The Manafort Indictment: Not Much There, and a Boon for Trump

Spread the love

Loading

Andrew C. McCarthy:

The Paul Manafort indictment is much ado about nothing . . . except as a vehicle to squeeze Manafort, which is special counsel Robert Mueller’s objective — as we have been arguing for three months (see herehere, and here).

Do not be fooled by the “Conspiracy against the United States” heading on Count One (page 23 of the indictment). This case has nothing to do with what Democrats and the media call “the attack on our democracy” (i.e., the Kremlin’s meddling in the 2016 election, supposedly in “collusion” with the Trump campaign). Essentially, Manafort and his associate, Richard W. Gates, are charged with (a) conspiring to conceal from the U.S. government about $75 million they made as unregistered foreign agents for Ukraine, years before the 2016 election (mainly, from 2006 through 2014), and (b) a money-laundering conspiracy.

There are twelve counts in all, but those are the two major allegations.

The so-called conspiracy against the United States mainly involves Manafort’s and Gates’s alleged failure to file Treasury Department forms required by the Bank Secrecy Act. Specifically, Americans who hold a stake in foreign bank accounts must file what’s known as an “FBAR” (foreign bank account report) in any year in which, at any point, the balance in the account exceeds $10,000. Federal law also requires disclosure of foreign accounts on annual income-tax returns. Manafort and Gates are said to have controlled foreign accounts through which their Ukrainian political-consulting income sluiced, and to have failed to file accurate FBARs and tax returns. In addition, they allegedly failed to register as foreign agents from 2008 through 2014 and made false statements when they belatedly registered.

In the money-laundering conspiracy, they are alleged to have moved money in and out of the United States with the intent to promote “specified unlawful activity.” That activity is said to have been their acting as unregistered foreign agents.

On first glance, Mueller’s case, at least in part, seems shaky and overcharged.

Even though the Ukrainian money goes back to 2006, the counts involving failure to file FBARs (Counts Three through Nine) go back only to 2012. This is likely because the five-year statute of limitations bars prosecution for anything before then. Obviously, one purpose of the conspiracy count (Count One) is to enable prosecutors, under the guise of establishing the full scope of the scheme, to prove law violations that would otherwise be time-barred.

The offense of failing to register as a foreign agent (Count Ten) may be a slam-dunk, but it is a violation that the Justice Department rarely prosecutes criminally. There is often ambiguity about whether the person’s actions trigger the registration requirement, so the Justice Department’s practice is to encourage people to register, not indict them for failing to do so.

It may well be that Manafort and Gates made false statements when they belatedly registered as foreign agents, but it appears that Mueller’s office has turned one offense into two, an abusive prosecutorial tactic that flouts congressional intent.

Specifically, Congress considers false statements in the specific context of foreign-agent registration to be a misdemeanor calling for zero to six months’ imprisonment. (See Section 622(a)(2) of Title 22, U.S. Code.) That is the offense Mueller charges in Count Eleven. But then, for good measure, Mueller adds a second false-statement count (Count Twelve) for the same conduct — charged under the penal-code section (Section 1001 of Title 18, U.S. Code) that makes any falsity or material omission in a statement to government officials a felony punishable by up to five years’ imprisonment.

Obviously, one cannot make a false statement on the foreign-agent registration form without also making a false statement to the government. Consequently, expect Manafort to argue that Mueller has violated double-jeopardy principles by charging the same exact offense in two separate counts, and that the special counsel is undermining Congress’s intent that the offense of providing false information on a foreign-agent registration form be considered merely a misdemeanor.

Finally, the money-laundering conspiracy allegation (Count Two) seems far from slam-dunk. For someone to be guilty of laundering, the money involved has to be the proceeds of criminal activity before the accused starts concealing it by (a) moving it through accounts or changing its form by buying assets, etc., or (b) dodging a reporting requirement under federal law.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

35 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

No doubt or argument that a valid, substantial suspicion that any foreign government interfered with our elections should be thoroughly investigated (which is why there is so much interest in Hillary’s and Obama’s relationships with the nefarious company that compiled false information on Trump with Russian aid). I, for one, appreciate and am relieved to finally find that that there is NO truth to the accusations that Trump or anyone in his campaign ever colluded with Russians for the benefit of the campaign.

Mueller serves up a big ol nuthing burger what no fries with that? All weekend the media was popping champange corks

@kitt: The left won’t be in a hurry to see this come to trial because the most damaging part of it all is the indictment, which presents the APPEARANCE of guilt. A trial will probably clear the defendants, or get them on some misdemeanor.

If found guilty on all 12 counts, Manafort and Gates could face maximum sentences of 115 years in prison.

They’re going to cooperate with the Mueller investigation and tell everything they know. Papadopoulos has done, and no one knows what he may have already revealed. Certainly more than what has become public in connection with his guilty plea.

@Greg: Aw… that’s cute.

@Bill… Deplorable Me: They will come with small charges , huge fines, Manafort is a slimey guy, else he would have lasted through the election. With Podesta leaving his lobbying firm my bet it was company A or B in the indictment, so IF Manafort was tied in with the Podestas he is SLIME of the lowest sort.
The Judge is an Obama apointee.
The left will be so sad they have had every advantage to pin something Russia on Trump and came up with ZIP.
#5 But hes got hiiigh hopes hes got hiiigh hopes high apple pie in the skyyy hopes.

@kitt: I certainly don’t care what happens to Manafort, if he broke the law. The disgusting part is that only conservatives are targeted for lawlessness while liberals, committing far worse crimes, are who are pulling the strings.

GOP senators reject talk of defunding Mueller probe

The focus on Mueller’s funding comes amid reports that former White House chief strategist Stephen Bannon urged President Trump to take a more aggressive stance against the investigation, including urging Republicans to cut off funding for the special counsel’s office.

Sources close to Bannon denied to The Hill that he has spoken to Trump about Mueller. Those same sources added that Bannon does want to see the president draw more attention to the special counsel’s funding.

But he would never actually suggest such a thing. He just looks at Donald and thinks this thought very hard.

Mueller announced the first charges in his investigation on Monday, unsealing a 12-count indictment against former campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his businesses associate, Richard Gates.

But any push to defund Mueller appears unlikely to gain traction in Congress, where Mueller, a former FBI director, is widely respected.

Senate GOP leadership has been wary of wading into Mueller’s probe and would likely need 60 votes to limit or nix his funding.

@Greg: Let the chips fall, faster this shakes out the better, then we can appoint special prosecutor to investigate the already “debunked” Uranium One treason.
Looks like another terrorist attack in Manhattan.

@Greg:

The focus on Mueller’s funding comes amid reports that former White House chief strategist Stephen Bannon urged President Trump to take a more aggressive stance against the investigation, including urging Republicans to cut off funding for the special counsel’s office.

“In related reports, stories were made up that Trump was planning on using the IRS to target and attack anyone involved in the phony-baloney, hope-and-a-prayer-to-Satan investigations against him. By all appearances, Trump has abandoned that plan, since the previous administration ruined it for everyone by over-using it.”

“Further reports have it that Trump was poisoning wells and burning babies, but confirmation (not really a necessity, anyway) could not be acquired.”

“It was reported today that, in response to the indictments, Trump had hookers piss on the mattresses in the White House, though independent confirmation (something that usually spoils our fun) was unavailable.”

In case you haven’t noticed, Greg, your “gosh, wouldn’t it be cool if THIS was true” method of investigation has not yielded much in the way of tangible results.

@kitt: This won’t ever “shake out”. The end result is the investigations and the implied guilt, a tactic the left has to use over and over, since they are not very good at winning elections. As long as they can imagine a crime (and there are enough liberals in the DOJ to politicize justice and keep the embers hot) there will be investigations.

@Bill… Deplorable Me, #10:

“In related reports, stories were made up that Trump was planning on using the IRS to target and attack anyone involved in the phony-baloney, hope-and-a-prayer-to-Satan investigations against him. By all appearances, Trump has abandoned that plan, since the previous administration ruined it for everyone by over-using it.”

What are you quoting? The voices in your head?

There was clearly an attempt at collusion with Russian election meddling efforts inside the Trump campaign organization. What do you think the Trump Tower meeting suggests? Did you read the Goldman email and Donald Jr’s replies? Trump Sr was either aware of this or not in control of his campaign organization. Take your pick.

@Greg:

There was clearly an attempt at collusion with Russian election meddling efforts inside the Trump campaign organization.

If it is so clear, then where is the evidence? Voices in YOUR head?

The collusion was Hillary selling uranium to the Russians and getting a $200 million payoff. NO collusion on the Trump side.

Trump Rips Mueller Target Papadopoulos as ‘Liar,’ ‘Low Level Volunteer’

He’s been demoted from his former status as “an excellent guy.”

@Greg: You need to try and become comfortable with facts. Your propaganda is failing you miserably.

@Greg: 14 easy enough to prove with is campaign finance disclosure. He was a bit of a hanger on all hat and no horse, can you pull 1 news article from the campaign that mentions him?.

Yeah, right. Weren’t the details of the GOP’s tax reform legislation supposed to be released today? They haven’t yet figured out where the money is coming from to pay for the proposed $5.5 trillion in tax cuts. We should talk more about the Mayor of San Juan, or Frederica Wilson’s hats, or what a dastardly guy Chuck Schumer is.

@Greg: I think the proof is in the indictment. Papadoploulos copped his plea almost a month ago yet it yielded no charges against anyone else.

They haven’t yet figured out where the money is coming from to pay for the proposed $5.5 trillion in tax cuts.

Tell me how, if the vast majority of taxpayers are going to pay MORE (as Schumer propagandizes), how does it wind up with a deficit? Sounds like yet another great big old lie the Democrats are placing all their bets on. Gosh, no Trump collusion and a booming economy… what’s the left going to do?

We should talk more about the Mayor of San Juan, or Frederica Wilson’s hats, or what a dastardly guy Chuck Schumer is.

While they are all lying, anti-American trash, they are not ALL the lying, anti-American trash in your party today.

Tell me how, if the vast majority of taxpayers are going to pay MORE (as Schumer propagandizes), how does it wind up with a deficit?

Because the wealthiest and corporations are going to pay far less.

Trump’s tax reform plan: Who are the winners and losers?

Say goodbye federal deductions for state and local taxes paid. Those changes will hit high-income blue state residents the hardest, where state governments rely more on local taxes and less on the redistribution of federal tax dollars.

@Greg: But the wealthy don’t pay any taxes, do they? That’s what you liberals keep telling us. And how can a tax break for the 1% cause a $5 trillion deficit when taxes go up on the rest of the taxpayers?

Loss of the deduction for state taxes is the problem of those who live in those high-tax liberal cesspool like New York and California. Taxpayers there are going to start reconsidering those representatives that keep raising taxes to pay for sanctuary cities, health care for illegal immigrants, abortions and sex change surgeries. The days of the rest of the nation subsidizing liberal stupidity is ending.

Don’t add up, Greg. Just liberal lies.

Loss of the deduction for state taxes is the problem of those who live in those high-tax liberal cesspool like New York and California.

Rather than moocher red states that receive far more federal tax dollars than they pay in, you mean? This is kind of like ranting about “socialism” while depending on Social Security and Medicare, or deploring intrusive government and loss of privacy while trying to take control of a woman’s reproductive decisions.

@Greg: I guess you aren’t aware that folks (well, some folks) PAY FOR Social Security and Medicare.

Debt ridden blue states get to jack their taxes up and have the rest of the country subsidize it.

End of the line.

Sam Clovis withdraws his nomination for USDA’s top scientist post after being linked to Russia probe

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s chief scientist nominee, Sam Clovis, withdrew his name from consideration Wednesday amid revelations that he was among top officials on the Trump campaign who was aware of efforts by foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos to broker a relationship between the campaign and Russian officials.

Court documents unsealed Monday revealed that Papadopoulos pleaded guilty in early October to making false statement to FBI investigators about his contacts with foreigners claiming to have high-level Russian connections. In August 2016, Clovis encouraged Papadopoulos to organize an “off the record” meeting with Russian officials, according to court documents. “I would encourage you” and another foreign policy adviser to the campaign to “make the trip, if it is feasible,” Clovis wrote. The meeting did not ultimately take place..

@Greg: What did the Trump campaign say about such meetings?

It’s Mueller Time

Let’s all kick back and enjoy an old James Bond movie moment.

@Greg: You’re setting yourself up for a massive disappointment, which I will regard as very humorous.

@Bill… Deplorable Me: Let them serve up another nothing burger to prove they aren’t worth keeping any investigation financed. Perhaps they will all work pro bono.

Democrats want inquiry into Wilbur Ross Paradise Papers link to Putin son-in-law

Ross, Donald Trump’s commerce secretary, is under pressure after the Guardian and international partners revealed his holding in a shipping company that does lucrative business with a firm co-owned by Kirill Shamalov, who is married to the Russian president’s daughter.

Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut said Ross had misled Congress and the US public by concealing his ongoing stake in the company, Navigator, which has a haulage contract worth hundreds of millions of dollars with the Russian energy company Sibur.

Nepotism is alive and well, both in Russia and the United States. In the United States, we recently put it on steroids. Some people, of course, can’t see what’s directly in front of their noses.

From the Guardian, Nov. 5th:

Russia funded Facebook and Twitter investments through Kushner associate

Two Russian state institutions with close ties to Vladimir Putin funded substantial investments in Twitter and Facebook through a business associate of Jared Kushner, leaked documents reveal.

The investments were made through a Russian technology magnate, Yuri Milner, who also holds a stake in a company co-owned by Kushner, Donald Trump’s son-in-law and senior White House adviser.

The discovery is likely to stir concerns over Russian influence in US politics and the role played by social media in last year’s presidential election. It may also raise new questions for the social media companies and for Kushner.

Stir concerns? Mueller is probably going to have to hire additional staff.

@Greg: Investments? “Associates”? What the hell is that?

Let’s replace Facebook with uranium and investment with BUYING. NOW you have a very critical situation.

You are grasping at thin, tenuous straws to satisfy an imaginary accusation while a gigantic threat to national security scandal stands before you, fully naked, showing you everything it has. But, you only want to see a Trump scandal, not a liberal crime.

@Bill… Deplorable Me: Sure They have Trump now, Theres a guy who knows a guy who has a second cousin he is a serial parker in handicap zones when he delivers vodka for amazon.com….you can just smell impeachment

You are grasping at thin, tenuous straws to satisfy an imaginary accusation while a gigantic threat to national security scandal stands before you, fully naked, showing you everything it has.

Is that why some of Trump’s Congressional tools are frantically attempting to shut down Mueller’s investigation?

And why isn’t Clinton being prosecuted? Trump may not be able to command the DOJ or FBI to go after his political enemies without evidence, but that certainly doesn’t prevent the republican-majority Congress from doing so. They have the power appoint a Special Council to investigate Clinton. But they don’t. Because that would quickly lead to the revelation that the whole thing is a political writer’s fabrication that falls apart under close inspection. They’d lose their tall tale.

@Greg: Maybe he should do the investigation he is being paid to, the trying to squeeze people to get to Trump from charges that dont involve the election seems a bit like a midevil witch confession. Why was Podesta not charged as he has the same crimes as Manafort?

@Greg:

And why isn’t Clinton being prosecuted?

Why do you ask questions you already know the answer to? Why was she not prosecuted by Lynch’s FBI? Why did Comey write his exoneration of Hillary before the investigation even began? Why did Lynch and Bill meet on a secluded tarmac and spend 33 pages of memos discussing grandchildren and golf?

You think Mueller will dig into ALL examples of unregistered lobbyists for foreign agencies? Oh, that’s right… he can’t. He can’t because he was right smack dab in the middle of the Uranium One scandal.

Now, what were we discussing… oh, right. Why Hillary hasn’t been prosecuted.