, specifically of family members, and likely coming as state charges that cannot be pardoned. Then, resignation. Then, more charges, specifically for Big Dotard in Little Russia.
1
If Manafort can derail or even limit the Mueller investigation, Trump will be delighted to pardon him.
Can't blame Manafort in the least for this maneuver. His 'opponent' has infinite resources and the zealousnses to match it.
10
Manafort's "opponent" is the American voter.
2
Well, good. Should criminals be the ones with infinite resources?
A criminal sues his PROSECUTOR, thats "a-ok" with you? Only other crooks would think that's a good thing.
1
Nice job, Paulie Know-Nothing. If you hadn’t already done so with a guilty plea, you have now submitted yourself to the jurisdiction of the Court. Duh. Thank you. And you deserve to be turned inside-out by the Court and opposing counsel, which they will do. And news flash: your attorneys don’t care if you win or lose. You’ll do another perp-walk to your orange, jump-suit fitting and they’ll be depositing your checks at the Chase drive-thru in their new cars on the way to private jets. So glad you took their advice. America thanks you.
49
But Paulie will sue his attorneys for malpractice and file complaints against them with the various regulatory agencies in their respective licensing states claiming that they are incompetent and demanding his legal fees back. Because, you know, that's the way people like Paulie roll.
This immediately comes under the definition of "chutzpah" without any per adventure of a doubt. Complete with the victim throwing himself on the mercy of the court as an orphan after murdering the parents. Such impudence.
34
So Right! How could someone challenge the legal authority of those acting to prosecute them! The next thing you know, people are going to start challenging the scope of warrants - or saying that the police didn't have the authority to search them! The sheer chutzpah of it.
Manafort is a blood sucker traitor who will sell his country (& may be family) for money and now he shows his arrogance.
Let's get him few life terms please at Guantanamo bay. Trump wants to fill it and so why not start with Manafort as a first enemy combatant.
44
What is most dismaying to me is that he actually found an attorney or attorneys to do this ridiculous STUPID THING. What the heck are law schools are accepting as students these days, Geez Louise!
The ghost of Roy Cohn is alive and well and floating around the White House.
When accused, accuse them of worse. When sued, countersue for more. When you lose, call it Victory.
I wonder what trump will call it when manafort is in jail, I will call it Justice. And ask for more.
91
Can we please just give these low-life types the very basic-cable level of due process. Lock them up, check on them once every 30 days. “You’ve got 5 minutes to talk. Or it’s another 30 days of cold scrambled eggs through a straw.” Putin told me repeatedly that this works, and I believe him.
13
He better not try to move any heavy furniture.
1
Not gonna work. " Ahh Paulie, won't see him no more"
5
It's unclear whether this is a desperate, though admittedly standard, Hail Mary pass aimed vaguely in the direction of intended receiver Declaratory Judgment or an equally desperate ploy to get Mueller to show some of his hand. Regardless, it would be more likely to backfire, either by replacement of a presumptively broad mandate with an explicitly court-broadened mandate or by public exposure of incriminating details about connections to possible money laundering by Trump. If this were carefully reasoned and well written, the Hail Mary interpretation would seem plausible. Instead, the argument ludicrously boils down to "Mueller's appointment wasn't political enough." This claim is supported, almost comically, by references to politically-motivated Op-Ed pieces from the 1990s.
It seems like the best plausible result for Manafort would be that some or all of the charges get bounced from the Special Counsel to the DOJ mainland. Once there, Manafort would at least have a better hope of pulling political strings to manipulate the result. With a little luck, the result will instead be that Mueller can establish a connection between this lawsuit and Trump's obious terror at the prospect of being investigated for his own money laundering before the campaign. As the complaint repeatedly points out, Mueller's mandate explicitly includes relevant efforts to obstruct justice. Forcing this matter into a politicized venue controlled by Trump might itself rise to obstruction.
11
Yes! Filing a legal challenge to have things decided by a judge is certainly obstruction! And freedom is slavery.
Definitely a Declaratory Judgment in favor of Mueller's team and Mueller only has to point to THAT DOJ written authorization/mandate as his authority for his investigation and filing of charges against Manafort, which an independent Court determined had merit after a Grand Jury issued the indictment. Special Counsel Mueller's mandate is sweepingly broad and I don't think ANY court will be swatting this down in REAL time - right now - despite Trump thinking he's got the game rigged for the next 40 years or so via his federal bench appointees. Mueller won't have to reveal a think about the cards he and his team of experts are holding. LOL! Ohhhhhh, the Wheel in the Sky keeps a-turning....
The lawsuit will have to be paid with ill-gotten funds. Maybe his Russian buddies are stepping up because they don't want to get found out. Or, even better, trumpkin is footing the bill for the lawsuit.
24
You're joking, LOL! Thanks for the last hearty laugh of today, oh my goodness. And here I thought it might remain "relatively quiet" (I ignore all Trump tweet bunkem) until at least Valentine's Day. Talk about eternal optimist moi. If this is a sample of what we can expect between now and November mid-terms, well - I guess I can only say BRING IT ON.
1
This is why they filed now. So that their bill becomes part of the bankruptcy estate and they can get paid from frozen or seized assets. Standard procedure to front-load this kind of complaint. Pay no attention to the substance.
this makes no sense. that's not how bankruptcy works. just the opposite
Shysters to the rescue. Hasn't it been obvious to anybody with at least half a brain the Trump and his ilk are totally amoral and shameless? When will we be delivered from this horrifying Twilight Zone episode in our history? Another major concern I have is that each one of these things will render the populace numb, as they become in a sense normalized. It will take the survival of history scholars with integrity eventually to put this whole mess back into the perspective it deserves.
44
The judge should rule against Manafort and the US attorney should immediately expand the inquiry. Only a criminal would ask for that ruling.
24
Yes! People who challenge the legal authority of those seeking warrants or indictments against them are obvious criminals! Off with their heads!
The entire Trump campaign team and administration are all criminals, SRM. We already know that. We, the majority of the citizens in this country, want to know EVERYTHING these traitors have done so we can be sure the punishment is appropriate. Do you think they will have to give Trump a different color jump suit so the guards can see where it ends and Trump begins?
1
The Chairman of the Trump Campaign needs to come clean with the American people.
If he is on Santa Claus's naughty list for owning tens of millions of dollars of illegal Russian Intelligence laundered bills-he needs to do some time for the crime.
11
If Manafort and Trump have laundered money from Russian sources, they are compromised. Therefore, anything pertaining to their financial situation with any connection, however remote, to Russia, is fair game. Can’t wait for both of these clowns to go to jail.
56
So if the cops are called to a home because of a domestic dispute, they should ignore two pounds of cocaine sitting in plain sight on the coffee table?
Gimme a break.
53
Either you didn't read the complaint, the article or both. The police have a very broad grant of jurisdiction. The Special Counsel does not.
2
Wrong, the Lawsuit and it's supporters are stipulating the Cops shouldn't ignore it,..as much as they should Snort the Coke with them.
At a discount of course.
Let's ask a judge to limit an investigation that might show that a treasonous act was committed against the USA.
Yeah Manafort is being railroaded.
When the end is in sight it's amazing what you'll say to throw you off the track.
Can't wait until his ex-boss is in the same position.
21
Manafort was always dirty, and his relationship with Trump goes further back than you might have thought. Take a look at "Get Me Roger Stone" on Netflix for the whole sordid story.
hahaha as my aunt says when the police come to your house to look for drugs and they find the dead body, you can sue and say "that's not what they were looking for" I guess if I had millions of dollars and the potential to spend decades behind bars, I would sue as well. Sad we've come to this, but I'm sure there's more to come.
22
So, let me get this straight, a prosecutor investigating an alleged crime happens to trip over another crime and he is not permitted to prosecute it? Give me a break.
30
There is some credence to Mr. Manafort's case. Because this will open up a discussion on what are the limits of a special prosecutor. Does anyone in the DOJ, even the AG have authority to create a position that has such extraordinary prosecution powers? It is worth a supreme court consideration in my opinion.
5
Since the Attorney General has the right to investigate anything he wants, I think it follows that someone appointed by the attorney general can be similarly empowered.
24
The AG does NOT have the right to "investigate anything he wants."
And Mueller is not the AG. Read the complaint.
Check out Neal Katyal's article in WaPo (May 2017) explaining this issue. He wrote the special counsel rule. He cites a prior case in which plenary authority was delegated by the AG: "Those sweeping powers could be given only to someone who was in the government and confirmed by the Senate — as Fitzgerald, then a sitting U.S. attorney, had been — so they are unavailable to Mueller." That's the basis of this challenge: Rosenstein did not have the ability to delegate full discretionary authority to Mueller, who was not a DOJ officer.
The country is so fortunate we have people like Comey and Mueller to conduct these investigations
In NY we have Vance, who has a For Sale sign on his door.
We need a strong Federal judiciary to offset our local failures.
7
A prosecutor goes where the information and evidence takes them. A special prosecutor has a specific "limited scope" to conduct an inquiry and seek indictments. BUT as an officer of the court must report all discovered violations of law to their convening or other appropriate authority. A prosecutor with integrity must reveal what they have reported for further investigation. Then the chips will fall where they may!
13
The purpose of the lawsuit is not to win but to play off of and embolden the right-wing conspiracy theorists attacking Mueller, a life-long Republican and decorated U.S. Marine. I predict that Breitbart, Fox and their ilk will give this frivolous suit heavy -- and heavily slanted -- coverage.
23
Maybe not now that Trump and Bannon are on the outs.
This should help to extend Mr Mueller's investigation several more years.
6
Years?? I was hoping month but weeks would be ideal.
Wait. Aren’t these the same people who want to require local police making traffic stops for broken tail lights to notify ICE, so they can round people up for deportation? But Mueller is expanding beyond his jurisdiction? Apparently consistency is overrated.
35
If the objective is to disable the executive branch using the tool of a "special counsel" then it is working just dandy. It is a drag on the executive branch and consuming millions of dollars.
But, we know that we really do not want to grant to the FBI and the DOJ the unchecked authority to run a star chambers.
The independent prosecution statute was allowed to fade into the sunset. It and was never renewed because we know it is a bad way to run a democracy.
There are already constitutional checks and balances that can protect against the worst abuses of the Executive Branch. The "special counsel" is at risk of being the worst abuse himself, no matter how well paved his road is with good intentions.
1
Tom,
How well have the "constitutional checks and balances" in the hands of the Republicans been working against Trump?
How well have they stopped Trump and Family from being further enriched by this presidency?
How well has it worked regarding removing a thoroughly unfit and unstable man from this presidency?
How well have the Republican investigations in the House and the Senate been progressing?
How well have they been protecting against attacks on the first amendment, the media, the FBI, the CIA, the EPA, the Education Dept., the State Dept.?
How well have they protected consumer rights getting trampled upon, removing net neutrality, removing information from public websites, allowing government to just hollow out with resignations?
How well have they worked against the firing of the State Attorney Generals (with particular attention to one state), and only filling a few positions on the last possible day?
How well has it worked against the coordination of attacks by the executive and legislative branches of government against whoever the state-run media (aka Fox and Friends) mentions in the hours that Trump is watching TV in his Man-Cave, hanging his shirts on the floor, and scarfing McDonald's, and stripping his own sheets (don't really want to know the reason for that peccadillo)?
How well has it worked against going after former opponents who actually won more votes (and probably more electoral votes when all the dust settles), or more popular predecessors?
Not well.
1
MAGA = Mueller Ain't Going Away = Many Are Getting Arrested
56
Well said.
1
I wonder if the suit is the beginning of an attack on Mueller with the goal to stop the investigation from continuing. It is almost certain that the Manafort suit will fail because he was obviously engaged with oligarchs in Ukraine who had strong connections with Putin and Russia. Nevertheless, the suit will focus Trump supporters on the idea that Mueller's investigation of Trump and his family is somehow illegal, and that Mueller therefore deserves to be fired. Very interesting.
8
Ken Starr was authorized under the old law to go after the Whitewater land deal, but went on a fishing expedition that finally got Bill Clinton for perjury in a deposition on another matter entirely.
When it was over, Congress members of both sides said, "Never again." The old law was allowed to lapse, under its sunshine provision.
An entirely different was said at the time to have safeguards against exactly that abuse. Does it? We are about to find out.
Because Mueller is repeating the Ken Starr formula, under an entirely different law that we were told at the time was meant to prevent exactly this.
Did Congress misrepresent its intent with that law?
Will the courts take any notice of that intent?
Those meaning to get Trump with it rather openly say they are doing just what was done to Clinton, and that's right, they are.
8
The reason the Special Prosecutor has full leeway is that you do not know if a line of investigation is relevant until it is followed. I find it interesting that you term an investigation that has uncovered illegal financial transactions "abuse". If you investigate a criminal for shop lifting and find he committed murder 5 years ago, I wouldn't call it "abuse", I'd call it justice.
AND, as mentioned in the article, resolving this issue in court means Mueller must elicit why he went down this path, which would be far more dangerous for Trump.
For example, Mueller would be publicly required to explain how Trump's tax returns show investment in Russia, and he had to follow Manafort's investments to see whether there was any connection. Such a declaration, even if not true, would expose Trump's nasty dealings.
I really doubt Trump is happy Manafort is trying this. I think he'd much rather have Manfort play the good, loyal soldier and wait for a pardon.
This is what happens when rats abandon ship.
26
This does not appear to parallel the expansive scope of the Ken Starr investigation. This seems to be more about the special counsel being able to pursue charges relating to real crimes uncovered as part of the investigation. President Clinton was impeached for lying under oath about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. A relationship that in and of itself was not criminal.
Hopefully the rule of law prevails and Mueller's team is not forced to turn a blind eye to actual criminal activity based on some legal technicality.
17
Mark,
I don't see Mueller as "abusing" his role at all.
I believe Mueller is acting fully within his Special Counsel charges. But a lot of Trump supporters seem to be questioning the definition of "any" in the "any matters" portion of his directive like Bill Clinton questioned the definition of "is" during the far more farcical Ken Starr investigation.
Yes, I hope we "get" Trump. For every illegal thing that he and his family and his campaign and his cabinet have done to this country. But Trump & Co. will have actually "gotten" themselves by their own actions.
And, no, I don't want to "get" Trump as payback for the Clinton investigation.
I see the Mueller investigation as much more substantive, with far-reaching national security implications. Conspiracy with a foreign adversary, violations of the emoluments clause, obstruction of justice, money laundering, involvement with domestic and international mobsters, dereliction of duty by a man totally unfit to be president, etc., etc., etc. makes the Clinton impeachment for perjury because he was trying to conceal an affair seem almost quaint in comparison.
I guess we'll all find out, hopefully soon, which investigation has more integrity, and whether Mueller overstepped or not.
We do know that the Congressional investigations are "abusing" their roles. In the other direction.
I have no faith in the House, and very little in the Senate, concerning their investigations. The Republicans are clearly dragging their feet.
3
Mueller should immediately undertake discovery and take Manafort's deposition. In a civil context just about everything is fair game.
20
And no Fifth Amendment in being deposed as to subjects relevant to your complaint!
5
*sigh*
I wish all the wanna-be lawyers would stop making legal comments based on Law & the Rachel Maddow Show, and wishful thinking. Discovery obtained in civil proceedings doesn't magically become admissible in a criminal case; there is still a 5th Amendment.
His complaint goes only to Rosenstein's authority under the DOJ regs. I'm sure he will be willing to testify for hours about that.
This is just dumb. Mueller seems to have a team of lawyers who are trying to milk some extra bucks from the case. Only explanation.
12
Chingghis: I guess you didn't know that Muller and his lawyers are Federal Civil Service employees who get paid by the month. If they weren't working on the Muller investigation they would be doing something else.
16
Meant Manafort.
4
What malarkey. This is a dream team of lawyers who could be making ten times what they are earning now if they were in the private sector. They are dedicated civil servants trying to protect your democracy!
7
I doubt whether Manafort is likely to get anywhere with suing Mueller. Manafort will have to prove that Mueller expanded his jurisdiction with malice and wanted to inflict personal harm. Mueller is not at Manaforts's service and therefore the law suit should have been filed against the entity that appointed Mueller. It is very odd case that could end up in the supreme court because there is no precedent.
11
Manafort and Trump look more guilty than ever. If they were innocent of any wrongdoing, they wouldn’t be so desperate to limit the investigation.
66
Read this entire article. Every charge reported in it brought to date by Mr Mueller predates the Trump campaign, by years! No evidence of collusion by Trump campaign officials.
Yes, there was a presidential campaign that paid a foreign agent cash to receive dirt on an opponent= that would be the DNC and the Steele dossier!
Democrats are such hypocrites.
11
Wow. You just ran right over the fact that every U.S. security agency has concluded that Russia tried to influence the outcome of the U.S. election. Further the fact that Trump Jr., Kushner, and other members of the campaign met with a Russian agent to discuss dirt on Clinton, and that Clinton e-mails, stolen by Russia, were handed to Wikileaks. That Manafort, who was the Trump campaign manager, had business connections with Ukraine oligarchs who are buddies of Putin, and that his illegal dealings with those oligarchs could be perceived as potentially useful blackmail. And that Manafort was responsible for inserting language more favorable to Russia into the Republican platform. But there is no evidence of collusion? And the first thing that Security Advisor Flynn does is to contact the Russian Ambassador and tells him not to worry about the sanctions...and then lies about having the conversation. And Sessions has had to revise his Russian non-contact statement three times. How obvious does collusion have to be?
61
Right, such hypocrites that at least Clinton released her tax returns. I don't give a fig if, say, Trump money-laundered years before the election. This is a chump who has blessed us with 'tax reform' that benefits the wealthy -- and if the POTUS were to benefit more from ill-gotten gains while being contemptuous of the average American tax payer, then yeah, he should be held to account.
Hypocrites! BAH. The Republicans claim to be pro-life, yet seek to cut programs for women's health. The Republicans claim that they want you to hang onto more of your money, but expect working Americans to wait for the 'trickle down.' The Republicans cry foul over Bill Clinton's sexual behaviors, yet throw their support behind a pedophile and an avowed sexual predator. Need I go on?
28
The fact that something preceded the campaign chronologically does not mean that it will be irrelevant to what happened during the campaign.
1
Agreed. Mueller should work under the same scope restrictions as Kenneth Starr.
2
These guys are amateurs. A child could see this hail mary is a fig leaf of a plan to shield Kushner and Trump as well.
Here's what's going to happen.
This case will not only get a good laugh out of court, if anything, it wil boomerang back in Trump's face by further strengthening a precedent for Mueller's jurisduiction.
27
Seems like the Trump administration is creating more legal jobs than coal jobs.
67
A scam and distraction...this will be dismissed as frivolous immediately...
14
Manafort is a money laundering criminal and a hypocrite. He's not qualified to polish Mueller's shoes!
What needs to be reigned in is people like Manafort who've been getting away with crimes because they can park their ill begotten money offshore.
New Rules.....stop offshore banking transfers until they're certified legally earned monies so that the Manafort's of the world can't park dirty money there to buy expensive real estate they have no business owning in the first place.
29
There's nothing clever about it. He has no say in whether or not he is investigated. If you don't want to be investigate, charged, prosecuted, sentenced, have enough integrity to not get caught up in a conspiracy to overthrow the Federal government.
27
Why didn't anyone of trump's people object when the FBI decided to reopen the Clinton email wound while examining Weiner's laptop, not for Clinton's emails, but for sexual correspondence with underage victims?
27
Is this the typical ploy of the wealthy? when imminent danger looms on the horizon, file suit against the face of the legal threat in a desperate attempt to frighten and intimidate him/her?
Imagine if regular folks tried this type of lameness when a warrant is issue, file a suit against the judge, DA, and likely arresting officer(s).
It seems as though those with more money than brains tend to neglect the inalienable logic of 'if you don't want to go to jail, don't commit crimes' - fools, all of them.
20
In the course of an investigation the DOJ discovered evidence sufficient to indict Manafort for crimes that may or may not be covered by its original remit. It is as if a police officer stops a car for running a red light, smells marijuana, which permits him to search the car, and discovers the trunk is filled with stolen goods. After being arraigned on all charges and posting bail, the driver sues the police officer for false arrest because he had been assigned to traffic detail and not narcotics or robbery. Good luck with that, Paul.
24
Mr. Mueller has a mandate to investigate whatever crimes he finds. He apparently found some involving Mr. Manafort and Mr. Gates. Kenneth Starr found nothing about Whitewater, but managed to get Clinton impeached for lying about his sex life. Sadly for Mr. Manafort, his alleged crimes are a little worse than lying about sex.
Mueller is an honest man; he will go where his investigation takes him. If he finds collusion or related crimes, he will say so; if he finds nothing, he will also say so. We have to wait until he is done investigating.
I would find it hard to believe that any patriotic American would want Mr. Mueller to ignore evidence of crimes that he uncovers, regardless of whether they occurred before, during, or after the campaign.
43
Not being a believer in the Starr chamber, so to speak, I would hope that Mr. Mueller would refer such evidence to a regular prosecuter and focus on the matter that is supposed to be his charge. So far, he's got two indictments for old tax-related stuff, and two people who were dumb enough to lie about things that were not crimes. When he actually produces evidence of a crime related to the 2016 election, I will take notice.
This is like a bank robber suing to get the investigation of the robbery narrowed to ignore the robbery itself and concentrate on whether the getaway car was illegally parked.
42
Whose paying for Manafort's lawyer's time? That detail may cast a light and reveal information about the real hidden vested interests in this whole sordid mess!
31
No -- people like Paul Manafort and Donald Trump need to be "reined into jail" for violating the law. obstructing justice, laundering money, and all the other hidden shell-company con-games the monied-class play everyday in Panama City and other beach Paradises.
29
Legal strategy. Yet, if anyone thinks for a minute that Mueller, who is a brilliant strategist himself, didn't already consider this chess move, they are sorely mistaken. Mueller didn't gain his reputation and achieve his accomplishments because he didn't anticipate a sophomoric legal maneuver such as this. Don't break a sweat.
31
Novel concept, suing the guy prosecuting you, for… prosecuting you? Aren't their laws against this, and immunity for prosecutors?
29
Right out of the Trump playbook who attacked Judge Curiel for no other reason but the insanely ridiculous one of his having an hispanic sounding surname.
7
Shades of Nixon and his antics.
If there was nothing to see behind the Manafort curtain why would he ask for the scope of the investigation to be limited?
25
Clearly Manafort's defense is coordinating with Trump's.
9
A pure hypothetical case, I guess that means “false law”, or a bad mystery:
FBI Agents with a valid warrant to search the White House situation room are looking for recently missing Government-owned crystal, vanished during the Trump presidency.
Th e WH staff had requested a Special Prosecutor to put a quick end to “kitchengate”’
Shocked officers come across the mummified remains of a man first believed walled up in the back of a closet during the two presidencies .
Evidence determines ithas been there longer, and is identified as the cat-hating Clinton era WH kennel keeper, who vanished after the attempted poisoning of Chelsea’s beloved Socks, who died quietly after a long and otherwise uneventful life.
Chelsea is quickly cleared.
But a grand jury indicts thebExecutive Catbox Cleaner, discharged for lying about “having harsh words with” Socks, and ordering the Chief Cook to prepare the beast only vegan meals after it presented her with the remains of a rat, three mice and an Iranian “mole”.
The ex-box-filler-filterer is indicted on charges including “failure to register as a foreign agent” while fulfilling her job of Disposer-Fumants of the Iraqi falcon during the Nixon Administration, as well as homicide.
She sues on the grounds Archibald Cox had never been allowed to investigate bugs on WH Dog Checkers 5th, who was seeing Daniel Ellsberg’s shrink for Check’s inability to stop wetting carpets.
Note: I’ve already copyrighted the plot outline for ‘Dogged Pursuit”
2
He is a slime, but his lawyers are clearly pretty bright.
On the other hand THEY aren't going to jail if their strategy doesn't pan out, so they can continue to have a lucrative and wonderful jaunt.
They win either way!
14
I agree with Mr. Manafort. Take Mueller off the case, and permit other prosecutors including any applicable state AGs to prosecute and therefore, if he's found guilty in state courts then Trump or his successor can not pardon him.
In the movie version of "All the President's Men," the famous book detailing the Watergate affair and allegations of high crimes and misdemeanors committed by President Richard Nixon, the character known simply as "Deep Throat" uttered three words to reporters Woodward and Bernstein: "Follow the money."
"Follow the money" is what the Trump-Russia investigation is all about. My own view, based on all that I've seen and read these past tortuous 12 months, is that Trump is trying to cover up years of shady financial dealings between his company and notorious Russian crime syndicates. True? Who knows? Who knows how deep the corruption runs in the Trump operation? That's what the Robert Mueller investigation will uncover. If Trump has done nothing wrong, then he should have nothing to fear from Mueller.
Paul Manafort, it appears, also had years of shady dealings with disreputable Russian characters. Among his alleged crimes were money laundering and committing perjury. Did Trump do the same thing? Is that why he is so preoccupied with Russia? These are fair questions.
If there exists a rat's nest of corruption and conspiracy in the White House and across the executive branch, then it needs to be rooted out and exterminated. If people go to jail because of it, well, so be it.
18
All I can really think about is how did we get here. I mean, really, how was it that our once great nation, respected around the globe, get here? The news today, to me at least, is just a more clear picture of the incredible wealth grab that's taken place at our expense.
17
Want to become a millionaire? 2 choices. Join a financial services firm or become a congressman. You are indemnified no matter what you do.
1
Two problems with you theory:
1. It's not true. Nobody is indemnified 'no matter what you do.'
2. It doesn't make any sense. Look up the word "indemnify."
1
Looks like the Special Counsel is onto something big! Thank you, Mr. Mueller. This low-life sleeze was fine with selling out our country -- I think there is a word for that...
14
I'm not a legal or law expert, but my common sense tells me that this is a frivolous suit. Imagine suing a police officer for a traffic violation. This will be thrown out of court. Money laundering is not pretty and jail gets you a boyfriend
6
After the judge denies his motion, there will be a plea bargain...this is his last desperate attempt to get of criminal charges....just about every defense attorney asks the judge for a dismissal at some point early on in the proceedings... it's a pro forma attempt when you don't have a lot to defend your client.
13
Manafort is too funny.
His defense is if you’re investigating for one crime, but find another, you can’t prosecute me.
Kinda like getting stopped for speeding, but you don’t want to be arrested for the kilo of cocaine.
24
So the indicted subjects of investigation are to dictate how narrow the investigation is to be. Yeah, tell us another one.
14
Oh, my, what fun!!!!
I'm very clear that Paul's lawyers think that his best chance of getting that presidential pardon is to carry as much water for said as possible. This sort of hail mary pass isn't the sort of thing even a public defender would file, though, given that the only legal precedent cited in the complaint (Morrison v. Olson
) resulted in a 7-1 decision that the Independent Counsel law was constitutional, in direct opposition to their reliance on the opinion of the lone dissenter.
The fun bit, which is the reason that the schlockiest of criminal defense lawyers wouldn't have attempted such a slam dunk baseless claim is that Mueller's lawyers aren't stupid prosecutors, so they know that the benefits of letting this civil case go on is it invites civil discovery rules to come into play.
Civil discovery rules exclude rights against self-incrimination. They include fun stuff like discovery motions, giving judges power to hold people in contempt of court for failing to disclose anything the defendant can convince a judge is relevant. As a result, Mr. Manafort may now be required to answer questions, under oath, about each and all of his interactions with Mr. Trump, questions Mr. Trump probably won't be happy to have answered.
IOW, Mr. Manafort just volunteered to give up any and all information Mr. Mueller's team ever wanted to ask as a potential part of a plea deal -- just without the benefits of becoming a "cooperating witness."
16
"Hey look, sure I knowingly broke the law, but that was YEARS ago....doesn't that mean I deserve to get away with it?"
11
This lawsuit is like when a cop pulls you over for speeding and finds drugs in your car, but lets you go because he's overstepping his authority. Happens all the time, right?
4
Translation: That guy is about to really clean my clack.
6
My first question is what federal crime was committed? To impanel a special council or special prosecutor their must be a federal crime, collusion is not a crime! Was the appointment of Mueller by Rosenstein illegal? So Mueller is given unlimited latitude to investigate everyone, for anything? This is not how or what the US Justice system is for! Hopefully Manafort's law suit may bring some sense to this investigation which is approaching two years. Is the criminalization of politics.
2
Collusion may be hard to prove but obstruction of justice would be the crime to prove.
1
Read Manfort’s criminal indictment. Collusion is not mentioned, but money laundering is and it is a federal crime.
2
Yes, but, this was supposed to be an investigation into alleged Russian collusion into the US Election. How did years old money laundering get into this investigation?
1
If only "stop and frisk" only applied to members of Trump's team and their financial ties. Tax returns?
5
By Manafort’s logic prosecutions against organized crime which rely on tax evasion and raqueteering charges instead of say murder would be beyond the purview of prosecutors and therefore people like Al Capone might never have been convicted. It’s absurd and hopefully the judge who hears this nonsense will clearly let Manafort know it in no uncertain terms.
5
Who is paying for Manafort's frivolous lawsuit? This is a blatant attempt to use any ruse available to interfere with Mueller's attempt to investigate. This is grandstanding, and I am sure Manafort is not footing the bill. So who is so rich and so corrupt that he or she is almost literally burning money to bury the truth?
6
You're kidding, right? Manafort has tons of money from his illegal dealings over the years.
This entire collusion story is a complete puerile waste of time. Because watching President Trump in action is like root canal for progressives, I liken the investigation to going to the dentist and listening to music while the dentist is drilling. Anything to distract from the pain.
1
Mueller should keep the scope of his investigation within the confines of what Paul Manafort considers to be appropriate, in the same way Ken Starr kept the scope of his investigation of Bill Clinton focused on . . . . anything and everything which may or might have been illegal, immoral or just something to get Clinton impeached.
16
So let's see.
If the police are investigating me for stealing hubcaps and find that I committed a murder while taking a break from stealing hubcaps, they can't prosecute me for murder; only stealing hubcaps.
Isn't this point of law well understood?
The fact that Manafort is an old, well schooled, albeit only alleged crook, means he goes free, because he didn't commit the crime that his lawyers say the prosecutor should be investigating. Makes sense huh.
5
The Whitewater investigation, which led to the impeachment of Bill Clinton, was initiated in early 1994 to investigate an Arkansas real estate deal made in 1978, long before Clinton took office. It led to Clinton's impeachment by the house in late 1998 for obstruction of justice, for lying about having sex with Monica Lewinsky. Their sexual encounters took place between November 1995 and March 1997; that is, after the Whitewater investigation began. Monica was 5 years old in 1978; nobody ever suggested she, or anyone she knew, even had anything to do with Arkansas real estate. Thus, these investigations can expand in scope – some have used the term “metastasized” – considerably.
Republican hypocrisy is nothing new, of course. (Indeed, even Democratic politicians are occasionally hypocritical.) But Mueller has authority to investigate any crimes he finds; in fact, he has the obligation to or to refer them to others prosecutors who will pursue them.
8
Apparently, Mr. Manafort has no understanding or has chosen to ignore laws against money laundering (for foreign / domestic gangsters), etc. Politics has nothing to do with why or not Manafort should be living in a jail cell.
3
Good luck wit dat, Jack.
Stunning the outrageous criminal behavior of the wack-a-doodle trump party.
Can you just imagine if President Obama had done even one thousandth of a percent of what this modern republicriminal "party" pulls off?
The wackos would have been out in force on the streets in their fatigues and waving their firearms.
Now the trump-a-doodle "president" plays 5 days of golf for every 2 days of work (if you want to call it that) and the republicons support all of it, along with their lightning fast switch to saying that a new $1 trillion dollar addition to the debt is good, because trump did it.
Looking forward to kicking every one of them out off office this year and an American Democratic President in 2020, reversing all these criminal acts and getting back to normal.
8
Psychosis a severe mental disorder in which thought and emotions are so impaired that contact is lost with external reality suffered by Democrats who actually believe this nonsense. What’s more hard to believe that a campaign and a candidate spending 1.2 billion dollars and having the support of the entire entertainment-media industry couldn’t get the job done.
What's hard to believe is that you think people believe facts only because they are Democrats.
1
The DOJ should sue Paul Manafort for bringing a frivolous lawsuit and seek sanctions against Paul Manafort and his lawyers, including disbarment.
11
So the perps are telling the cops now what they can investigate?
6
Picture this in a year or two or three, when the judges appointed by Trump get busy. What a heaven for corruption awaits us now.
5
Manafort to the Judge..
Don't let them look there ! Nothing to see. Scouts honor,
Just because Trump has been hiding his tax returns, no reason to find out WHY. ....You believe me, don't you Judge?
Trump never lies. He SAID there is no collusion, no financial dealings with the Russians. I'll tell you what. He will release his tax returns right after the audit.
Yea.... That's right. He'll release them after the audit.... He said so, you know Trump never lies. Now call off this investigation. We don't want Trump to get caught ! err I mean caught up in a needless investigation.
5
My step-mother liked Dachsunds. Odd little beasts. Don't know how small they are. It's ten percent dog and 90% attitude. The first of them, Daisy June, chased a car head on. Kind of like Paul is doing now.
8
His Russian handlers must have made it very clear that he will accidentally slip and fall out a very high window if he cooperates and takes a plea deal
7
"Republican efforts to discredit an investigation".
Facts are discrediting Mueller, not Republicans. Overloaded with Hillary supporters AND with Trump hates, the investigation is beyond tainted.
Since Trump is squeaky clean Mueller can only hurt the Dems and fringe folks like Manafort anyway. What a farce.
Still Mueller calms the Democrats hysteria from accepting their humiliating loss to Trump.
Proving only that DC has so many lawyers you can always find a couple of them to file a bogus lawsuit for you, whether it has merit or not. As a brilliant lawyer told me 40 years ago when I was new to the law, “paper will hold anything put upon it.” In this case, 17 wasted pages of paper.
5
The damage that all this circus of self-interested, well connected and wealthy egomaniacs is doing to the country, and to the faith of the American people in our system of government is beyond anything we saw during Watergate. We're letting this cabal of populists, lobbyists and self-interested clowns destroy the structure and credibility of America inside and outside our borders. We are facing an existential threat from within (with assistance from Putin and his puppets). We need to wake up and end this NOW.
11
I thought all his sins would be washed away if he "snitched/ratted out" trumpy. What happened?
At one time criminal perps slunk away in shame, to be shunned by all, or 'played the Roman,' but not characters like Manafort or Wall Street crooks sue their own prosecutors!
Guess Manafort can kiss a Flynn-like deal from Mueller goodbye!
And here hoping Manafort has to foot the bill for full court charges for an utterly frivolous prosecution too!
6
When does the effort to obstruct justice become treason? That is the question the American public should be asking.
4
Quite a while ago.
It is of course unimaginable that money would lie at the heart of Manafort’s or Trump’s collusion with the Russians.
2
the case should be assigned/reassigned to the district court judge before whom the RELATED criminal case is first-filed/pending. anything other than that blatant forum shopping.
2
Errr... yeah, funny how those who supported Ken Starr starting with a Real Estate deal and careening all over the place for years only to home in on a “stain” suddenly think different. Seems the ONE thing you can always count on is for Conservatives to be hypocrites that NEVER want to eat their own cooking...
4
So money laundering in his past isn’t relevant? I think ... Yes, It Is!
3
Only one word comes to mind: hubris, I say!
2
Desperation. Manafort is quite clearly making a desperate attempt to avoid conviction for very serious crimes.
Guilty. As. Sin.
Lock him up!
5
What has Mueller accomplished? He indited Manafort for business activities that had already been investigated by the justice department. He got one person to plead guilty for lying about something not even against the law. He sends his team in to Flynn's house and they leave with photos of suites hanging in the closet. He makes a big deal of getting Flynn to plead guilty to lying which was what got him fired within days of being on the staff in White House. Mueller also fully investigated a beauty contest that happend years ago in Moscow. . What he hasn't done is find one iota of evidence Trump colluded with Putin. In any case, Trump didn't need Russia. He had Hillary to get him elected.
And Nixon didn't need to lead a third rate burglary into the DNC to win in 1972; but, he did it anyway.
How is this not just a retaliatory suit from a "disgruntled" former indictee? Seems to me that a Federal judge might just say "no; and be quiet or will find you in contempt" or something nifty like that.
3
if the cop pulls you over for a burnt out light, you reek of weed and booze. the cop just don't give you a ticket for the burnt out light, trust me they gonna tack on the other charges. aka as it ain't the crime it's the coverup. they gonna pile it on.
10
I have no sympathy for these people (Manfort, Republicans). I am reminded of the investigation of Whitewater by Ken Starr, which ended in the impeachment of Mr. Clinton for having sex with a White House intern. Where does Mr. Manafort stand on that? If he was for limiting Mr. Starr's investigation to Whitewater, then I apologize to him for suggesting otherwise. But, it would be interesting to know...
3
This is a man with no conscience and his activity in the Ukraine is deplorable. He claims to have worked for Trump to save the country; right. He sells his soul to the highest bidder. He and his lot should rot in prison.
10
The NYT missed the delicious response from the PR arm of the DOJ, which was reported by a competing publication today. DOJ is reported to say, essentially, "It's a Free Country, and the complainant is entitled to their wrong opinion."
10
Hopefully Mr. Manafort's lawyers will extract every last penny of his ill gotten gains pursuing ludicrous legal claims...
7
This tells me he doesn't have is grasping at straws.
Sounds like a bad legal strategy to me; it is too broad because you found stuff? CRAZY. How about, not breaking the law, then their would be nothing to worry about. Applies to them all BTW
6
Manafort is guilty.
Mueller's indictment of Manafort and longtime aide, Rick Gates, concerns their work for pro-Russian elements in Ukraine and the laundering more than $75 million in payments received as a result of that work.
The charges do not relate to the 2016 election or possible collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. They concern Manafort's long previous career as Russia's most vocal paid defender in Washington.
That evidence includes FISA voice recordings. 1) conspiring with the intelligence service of a foreign power (espionage, 18 U.S.C. § 957). 2) defraud the electoral rights of the American people; 18 U.S.C. 241, Misprision of Treason (18 U.S.C.. § 2382) and finally, Treason 18 U.S.C § 2381.
He will THEN be convicted in New York state courts for numerous financial crimes, including money laundering.
6
Nixon must be whirring in his grave.
What a great legal system we have: you are investigating a burglary and stumble upon a dead body. According to this investigators have to ignore the dead person on the carpet! Great!
1
If Ken Starr can shift his Clinton investigation from Whitewater to Bill's sex life, how is it that Mueller has overstepped his bounds?
3
Dear Mr. Manafort,
You broke the law. When you break the law and law enforcement finds out and law enforcement is not corrupt, you get indicted. Drop your frivolous lawsuit.
4
As Manafort once smirked: "Absurd!"
2
Two words, Paulie: Fat Chance
2
With this lawsuit against the especial counsel, Paul Manafort demonstrates he is a criminal no different than those pertaining to the drug cartels!! As them, he finds illegal ways to hide money fraudulently obtained, creates a web of deception, enmeshes with colorful characters and fights the very authority in charge of bringing him to justice. It appears Manafort learned his ropes from the Medellin Cartel. At the peak of the confrontation between Pablo Escobar and the Colombian government, the narco, accused the Justice minister of going too far!!
Let's hope than money does not circumvent the process that should land him in a far less glamorous place than the White House.
2
The arrogance of all these characters is astounding. Trumps ego is bigger than his button
4
i think just about anything is bigger than his button...
3
My recollections from law school are pretty dim, but I seem to recall that this lawsuit raises significant and perhaps fatal issues of standing. It's sort of like: "Mommy, Bobbie is hitting me and I want him to stop!"
2
Gee, I wonder who's paying for the suit?
2
'hey you just pulled me over for speeding! Never mind the kilos of heroine in my trunk!'
3
Seems like manafort is not disputing that he is a crook - just does not like the manner in which he was caught - you can'r make this stuff up.
5
This is desperation. If it succeeds at all, either the justice department or congress could easily reinstate everything Mueller has been doing and more. If not, Dems. after winning in November, 2018 could do so--I think. Worst case: Trump needs to sign off and he doesn't. In any case, a country-wide crisis ensues if Mueller is stopped. I can't imagine the American people letting Trump&co. get away with this.
4
This is like a low level Mafioso enforcer suing for being brought in for petty theft when all the DA is trying to do is pressure the enforcer to tell him what he knows.
3
Poor Paul Manafort, he has to spend so much laundered money to defend himself.
6
He is probably scared of all the cold killers for which he has been laundering money all these years. He has to show them “he tried”.
1
When the merits are not in your favor, you attack the process, the investigator, the court, etc. - everyone but yourself is at fault. SOP.
5
My thoughts are this, Manafort needs to go to jail for the rest of his life. Just like his friends.
8
He, like Trump, doth protest too much
1
I guess Manafort learned at the knee of trump. Whenever there is an unfavorable situation...sue. Whenever you divert the attention of those attempting to derail you or your company...sue. Whenever you find yourself in hot water...sue. Paul, your Mom should have named you...
6
Don't worry, should Mueller lose, Eric Schneiderman is on deck to pursue the Manafort case.
4
I didn't steal the cat.... I stole the dog. You were suppose to investigate who stole the cat. LAME!
2
So Manafort wants to go to court? Where all things....all things....will be public record.
4
LOL.
And where you can ask any question, under penalty of perjury, and the complainant (because it's a civil suit, not a criminal suit) CAN'T REFUSE TO ANSWER....
Mr. Manafort's lawyers are geniuses (not) for getting him into a predicament where, unless Mr. Mueller chooses to be gracious, he can be forced to sing like a bird about every conversation he's ever had with Donald Trump, without the benefit of coping a plea deal.
1
Manafort will found guilty of treason and even a fifth grader could follow his money laundering.
3
Manafort must have been bribed or threatened not to cooperate
with Mueller. I would go with threatened. Putin's long bear paw?
3
All one can hope and pray is that this Manafort matter doesn't have the privilege of being decided by one the the numerous incompetent judicial appointments of DJT. Scary and sad.
2
It’s the fruit of the poison tree argument. Manafort has a case here. This should be about Russia election tampering only. It can’t be used to microscope ones entire life for wrong doings. Mueller is charging people on matters unrelated to the election hoping to get someone to implicate Trump to lesson the charges. It akin to extortion.
@Jim - How do you come to that conclusion? Most of Manfort's illegal work was for Russia and/or Russia related interests. Trump is aware of his history working for Russia in the Ukraine election, and hires him for his own campaign. Seeing as the investigation is about Russian interference in US elections, it's more than reasonable to investigate Manafort. Also, it's the duty of any DOJ prosecutor to sit a grand jury for any crimes uncovered during that process; it doesn't matter if they're directly connected or not.
The campaign manager of a presidential candidate illegally acting as a foreign agent and hiding the proceeds, then advocating specific policy positions in the candidates platform is unrelated to to election tampering? What would rise to the level of "related"? And Flynn was charged with a simple count of perjury in exchange for cooperating--saving himself from charges of treason (and maybe more). The poisoned tree here is the entire trump team
I don't think that Mr. Mueller is particularly rattled by this.
That's bad news for Mssrs Manafort et al.. Because the worst it is likely to do is drag out the investigation as the investigator has to deal with being investigated. Not what you wanted to have happen. Not with an election in 11 months.
While not rattled, Mr. Mueller will be annoyed, and driven to redouble his efforts.
While I'm here. May I commend Mr. Mueller's committee for their unmarked lack of leaks! Contrasting this to the Ken Starr circus of the sieve. I do appreciate the professionalism even as I eagerly await the red meat I expect will be thrown towards us lions.
It makes me chuckle in anticipation every time I read "He's got nothing!" as if.
6
This is a good effort on the part of Mr. Manafort's lawyers, but the issue arises from reading more into Mr. Rosenstein's appointment to Mr. Mueller than actually exists.
From page 3 and 4 of the filed Complaint, #8. “Consistent with DOJ’s special counsel regulations, the Appointment Order gives Mr. Mueller authority to investigate a specific matter: “links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump.” …the Appointment Order then purports to grant Mr. Mueller the additional authority to pursue “any matters that arose or may arise directly from” that investigation.”
Reading carefully, one sees that the direction given to Mr. Mueller is to investigate the links of those ASSOCIATED to the campaign. The direction does not specify that those links could only have been ESTABLISHED or invoked during the campaign.
Therefore, Mr. Mueller can investigate links between Mr. Manafort and others with the Russian government. After all, previous associations and/or financial liabilities with the Russian government could be a motivating factor in decisions made during and after the campaign.
7
A judge cannot hear a case unless he has jurisdiction and venue over the litigant.
Likewise, a prosecutor has no authority to prosecute unless he has the legal authority under the law and regulations in effect.
Manafort is saying Mueller does not have the authority under the law and regulations to do what he did with respect to him.
A judge will decide whether he is right.
A Virginia prosecutor cannot prosecute a Maryland murderer.
He does not have the authority.
@True Observer - The lack of logic in your statement is stunning.
1
actually, True Observer is right.
1
It is very likely that Trump legal team are behind this to narrow the scope of Mueller's investigation and Mercer's are financing it.
4
A thinly disguised diversionary tactic. I agree with those pundits who say sanctions should be imposed on the lawyer who filed this frivolous suit.
4
So...Manafort is asking the court to tell a special prosecutor to ignore evidence of criminal activity which may not only violate state and federal law, but potentially has national security implications?
Good luck with that!
But, if he wins it, I am filing the same suit preemptively. I don't want to be investigated for any crimes either, regardless of how guilty I (allegedly) may be.
3
I think this is a desperate attempt to bring a halt to Mueller's investigation BEFORE Mueller reports out how he has connected the dots between money laundering and collusion in the Trump campaign, plain and simple.
3
Mr. Manafort no doubt feels he's hidden his assets well enough to crawl out of this self-made hole and can cause enough diversion meantime to save himself. But even if this gambit works there are still state courts - all those government lawyers fired by Mr. Trump are no doubt ready to pitch in. No matter the ultimate outcome Mr. Manafort will be spending the rest of his life under indictments, in court, with lawyers and possible house arrest and jail.
Crime definitely does pay in this case - it pays for all those lawyers to pretend you didn't commit those crimes. An innocent man has paperwork to prove the legality of his finances; a guilty man has lawyers. There is some justice knowing how fast a legal team can eat through one's net worth.
3
This is no more absurd than the practice of "ruling out" evidence, for whatever procedural reasons, even though it could help find the truth.
A special prosecutor may only be appointed to investigate a specific crime. Rosenstein has never specified a crime. This whole investigation may go up in smoke as a result of this suit. What took so long. The law is the law.
Mueller is not a "special prosecutor."
1
So, when the officer pulls you over about the expired licence plate, he can just ignore the box of iPhones, social security cards, credit cards and driver's licences in the back seat? Sadly, there may be a judge who buys Manafort's novel concept of criminality.
You have eyewitness testimony. There's a banking and money laundering paper trail which extends around the world. There's electronic surveillance. There's evidence taken via a search warrant of Mr. Manaforth's home. And there's a financial motive which exceeds $17 million dollars. Please your Honor; let's not waste anymore of taxpayers hard-earned dollars on a man that has repeatedly lied and rejected full disclosure plea offers. There's no need--- now out of dire desperation, to grant Mr. Manafort's defense team essentially a last minute chain of custody hearing to undermine the veracity of solid evidence relating to Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation. Please Your Honor!
1
Mueller needs to be reigned in as much as Ken Starr was. I think everyone can agree on this.
It is usual for these operations to begin investigating one subject - say, the Whitewater Land Deal, and years later after finding nothing wrong in the original area to ask for prosecution in another area entirely, such as whether President Clinton lied about an extra-marital affair. All members of the Republican leadership have endorsed this way of doing things.
It is also worth remembering that Mueller is a special counsel, not a special prosecutor. He cannot prosecute. If he finds strong evidence the most he can do is to turn it over to the appropriate legal authority. New York State got some of the Manafort rap sheet. The House may get evidence against Trump.
1
Manafort's complaint should, and will, be dismissed immediately. The civil court doesn't have jurisdiction over these claims when there is already a criminal proceeding with competent jurisdiction in which they can be argued and addressed. This is such black letter law that the lawyers who filed the complaint should be sanctioned.
2
ahhh, no. completely wrong.
I don't understand how Mueller could ignore evidence of another crime that emerged while he was investigating possible Trump campaign collusion with the Russian government. Would a perpetrator expect to not be charged if he or she would have gotten away with the crime otherwise? If an individual has committed a crime, shouldn't he or she be expected to pay for it no matter how it came to light?
16
This is an act of desperation. Once it is shot down he'll probably appeal it as far as he can too.
I forget the circumstances but as I recall the path to his prior bad acts was pretty straight forward.
Here is one: He was the campaign chief he gets looked at, his prior work in Ukraine comes up because it is well known he worked for Yanukovych and that coming out is why he was removed as the public campaign chief, and then it gets looked at how closely he worked with Moscow on that campaign and the accounting ledgers the Ukrainian government found when Yanukovych abandoned his office indicating Manafort was paid more then $12M, get tax records that show no such income...etc. is one path. There are literally hundreds of possible paths to discovering his illicit activities.
1
For defendants, civil or criminal, there is no downside (other than attorneys fees) to a motion to dismiss: If they lose, nothing changes; if they win, they get to go home (and it's not house arrest). There's always hope that a judge will have a moment of insanity and grant the motion. Doesn't happen often, but when it does, it's game over. Some entities have a standing rule for their in-house attorneys requiring the attorneys to file a motion to dismiss in every action.
So no real news, but good publicity and another chance to recite claims of innocence.
4
How do these high-priced attorneys live with themselves? I know they are "doing their job" and everyone has the right to a defense, but at the end of the day isn't this our democracy at stake? I guess everything and everyone has a price.
4
The actions Mr. Manafort is charged with are specifically relevant to his suitability as a go-between for Mr. Trump's campaign and the Russian government. They're among the qualifications he had when Mr. Trump selected him to chair his campaign.
11
I assume the new case will be assigned or reassigned to the judge handling the criminal case, so I don't think Manafort is shopping for a different judge. The criminal case will take awhile, assuming Manafort has waived speedy trial. So why not get the constitutional challenges on a fast track? If he prevails on appeal, he might be able to spare himself a criminal trial. If he fails to prevail on appeal, he might also spare himself a criminal trial by making a deal with Mueller. Either way, this move prob brings the Manafort matter to closure more quickly than if Manafort had raised these challenges in the criminal case.
1
It's a civil case, not a response to the criminal one and oi vei, there's the rub for lots of reasons, but...
Did it ever occur to you that any plea deals are now permanently off the table?
When attorneys file a complaint such as this, specious as it is -- or rather, because it is SO specious that accepting it as "okay" threatens to put a black eye on the face of anyone who respects the rule of law rather than the rule of men, because it devalues the ability of the courts, of representatives of the people (in the form of the Grand Jury that indicted him), of the lawful representatives of the state (in the form of the lawfully appointed Special Prosecutor) and is, in essence, is a toadying attempt to give Potus grounds to deliver an entirely self-serving and therefore unconstitutional pardon...
Did it occur to you that NO rational prosecutor would ever whimper and offer to trust Manafort again...?
"The unusual move comes as Mr. Trump tries to portray the investigation as a politically motivated witch hunt that has cast a dark cloud over his administration and, in his view, the country."
Mr. President, one of the things that still makes the US a bright spot in the collection of nations is our tradition and ability to investigate and prosecute people, even if they're very close to the President (or even happen to be President). Nation of laws, sir. You wanted the job, you have to expect the scrutiny of your wealthy, cash-heavy associates.
4
It will be interesting to see if Manafort's theory that the conduct which ostensibly gave rise to the indictment against him was in fact fully disclosed to the DOJ in 2014 and therefore cannot be deemed to be "discovered" by Mueller in the course of his 2017 investigation gets any traction with the court.
5
There is something basically American about Manafort's claim. Mueller's team has combed through documents from 2009 to bring the charges against him. There are limits to just how far into ones history a prosecutor can go in this country. Certainly activities from 2009 can not possibly be germane to the 2016 election. Are you willing to submit to a lifetime examination if you get arrested for speeding.
1
Money laundering and treason aren't exactly speeding...are they?
5
The point of this is discovery--DOJ and Mueller will have to disclose a lot of information they would rather not. It will not be good for them.
3
A broad overview: Trump, Manafort, Kushner, and various other members of Trump's administration have committed various prosecutable crimes. But most of the perpetrators get a pass because Republicans own the DOJ, and the Congress.
Now because of Trump's dual blunder of firing Comey and appointing Sessions we have a special prosecutor. Truly a bizarre quirk of fate and not a pleasant one for Republicans.
Now Manafort feels cheated because he isn't covered by the umbrella of Republican partisan protection. It's not legal protection just a whole government feeling authorized to look the other way. Tough.
And what of the basic principle that a policeman may legally search a car if incriminating materials are apparent from the outside, and the policeman may also produce evidence that can lead to prosecutable charges for any criminal activities that are uncovered during the search? That is, the search becomes legally valid with the visible items and prosecution can proceed based on any other items that may be uncovered during the search. There are limits to the extent of the legal search and it depends on how Mueller came across the information regarding Manafort's crimes.
Manafort will be prosecuted in New York if not by the feds.
10
It sounds like the scope of the investigation should be expanded. The truth is not multiple choice.
4
This seems a little odd. The claim is that a special counsel can not investigate things that were not the primary basis for the investigation? Has that ever been the case? Certainly not in the Starr investigation of Bill Clinton.
Seems to me that if an investigation leads to information that had not been anticipated and that information indicates criminal acts have been committed, then there is not a problem. If someone is being investigated for money launddring and evidence develops that they committed treason, should they get a free pass? Probably not, so why should it be the other way around?
5
The courts reviewing the Executive Branch determining the scope of an investigation could trip over the separation of powers of the branches.
Finding motives is very vague, to see what advantages any particular individual sees in dealings of any kind, especially financial.
Whether there is a parallel with the investigation of Bill Clinton that ended with impeachment related to Monica Lewinsky is moot, since impeachment is not a judicial process but solely political.
2
How can the target of an investigation sue to dictate the scope of the investigation? How can a target contend that certain crimes are beyond investigation and prosecution? This is better confirmation that Mueller is on the right track than anybody else could have provided: Manafort has all but taken out a full-page ad announcing that his business dealings are dirty, have always been, have been his tie to Russia and Ukraine, and constitute the focus of his relationship with Trump --all the things he wants Mueller to be restrained from examining.
8
Looks like an attempt to preempt the coming charges against Donald Jr. and Kushner, if not Trump himself.
46
So if in the course of investigating one matter, law enforcement officials come across evidence of another crime, they can't pursue that crime? Seems a bit preposterous - new charges are routinely uncovered during the investigation of other ones - but I have no clue how this would apply in the case of a special council.
58
The short answer is yes, evidence of other crimes that are uncovered during an ongoing investigation are chargeable.
So a special prosecutor is appointed to independently investigate a specific crime. Mueller may run into a problem here. NO ONE has ever name the underlying crime. This is an act of brilliance. Rosenstien's hand is being forced. Unless a specific crime can be named a Federal Judge may pull the plug on this whole thing. ( before any small brains chime in....collusion is not a crime )
New charges are always uncovered because, in this case, they can’t find any proof of collusion. So they look elsewhere, find some other crime, and then blackmail that person to give up something; in this case something on Trump. It’s a pathetic abuse of Powers’s the special prosecutor has open hunting season , even w/o cause on U.S. citizens.
If Manafort prevails, the charges against him will be dismissed, but the Mueller team could continue to investigate crimes directly related to the 2016 election. The problem is there doesn't seem to be any. That's why Muller is investigating Michael Flynn lobbying work for Turkey and loans a German bank made to Donald Trump's organization.
13
It could be a deliberate strategy. He is getting them on federal charges and saving other financial issues to give state attorneys options, incase Trump pardons people on the federal charges (he can't pardon for state crimes). The NY AG for example could have jurisdiction over many financial shenanigans. Alternatively, there really could be no evidence worth any more indictments of course. Only time will tell.
16
So, if if the FBI found a dead body in Manafort’s closet when they raided his home, they should just step over it?
You might want to google the German Bank. It has been fined for not being very diligent about money laundering. And I believe some Russians may have benefitted.
73
No, evidence of crimes, uncovered during an ongoing investigation are chargeable. For example if your a drug dealer, and your house is raided, and during the search, a body is found, then that is treated as a secondary crime, the crime scene and the evidence is preserved. A search warrant wouldn't be needed if the body is found during the course of a legal search. However, they would more than likely get one just Incase. A search warrant can be obtained in a matter of minutes.
It's similar to being stopped by a cop, he walks up to your window, and sees a weed pipe in plain sight, that officer wouldn't need a search warrant at that point. And anything found as a result of the search that would follow is admissible evidence.
3
Manafort's claims have some merit if you adopt a narrow interpretation of the Department's rules. Unfortunately for Manafort, courts have held that administrative agencies like the Department have broad authority to interpret and apply their rules so long as they are not doing so in an arbitrary or capricious manner. Even then, practically speaking, the acting attorney general could fix the problem by simply expanding the special prosecutor's jurisdiction or by charging the crimes himself. But if this requires one of them to re-issue an indictment, then that might create issues with some of the charges' statute of limitations, particularly the tax related ones, which were looming if I recall correctly. That could be the real strategy of Manafort's attorney here.
34
Begging the question if what Manafort's lawyers are doing doesn't amount to some sort of obstruction of justice.
It is Justice Department's jobs to prosecute federal crimes, and the department has delegated that authority to Mueller. Case over.
43
No, prosecuting federal crimes is the job of the US Attorneys. Mueller was appointed under a very particular set of rules with a particular mission to investigate violations in connection with the 2016 election. Manafort is arguing that money laundering with funds paid to him under a consulting contract that had nothing to do with his role in the Trump campaign exceeds that mission.
Mueller could have referred all that he found to the appropriate US Attorney.
1
These are surely the acts of innocent men. Manafort wants to narrow the scope of Mueller's investigation, and Trump wants no light shined on his personal finances. These desires alone convince me that there is something amiss here. Combine this with the article in today's NYT by the founders of Fusion GPS about the Congressional investigations, and any reasonable person would conclude that something very serious is lurking in the shadows. Hopefully, Mr. Mueller will bring it all to light.
152
The possibilities include 1) The Manafort Republican Trump team gains a new stage to publicly criticize and counterattack Mueller. 2) Presumably Manafort et al chose a sympathetic court to file their case. So in addition to what Manafort lawyers can concoct there is a chance that in the newly appointed pro-Trump judiciary they'll have chosen a judge eager to make pro-Trump rulings (like the one who never tried a case or apparently never read a lawbook. And if it ever reaches the Supreme Court there's Gorsuch. Also, hate to say it, is Roy Moore still on the bench somewhere, or does he just work malls? 3) Republicans have laid the groundwork for refusing to increase Mueller's budget. So whatever resources will be needed to contest Manafort's claims will limit Mueller's investigation. With discreet donations to other defendants this might become a trend. There's all that tax cut money out there now.
15
Follow the money. Who is financing Manafort's lawsuit? If Manafort prevails, who else benefits?
1
“It got to the point where the staff of the commission was spending more time responding to litigation than doing an investigation,” Mr. Kobach said.
Quoth the vice-chairman of the dissolute commission on anti-Trump voting. So Make Trump Great Again knows about the effectiveness of this tactic.
Mr. Manafort argues that criminal acts occurring prior to the 2016 election campaign involving parties with ties to Russia are outside the scope of the Special Counsel's investigation into alleged collusion with Russia because he asserts they are not connected and, as proof, he states 'I'm not guilty, believe me'.
Ample reason seems to exist to believe that crimes were committed by Mr. Manafort involving parties with connections to the highest levels of government in Russia and that these crimes may be evidence of long standing relations coalescing in the election of someone beholden to a foreign power. It seems unreasonable that investigations and prosecutions be restricted to crimes committed when Mr. Manafort was a member of the campaign team, since the crimes Mr. Mueller is charged to investigate are likely multifaceted, involving several actors, and their genesis may have been years earlier. Evidence of shady relations between Mr. Trump, his campaign colleagues and Russian actors crop up with regularity, reinforcing the appearance of impropriety and criminality and should not be discarded. The Special Counsel must prove criminality and has passed initial tests by obtaining warrants and indictments. How Mr. Manafort's crimes and associations fit with those of other actors is a puzzle the Special Counsel must unravel and argue successfully in court to obtain convictions and he should be allowed to pull the threads of criminal behaviour he finds.
35
At best this is a stall. Even if he were successful (doubtful), he could still be prosecuted by the regular DOJ I would think. In fact DOJ was investigating most of these crimes before Mueller got involved.Manafort might as well try anything because on the merits it appears he has a very weak case. If he’s lucky he’ll get a Trump nominated judge.
13
The legal complaint is frivolous. The Department of Justice has specific rules pertaining to officers of the court (special agents, attorneys) who become aware of a crime and fail to take actions to address the crime. Justice is blind. Officers of the law can not be blind. It is only common sense.
36
Manafort may or may not prevail in the court. But he still should make his case in public, because the problem the Trump camp faces is more political than legal. As long as a significant segment of the society accepts the general view point of the Trump camp that the investigation is biased, the Trump camp will be doing just fine. This law suit strengthens the perception that this investigation has no limit to pursue Mr. Trump and people associated with him. A steady flow of information resulted from this investigation has already been hit the Trump camp. At the same time, there is a complete silence and inaction on obvious misconducts, such as collusion with a British intelligence agent to influence the US election, mishandling of classified information, and giving the Russians the best Uranium they have ever had. Trying to defend every aspect of a special counsel's attack is an impossible task. Just look at the Clintons, who tried to defend themselves by other meanings such as stonewalling. Quickly, they were not and have never again been associated with something called honesty. It's very smart to go against the investigation itself from the very beginning. Unless this investigation can produce a signed contract between Mr. Trump himself and the Russian government, it will be a complete waste of money.
1
pssst the Uranium One sale stipulated that no uranium mined on US soil by that company could be exported to Russia. Details are the enemy of conspiracy making.
2
hiring a former British intelligence agent who is now a private investigator is not illegal or "collusion". And its worth spending the equivalent of a weekends of Secret Service protection to discover how Russia and Trumps campaign team tried to undermine our election. We don't need to see a signed contract with the Russians, Donny Jr. already admitted that he tried to make a deal with the Russians.
I suppose the suit hinges on the assertion that whatever money laundering Manafort did was completely separate from the Trump campaign. I wonder whether it has been so separate.
11
Obviously, financial deals with Russian interests which Manafort or anyone else in the Trump campaign entered into years before the campaign could have heavily influenced the campaign itself, as well as presidential behavior today. What appear to be matters disconnected from the campaign or the presidency may be closely connected if they can induce a conflict of interest in decision-making. Had Rosenstein given Mueller a more narrow mandate, it would have just been the corrollary of putting blinders on him, to keep him from "following the money". This lawsuit seems to be a blatant and desperate effort to cover up evidence by narrowing Mueller's field of vision.
27
I would sue Mueller too if I were Manafort - he's got oodles of money for litigation and a political climate on his side. This is nothing more than strategy to defray the consequences of severe infractions against U.S. laws.
11
Old defense tactic: can’t attack the facts attack the victim/witnesses. None of that presenting itself, attack the government, its prosecutors and their authority. I’m just a retired deputy public defender I’ve thought up all kinds defenses already.
Sing birdie sing. Now they’re max his sentence. Adios.
24
Doesn't this tactic amount to a tacit admission of guilt? If he were innocent, or believed the charges to be inappropriate, wouldn't he seek to have the charges dismissed instead of suing for overreach? Going the civil route is akin to saying, "I can't fight the legal basis of the charges, instead I am suing to curb your investigation."
36
Paul is an Autumn. We like him in orange. Donald should opt for the stripes, very slimming. The kids are young, prison garb in denim we think for them.
So many crimes. Federal. State. Civil. And who doesn't think that Bannon knows a guy with access to some Jeffrey Epstein tapes of parties with young girls and Don?
82
This strikes me as the height of arrogance, of which there is no shortage among all the various sleazy characters associated with Donald Trump.
If Manafort is hoping he’ll get something out of this diversionary lawsuit, aside from more infamy, he is likely to be quickly disappointed.
If anything, it should make sentencing more interesting!
125
I think its mostly desperation. He is facing a lot of time in prison.
While my legal knowledge is limited to Criminal Justice 101 and a few dozen Law & Order episodes, isn't suing Mueller equivalent to filing a civil lawsuit against a DA who just indicted you on multiple felony criminal charges?
How does a civil lawsuit serve as a defense in criminal court? Wouldn't Manafort's criminal defense lawyer be filing a motion to dismiss the case from criminal court? Can someone ask Sam Waterston's character for his opinion? Or better yet, it's a shame Fred Thomson's character couldn't be asked--Watergate reference anyone?
58
The chief minority counsel on the Senate Watergate committee. I watched the hearings every day!
The simple criminality cannot be ignored since it can be used by the Russians as blackmail material. What might give Russia a good mole in the Whitehouse? Maybe knowledge that the person has committed crimes. Trump and his criminal cronies likely laundered money for the Russians, which means they cannot cross the Russians. They are owned by the Russians. Of course if the truth of those crimes comes out then the Russians lose that bargaining chip, but we then are left with a criminal president. Something that is fairly obvious already, and maybe not that appalling to our other leaders because they are also likely criminals, but it will be a conundrum nonetheless. Do we believe in laws, or do we believe in birthright royalty. I suspect there will always be people who would prefer a cruel king to living in freedom and thus having to accept responsibility for their own lives. The base of both parties seem willing slaves to me.
41
Except for noting the jurisdictional arguments didn't work so well for the Mafia, I will leave the legal matter to the judges.
In the real world, outside of the courtroom, however, the legal argument proferred by Manafort's lawyers appears to rest on a lie, that the Ukraine has nothing to do with Russia when its government, for whom Manaforte was working, was hog tied to the Kremlin and wealthy oligarchs who enjoy Kremlin patronage. Keep in mind, that according to an e-mail, Panforte was interested in making himself "whole" with one of the oligarchs.
The Trump Tower meeting, at which Mr. Manaforte was present, also had something to do with Kremlin interests in meddling with our politics. Away from lawyers' dusty tomes. the idea that the Manaforte indictment had nothing to do with Russia is ludicrous.
50
Didn't Monica Lewinsky's blue dress get turned up by Ken Starr as a rather meandering but nonetheless real consequence of the Whitewater land deal investigation? Investigations beget investigations.
70
Ah, but those were Democrats, Republicans want different treatment.
which is exactly why the independent counsel statute was allowed to lapse by Congress . . . if you read the article you'll understand this and that Mueller is operating under a different authority.
Yes, it did come up that way, but Bill was a Democrat and thus fair game. If Paul & Donald are innocent, all they need to do is hush up, sit back & let Mueller exonerate them.
Lotsa luck, Paulie. At least you know El Presidente will of course have your back.
Heh-heh.
48
Manafort only got hit with the minimum as a quid pro quo for his cooperation with Mueller. Could it be he's getting squeezed a bit harder now based on Flynn's admissions? This seems like a desperation move - suing for anything and everything that might stick to the wall and hoping he gets one of Trump's judges to see it that way. Good luck, Tovarisch Manafort.
36
Manafort is cooperating with Mueller? Are you perhaps confusing him with other targets of the investigation?
Manafort has not reached any deal with Manafort, at least not publicly. This lawsuit certainly puts that idea to rest though. I believe you're thinking of Flynn.
Well, we now know that sleazy, slimy, felonious, treasonous Manafort is not turning on Trump any time soon.
Okay, so you commit a crime, get charged with the crime, and in order not to serve the time for your crime, you sue the prosecutor. Ingenious! This lawsuit should be thrown out as well as laughed out of federal court. Every criminal who ends up in court and does not like the judge's decision can threaten to sue both the judge, the prosecutor, and the judicial system for putting him or her in such a position. The ultimate attempt at avoidance for taking responsibility for crimes committed.
Trump must just love this lawsuit as he wants to take down our democracy and our justice system. This is a two-fer lawsuit for him. Discredit everyone else so you appear to be a victim and not a perpetrator. He has spent 72 years avoiding taking responsibility for his actions. He loves projecting all his crimes onto other. A walking, talking psychological projection system.
If Trump, Don Jr., Kushner, et al were all so innocent they would not be sweating profusely and in primal fear mode about this investigation and its forthcoming charges. Trump has been trying to shut it down since he learned that Russian hackers attacked our democracy in favor of getting him elected. National security be damned, it is all about Trump and how he made out in this deal.
I wish all these people would crawl back under the rocks they emerged from.
46
How rich. This guy was a professional lobbyist always working against the best interest of the United States. A traitor trying to say our government has no right to investigate his treason. Lock him up!!!
60
Since when does the target of a criminal investigation have standing to challenge its scope?
Since never, Mr. Manafort. Hey, maybe you can punch Mueller in the face and Trump will cover your legal bills. That's the sort of "campaign" you "managed," and the kind of cretin you gladly worked for. When you weren't cohabitating with the Russians.
71
since forever, actually.
It seems like Manafort is between a rock and a hard place. He must have a lot to hide and there must be a lot of down side for him to cooperate. It is probably worth a try since there is a growing effort to try to stop this thing before it nets to many players. Maybe it will be heard by a judge who also has a lot to hide and would want to squash this.
7
Total grandstanding by Manafort and his lawyers. My concern is that the Trump/Manafort strategy is for Sessions or Trump to order Rosenstein not to oppose the lawsuit (the DOJ is a named defendant) and, when he refuses, to use that as an excuse for firing him and replacing him with someone more subservient who will fire Mueller. Then we will have a constitutional crisis. So it's essential to get a judge who will act quickly and decisively in dismissing this, even without an opposition from the Justice Department.
22
It's just a predictable bid on his part to muddy the waters and stretch out the impending prison sentence he is likely to get. We can expect the same from other members of the Trump inner circle as they are slowly tied up legally by Mueller. It's an old ploy used by Trump himself in the many legal lawsuits he has had over his business career.
24
The NYT should move Apuzzo to the opinion pages. This isn't straight reporting; this is a news story laced with Apuzzo's leftist perspective. I miss the days when the NYT separated news from opinion.
1
Seriously? I re-read every paragraph and found that every one either:
1. provided new factual information about the breaking story of Manafort's legal move
2. Re-iterated the context that lead up to today's action. Let's see:
last Trump said no firing plans, but various disparagement. Yep, facts and pertinent (would have been different had Manafort been the ONLY one to cry foul about the special counsel, but notoriously, he is not). Previous 3 Ps: relevant facts. Before that the one about the theory that the investigation must have limits, which, factually, DJT HAS argued before, as stated. It would have been unfair (as did not happen) had the writer called this argument stupid or something, as various commenters have pointed out...
Basically, I agree that the NYT is all in on the quite different way that this administration is handling he job, and personally I no longer think it's really news when the POTUS says or does something an 10th grader could handle better, but they are sort of feeding a daily outrage as it sells
Why didn't Bill Clinton think of this?
16
Either Manafort is totally crazy (we already know he's a nefarious money launderer and influence peddler) or his lawyer or adviser must be off their rockers. This guy is going to go to jail. Hopefully sooner than later. Right, Mr. Schneiderman?
14
I'd love Paul Manafort and his legal team to appeal this 'case' (sic) all the way up to the Supreme Court.
I'd love the Supreme Court - pace Justice Gorsuch - to dismiss the case.
Then, I'll love to see citizens (including me) rioting in the streets.
NOT my president
23
Mr. Mueller should hand over the evidence to a State AG and let him be charged under state laws, then POTUS can't pardon him.
12
You can bet that that has already been done. I am willing to bet there are state charges in a sealed indictment
11
There is no basis in fact or law for this suit. In Federal Court attorneys sign the complaint and are obligated to vouch for it. They, the attorneys, assert that they have found an actual factual bases and that there is law consistent with those facts that could grant the relief sought. When there is no factual bases and that there is no law supporting the complaint(at least a reasonable theory based upon prior law and court decisions) then the attorneys are subject to sanctions.
This is a good time to issue sanctions in a significant amount to make sure this does not happen in the future. Something like $50,000 payable by the attorneys seems appropriate to this attorney
18
The Manafort lawsuit asserts that the Justice Department’s appointment order exceeded statutory limits by expanding the soccer of the special counsel investigation to include matters not directly related to the Trump campaign or to the 2016 election. If Manafort prevails, the charges against him, his partner Rick Gates and Michael Flynn might be dismissed. They are not related to the Trump campaign or the 2016 election. Mueller investigators would be limited to investigating crimes directly related to the Trump campaign and the 2016 election. So far, the only crime alleged that is directly related to the 2016 election is the hacking of DNC and John Podesta email and its subsequent delivery to WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has offered to present evidence proving WikiLeaks didn’t get the email from Russia in exchange for the same immunity afforded U.S. news outlets when they published stolen email and documents. The Mueller team should take Assange up on his offer.
1
The Steele dossier, if used to spy on the Trump campaign by the current POTUS administration, could also be a crime.
If Russia didn't send Assange the email, why ask for immunity? That it came from Trump's camp is the only logical reason I can think of.
wrong, wrong, wrong. The order was to study that election and things coming from that. Following the money is OF COURSE a part of that
1
A-hahahaha! Bring it on, Manafort! It's Mueller Time!
12
So if I am investigating you for stealing money from your employer, for example, and during that investigation I discover that you murdered someone, I'm supposed to ignore the murder? Interesting....
21
If the facts are on your side, argue the facts.
If the facts aren't on your side, argue the law.
bye, Felicia
12
What are you hiding Paul?
7
All these ladies doth protest too much. The more they deny or obfuscate or can't remember the louder their admissions of guilt.
6
If Manafort (and Trump) have been successful of perpetrating crimes that began decades before
the Russian investigation, and Mueller discoveries those crimes during the Russian investigation, not only should it be fair game resulting from the Russian investigation but it defines and sets the mode of behavior that Manafort (and Trump) operate under.
DO NOT ENABLE CRIMINALS TO DEFINE THE PARAMETERS OF WHICH THEY WILL BE INVESTIGATED.
18
I suspect that Mr. Manafort is issuing this challenge at the behest of Mr. Trump. This suggests to me that Mr. Trump has promised him a pardon. He is thus gambling wth house money and has no real fear of repercussions.
I continue to hold out hope that Mr. Trump will be removed from office in the coming months.
16
This move by Manafort just prolongs the inevitable. Mueller can't make much of any move without permission from the grand jury, i.e., he has to show ample evidence that the law was violated before he can arrest Manafort and seize his files. Unfortunate that the welloff can afford to prolong the inevitable.
2
Find it interesting that Simpson & Fritsch's NYT's op-ed, same date bookends Manfort's suit especially as they delve into the financial end of things both here in the U.S. and Russia...
Oh and let's not forget the "coffee boy" moving up in the order as well.
Yeah-Right! Boundaries on a “Special Council? Ask Bill Clinton about that one. Manafort is suspected of breaking US Laws as a result of the investigation that was started. Unlike Ken Starr, Muller is mute with the press allowing his actions to speak for him. Like all Special Council prosecutors he will prosecute everything that surfaces in the investigation. The RNC didn’t seem to be bothered when Clinton was in the cross-hairs.
This is going to get really ugly and a lot of dirt is going to come to the attention of the nation. However, house-cleaning is a necessary task to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and Laws of this nation. Funny, that is exactly what all federal officials swear an oath to do – including the sitting President as well as all members of Congress.
6
Here is what Manafort's suit will do if successful: If the police are investigating a burglary and find that the culprit committed murder, then they are not allowed to arrest him for that murder because that was not what they were originally investigating.
3
Any chance he'll hire Ken Starr as an expert witness?
Trump must be having conniptions. The sum of his first year is a lot of people on all sides hate his bellicose belligerent hysterical foray into politics. All he wanted was high TV ratings. He clearly never wanted the hot seat presidency. He just wanted a platform to complain about who did get elected. It was fun being a birther and complaining about Obamas golfing.
5
Ken Starr's free-range mandate was so problematic - and made so many in both parties gulp - that the Independent Counsel law was allowed to lapse in 1999 as Capitol Hill breathed a collective sigh of relief. But it's back, with Mueller being treated as a de facto Independent Counsel, free to poke around wherever he wants in order to better find all those hidden Russians. They could be anywhere! It is deja vu all over again. Just as, when the Starr Report was issued, a widespread reaction was (other than disgust at its prurient detail)"Huh?
What was this all about, again?," so too when this bizarre Mueller As Avenging Champion of the Resistance saga is through, there will likely be similar puzzlement about what was really accomplished, if anything. Maybe Mueller is karmic payback to the GOP for their Starr escapade 20 years ago.
The case will be tossed out by the Court. Waste of time and money. Yawn.
3
The desperate thrashings of a throughly bad man as he watches his wealth and freedom slipping away. Entertaining.
6
This cabal is up to their eyeballs with Russian connections, shady Russian funding, lies about their meetings with Russians . . . . When will this end? How long can this go on?
1
At least its a clever deflection this time. of course manafort and trump are both traitors so who cares.
Enjoy the impeachment everyone.
2
It is odd that the NYT attributes Manafort's indictment as evidence that Trump forces conspired with the Russians to subvert the election. That said, if law enforcement detects criminal activity conducted under Obama, it seems reasonable to indict. When are similar charges going to be made against the Podestas, including Hillary's campaign director. Is there selective prosecution going on? The Podesta consulting firm is guilty of the same offenses that Manafort committed while Obama was President and using his "flexibility" in dealing with the Russians.
1
Sorry Paulie. Traitors can't file counter suits as a form of obstruction. You will be punished harshly for your dirty work.
6
So a Federal Judge is supposed to forget about all the charges against Manafort because he claims Rod Rosenstein gave Mueller too much of an investigative prevue?
Mr. Manafort, the Department of Justice can't simply forget about your crimes because they appointed a Special Counsel to investigate ANY crime identified during their investigation. Were I you I'd just start cooperating as there are additional charges coming and this stunt won't help you. Specifically the meeting you took with Donnie boy Jr. for the purpose of discussing stolen property in the form of e-mails from the DNC. That's conspiracy and you haven't been charged with that as of yet. And you were the campaign manager at the time.
Perhaps it's better if you end up in Federal prison as where Putin's guys can't catch up with you for not paying the money back. You'll be begging for a nice, safe cell in Leavenworth.
We reap what we sow.
3
But its perfectly OK when a Republican witch hun...I mean investigation created to investigate Whitewater delves into the personal life of a Democrat president
8
It's your money. Knock yourself out.
3
Legally dumb.
Optics worse.
What to avoid the money laundering and where that leads? I mean youre not subtle are you?
By the way they got Capone for tax avoidance in October 1931
1
Aiding and abetting obstruction of justice and other criminal activity is also a crime. So is solicitation. Was Manafort solicited by the Trump team to bring this action?!?!
Maurice F. Baggiano, Member of the Bar of the U.S. Supreme Court
5
Unless that mad-dog republican rep from Ohio, the pantywaist, trump-puppet nunes and the idiot gohmert are extra-constitutionally appointed to serve as a 3-judge panel empowered to hear it, manafort's stupid-pet-trick/pardon-supplicant folly of a lawsuit will yield nothing but a quick and summary dismissal -- plus monetary sanctions 'for' him and his attorneys.
1
An old joke: one week you're on the cover of Time; the next week you're doing time.
Notoriety can sink you; arrogance doesn't save you.
11
A little strained, because it asks for the indictment against Manafort to be set aside...but Mueller didn’t indict Manafort, a grand jury did. I suppose if Manafort was alleging that Mueller corrupted the grand jury, it would be a matter to be brought before the judge presiding over the charges in a motion to quash. But Manafort is challenging a grand jury indictment on a technical ground that the prosecutor’s boss didn’t ...what...okay his participation. That doesn’t invalidate the grand jury’s judgment
9
The GOP had no problem with their Benghazi witch-hunt.
16
A crime is crime .....it is time that the white collar is traded for orange.....and not a country club prison.........
8
Is that all you get for your money from those high priced attorneys you hired Paul? Can't wait to see the photos of you handcuffed and going to prison. Even your own daughter says the same.
6
Frivolous lawsuit?!?! His last gasp?
5
This is truly a cowardly, manipulative and wicked strategy of a counter- attack as a last ditch attempt to confuse the playing field and escape. Truly low life!
11
Ken Starr anyone?
1
So, because you're pulled over for reckless driving while drunk you can't be charged with drunk driving because, you were pulled over for reckless driving. I'd look for a better criminal lawyer and hope for a deal with any state attorney general that may have a shovel in this pile.
7
A judge should throw the case out and not hear it. Manafort is desperate. He needs to be on house arrest, or wait for the trial if it is heard in prison. What a low life
7
I'd wager that an additional sentence to the pleading will be added: "but .... Benghazi!"
7
It's like the GOP suddenly has no recollection of Kenneth Starr's Whitewater fishing expedition.
13
He is hoping that this will be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court which will vote in favor of Trump and Manafort. Not a bad plan for Don and Paul.
A horrendous soul destroying plan for the rest of us.
6
CheKa, NKVD, KGB, SVR, GRU, FSB, Fancy Bear, Cozy Bear... Veselnitskaya is a lawyer and the Kremlin has deep pockets... To be sure they have plenty of US-trained, Russia-affiliated American jurists helping them clutch at straws.
Here's an interesting juxtaposition: read the Guardian's review today of the Wolff book (F&F). Then go watch "Molly's Game," as I just did. Go see just how sanitized and respectable associates of the Russian mob have been made to appear by our own Hollywood image-generators... They have their hooks into a lot of people, and they have a lot of kompromat in their hard drives.
On the other hand, there are far many more dedicated professionals in our own LE & IC. Paul Manafort: should have thought of a different way of making money, buster, a whole lot sooner!
1
Paul Manafort suing Robert Mueller would have been like John Gotti suing his prosecutor......
Talk about an utterly ridiculous lawsuit.....
6
Wow. Mueller must be getting close to something big.
11
Between this announcement and Trump on the offensive this week, I have the feeling Mueller already has it. I'm hoping the next year is all about putting it together and dotting all the i's and crossing all the t's.
A drowning man grasping at straws. Pathetic, or as Trump would say ...loser. We all know how Trump feels about people who get captured.
3
My poor head feels like it gets banged into the wall of improbability and strangeness every day since Trump entered the White House he cheated hi way in to. And more and more each day it appears he had surrounded himself with gutter punks and rat fighters, those who bare their teeth when cornered and fight any way they think can what, buy them time? Because the more they do this sort of thing, the guiltier they look. Maybe they all rot in jail for the rest of their sorry lives.
6
This has nothing to do with Manafort’s legal defence and everything to do with playing into the Fox Propaganda Network and extremist Republican’s narrative that intends to discredit and undermine Mr Mueller’s investigation.
It’s disgraceful to watch Republican extremists and their propaganda machine weaken America.
17
It's not, not a crime because they were looking across the street when you rob a bank. Well probably with Putin.
2
Every thief who was caught red handed with the loot they stole in the seat next them when stopped for a minor traffic violation will hope that Manafort wins this argument. If he does, then we can believe our democracy is truly at great risk.
3
Mr. Mueller will almost certainly ask the court to dismiss the lawsuit, and if successful, this delaying tactic will not be an option for other defendants.
1
Our legal system....if you're rich.
4
Extraordinary.
Manafort seems to be pleading in his papers, that Russia has used the US system of law and government and justice, against itself, to undermine itself, so that it will be suceptible to threats from enemy nations....and pleads with the judge to apply the law, rules, and logic of US jurisprudence in the extreme, so that Russia may execute its plan.
Truly extrarordinary.
5
Wow, the worm has turned; I remember the days when the left attacked Ken Starr for overreaching and prosecutorial abuse. I guess their outrage is dictated by the target.
3
Wonder which one of Trump’s lackeys ‘suggested’ this and what Manafort gets in return?
1
Pay no attention to that crime behind the curtain...
1
That Manafort thinks he is a victim is understandable. He's got $50 million and supported some of the worst dictators in history, and made money doing so. Add Donald J. Trump to list, of course. Manafort ought to be tarred and feathered and run out on a rail, they way they did it to other traitors who were loyal to dictators, like King George. Lock 'm up!
2
Revoke his bail. Send him to Rikers tonight to await trial.
3
Nice try. DId the RNC pay for your lawyers?
2
"You were supposed to be investigating my hand, not the steak knife it's holding or the guy whose back is stuck on its blade!"
Manafort wasting money while he still has som.
1
What utter nonsense! He has no standing to challenge the special prosecutor.
4
Another former “Looney Tunes” member.
The lawsuit said Mr. Rosenstein had improperly given Mr. Mueller the authority to investigate “anything he stumbles across while investigating, no matter how remote.” Oh, they mean The Starr Chamber's witch hunt, Paula Jones, Whitewater Development Co., Jim & Susan McDougal, Ark. governor Jim Guy Tucker, Travelgate, Filegate and poor dead Vince Foster. Now that would be a shame, wouldn't it? Fasten your seatbelts, it's going to be a bumpy night!
If a cop gets called in for a domestic and you've got 10 pounds of smack on the coffee table.... well...
You'd have to be really buzzed to think you're not BUSTED.
Happy travels, Ollie Garch...
2
He adhered to our enemies, like his boss, and his the bosses family. They all both need to pay the proscribed penalty:
18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)
1
I hope he gets slapped with filing a frivolous lawsuit.
8
Not gonna happen. It's a legitimate issue, but the suit will fail.
1
Paul Manafort, good luck with this. I cannot be charged with a crime because the investigation was too broad. How about I murderd someone and they start investigating me for stealing and the investigation uncovers the murder? I could just sue and say you broadened the investigation? Hilarious.
25
If this were a normal investigation you would be quite correct. However, a Special Prosecutor is assigned to investigate only certain things; the scope of his investigation is limited by the terms of the act appointing him. Mr. Mueller could, however, turn over the results of his investigation to the DA of the jurisdiction in which the alleged crimes occurred and allow him to file the indictment and prosecute the case.
Folks usually don't get this nervous unless they know something is coming down the pike.
BTW Mr. Manafort, just because you bring a lawsuit against someone doesn't mean that lawsuit will go forward. Nice try in trying to distract from what is under investigation.
It's interesting to me people seem to be forgetting Michael Flynn and what has happened to him. I do hope Mueller gets this ball really rolling.
11
A wide scope was fine to investigate Bill Clinton, so it is fine to dismantle and prosecute Trump's crime organization.
28
A major difference is that Clinton committed perjury and his wife lied.
1
Like Al Capone suing Elliot Ness.
17
Oh no! The special prosecutor is doing his job?! Say it isn't so! And then remind all of the players in the trump white house that the law is not blind, and breaking our laws is not tolerated by white-house-weasels, let alone this president. And of course lets not forget that both houses of republican weasels are complicit in their "fake news" opinions that our system is being violated by rules that have been in place since the signing of the constitution - for this occasion specifically.
8
For Mueller
It’s Straightforward
THE MONEY
7
I am not a lawyer, but I don't understand how Mueller is different than any other Justice Department lawyer in terms of his power in the eyes of the law. It would be different if he were an Independent Prosecutor outside the Justice Department. That opens a whole other series of issues. But he is a Justice Department counsel, separated from others for reasons of conflicts and recusals on the part of those he works for.
This goes nowhere.
And if it went somewhere, Mueller would hand his evidence over to the Department, and somebody else would lock Manafort up for the rest of his life.
4
Need we remind our republican friends that the Kenneth Starr witch hunt which resulted in Clinton's impeachment due to a sex scandal was the result of the White Water investigation?
18
Need we forget that the Clinton allies were all convicted but were afraid to testify against the Clintons? It is absurd to suggest that the Clintons were innocent.
Brown has his car stolen. Calls police and Blue in the auto theft division is assigned his case. Next day Blue sees Brown's car speeding along Main street and pulls it over. Red, the driver is arrested, cuffed, and searched. He has Glock in his waistband. Brown's car is towed to impound. Two days later, Brown comes to retrieve his car and notices a foul smell coming from the trunk. The trunk is opened and a body is discovered. The deceased is Grey and he has been shot 3 times. Ballistics proves that the slugs came from Red's gun and his charges have murder added to them.
Red's lawyers argue in court that Red had been arrested for car theft and that the charge of killing Grey is invalid because his murder was not what officer Blue, (of the car theft division), was assigned to investigate.
Sounds a lot like Manafort's argument for dismissal.
8