Andrew C. McCarthy on the Manafort breach
As so often happens, former prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy sheds light on some legal-political news that no one else seems to have quite understood (and that includes me). The subject matter is Mueller’s charge that Manafort’s lies have abrogated their previous plea agreement.
Here’s McCarthy:
When it comes to claimed breaches of a plea agreement, the prosecutor holds the dominant position. Defendants who plead guilty and agree to cooperate, as Manafort did on the day before his Washington trial was to begin, do so with the understanding that the value of the cooperation is the prosecutor’s call. If the prosecutor decides the information provided is not useful — or, worse, that the defendant has lied — the defendant does not get to withdraw his guilty plea. Further, if the prosecutor decides the defendant has breached the agreement, the government is under no obligation to support reductions in sentence that the defendant hoped to achieve by entering the agreement.
On that score, Mueller’s prosecutors are laying the groundwork to argue that Manafort should not even get any credit for pleading guilty and sparing the public the need for a second trial (after he was convicted at his first trial in the Eastern District of Virginia). In the submission, the special counsel points out that Manafort did not decide to plead guilty until the last minute, so prosecutors and the court had to gear up for the trial. Moreover, Weissmann emphasizes that the alleged breach relieves the government of any duty to support Manafort’s claim that he has demonstrated “acceptance of responsibility” — a standard sentencing reduction for defendants who plead guilty.
For their part, Manafort and his lawyers are clearly preparing to argue that Manafort was honest but that Mueller’s rabidly anti-Trump prosecutors did not like what he had to say — i.e., he would not implicate the president in misconduct. This would echo a theme posited by Judge T. S. Ellis in Manafort’s Virginia trial: Mueller aggressively pursued Manafort on charges that had nothing to do with Russia’s interference in the 2016 election in order to squeeze Manafort into singing, or even “composing,” as a witness against the president.
There’s much more at the link about the power plays going on here, and what might be behind them.
I will add, though, that the timing, context, and course of the Manafort prosecution has made it quite clear that the real prey Mueller has been stalking was and is President Trump. I don’t think there’s much question about that.
Part of me still wants to see President Trump fire Mueller, Rosenstein, and all the other bad apples at Justice. Who cares if the House impeaches? The Senate won’t convict.
The Mueller investigation has always been a soft coup against Trump.
Aaahhhh [stretching arm straight up, fingers intertwined, palms flexed face upward], so whom [arms back down] will we try [rubbing hands] to destroy today?….
It’s not that I have any emotional attachment to Manafort’s fate. But it does seem wrong that a guy is going to spend the rest of his life in prison for having worked for the Trump campaign for 2-3 months, when clearly Trump is the target, not Manafort. It looks like Manafort has declined to compose something adequate to Mueller’s purpose of getting Trump. Poor guy. Democrat wheeler-dealers aren’t under the microscope, only people with some connection to Trump.
These special prosecutors (Fitzpatrick and Mule-er) seem to be hell bent on personal destruction of those who fall into their webs. How does one of their victims ever get their reputation back even after a pardon? Remembering what Fitz did to Scooter Libby and what Mule-er has done already to McFarland (and others). A longer, slower, but different, process than what was used against Judge Kavanaugh.
The end justifies the means.
Inspector Javert wants Trump so much that he want Manafort to perjure himself.
That’s an indicator.
Assange is having a FIT.
Alan is going to be disappointed, I suspect.
Can we presume that there will be a hearing where the prosecution will have to demonstrate to the satisfaction of some judicial authority the “lies” that Manafort is accused of telling? And therefore, will have to reveal what it believes is a truth that has been transgressed?
What is the process for such things? I wonder if this will be public?
It’s worse with Corsi.
As I see it, Manafort is impeaching himself as a witness against Podesta, Craig, Perkins Coie et al. in the cases Mueller turned over to the SDNY for prosecution. Pretty slick.
I doubt they are connected, but it does seem a bit of coincidence that The Guardian story broke just after the Manafort/Mueller story came out. Could the source for The Guardian story be one of Mueller’s team? Could Mueller’s team really be suckered by a bunch of phony Ecuadorian intelligence information?
That would be hilarious!
“…broke…”
https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201811281070185720-Guardian-Walks-Back-Disgraced-Reporters-Story/
Apparently Trum is talking about the fed reserve now. Heh. Wonder what all the people here who thought the federal reserve was “no problem” will have what type of reaction to that. Is Trum now making up stuff that is not a problem for kicks and giggles reality tv style.
People seem to think that because Trum appointed the fed chair, that he can now fire the board… hahaha. Just like Trum can fire Roberts right.
To me, it looks like Mueller is approaching this they way he would approach an organized crime investigation, which is his background. There one can reasonably assume that the big cheese is guilty of something. It is just a matter of finding out what it is. You have the moral authority to assume guilt and press to find the evidence.
That is not what the Mueller investigation should be about. He has no right to assume guilt. That he must prove. But it is hard to teach an old horse new tricks.
“…old horse…”
Well, um, OK; but yer being far too kind.
Mueller has two missions to fulfill (i.e., two birds to k***)—with one stone (i.e., one investigation aka one inquisition):
1. GET Trump (and send a message to anyone who is close to him—or would like to get close to him that they will pay dearly for such “proximity”).
2. PROTECT Hillary and Obama and Lynch and Brennan et al. (i.e., the rest of that scurvy crew) from the legal comeuppance (i.e., prison) they—if there is any justice—so richly deserve.
I should add another point:
3. Do ANYTHING and EVERYTHING possible to achieve BOTH 1 AND 2—but failing that, AT LEAST achieve point 2.
Mueller is (they all are) playing for very, very high stakes here. He MUST NOT FAIL.
it does seem a bit of coincidence that The Guardian story broke just after the Manafort/Mueller story came out.
Yes, I had the same thought. I suspect that Mueller thought he had Trump with the supposed Wikileaks connection.
The day the Podesta brothers are prosecuted is the day I will believe anything Mueller says. He’s home free on one topic,. Whitey Bulgar died.
while not all Germans are Nazis, Herr Müller and his little Eichman Weißmannn fulfill the most extreme stereotype from central casting. Leni Reifenstahl would have drooled at the opportunity to cast herr Müller.
What kind of vile scum divines that a man who whose interrogators said told the truth committed perjury? that scum then bankrupted Flynn and threatened his son.
this is the nazi who tortured Mark Hatfill and drove Ivins to suicide. Our DOJ is so corrupt that those two didnt get fired after those or the Enron infractions.
I wonder how many of Herr Müllers family served as Einzatsgruppen of in Sobibor.? And to think that my uncle died saving West Müllerland from the Russians , especially when you consider that Müllerism began in West Müllerland
Mueller and Fitzgerald seem to be made on the same pattern. Lawrence Walsh is a member of the same club.
Inspector Javert comes to mind.
Mueller and Fitzgerald seem to be made on the same pattern. Lawrence Walsh is a member of the same club.
Inspector Javert comes to mind.
Heydrich und Beria ist more appropriate
More on “Guardian” “backtracking” on the so-called Manafort-Assange assignations:
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/314242/
Clearly Manafort’s threats to sue that dishonest “news” organization for libel has gotten their attention. One might hope that he will follow through and succeed.
” One might hope that he will follow through and succeed.” – worked for Hulk Hogan and Gawker.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollea_v._Gawker
Too bad the “rape” lawsuits didn’t shut down Rolling Stone.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/jury-rules-rolling-stone-defamed-uva-dean-in-its-jackie-rape-story