Posted on 07/22/2017 8:01:24 AM PDT by Rusty0604
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. investigators examining money laundering accusations against President Donald Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort hope to push him to cooperate with their probe into possible collusion between Trump's campaign and Russia, two sources with direct knowledge of the investigation said.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team is examining Manafort's financial and real estate records in New York as well as his involvement in Ukrainian politics, the officials said.
Between 2006 and 2013, Manafort bought three New York properties, including one in Trump Tower in Manhattan. He paid for them in full and later took out mortgages against them. A former senior U.S. law enforcement official said that tactic is often used as a means to hide the origin of funds gained illegally. Reuters has no independent evidence that Manafort did this.
The sources also did not say whether Mueller has uncovered any evidence to charge Manafort with money laundering, but they said doing so is seen by investigators as critical in getting his full cooperation in their investigation.
"If Mueller's team can threaten criminal charges against Manafort, they could use that as leverage to convince him to cooperate," said one of the sources.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
No. I said if he finds a trail he can follow it. You claim he is already outside the scope
I am going to leave it at that
You are just being pedantic with that set of remarks. At least I've been attempting to advance the argument to a conclusion, so our positons and differences are clear.
-- I am going to leave it at that --
I also think the thread has enough of a trail for the record.
Manafort’s home didn't vote in the election and none of these people had access to influence a change at the scale they claim took place. Trump and his campaign staff were never in a position within Federal, State, or Local government to control any of it! Collusion would have to originate where enough resources could be utilized to affect votes. And by all media accounts everybody hated Trump, why would anyone help him?
Those guilty of election tampering would have also had to have enormous resources in place to monitor actual voting tabulations to know how many votes would need to be made up or eliminated. By the sheer number of districts Trump carried, the personnel needed to coordinate and carry out such an act would need to be enormous. By the accusation alone they are complimenting the most offensive and stupidest person on the planet for accomplishing such a feat. Which is it, Dems?
Looking at the previous three election cycles, long before Trump entered the political fray, the trend was clear — nobody wanted what the Dems were selling. Ramming Obamacare through, bailouts, zero job promotion, stagnate economy, open borders, ignoring our constitution, encouraged lawlessness, overturning voted-for legislation, re-education camp public schools, coddling terrorism, birth of ISIS, doubling our debt, forced refugee placement, and their attempts to disarm Americans. The democrat failures are epic.
Many Republicans in DC share in that failure by enabling the scourge, but voters did what they could. Wasn't perfect and patience wore thin as the law abiding, productive citizens of this nation watched their liberties erode at the hands of the people they entrusted to represent them. Insiders on both sides let Americans down enough to force them to vote for an outsider.
Even if Russia did have all that access to voter equipment, databases, and persons with access and influence to carry out the steps needed to influence a presidential election, that is ultimately more damning on the Obama administration for their abysmal lack of national security, especially with the enormous resources they had at their disposal.
Dragging our nation through this obvious farce is the only crime here.
Good post.
We'll see if Manafort learned this lesson. He may have said too much in public and private forums already, any "inconsistency" in what he may have already said may be his undoing. We'll see in the coming weeks I suppose.
You're living in the same times I am and seeing the same things I am.
That's exactly how it works in Government, Politics, Media ..... especially when one isn't part of the Dem-Rep duopoly and seeks to dismantle that which they've built up to protect themselves over decades.
How dare Donald J. Trump run for President and win!
This is all being engineered behind the scenes to send a message to anyone who dares think they can change Washington DC from the outside that they'll never break up the DC Cabal.
I've been responsible in the past for implementing AML systems for large multi-national banks and am familiar with AML laws not just in our country, but also with international anti-money laundering laws as well. I have to take training on it every year. Having said that, paying cash for property and writing a check against it almost immediately is also one of the most common ways to convert "dirty" money to clean. Not saying that's happening here, just saying it's one of the most common methods of money laundering.
In Manafort's case, this "investigation" may be a big nothing burger if Manafort has traceability to the money used to pay cash for the property. If he does, this "investigation" evaporates into thin air. Done, over, kaput.
In fact, most convertible HELOC agreements include check writing privileges.
I'm not fully fluent in HELOC agreements however don't those involve a loan for a property in which the borrower has equity in the property? That's not the case with Manafort. My understanding is no "loan" was made for the property, it was paid for in cash and that's a "red flag" for AML activities.
No disagreement there! I'll simply restate what I said in one of my initial posts: We all know that the job of a special prosecutor is to find "something" to pin on "someone" to justify the existence of the special prosecutor in the first place.
A special prosecutor finds something on someone, then transitions to making that person the fall guy. Prosecute, prosecute, convict, imprison/besmirch that person, ruin their lives, then call it a day and go home.
That is exactly what every special prosecutor has done in my lifetime (I'm going on 55) so the pattern to me seems pretty clear.
I've yet to see a special prosecutor stay within the boundaries they were given and IIRC the one time a President acted against a special prosecutor to remove them that President was threatened with impeachment and removal before resigning in disgrace.
There have only been a few SC or similar in the last 60 years. Most fit the pattern you describe.
I think that is all of them. One per decade, and each one being unprecedented in some ways.
Mueller's appointment bothers me because no crime is sitting out there to be investigated. All the others had reported evidence, facts, that were plausibly crimes.
I'm a radical minority on FR in that I see practical reason for an appointment in this case. The extent deep state has managed to spin up the public with guilt by insinuation can't be spun down by a summary dismissal. If Mueller stays in bounds with the scope of his jurisdiction, the fact that he shouldn't have been appointed as a matter of law is tolerable, to me.
Administrations just can't investigate themselves and deliver a credible result. We'd bitch if a hypothetical AG Podesta gave Crooked Hillary a clean bill. I see a special counsel as inevitable (and damn Comey and Congress for perpetrating the travesty) - it has nothing to do with Comey's leak or Sessions' recusal.
Team Trump has to force Mueller to stay in his box, and it has to do that in a public way. That effort is beginning. Once news reports Mueller is out of his box, Trump's team can get to work.
Every property purchased with cash has 100% equity for the owner...that was very much the case with Manafort.
A home equity line on such a property would be standard for any investor and those equity lines are typically convertible to a standard mortgage at the request of the customer.
Manafort could have easily bought a property for $1M cash, then tapped the equity line on it for $700K to finance his next cash purchase, then tapped the second property's equity line for $500K to finance his third purchase.
Completely legal and a common place practice for many investors.
You’ve shown the patience of a saint.
Thank you for your well informed comments here and on this topic.
You’re living in the same times I am and seeing the same things I am.
That’s exactly how it works in Government, Politics, Media ..... especially when one isn’t part of the Dem-Rep duopoly and seeks to dismantle that which they’ve built up to protect themselves over decades.
************************************************************
I quite understand the reason the swamp dwellers do as they do as well as the methods they use (threats, intimidation) but my question is, threats aside, how can a conviction be secured against a defendant without evidence of wrongdoing?
I am assuming defendant has competent council and enough money with which to pay same.
The defendant is put in a position of proving he did not do something rather than the Gov be made to prove he did. As you know it is difficult if not impossible to prove a negative.
What did she know about Seth Rich, and when did she know it?
http://www.wnd.com/2017/05/twitter-suspends-news-agency-for-seth-rich-report/
Manafort's lucrative Ukaine dealings are beyond the jurisdiction of any of the fifty-seven states.
The technical term is "general warrant".
General warrants are un-American, and those who advocate them are traitors.
Here's something that will help get the crappy taste out of your mouth...
And you my friend, just perfectly encapsulated the mission statement of Robert Mueller, the "special counsel" in this case. I wish I had the gift of brevity that you just demonstrated. Well done.
I had completely mis-stated my thought process and am only catching that now, so my apologies. You're correct, that's exactly what Manafort did and that was my understanding.
What I attempted to say and poorly communicated was that my very limited understanding of HELOC agreements involved properties for which a buyer/owner had some equity in with a loan to cover the remaining balance and then took out a loan for the value of the property.
That itself is likely incorrect too, so I very much appreciate your explanation. Thanks for adding to the discussion and your patience.
I suggest you look into real estate money laundering to see how it can be done
Btw..you could also ask dustin hoffman what he thinks about manafort family real estate transactions
So now that we know there was a no knock warrant issued for Manafort looking for tax returns and bank records... and his son in law has been reportedly pressured to flip likely using the Dustin Hoffman scam to pressure him...
Are you going to still claim that Mueller is outside his scope agreed upon with Rosenstein
I am pretty sure I am one of the few..if not the only one..that has brought up the importance of the alleged Ponzi scheme on this site. Weissmann can use all kinds of things to pressure those involved. He is an expert at flipping people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.