*****BREAKING*****MUELLER TOLD MANAFORT TO EXPECT AN INDICTMENT

[DemocratSinceBirth]

Link to tweet

Mueller told Manafort to expect an indictment, per LaFraniere, @mattapuzzo @adamgoldmanNYT

[superpatriotman]

1. It's a start

[Stuart G]

2. The first among many..........k and r.

I wonder what the Trumpster will say...???....another lie, no doubt..

[FakeNoose]

30. Manafort will give it all up - if he hasn't already

This could be for show, just to scare Cheeto.

It's possible that Manafort has already made a deal and told everything he knows.

[greeny2323]

3. Ugh. Second diary with misleading title

The article says they threatened him with an indictment. That's a technique to encourage cooperation. The article doesn't say he's going to be indicted.

[Ms. Toad]

8. Yup.

Especially in connection with the scope of the article.

[fallout87]

51. Yes...

They got my hopes up in the Rachel Thread... If he was going to be indicted, they wouldnt warn him, they would just do it. Let's manage expectations here.

[Nitram]

75. In my opinion, posts with such misleading titles (B2 Bomber flies over N Korea) shouldd change the

title or be deleted.

[Me.]

4. Sleep Well Donald

[dixiegrrrrl]

5. This is moving right along, it seems.

I feel sure that Mueller et al have long lists of names under several charges by now.

Always nice to have a lot of leverage.

[Ms. Toad]

6. That's not what the article says.

The article is describing the manner in which Mueller is dealing with the investigation, and describes an event in July when prosecutors asserted they intended to indictt Manafort (in connection with the search warrants being executed).

It does not say there is a current plan - it does not even say the threat was anything more than a bald threat to coerce cooperation. (Quite likely - since the article is describing how Mueller is setting a tone that is likely to compel cooperation.)

Don't count your indictments before they are announded.

[Stuart G]

9. You are correct, not indicted yet..But this guy was Trump's campaign manager..

]If he is indicted, if...what does that say..? about Trump?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. Res ipsa loquitur

Mueller told Manafort to expect an indictment, per LaFraniere, @mattapuzzo @adamgoldmanNYT

[Ms. Toad]

12. Manafort was threatened with an indictment

in connection with execution of a search warrant.

Relatively standard threats that may, or may not, match with what is planned.

The article by the three authors describes a past threat, not a current plan.

(I have no way of knowing what is planned - BUT the article is not describing, and does not support, the breathless manafort is about to be indicted headlines in two separate threads.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

58. thank you, Ms. Toad.

Glad I saw your post.

[Ms. Toad]

11. The point is that the article doesn't even say an indictment is planned

What it says is that they threatened him by telling him one was planned. Back in July.

The article is being used in this thread, and at least one more, for the proposition that an indictment is actually planned when it says no such thing.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. I quoted Maggie Haberman verbatim.

[Ms. Toad]

19. That phrase appears nowhere in the article.

It is the caption on a tweet which, because of the need to fit in 140 characters, is devoid of context.

The context of the expectation you quoted was as a threat used in connection with the execution of the search warrant in july.

WASHINGTON — Paul J. Manafort was in bed early one morning in July when federal agents bearing a search warrant picked the lock on his front door and raided his Virginia home. They took binders stuffed with documents and copied his computer files, looking for evidence that Mr. Manafort, President Trump’s former campaign chairman, set up secret offshore bank accounts. They even photographed the expensive suits in his closet.

The special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, then followed the house search with a warning: His prosecutors told Mr. Manafort they planned to indict him, said two people close to the investigation.

I.e. it was a threat made in July - that may or may not have been a real threat at the time, and even if it was true in July the article does not even hint that it is that is a current expectation.

Fake news (the DU caption indicating the current expectation is an indictment) is not helpful - regardless of which side promotes it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

22. I quoted Maggie Haberman's tweet verbatim.

Here is her contact information:

Maggie Haberman
The New York Times
620 Eighth Avenue,
New York, NY10018


should you wish to correct her.

[Ms. Toad]

25. It is not her article I am responding to.

Her article is accurate (as far as I know).

It is the misuse of an isolated quote to make it appear that it is "Breaking" - and a current (new) expectation that Manafort has been told to expect (present tense) an indictment.

The comment made to Manafort in July is not "Breaking" is your characterization of a comment made to Manafort, not Haberman's.

Mischaracterizing, as a "Breaking" threat to indict Manafort, a story that is a investigative background piece describing how Mueller set a tone for the investigation (including a two-month old threat of an indictment, that may not have actually been planned at all) is fake news, and has no business on a progressive website.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

28. I quoted Maggie Haberman's tweet verbatim. (REDUX)

This is the first time she tweeted it. Here is the number for the New York Times:

1 [phone]


If you believe their reporters are tweeting apocrypha you should bring it to their attention.

[Gravitycollapse]

48. Why are you acting like this?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

60. I quoted her verbatim and added a link to the article. I fulfilled my obligations .

Last edited Tue Sep 19, 2017, 02:14 AM - Edit history (1)

The ninety one members of our community who recommended it and the six members who put it on facebook seem to have liked it.

[fallout87]

53. Quoted or not

Where's the indictment?

[jberryhill]

56. It's fairly obvious...

That the necessity of brevity in tweets often leads to a sacrifice of accuracy. Furthers the NYT is not the publisher of her tweets. So not only are you obstinately missing the point, but your proposed remedy makes no sense.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

62. It's fairly obvious I copied her tweet verbatim

It's fairly obvious I copied her tweet verbatim and posted a link that amplifies and goes into detail what was in her tweet:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029607326


I can not please everyone so I will have to please myself:

But it's all right now, I learned my lesson well.
You see, ya can't please everyone, so ya got to please yourself

and the ninety one members and counting of our august community who recommended it and the six members who put it on their facebook page.

[Juliusseizure]

71. Mueller wants Manafort to testify against Trump

You should read Seth Abramson on Twitter. A lot of this is criminal law legal strategy and hard to understand.

Assume the threat is real and not a bluff. The FBI had a wiretap on him before and during the campaign. That came out today too. The threat was made in July but leaked now, with the wiretap info., for a reason.

Mueller must have evidence to prosecute Manafort on serious felonies with possible long sentences. He's leaking both facts now to scare Manafort into agreeing to immunity in exchange for being a witness against Trump. He's also alerting others that if they want immunity they better move fast, because he only needs 2-3 strong witnesses.

[Cosmocat]

72. I am sure it was trying to leverage cooperation, but

Seriously doubt it was an empty threat.

Nothing about Mueller would indicate he would bluff.

[Ms. Toad]

73. That is still different from a current impending indictment

It may well be true that, at the time the prosecutors threatened it, that an indictment was expected.

That doesn't mean that now - 2 months after the execution of the search warrant - there is still an indictment expected.

It is clear the OP - and many of the people commenting in this thread - interpret the OPs breathless headline *****BREAKING***** as an indication that there is Manafort is currently expected to be indicted. There is simply nothing in the article to support that.

Yes, he was threatened in connection with the execution of the July search warrant. That threat, even if it was a real threat, doesn't say anything at all about the current expectations - but everyone cheering in this thread is breaking out Fitzmas decorations.

[Cosmocat]

78. OK

I am feeling you there.

I do see it as positive, more information that indicates there is some real there, there.

BUT, I have always taken a much longer arching view of how this will shake down, so I get your point.

[Lifelong Protester]

7. K & R!

Hope it sticks!!

[JNelson6563]

14. That should help move things along.

[LittleGirl]

15. When he was let go so early in the campaign

I knew something was up. Guess we'll find out soon enough.


couldn't be soon enough for most of us.

[Xolodno]

16. Lets see...why would they state that too him?

A. They want him to bail on the country with every liquid asset to a non-extraditing country. Which will make EVERYONE else look guilty as fuck and a good chance many come running for a plea bargain. Bonus, Manafort lives his life out as a fugitive of the USA and can only visit countries that are a hair short of collapse with the possibility the new government extraditing him to gain a "favorable" loan. In other words, live in paranoia and never put down roots unless you are comfortable of being hanged there.

B. He's cooperating. And this was a message to everyone else, to cooperate.

[Chasstev365]

17. Will he be a fink?

The Magic 8 Ball says count on it!

[ChubbyStar]

20. FINK!!! What a fabulous word

Perfect for the tRump crew!

[Chasstev365]

27. An oldie, but a goodie!

[WheelWalker]

31. "Rat" Fink, I think is the full conjugation.

[Mr. Ected]

55. You rang?

That's my avatar: Ratfink. LOL.

[japple]

77. Genuine Rat Fink from the 1960s

I think I had a green one.

[mcar]

18. Woo! And Hoo!

[Turbineguy]

21. And you even gave him

some music to go with that!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

23. He can put this in his IPOD

[onetexan]

24. This is more consistent with how youd go after an organized crime syndicate.

“This is more consistent with how you’d go after an organized crime syndicate.” << quotation marks were removed from the title, but it's directly from the NYT article.

In this grand collusion scheme the GOP, idiot 45 and the lot of his enablers are exactly that - an organized crime syndicate.

[OliverQ]

26. Still angry knowing Trump will likely pardon him.

[Sugarcoated]

80. But dum dum can't pardon someone

convicted in a federal case.

[iluvtennis]

29. Haberman: Feds wiretapped Manafort - before and after the election....

Link to tweet

[FreeState]

33. Yep started wire tapping him in 2014 n/t

[Still In Wisconsin]

32. Breakin' rocks in the hot sun...

great song, and how appropriate!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. Thirty Days In The Hole

[Still In Wisconsin]

57. Damn DSB you have good taste!

Humble Pie... hell YES!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

68. More

[denbot]

65. This was one of the songs of my misspent youth..

[DemocratSinceBirth]

67. This was how I spent part of my misspent youth..

[denbot]

69. Well done, that was a pretty obscure song reference.

I remember the old time wrestling and Roller Derby. I watched it mostly with my cousins, but that was back in the '60's.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

70. I came of age in the 70s/80s.

Manafort might get more than thirty days though.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

34. So this is news from July,

and it apparently is coming from someone other than Mueller himself? Have I missed anything important?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

43. No. The article is September 18, 2017. That would be today.

The search was July 26.

The warning about an indictment came some time after; time not specified.

The article contains lots of information that undoubtedly has been gathered over the intervening period of time. Probably the reporters only learned about the indictment warning very recently and must have confirmed it today or yesterday.

Not just "someone" as a source. NYT uses multiple sources for key facts in important stories. In particular, if you had read the article, you would have noted that the headline indictment warning was confirmed by two sources. In the second paragraph.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

52. As much as I want to see all of these people go down,

my memories of Fitzmas are very strong. The high, high hopes. And then . . . nothing.

I see history repeating itself.

I so hope I'm wrong. I'll be posting mea culpas everywhere if I am.

[denbot]

66. I have felt that deja vu..

But I am becoming a believer..

[DemocratSinceBirth]

64. You don't know how much I appreciate your post.

I quoted Maggie Haberman verbatim along with a link to an article that amplifies upon what she wrote in her tweet, nothing more and nothing less.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

76. I noticed the same thing - on cnn - they put the "expect an indictment" with the same

lines about searching his house - as if the threat of indictment was made during the raid

[shenmue]

36. Yes

[Gore1FL]

37. Do each of the asterisks represent a week since this was breaking?

This is a story discussing what happened in July.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

38. Thank you for kicking my thread.

Could you kick this one as well please ?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029605946


Thank you in advance.

[Gore1FL]

39. Sure. Here you go. nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

40. Thank You.

Here are some more to kick:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029605228


https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029604982


Thank you in advance.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

44. No. The article contains information not previously reported until Sept 18, 2017 (today). . . . nt

[humbled_opinion]

41. Lock them all up

Our very Democracy is at stake here.

[Dreamer Tatum]

42. Yup - coming somewhere between 23 and 25 hours from now.

Business hours, of course.

[UTUSN]

45. Bwah-ha-HAH!1 !!!!!!!!!! 111111111111

[ananda]

46. And yet ..

Where is it?

Has anyone been indicted, arrested?

This is getting ridiculousl.

[Mr.Bill]

47. I think this

and the search of his house are just to give cover to him for snitching on everyone he can think of.

[LS_Editor]

49. In a metaphorical way...

[LudwigPastorius]

50. Balls, meet Vise.

[nmgaucho]

54. Hehehe....El Cheetoh is shitting bricks about now

[Glimmer of Hope]

59. I can't believe the FBI obtained a warrant to pick the lock to his front door.

How dirty do you have to be for that to happen?

[NastyRiffraff]

74. Dirty enough to destroy evidence

That was apparently the reason they were allowed to pick the lock. They had to prove there was a good reason to believe Manifort would torch evidence.

[mvd]

61. K&R

They say it always starts with the smaller catches..

[L. Coyote]

63. VIDEOS:

&t=201s

[fwvinson]

79. Reichstag Fire

Seems, trump is building up his "Reichstag Fire" and is preparing.
When is the Mueller investigation going to get too close? Then he lops a nuke or two at....North Korea...Iran...Hell, Chicago.
Then declares "Marshal Law".
Then declares himself ..... Dictator or Great Leader or...whatever he calls himself.
Seems, we are getting very close.