Based on what we already knew about Manafort (the multiple passports, the million dollar rugs, etc.) I feel like it was already pretty clear that this was a man who really swam in the deep end of the pool of criminality.
It reminds me of a story I once read about the police going into the apartment of a believed thief and find that the wife had in the kitchen a to-do list for the family with things like, “Steal new pants for little Timmy”, “Purloin a new toaster”, “Check the neighbor’s mail”. I.e., looking through the house, it was clear that the whole family in everything they did, they did it through thievery. Committing crime was just their every day experience of life.
Manafort reminds me of that, only at a larger level.
I remember the first time I ever laid eyes on Manafort. Lewandowski has a creep vibe, but Manafort put me in mind of every caricature of a Mafioso mid-level guy I ever saw. First word that sprang to mind was, “oily.”
That’s a great story, by the way. A perfect description of the seedy lounge lizard. (Actually, an insult to honest lounge lizards everywhere.) All that’s missing is the gold chains.
His departure from the campaign was curiously abrupt. I remember thinking, this can’t be good.
How corrupt do you have to be for Lewandowski to hate you, anyway?
I think the only reason he’s holding tough on cooperating with Mueller is he’s more scared of the Russians.
If we needed any more proof that this is Stupid Watergate, consider that Manafort was caught because he forgot to turn off “track changes” in Word. :smack:
LOL, I know, that gave me a laugh, too. Though I expect Mueller’s team would have ferreted it out regardless. Sounds like Manafort’s lawyers are rather taken aback at how much evidence Mueller has already amassed against their client, with the 400,000 pages of discovery they recently provided. Sounds like there is more, too.
I love how Fox was lambasting the investigative team for all of their conflicts of interest, yet towed the line of it being perfectly fine that Trump has even more, and much more severe.
I was awakened by the strong smell of poop (pet accident in the kitchen-- something that will never happen in the WH, eh?). After cleaning it up, couldn’t sleep, came here, and I’ve been reading, with the smell still seared in my nostrils. So appropriate. Some of theses posts are darkly hilarious, and I started laughing hysterically. Then, to my surprise, the laughing turned to crying, and my face contorted into a version of Munch’s “The Scream,” the perfect emblem of our times.
I have a sneaking suspicion some of them roll in it. In any case, the poop smell would have been overridden by the prospect of the sweet, sweet smell of lib’rul tears.
For those hoping that Trump is left impoverished, there’s an important point you’re overlooking: Fines and confiscations might reduce Trump’s net worth to zero, but that doesn’t matter. It’s quite possible that it was already zero or negative. A person’s net worth is unrelated to whether they’re rich or poor. What we need is not to destroy Trump’s net worth; we need to make him poor. And I have no idea how that can even be done.
My job is eDiscovery. I’m the guy that coordinates the forensic collection of electronic documents, loads the documents into a review platform, searches, and culls the documents using various tricks to get to just the documents the attorneys want to see. I deal with government investigations and high volume reviews every day. I have 30 contract attorneys coming in Monday to review about 170k documents in the next three weeks for a matter.
With my bona fides out of the way. 400k pages of discovery from the government is nothing. Typically, they’ll go in, image every computer, collect every scrap of paper, then produce it all back to you without taking anything out. It’s most likely just a copy of everything they collected.
As for the track changes, the software we use to process the documents into the review platform will automatically detect that the document has track changes turned on and will index the text of the track changes. At that point, finding it would depend on first that document getting a hit on whatever keywords they’re running, and second, on the reviewer actually opening the document and reviewing the track changes rather than just perusing the document as displayed on their screen which typically doesn’t show track changes. If you were to hide a smoking gun in track changes and bury it in a mountain of documents. I’d give about a 70% chance of finding it.
Hey Sinaptics! I’m a computer forensic guy (did DFIR for a couple of Fortune 50 companies, taught forensics at a university). Man, I’d love to be working on forensic examinations for Mueller. I just love piling evidence on someone who thought they were being so very clever.
I did a case once where a guy was sending threatening messages over Facebook. Pro tip: don’t do that on a work PC. Anyway, he swore up and down that he didn’t do it and he was being targeted by some organized group of activists. Sadly for him, merely clearing the browser history didn’t eliminate the evidence. Writing that report was fun.
I have actually been keeping my Facebook feed apolitical but right before Thanksgiving I posted a satire piece about Trump rescinding the pardons that Obama gave Thanksgiving turkeys. Then a bunch of assholes came out of the woodwork and accused me of propogating “Fake News”. So now I post stuff like this all the time
Just to tweak them. Which is what I had been trying NOT to do. But it’s fun.
