Andrew McCarthy - "Coldheart is right".

So Andrew McCarthy weighed in on the Manafort plea, and came pretty much to the same conclusions as I did. I might point out that his article was published six hours after my post, so any idea that I borrowed my thinking from him would be nonsense.

Paul Manafort’s guilty plea in the District of Columbia makes perfect sense. We’ve been speculating about its likelihood since Manafort was convicted three weeks ago on eight felony counts of bank and tax fraud in the Eastern District of Virginia. There was nothing to be gained for Manafort or Special Counsel Robert Mueller in a second trial.

I elaborated that, when it comes to Manafort, Mueller’s focus is not President Trump. It is Russia, “specifically, Manafort’s longtime connections to Kremlin-connected operatives.” This seems consistent with what Manafort’s camp is telling the press. Politico quotes a source close to Trump’s former campaign chairman: “The cooperation agreement does not involve the Trump campaign. . . .There was no collusion with Russia.”

Again, the logic behind the plea agreement was obvious. The statements of guilt were standard. The agreement to cooperate with the ongoing investigation is also standard. Of course, what people seem to mysteriously forget is that Manafort was never investigated, much less accused of "anything" that had to do with his time in the Trump White House. Manafort and the "inherited" investigation was always about Ukraine, lobbying, and any connections Manafort might have with Ukrainians tied to Russia.

For those of us who actually pay attention to facts (such as court documents and court transcripts) would remember that Special Counsel admitted that the Manafort money laundering scheme was not an investigation that "arose" from the larger investigation. Rather it was part of a second "secret" Rosenstein to Mueller authorization. The Special Counsel attorneys referred to it as an inherited investigation.

Furthermore, the Mueller camp has already charged Russians with both the illegal advertising and the hacking of the DNC emails. There was no indications that anyone from the Trump campaign was involved, nor was there any indication that Paul Manafort had anything to do with any of it.

At this point, it does not appear that Mueller has a collusion case against Trump associates. His indictments involving Russian hacking and troll farms do not suggest complicity by the Trump campaign. I also find it hard to believe Mueller sees Manafort as the key to making a case on Trump when Mueller has had [Richard] Gates — Manafort’s partner — as a cooperator for six months. You have to figure Gates knows whatever Manafort knows about collusion. Yet, since Gates began cooperating with the special counsel, Mueller has filed the charges against Russians that do not implicate Trump, and has transferred those cases to other Justice Department components.

Lastly, its now been reported that Special Counsel is weighing the idea of bringing charges against the former Obama White House counsel Greg Craig who is seen as related to the Manafort probe. In fact, there is talk of taking action against the entire law firm associated with Craig.

There may be more shoes to drop in the Manafort case, now that he is agreed to cooperate. But all logic and known facts suggests it will have nothing to do with Trump.