Chicago Boyz

What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?

  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • The Manafort Case.

    Posted by Michael Kennedy on July 10th, 2018 (All posts by )

    In the summer of 2016, just before the GOP convention, the Trump children hired Paul Manafort and fired Cory Lewandowski who had been the campaign manager since 2015 and all through the primaries.

    The rationale for Manafort was that he knew how to round up delegate votes at the convention.

    Mr. Manafort, 66, is among the few political hands in either party with direct experience managing nomination fights: As a young Republican operative, he helped manage the 1976 convention floor for Gerald Ford in his showdown with Ronald Reagan, the last time Republicans entered a convention with no candidate having clinched the nomination.

    He performed a similar function for Mr. Reagan in 1980, and played leading roles in the 1988 and 1996 conventions, for George Bush and Bob Dole.

    Mr. Manafort has drawn attention in recent years chiefly for his work as an international political consultant, most notably as a senior adviser to former President Viktor F. Yanukovych of Ukraine, who was driven from power in 2014.

    His “experience” was 20 years in the past and he proved to be a rapacious employee, demanding $5 million dollars for “outreach” soon after being hired.

    The Lewandowski book, “Let Trump be Trump” is a very good description of the campaign, written with David Bossie.

    In August, after sidelining him for a month, Trump fired Manafort, and, according to Lewandowski, it was because he learned that Manafort was “a crook.”

    Mueller, and his traveling road show, is now holding Manafort in prison awaiting trial which keeps getting postponed.

    A Washington, D.C., judge on Wednesday set a trial date of Sept. 17 for Paul Manafort, just weeks before the 2018 midterm elections, a spokesperson for the former Trump campaign chairman confirmed.

    Manafort has pleaded not guilty to numerous charges in special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, including money laundering, tax fraud and bank fraud conspiracy.

    Nowhere in the charges is there any allegation of contact between the Trump campaign and Russia. Manafort is being charged with financial crimes related to work he did for Ukraine a decade ago.

    Now it seems, that serious misbehavior occurred with the DOJ and FBI in this case.

    The gist of the story is that Andrew Weissmann was meeting with AP reporters in April of 2017, approximately a month prior to the formal construct of the Robert Mueller investigation. The information from the meeting, which was essentially based on research provided by the “reporters” about Paul Manafort, was then later used in the formation of the underlying evidence against Manafort to gain a search warrant.

    I would not be terribly surprised to see the whole case thrown out for prosecutorial misbehavior.


    10 Responses to “The Manafort Case.”

    1. TMLutas Says:

      So Trump was of the opinion that Manafort was a crook and fired him. Now Mueller has come to the same conclusion and indicted him. I’m not seeing the great anti-Trump implications of this.

    2. Grurray Says:

      Yesterday Flynn’s sentencing was again delayed. It’s been eight months since he copped a plea and agreed to cooperate, yet there’s no indication he has provided any information to Mueller. Odds are that the delays are because there won’t be any jail time. If and when Flynn skates with only a slap on the wrist it will be a big black eye to this whole national debacle. What was this all supposed to prove?

    3. Mike K Says:

      My opinion is that Flynn has the whole case dismissed. We’ll see.

      Manafort might even get the case thrown out for the outrageous behavior of the prosecutors.

    4. morgan Says:

      They aren’t prosecutors, they are persecutors and a stain on the law profession.

    5. Ginny Says:

      Well if Manafort were a more appealing person, we might have the makings of one of those swashbuckling movies when the powers that be put the hero in a castle tower to await the crown’s edict. We don’t seem to be taking the crime as the cause of the charges but rather the man. And surely solitary will lead him to confusions if not confessions.

      Meanwhile in the midst of all this, Awan gets a very light knuckle tap. And the IG’s report, full of rich detail of wrongdoing, is quoted against the republicans as they interrogate the smarmy Strozk.

    6. Ingot9455 Says:

      Flynn has provided all kinds of information as a result of his guilty plea. It’s just that it has nothing to do with incriminating President Trump.
      It’s what’s called ‘graymail’ – national security classified information that goes into the public record of a court case. Either they declassify it and have a big reveal, or they don’t.

    7. newrouter Says:

      Levin: Mueller’s appointment was unconstitutional
      Chris Pandolfo · May 21, 2018

      “Mark Levin
      about 2 months ago
      The appointment of Robert Mueller violates the Appointments Clause of the Constitution…
      The appointment of Robert Mueller violates the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. Mueller is not an inferior appointee, but a principal appointee as understood under our constitutional. His powers are more akin to an United States attorney, not an assistant United States attorney. Moreover, his boss, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, treats him as a principal officer — that is, Mueller is mostly free to conduct his investigation with few limits or restraints. The parameters of his appointment were extraordinarily broad in the first instance, and have only expanded since then. …
      See More

    8. Anonymous Says:

      “… work [Manafort] did for Ukraine a decade ago…”

      Inasmuch as his client Yanukovych was a Putin stooge engaged in selling out Ukraine to Russia, I would say that any work Manafort did then was done in Ukraine, but not for Ukraine.

    9. Rich Rostrom Says:

      Anonymous above is me.

    10. Mike K Says:

      “Flynn has provided all kinds of information as a result of his guilty plea”

      News to me and I would like to know where you got this from.

      The FBI agents originally, form what I have seen, did not say he lied and Sally Yates chose to indict him anyway.

      His son was threatened and he caved to stay solvent.

      I think this will be dismissed. We have already had a judge ream out the prosecutors on thus case.

      Contreras , the first judge, was a buddy of Strzok/Gates and was the FISC judge who OK’d the surveillance that is going to put Strzok/Gates in prison.

      When he took over the Flynn case in December, Sullivan ordered Mueller’s team “to produce all discoverable evidence in a readily usable form.” And he declared that “if the government has identified any information which is favorable to the defendant but which the government believes not to be material, the government shall submit such information to the Court for in camera review.”

      We’ll see how this goes but I don’t think a pardon will be needed.

    Leave a Reply

    Comments Policy:  By commenting here you acknowledge that you have read the Chicago Boyz blog Comments Policy, which is posted under the comment entry box below, and agree to its terms.

    A real-time preview of your comment will appear under the comment entry box below.

    Comments Policy

    Chicago Boyz values reader contributions and invites you to comment as long as you accept a few stipulations:

    1) Chicago Boyz authors tend to share a broad outlook on issues but there is no party or company line. Each of us decides what to write and how to respond to comments on his own posts. Occasionally one or another of us will delete a comment as off-topic, excessively rude or otherwise unproductive. You may think that we deleted your comment unjustly, and you may be right, but it is usually best if you can accept it and move on.

    2) If you post a comment and it doesn't show up it was probably blocked by our spam filter. We batch-delete spam comments, typically in the morning. If you email us promptly at we may be able to retrieve and publish your comment.

    3) You may use common HTML tags (italic, bold, etc.). Please use the "href" tag to post long URLs. The spam filter tends to block comments that contain multiple URLs. If you want to post multiple URLs you should either spread them across multiple comments or email us so that we can make sure that your comment gets posted.

    4) This blog is private property. The First Amendment does not apply. We have no obligation to publish your comments, follow your instructions or indulge your arguments. If you are unwilling to operate within these loose constraints you should probably start your own blog and leave us alone.

    5) Comments made on the Chicago Boyz blog are solely the responsibility of the commenter. No comment on any post on Chicago Boyz is to be taken as a statement from or by any contributor to Chicago Boyz, the Chicago Boyz blog, its administrators or owners. Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners, by permitting comments, do not thereby endorse any claim or opinion or statement made by any commenter, nor do they represent that any claim or statement made in any comment is true. Further, Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners expressly reject and disclaim any association with any comment which suggests any threat of bodily harm to any person, including without limitation any elected official.

    6) Commenters may not post content that infringes intellectual property rights. Comments that violate this rule are subject to deletion or editing to remove the infringing content. Commenters who repeatedly violate this rule may be banned from further commenting on Chicago Boyz. See our DMCA policy for more information.