U.S. judge refuses to dismiss ex-Trump aide Manafort's criminal case

[webfact]

U.S. judge refuses to dismiss ex-Trump aide Manafort's criminal case

By Sarah N. Lynch

 

Former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort leaves a U.S. District Court after attending a motions hearing in Washington, D.C., U.S. April 19, 2018. REUTERS/Carlos Barria

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A federal judge dealt President Donald Trump's former campaign manager Paul Manafort a major blow on Tuesday by refusing to dismiss criminal charges brought by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, after Manafort claimed that Mueller's probe has run amok and should be reined in.

 

In a sharp rebuke of those claims, Judge Amy Berman Jackson of U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein had followed all the Justice Department's rules when he hired Mueller and Mueller's case against Manafort is not overly broad or improper.

 

Rosenstein "expressly approved the Special Counsel’s investigation of the facts alleged in the indictment, so there has been no violation of the regulations, and the Special Counsel did not act without authority," wrote Jackson, who was appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama.

 

In response to the ruling, Manafort spokesman Jason Maloni said: "Paul Manafort maintains his innocence and looks forward to prevailing in this matter." A spokesman for the Special Counsel declined to comment.

 

Manafort, who performed lobbying work for a pro-Russian former Ukrainian president before serving as Trump’s campaign chairman in 2016, is facing two indictments brought by Mueller in federal courts in Washington and Alexandria, Virginia.

 

The charges against him in the Washington case include conspiring to launder money, conspiring to defraud the United States and failing to register as a foreign agent. In Virginia, he faces charges that include bank fraud and filing false tax returns.

 

He has pleaded not guilty to all of the charges, none of which are directly related to work he performed for Trump's campaign.

 

In both criminal cases, Manafort has asked the courts to dismiss the charges on the grounds that Rosenstein's May 17, 2017 appointment order hiring Mueller runs afoul of Justice Department rules on special counsels.

 

He has also argued that Mueller's case against him has nothing to do with Russian interference in 2016 election, and that the probe by the FBI into his Ukraine dealings predates the Russia probe.

 

Trump has denied that his campaign colluded with Russia and called the probe that has dogged his presidency a "witch hunt."

 

Jackson was not moved by any of Manafort's assertions.

 

"Manafort was, at one time, not merely 'associated with,' but the chairman of, the Presidential campaign, and his work on behalf of the Russia-backed Ukrainian political party and connections to other Russian figures are matters of public record," she wrote, adding that it was "logical" for investigators to probe Manafort's dealings.

 

Her ruling also pointed to an August 2017 memo by Rosenstein that further detailed the scope of the probe. That memo explicitly gave Mueller authority to probe all of Manafort's Ukraine-related work predating the 2016 campaign.

 

Republicans in the House of Representatives who are critical of the Mueller probe have pressed the Justice Department in recent months to provide them with an unredacted copy of the August memo.

 

The ruling marks a setback for Manafort, who last month was buoyed when the judge in the Alexandria case aggressively questioned prosecutors about whether their case was overly broad and mused that he believed they were using the charges to get Manafort to turn over dirt on Trump.

 

That judge, T.S. Ellis III for the Eastern District of Virginia, has yet to rule on whether to dismiss the charges against Manafort.

 

Ellis, who was appointed to the bench by Republican President Ronald Reagan, has also said he too wants to see an unredacted copy before he can fully form a decision on whether to dismiss the charges.

 

He told prosecutors to turn over a copy to him by Friday.

 

(Reporting by Sarah N. Lynch; editing by Tom Brown and Cynthia Osterman)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-05-16

[Srikcir]

17 minutes ago, webfact said:

The ruling marks a setback for Manafort

Not a personal remark, a musing or a political comment.

But a legal and binding decision. The prosecution knew this ruling would be made against Manafort and so remained unruffled and silent to the judge's previous comments.

I suppose what's next will be Trump's tweet that the judge is a Democrat political hack and a blight on the reputation of American justice.

[riclag]

His involvement with the Campaign was perfectly legal.The crimes that he was indicted for are all process crimes which occurred before the Campaign . He's innocent until proven guilty . He was a good staffer. He was brought in to take care of the delegate selection during the GOP Primaries. I believe without his help it would of been very difficult to get those GOP delegates to commit to DT .I'm confident he will get what's coming to him

Edited May 16, 2018 by riclag

[bristolboy]

26 minutes ago, riclag said:

His involvement with the Campaign was perfectly legal.The crimes that he was indicted for are all process crimes which occurred before the Campaign . He's innocent until proven guilty . He was a good staffer. He was brought in to take care of the delegate selection during the GOP Primaries. I believe without his help it would of been very difficult to get those GOP delegates to commit to DT .I'm confident he will get what's coming to him

I think so too. I hear that Putin is planning on awarding with the Order of Lenin Medal.

[dcutman]

The charges against him in the Washington case include conspiring to launder money, conspiring to defraud the United States and failing to register as a foreign agent. In Virginia, he faces charges that include bank fraud and filing false tax returns.

 

I am having trouble seeing how the charges have anything to do with Russian collusion of the 2016 presidential election. As I understand all of the current charges against Manafort have been visited many times,  a decade or so before the 2016 election, with no indictments.

Russian collusion, that is what is supposed to be being investigated, right?

Edited May 16, 2018 by dcutman

[riclag]

46 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

I think so too. I hear that Putin is planning on awarding with the Order of Lenin Medal.

 If you hear it,  please Sources . I'll be curious to see this report

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, riclag said:

 If you hear it,  please Sources . I'll be curious to see this report

The Hannity Samzdat

[riclag]

5 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

The Hannity Samzdat ? 

 

  You have no sources(links) ,"I hear that Putin is planning on awarding with the Order of Lenin Medal". 

I,can't go further  into your claim, its off topic

[puck2]

9 minutes ago, riclag said:

  You have no sources(links) ,"I hear that Putin is planning on awarding with the Order of Lenin Medal". 

I,can't go further  into your claim, its off topic

@bristolboy, please give it up. riclag isn't able to understand irony.

[bristolboy]

32 minutes ago, puck2 said:

@bristolboy, please give it up. riclag isn't able to understand irony.

 

Among other things, I thought that the awarding of a Soviet Era medal by the head of the Russian State might be a giveaway.

[Baerboxer]

4 hours ago, dcutman said:

The charges against him in the Washington case include conspiring to launder money, conspiring to defraud the United States and failing to register as a foreign agent. In Virginia, he faces charges that include bank fraud and filing false tax returns.

 

I am having trouble seeing how the charges have anything to do with Russian collusion of the 2016 presidential election. As I understand all of the current charges against Manafort have been visited many times,  a decade or so before the 2016 election, with no indictments.

Russian collusion, that is what is supposed to be being investigated, right?

 

Ah, but it suits a political agenda now. Very Thaianesque!

[Baerboxer]

4 hours ago, puck2 said:

@bristolboy, please give it up. riclag isn't able to understand irony.

 

Maybe not but he clearly recognizes inaccurate nonsense!

[RobFord]

6 hours ago, riclag said:

His involvement with the Campaign was perfectly legal.The crimes that he was indicted for are all process crimes which occurred before the Campaign . He's innocent until proven guilty . He was a good staffer. He was brought in to take care of the delegate selection during the GOP Primaries. I believe without his help it would of been very difficult to get those GOP delegates to commit to DT .I'm confident he will get what's coming to him

 

555. And he was one of all the best people.

[joecoolfrog]

7 hours ago, riclag said:

His involvement with the Campaign was perfectly legal.The crimes that he was indicted for are all process crimes which occurred before the Campaign . He's innocent until proven guilty . He was a good staffer. He was brought in to take care of the delegate selection during the GOP Primaries. I believe without his help it would of been very difficult to get those GOP delegates to commit to DT .I'm confident he will get what's coming to him

Yes I believe the pokers are being heated as we speak !

[joecoolfrog]

6 hours ago, dcutman said:

The charges against him in the Washington case include conspiring to launder money, conspiring to defraud the United States and failing to register as a foreign agent. In Virginia, he faces charges that include bank fraud and filing false tax returns.

 

I am having trouble seeing how the charges have anything to do with Russian collusion of the 2016 presidential election. As I understand all of the current charges against Manafort have been visited many times,  a decade or so before the 2016 election, with no indictments.

Russian collusion, that is what is supposed to be being investigated, right?

So its just certain areas of the swamp that you would like drained ?

[joecoolfrog]

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Ah, but it suits a political agenda now. Very Thaianesque!

Leaving aside this particular case , is it not a good thing for enquiries to be far reaching. One only has to consider the Chilcot report , after 7 years of investigation nobody was taken to task because such action was outside the original remit (lol ).

Unless an enquiry has a broad focus it becomes a whitewash , utterly pointless.

[Srikcir]

2 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

he clearly recognizes inaccurate nonsense!

How does one recognize accurate nonsense?

Really.

[Mac98]

8 hours ago, dcutman said:

The charges against him in the Washington case include conspiring to launder money, conspiring to defraud the United States and failing to register as a foreign agent. In Virginia, he faces charges that include bank fraud and filing false tax returns.

 

I am having trouble seeing how the charges have anything to do with Russian collusion of the 2016 presidential election. As I understand all of the current charges against Manafort have been visited many times,  a decade or so before the 2016 election, with no indictments.

Russian collusion, that is what is supposed to be being investigated, right?

We don't know the details, but the judge does. That's how it works.

[mlmcleod]

Sadly for the Republicans any Special Prosecutor can indict for ANY crimes uncovered during an investigation.  I am sure that the Republican led House committee will do their best to subpoena any evidence collected by the special prosecutor in order to impede his investigation.  They cannot be impeached for obstruction of justice!

[Chomper Higgot]

21 hours ago, dcutman said:

The charges against him in the Washington case include conspiring to launder money, conspiring to defraud the United States and failing to register as a foreign agent. In Virginia, he faces charges that include bank fraud and filing false tax returns.

 

I am having trouble seeing how the charges have anything to do with Russian collusion of the 2016 presidential election. As I understand all of the current charges against Manafort have been visited many times,  a decade or so before the 2016 election, with no indictments.

Russian collusion, that is what is supposed to be being investigated, right?

Here’s a clue:

 

We’ve non of us seen the indictments against Manafort, so we are all reliant on other sources for our understanding of what those indictments are.

 

Somebody has apparently told you they relate to previously prosecuted charges.

 

If that is correct Manafort’s lawyer would have made that case to the judge and the judge would toss the new indictments in the trash.

 

That’s not what’s happening.

 

So maybe whoever it was who told you these indictments relate to previously prosecuted charges was making stuff up?!

 

Manafort is toast.

[Chomper Higgot]

5 minutes ago, mlmcleod said:

Sadly for the Republicans any Special Prosecutor can indict for ANY crimes uncovered during an investigation.  I am sure that the Republican led House committee will do their best to subpoena any evidence collected by the special prosecutor in order to impede his investigation.  They cannot be impeached for obstruction of justice!

It was never a problem for them when the investigation into Whitewater wandered off to look at what was going on below the desk in the Oval Office.

 

[Andaman Al]

On 5/16/2018 at 9:59 AM, riclag said:

His involvement with the Campaign was perfectly legal.The crimes that he was indicted for are all process crimes which occurred before the Campaign . He's innocent until proven guilty . He was a good staffer. He was brought in to take care of the delegate selection during the GOP Primaries. I believe without his help it would of been very difficult to get those GOP delegates to commit to DT .I'm confident he will get what's coming to him

I assume you are referring to a Pardon.

 

When are you guys all going to get real? It does not matter whether this is part of the Russia collusion investigation at all. IF potential crime is revealed then it is the DUTY of the law enforcement people conducting the investigation to prosecute.

 

Ted Bundy was arrested for driving a stolen car - should the police have let him go because serial killing was nothing to do with driving a stolen car?

 

Quote

Joel Rifkin Was Caught Because Of A Missing License Plate

 

Timothy McVeigh Was Apprehended Because He Was Driving Without A License Plate

 

Charles Ng And Leonard Lake Were Caught Shoplifting From A Hardware Store

 

 

Robert Durst Was Apprehended When He Stole A Sandwich

 

Peter Sutcliffe Was Apprehended Because He Had Stolen License Plates On His Vehicle

 

etc etc

https://www.ranker.com/list/minor-crimes-that-led-to-catching-famous-criminals/cat-mcauliffe

 

What shall we do? say 'Aw that's not fair, he was arrested for driving without a licence plate, the murder was before that'?  

 

There are people on here who are voicing opinions that are nothing short of insane. The fact that Manafort is a friend of Trump's DOES NOT excuse him or pardon him of crimes he may have committed. If you are going to throw the constitution in the bin then just do it instead of cherry picking the bits you like.

 

If you can't do the time don't do the crime! Justice has no expiry date.

Edited May 17, 2018 by Andaman Al

[stevenl]

12 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

<snip>

 

There are people on here who are voicing opinions that are nothing short of insane. The fact that Manafort is a friend of Trump's DOES NOT excuse him or pardon him of crimes he may have committed. If you are going to throw the constitution in the bin then just do it instead of cherry picking the bits you like.

 

<snip>

" If you are going to throw the constitution in the bin then just do it instead of cherry picking the bits you like."

 

Federal crimes, so I'm pretty sure this is what is going to happen with a presidential pardon.