Analysis: Could Mueller be ready to tell us something big? |

Analysis: Could Mueller be ready to tell us something big?

FILE - In this May 23, 2018, file photo, Paul Manafort, President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman, leaves the Federal District Court after a hearing, in Washington. Special counsel Robert Mueller is accusing Manafort of lying to federal investigators in the Russia probe in breach of his plea agreement. Prosecutors say in a new court filing that after Manafort agreed to truthfully cooperate with the investigation, he “committed federal crimes” by lying about “a variety of subject matters.” (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)

WASHINGTON — Special counsel Robert Mueller has voided his cooperation agreement with former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, accusing Manafort of violating it by lying.

The episode appears to be a setback for Mueller’s efforts to glean information from a key player in the Russia investigation. But it may double as an opportunity for disclosure — even a chance for Mueller to enter key events into the public record. That’s especially the case if he’s worried about what new acting attorney general Matt Whitaker might do to the investigation and if the whole thing is indeed winding down. The episode could give us one of the best senses to date of exact what Mueller is probing and how much trouble President Trump and his campaign might be in.

If Mueller wants to spill, that is.

In the filing voiding the agreement, Mueller’s team promises extensive information on Manafort’s alleged lies before he is sentenced. “The government will file a detailed sentencing submission to the Probation Department and the Court in advance of sentencing that sets forth the nature of the defendant’s crimes and lies.”

The words “detailed sentencing submission” loom large. Mueller’s team has always been tight-lipped publicly, but it has made some key disclosures through indictments (often referred to as “speaking indictments”). The indictments of 13 Russians earlier this year contained extensive detail and was perhaps more about disclosure than punishment, given the Russians almost definitely will never be in the United States to face trial. The initial Manafort indictment disclosed that he was viewed as a key witness not just generally, but specifically with regards to potential Trump campaign collusion with Russia — a pregnant inclusion.

The Mueller filing on Manafort’s alleged lies won’t be an indictment, per se, and there is a very real chance it could remain under seal to protect the ongoing investigation. But if it is made public, it would give Mueller a chance to say whatever he feels like disclosing, and notably without Whitaker’s approval — which would be required for a new indictment or for releasing a final report, if Whitaker has indeed taken oversight of the probe and supersedes Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein.

It’s tough to see how it wouldn’t shed at least some light on key events. Mueller has reached plea deals with others for lying to his team, but none were as central as Manafort, who ran Trump’s campaign for months. He was there for the Trump Tower meeting, for instance. He has long-standing ties to Russian interests.

There’s also the fact that Manafort previously reached the plea deal and ostensibly knew the punishment that would follow if he lied. The fact that he allegedly did so — enough to cause Mueller’s team to void the agreement — suggests the alleged lies may have had to do with substantial questions in the Russia investigation. And if Manafort lied to cover something up, it may become clearer what, in fact, is being covered up.

That’s a lot of what-ifs, and Mueller may continue to play things close to the vest and/or keep the document under seal. But rarely has there been so good an opportunity to learn just exactly where this investigation stands through court filings. And we seem to have entered a new phase in which external factors — mostly Whitaker — are threatening Mueller’s 18-month investigation like never before.

“[The filing] will set out not just alleged lies but explanations of why they are lies, which has to include the evidence Mueller has that contradicts Manafort’s prevarications,” said former Justice Department official Harry Litman. “So it will be a rich document chock-full of information that we don’t know.

“But we (as opposed to the court) may not learn any of it yet, because it could be filed under seal to protect the ongoing investigation.”

Former federal prosecutor Patrick Cotter said expectations should indeed be tempered.

“My suspicion is that the Old Marine will continue to hold his fire,” Cotter said. “For guys like Mueller, not letting developments like the emergence of a legal nuisance like Whitaker rattle you is both habit and principle. My money says that Mueller will continue to steer a straight, steady and quiet course.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.