Manafort

Updated,

8.3.18:

Mueller not getting what he wants from this judge.  This case is key for Mueller.  If he loses this case and/or the next one, the game is over --- they say.

Well, if it is over, it never should have started in the first place.   But, I repeat myself. 

What Manafort did or didn't do was before Trump was even a candidate.  < sigh >


8.2.18:


18:30:

This is a doozy.  Rosenstein refuses to prosecute Manafort in 2005 for essentially the same alleged crime.

Rosenstein does not look like Mr. Clean.

Not Rosenstein

17:30:

Judge in Manafort case warns prosecutors that they can't prove conspiracy without star witness.

I am also wondering how this was written up.  Won't express my reservations here exactly, just that people who report this stuff may be slanting it up.  Note that it is Fox news, which has a reputation of being "conservative", but is it really?

Give credit to Fox for reporting it, though.

A bit of speculation:  If the evidence is weak, could it be because there really isn't any evidence?

I thought that Ukraine is supplying some of the info.  Unless someone appears on the witness stand, it is hearsay.


12:30 pm:

I hate to link Jennifer Rubin, but I read yet another one of her anti-Trump articles, so here's goes a comment.

Again, I ask:  Where's the crime?  Jennifer Rubin appears to believe that Trump is guilty of something, but what is it?

There are those who insist that collusion is indeed a crime.  My thinking is if this is a crime to merely collude, then anybody can be convicted of just about anything.

There has to be an underlying crime involved here.

Manafort has been under investigation for years.  The stuff they are trying him for occurred long ago.  Long before Trump ran for POTUS.   If Manafort is found guilty of some crimes here, what's that got to do with Trump?

There will be two trials.  One of them involves something to the effect that Manafort was a foreign agent, and failed to register.

Trump is denying that he knew that Manafort was under investigation.  Based upon what Trump is saying, he has good reasons to hire Manafort.  However, if the Feds hid that information from him, and now are accusing Trump of colluding with a foreign agent with respect to Russia, then that in itself is a problem.  But not necessarily for Trump.  It sounds like entrapment.  The government had a duty to inform Trump, if they didn't.

Manafort supposedly got arms for Ukraine eliminated from the GOP platform.  So what?  Trump was running on that.  Are differences in policy now a cause for impeachment?

This is closest that I see for a quid pro quo.  However, it is very nebulous.  Question:  do you seriously want to remove a POTUS for conspiring to change the GOP platform in exchange for unspecified Russian help in winning an election?

Sheesh.  This is political garbage.



Originally posted 8.1.18:

One thing that I find rather curious is that Trump hires the guy in the first place.  Surely he can vet his prospective employees better than that.

Anyway, it was no secret that Manafort had connections, so to speak.  Heck, everybody in DC knew that.  If they knew it, so did Trump.

Manafort has had the government on his butt for a long time.  What could explain his not being prosecuted?  Could it be that Obama wanted Putin's favor in getting his deal with Iran?

My impression is that Manafort's goose is probably cooked.  So, what does this have to do with Trump?  Perhaps very little.

Speculation alert here:  could it be that Trump put down a false trail because he knew that his critics would seize upon it?  In other words, since Trump almost surely knew about Manafort, he could have hired him because it would stir suspicion, even though there was nothing there.

Trump also hired Carter Page and Papadopoulos.  Papadopoulos is connected to the alleged hack of the DNC.  Carter  Page is connected to the infamous Dossier.   Ostensibly, Page was supposed to be influencing Trump to relax sanctions on Russia.

It may seem plausible to some that Trump is being influenced by Putin, but to do what?  If these investigations are any indication, Mueller's "trump card" was that Trump would end sanctions against Russia.  That would be a quid pro quo in exchange for Putin's help in getting the DNC hacked.

How does Manafort fit in, though?  Manafort seems to be a guy who can get people to pay him for connections.  You don't impeach a president based upon that.

As for relaxing sanctions, well, if Trump gets Russia to do a lot of things in America's best interest, then quid pro quo or not, what difference does it make?

Manafort is a sacrificial lamb.  There has to be somebody who pays for this hanging.  Hillary is really pissed.