Making sense of Manafort's strategy

The sudden announcement this week from Robert Mueller's office that he was cancelling the plea deal/cooperation agreement with Paul Manafort was at first puzzling.    Mueller's office said it was because Manafort had continued to tell lies and commit crimes even while supposedly cooperating.

At first that just seemed arrogant and stupid on Manafort's part -- thinking he could get away with pulling off a fake cooperation stance while continuing to withhold the truth Mueller was seeking.    But, as we learn more, or figure out more, it seems perhaps to have been a strategy that didn't work because the investigators saw through it.

Here's what I think, at this point, happened.   We knew that Manafort's lawyers had a mutual defense arrangement whereby separate individuals being investigated in related cases can share information of what their clients are being asked, what direction the investigation seems to be going, etc.     There is nothing illegal about this.

President Trump is said to have 31 such sharing agreements with others being investigated by Mueller, Paul Manafort among them.

The only thing is that, by tradition observed, as soon as a plea deal/cooperation agreement is made by one of the parties, the person is supposed to end any further sharing.    Paul Manafort's lawyer did not do this.  The plea agreement did not specifically require this, but it did use language that arguably would rule out such sharing as not cooperating with the investigation.   Whether thus omission was a simple mistake or intentional, on the Mueller team's part, has not been clarified.

In fact, Manafort's lawyer kept right on informing the Trump lawyers the inside view Manafort now had into the investigation as he was supposedly being a cooperating witness.   In effect, Manafort became a "mole" or a double agent. Was this a scheme the Manafort had set up in exchange for a presidential pardon later on?   It's about the only thing that makes sense.   Because now that he's been caught in the act, Manafort is facing much more jail time than he would under the plea deal -- or maybe even without the plea deal.

In a way, it's a set back for Mueller, because some of what Manafort has told him may not be true and because he may not have gotten to all the questions he wanted to ask.  However, all is not lost.   Here's why.

Before Manafort knew he had been caught, he may have given false answers -- then had his lawyer tell Trump the answers he had given Mueller.   And Mueller didn't let on that he knew until after Trump had already submitted his written answers.    So he may have Trump in writing giving some answers that are knowingly false, which he assumed would be backed up by Manafort's (false) testimony.   If Mueller has other proof that Manafort lied to him -- and that Trump gave the same lie in writing, then this implicates Trump anyway.

But at the least, this adds to any case Mueller is constructing on obstruction of justice for Trump, because he would knowingly be participating in an effort to interfere with the investigation.

Here's another benefit to Mueller's case.    He is now required to make the case to the court as to why he cancelled the plea agreement.   In doing so, he can implicate Trump in court filings now that do not have to get approval of the Acting Attorney General stooge Trump set up in office to protect him.   And, unless they are sealed, this will become known to the public.

So Mueller can get things in the court record about Trump's activity that might be blocked in the final report by the Special Counsel.    There has already been speculation that Mueller might use indictments of others to get into open court records some of the things that Trump has done, even if he can't be charged as a sitting president.

I believe the apt metaphor would be:   "There's more than one way to skin a cat."

Ralph