we have gates about to plead guilty and cooperate. we have manafort. let me hit the pause button. if he does that, we know he may be heading in that direction. if gates cooperates after all the thinking is he may have information about manafort. that doesn t say anything about the president, though. we don t know what manafort or gates knows. gates was there before and after. he may have a lot of information. one of the things john dean has often said the white house underestimated how much i knew. i don t want to underestimate what gates knows. i also want to point out in this indictment it says, and others known and unknown, so it indicts a certain group of defendants but also says there are others involved, known and unknown.
more than 30 days ago? sorry. must be nice. you d be constantly living in the moment. no trauma too big as long as it s old. the government says, though, that in their raid of paul manafort s home in virginia, they turned up records older than 30 days that showed lobbying work that manafort and gates had denied participating in. if it s one clear view on what the government thinks they got, what they earned in that pre-dawn raid on manafort s house in alexandria back in the summer. now, in terms of what we learned from the manafort and gates indictment, we also got a list from the government of overseas corporations that manafort and gates allegedly used not only to get paid from foreign sources, but to pay for stuff here in the u.s.. the government uses that list of companies and extensive list of alleged wire transfers from those companies to basically make two allegations. they say that manafort laundered money by purchasing real estate. he would use overseas shell
gates transferred more than $3 million from offshore accounts from other accounts that he controlled. they say that in the indictment. government then goes into great line by line detail to explain what it was that paul manafort spent money on using this weird overseas wire transfer process. but the math here has a really big hole in it. they re saying more than $75 million moves through these accounts, but then they only account for $20 million of it. the government makes no account of more than $50 million of that money. the government gives no accounting basically at all for the way money came to gates and manafort. where did that money come from? the only thing the indictment says is they worked as agents of ukraine and its political parties and leaders and as such they generated tens of millions of dollars in income. but that s all they say. we hear nothing else about those sources of income and the reason i m asking is because there s no crime in being a rich guy. there s no crim
like? that process that the government described here in the indictment, the people who look at indictments like this and who follow white collar crime like this, is that a familiar-looking process? here s one more big questions that s raised by the manafort and gates indoochlt keeping in mind this is an indictment manafort and gates have pled not guilty. but there is something that doesn t make sense in the indictment in terms of money. page 3 of the indictment says on page 3 of the indictment the government says, quote, in total, more than $75 million flowed through offshore accounts. manafort lan derred more than $18 million used by him to buy property, goods and services in the u.s., income he concealed from the department of treasury and justice and others. gates transferred $3 million from offshore accounts from other accounts that he controlled. they say that in the indictment. government then goes into great line by line detail to explain what it was that paul manafort spent
this meeting he was trying to set up last summer according to papadopoulos, quote, has been approved from our side. whether or not george papadopoulos was lying to the russians about that proposed meeting being approved from our side, from the trump campaign side. the other document cited in the unsealed filings in his case today aren t just papadopoulos describing things. the other stuff that turned up in the statement of offense today, in his guilty plea, those documents are other members of the trump campaign okaying and encouraging his work with the russians. are those other people from the trump campaign potentially in trouble? and is that why none of their names appear in the documents about papadopoulos today, even though we can kind of figure out who they all are? then there s the manafort and gates indictment. unlike the george papadopoulos documents, what we ve gotten from this indictment about gates