Manafort Just Couldn't Stop Lying

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
woolfe9998

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,242
14,243
136
Hayabusa Rider said:
I was watching talking head lawyers who brought up an interesting point. The any joint defense agreement between Trump and Manafort changes once Manafort is convicted and enters into the plea agreement as that details the sentencing, therefore a JDA serves no legitimate purpose.

My sense of all this is that Trump's lawyers may be yelling at him to not pardon Manafort at least not until the dust settles, but Trump might do it anyway. If he does then obstruction and all kinds of conspiracy charges might kick in for Trump. He has the right of pardon but nowhere is there a protection from consequences.
Click to expand...

True, but if Eski's theory is correct, and it could well be, that Manafort only entered into the plea deal to help Trump determine what Mueller knows, and never had any good faith intention to cooperate, that would suggest a pardon was dangled before he plead guilty and entered the plea agreement, which would make it a privileged communication.
 
trenchfoot

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,780
8,358
136
cytg111 said:
Its not like Manafort should/would be afraid of something like Novichok... Right?
Click to expand...

From all of the skullduggery he's been involved in for what, decades now, there should be a host of associates in the shadows that do not want him divulging even a hint of what Manafort knows about them and their dealings with him. How high that goes is relative to the level of threat that Manafort has against him.

As Fskimo mentioned, protecting Trump seems to be Manafort's job#1. As to what Manafort can get out of this favor he's doing for Trump, it seems to me that Trump is the only guy in the whole world that can do anything to help Manafort seeing as if he's already in jail with no get out of jail free card to cash in. Being loyal to Trump has a very finicky and time sensitive limit to it and it seems Manafort is on the verge of exceeding his usefulness to Trump now that his back channelling scheme has been uncovered.
 
dank69

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
37,343
32,955
136
woolfe9998 said:
Trump will have special difficulties explaining a Manafort pardon, because Trump and his lawyers have repeatedly claimed that Manafort's criminal activities occurred before he was Trump's campaign manager and had nothing to do with Trump. If the charges were related to collusion during the campaign, Trump could try to justify the pardon because he claims there was no collusion so Manafort was railroaded. But how does Trump explain pardoning him for myriad financial crimes which Trump has said had nothing to do with him or his campaign?
Click to expand...
Way, way, way too much logic for Trump. He is happy to be on both sides of an issue in a single, incoherent, rambling sentence.
 
cytg111

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
26,159
15,579
136
T

thilanliyan

Lifer
Jun 21, 2005
12,057
2,272
126
dank69 said:
Way, way, way too much logic for Trump. He is happy to be on both sides of an issue in a single, incoherent, rambling sentence.
Click to expand...
Lol, exactly what I was thinking. He'll make up some lie about why he had to pardon and his supporters won't care one bit.
 
SMOGZINN

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
14,359
4,640
136
HomerJS said:
Trump just put pardoning Manafort on the table
Click to expand...

Trump has never had it off the table. He has spent months building up support for it by talking and tweeting about how badly Mueller is treating Manafort, calling Mueller names, and other dirty politics tactics to undermine the investigation.
 
cytg111

cytg111

Lifer
Mar 17, 2008
26,159
15,579
136
But accepting a pardon is also an admission of guilt, going by that logic if the pardon involves lying about informing Trump about wikileaks and buttermails ... is Trump not setting fire to his own ass in the process??
 
T

thilanliyan

Lifer
Jun 21, 2005
12,057
2,272
126
cytg111 said:
But accepting a pardon is also an admission of guilt, going by that logic if the pardon involves lying about informing Trump about wikileaks and buttermails ... is Trump not setting fire to his own ass in the process??
Click to expand...
As he said himself, he can shoot someone on the street and people will still love him....him pardoning someone is barely going to register. And the republican party have also shown they are not willing to go against him, so no punishment from that end either.
 
Hayabusa Rider

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
cytg111 said:
But accepting a pardon is also an admission of guilt, going by that logic if the pardon involves lying about informing Trump about wikileaks and buttermails ... is Trump not setting fire to his own ass in the process??
Click to expand...


Things don't work for Trump as it does for normal people. No matter what is found a substantial number of people, almost his entire following, won't think a thing of it. The Reps fear these people when they aren't outright supportive of Trump in principle. Looking bad is irrelevant and so overt criminality of a major nature combined with blackmail by the House (controlling Rep's being able to do anything plus their own investigations which may lead back to Nunes and others) is likely what will be needed to chase Trump out.
 
Fanatical Meat

Fanatical Meat

Lifer
Feb 4, 2009
35,862
17,403
136
Per CNN, during an interview with the NY Post the President said a Manafort pardon is not off the table.
 
woolfe9998

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,242
14,243
136
If Trump does pardon him, the issue will be whether it can proven that the pardon was the result of a prior arrangement between them. Even Dershowitz admits that a POTUS is guilty of obstruction if he tampers with a witness. There would be no Constitutional defense because the criminal act wouldn't be the pardon but the arrangement in place before the pardon. Indeed, if there is already an arrangement then Trump is already guilty of obstruction, even if he reneges and never pardons him.

Proving that will be tricky, however.
 
F

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,935
55,288
136
woolfe9998 said:
If Trump does pardon him, the issue will be whether it can proven that the pardon was the result of a prior arrangement between them. Even Dershowitz admits that a POTUS is guilty of obstruction if he tampers with a witness. There would be no Constitutional defense because the criminal act wouldn't be the pardon but the arrangement in place before the pardon. Indeed, if there is already an arrangement then Trump is already guilty of obstruction, even if he reneges and never pardons him.

Proving that will be tricky, however.
Click to expand...

Yes, I think this is pretty clear. I mean plenty of otherwise legal acts are obstruction of justice if done for that reason. A CEO of a business can legally shred any documents he wants but if he does so to impede an investigation he’s in trouble.

I’m no lawyer so correct me if I’m wrong but it seems like proving intent might be unusually easy in this case considering the sheer volume of confessions from Trump of his desire to obstruct the investigation and everything else.
 
woolfe9998

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,242
14,243
136
fskimospy said:
Yes, I think this is pretty clear. I mean plenty of otherwise legal acts are obstruction of justice if done for that reason. A CEO of a business can legally shred any documents he wants but if he does so to impede an investigation he’s in trouble.

I’m no lawyer so correct me if I’m wrong but it seems like proving intent might be unusually easy in this case considering the sheer volume of confessions from Trump of his desire to obstruct the investigation and everything else.
Click to expand...

Actually, what I'm saying is even more air tight than the argument that a legal act is being done for a corrupt purpose. The argument is not that Trump cannot pardon for a corrupt purpose. It's that the illegal act isn't the pardon at all. It's the conspiracy to trade a pardon for Manafort's not providing incriminating evidence to Mueller. This illegal act - obstruction of justice in the form of witness tampering - is separate act from the pardon itself, is complete before there is a pardon, and would be illegal even if the pardon never ultimately happened. I don't think any constitutional defense would even be remotely possible here.

The problem is that a prior arrangement has to be proven. The proof is just the pardon itself, the fact that Manafort ultimately lied and did not cooperate and Trump's generally stated desire to obstruct. Not good enough to prove an actual conspiracy. Since it's a reasonable doubt standard, it will be tough to prove without some direct evidence.

Anyway, I think the legal experts who are saying Trump can't pardon with corrupt intent - though they may be right - aren't framing their argument correctly. Once you understand the illegal act isn't the pardon itself, it removes any doubt about whether he has a defense under the Constitution.
 
Last edited:
F

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,935
55,288
136
woolfe9998 said:
Actually, what I'm saying is even more air tight than the argument that a legal act is being done for a corrupt purpose. The argument is not that Trump cannot pardon for a corrupt purpose. It's that the illegal act isn't the pardon at all. It's the conspiracy to trade a pardon for Manafort's not providing incriminating evidence to Mueller. This illegal act - obstruction of justice in the form of witness tampering - is separate act from the pardon itself, is complete before there is a pardon, and would be illegal even if the pardon never ultimately happened. I don't think any constitutional defense would even be remotely possible here.

The problem is that a prior arrangement has to be proven. The proof is just the pardon itself, the fact that Manafort ultimately lied and did not cooperate and Trump's generally stated desire to obstruct. Not good enough to prove an actual conspiracy. Since it's a reasonable doubt standard, it will be tough to prove without some direct evidence.

Anyway, I think the legal experts who are saying Trump can't pardon with corrupt intent - though they may be right - aren't framing their argument correctly. Once you understand the illegal act isn't the pardon itself, it removes any doubt about whether he has a defense under the Constitution.
Click to expand...

That all makes sense. As always, your expertise is fantastic.

Also in case you missed it Trump is now on the record saying that the deputy AG should be imprisoned for appointing Mueller.
 
J

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
woolfe9998 said:
True, but if Eski's theory is correct, and it could well be, that Manafort only entered into the plea deal to help Trump determine what Mueller knows, and never had any good faith intention to cooperate, that would suggest a pardon was dangled before he plead guilty and entered the plea agreement, which would make it a privileged communication.
Click to expand...

True. OTOH, any information transmitted by Manafort's attorneys to Trump's team after the guilty plea was entered would be a violation of confidentiality & criminal conspiracy. If Mueller proved that to a judge then communication search warrants may have been in place for some while.
 
F

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,935
55,288
136
woolfe9998 said:
True, but if Eski's theory is correct, and it could well be, that Manafort only entered into the plea deal to help Trump determine what Mueller knows, and never had any good faith intention to cooperate, that would suggest a pardon was dangled before he plead guilty and entered the plea agreement, which would make it a privileged communication.
Click to expand...

It seems that the only question is if Manafort decided to go for the pardon before or after his plea. Otherwise his conduct makes zero sense.

Considering how many times a pardon was dangled in front of him before his plea it’s hard to believe the latter.

To me it seems like he decided to roll the dice on a trial and just escape scot free. Once he lost decided to go for a pardon.
 
dawp

dawp

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
11,347
2,710
136
seems to me running for president was the worst decision trump could have made as it looks like all he past dealing are catching up to him and he can not bully the federal government like he could the contractors he screwed over in the past, all his money will not save him from Mueller.
 
SMOGZINN

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
14,359
4,640
136
dawp said:
all his money will not save him from Mueller.
Click to expand...

This part is yet to be seen. It seems probable that Trump's money will save him yet, even if it does not save his Presidency (which is questionable). It is becoming increasingly clear that this administration is a test if our country is a Kleptocracy or Democracy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom