Paul Manafort's lawyers bungle redactions on new legal filing exposing new secrets

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Raw Story


MARTIN CIZMAR
08 JAN 2019 AT 13:40 ET

Attorneys for Paul Manafort incorrectly redacted portions of their latest filings, leaving the secrets that had been redacted open to discovery by anyone with a computer mouse.

As noticed by Mike Scarcella of Law.com, the redacted portions of the new filings in Manafort’s case can be accessed by copying and pasting the portions that are blacked out.

One of the redacted portions includes details about Manafort meeting with Russian intelligence operative Konstantin Kilimnik in Madrid.

Another concerns President Donald Trump.



Read more: https://www.rawstory.com/2019/01/paul-manaforts-lawyers-bungle-redactions-new-legal-filing-exposing-new-secrets/?utm_source=push_notifications

---

Follow the direction at the end of the article. It works. Excellent!

[democratisphere]

1. Everything associated with drumpf is a bungled botched mess!

[More_Cowbell]

2. "the best people"

You don't even need a mouse! the trackpad on my Mac works fine.

[Iliyah]

3. Come on. Could this be

intentional? Or are they that stupid. Makes you wonder.

Doesn't Falwell Jr. have a "fake" law school.

[More_Cowbell]

12. Yes, it could be intentional

Now these people know specific information Mueller has on them.

[DivByZero]

14. Rookie move

There are right (secure) ways to redact and rookie ways to redact. I don’t think this was intentional, it believe it was just a rookie move.

I also remember reading sensitive Word documents with numerous revisions, and when the final version was sent out, the author forgot to “accept all changes”, so the original version, revisions, and comments were still in the document. Highly embarrassing.

Know your tools!
But i’m glad they bungled it 😄

[bpositive]

4. funny- just posted this

[PJMcK]

5. How interesting

Quite a screw-up. I'd probably want to fire my lawyers if they did this to me.

It's kind of fun to be able to read the redactions, however! This clown is toast.

[dalton99a]

6. Pdf:

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5677512/Manafort-20190108-Dc.pdf

----------------------------------------------

How To (Properly) Redact a PDF
https://lawyerist.com/how-to-redact-a-pdf/

[ffr]

9. Holy crap, you can simply copy/paste the redacted section into its text.

It works for all of the redacted sections. What complete keystone attorneys!

(See, e.g., Doc. 460 at 5 (After being shown documents, Mr. Manafort “conceded” that he discussed or may have discussed a Ukraine peace plan with Mr. Kilimnik on more than one occasion); id. at 6 (After being told that Mr. Kilimnik had traveled to Madrid on the same day that Mr. Manafort was in Madrid, Mr. Manafort “acknowledged” that he and Mr. Kilimnik met while they were both in Madrid)).

In fact, during a proffer meeting held with the Special Counsel on September 11, 2018, Mr. Manafort explained to the Government attorneys and investigators that he would have given the Ukrainian peace plan more thought, had
the issue not been raised during the period he was engaged with work related to the presidential...

The Government has indicated that Mr. Manafort’s statements about this payment are inconsistent with
those of others, but the defense has not received any witness statements to support this contention.

The first alleged misstatement identified in the Special Counsel’s submission
(regarding a text exchange on May 26, 2018) related to a text message from a third-party asking
permission to use Mr. Manafort’s name as an introduction in the event the third-party met the
President. This does not constitute outreach by Mr. Manafort to the President. The second
example identified by the Special Counsel is hearsay purportedly offered by an undisclosed third
party and the defense has not been provided with the statement (or any witness statements that
form the basis for alleging intentional falsehoods).

Or if you're totally lazy, just hit select-all, copy, then paste the entire document into your word processing software.

[dalton99a]

10. +1. Unbelievable

[WheelWalker]

7. Works for me with a Chromebook, pasting into Google Docs

[eggplant]

8. All I had to do was click "reflow text" in my PDF viewer. n/t

[pnwmom]

11. So, is this all a run-up to an appeal saying he had an incompetent attorney that he had to fire?

Could his attorney have committed legal suicide?

[More_Cowbell]

13. Manafort gave up the right to any appeal when he made his deal nt

[AZ8theist]

15. Here are the redacted portions (in order):

1. discussed or may have discussed a Ukraine peace plan with Mr. Kilimnik on more than one occasion); id. at 6 (After being told that Mr. Kilimnik had traveled to Madrid on the same day that Mr. Manafort was in Madrid, Mr. Manafort “acknowledged” that he and Mr. Kilimnik met while they were both in Madrid)).
2. In fact, during a proffer meeting held with the Special Counsel on September 11, 2018, Mr. Manafort explained to the Government attorneys and investigators that he would have given the Ukrainian peace plan more thought, had the issue not been raised during the period he was engaged with work related to the presidential Case 1:17-cr-00201-ABJ Document 471 Filed 01/08/19 Page 5 of 10 6 campaign. Issues and communications related to Ukrainian political events simply were not at the forefront of Mr. Manafort’s mind during the period at issue and it is not surprising at all that Mr. Manafort was unable to recall specific details prior to having his recollection refreshed. The same is true with regard to the Government’s allegation that Mr. Manafort lied about sharing polling data with Mr. Kilimnik related to the 2016 presidential campaign. (See Doc. 460 at 6). (See, e.g., Doc. 460 at 5 (After being shown documents, Mr. Manafort “conceded” that he
3. The Government has indicated that Mr. Manafort’s statements about this payment are inconsistent with those of others, but the defense has not received any witness statements to support this contention.

4. The first alleged misstatement identified in the Special Counsel’s submission (regarding a text exchange on May 26, 2018) related to a text message from a third-party asking permission to use Mr. Manafort’s name as an introduction in the event the third-party met the President. This does not constitute outreach by Mr. Manafort to the President. The second example identified by the Special Counsel is hearsay purportedly offered by an undisclosed third party and the defense has not been provided with the statement (or any witness statements that form the basis for alleging intentional falsehoods).

[Bernardo de La Paz]

16. This is the biggest news of the day. Bigger than TV speeches or PM May's BrExit setback. . . . nt