What the Manafort indictment proves about Trump (and what it doesn't)
(CNN) On Monday morning   former Trump presidential campaign chairman Paul Manafort  was indicted on charges of money laundering and filing false foreign lobbying reports   among other counts.
The indictment  which was long expected  is the first example of charges filed by special counsel Bob Mueller  who is investigating Russia's attempted meddling in the 2016 election and whether any collusion occurred between the  Trump  campaign and the Russian government.
That  plus Manafort's lofty title and central role in  Trump 's campaign  makes it HUGE news. But  it's important to take a minute and detail what these charges against  Manafort  prove vis a vis  Trump's campaign  and what  they  don't.
Let's start with what the  Manafort  charges prove in regards Trump.
 Trump  hired  Manafort  in the spring of 2016 as  he  was working to beat back what was  at the time  seen as a likely delegate fight with Texas Sen. Ted Cruz at the Republican National Convention.
 Manafort  had two things that  Trump  needed: A knowledge of establishment Washington and a willingness to work for  Trump . (Lots and lots of establishment Washington types -- even back then -- wouldn't go within a country mile of  Trump 's campaign.)
 Manafort  also had long been someone with a demonstrated willingness to work for controversial/authoritarian foreign leaders and businessmen with questionable pasts -- most notably with his involvement in Ukraine  where he represented pro-Russian interests.
No one -- and I mean no one -- in political Washington didn't know that about  Manafort . Which leads to one of two conclusions about  Trump  (neither of which are a terribly good look):
1) He knew about  Manafort 's sketchy past and didn't care -- or thought it was not a big deal
2) He didn't know about  Manafort 's sketchy past.
I'm not sure which one reflects more poorly on  Trump . In the first scenario  he's willing to overlook what had to be doubts raised by his advisers about the issues of bringing  Manafort  on in such a senior role. In the second   Trump  simply didn't do the research necessary when hiring someone at such a senior level.
Either way  the Manafort indictment -- along with that of Rick Gates  a Manafort protege who served as liaison between even the  Trump  campaign and the Republican National Committee even after  Manafort  was fired in August 2016 -- raises real questions about  Trump 's judgment in regard to staffing at the highest levels of not just  his  campaign but the federal government.
 Trump  repeatedly made  his  judgment an issue during the campaign. "I'm going to surround myself only with the best and most serious people "  Trump  told the Washington Post during the 2016 race. "We want top of the line professionals."
That quote seems a million miles away from  Manafort 's indictment.
Now to what  Manafort 's indictment doesn't mean for  Trump .
Remember that  Trump  has been adamant -- as recently as Sunday on Twitter -- that there is no proof (and there will be no proof) of collusion between  his  campaign and the Russians. Manafort's indictment deals specifically with financial dealings -- money laundering etc. -- and therefore allows  Trump  to insist that what Manafort did is all about Manafort and nothing about  Trump  or the 2016 campaign.
(CNN) On Monday morning   former  [TGT]  presidential campaign chairman Paul Manafort  was indicted on charges of money laundering and filing false foreign lobbying reports   among other counts.
The indictment  which was long expected  is the first example of charges filed by special counsel Bob Mueller  who is investigating Russia's attempted meddling in the 2016 election and whether any collusion occurred between the  Trump  campaign and the Russian government.
That  plus Manafort's lofty title and central role in   [TGT] makes  [TGT]  HUGE news. But  it's important to take a minute and detail what these charges against  Manafort  prove vis a vis  Trump's campaign  and what  they  don't.
Let's start with what the  Manafort  charges prove in regards Trump.
  [TGT] hired  Manafort  in the spring of 2016 as   [TGT]   was working to beat back what was  at the time  seen as a likely delegate fight with Texas Sen. Ted Cruz at the Republican National Convention.
 Manafort  had two things that   [TGT] needed: A knowledge of establishment Washington and a willingness to work for  [TGT]  . (Lots and lots of establishment Washington types -- even back then -- wouldn't go within a country mile of  Trump 's campaign.)
 Manafort  also had long been someone with a demonstrated willingness to work for controversial/authoritarian foreign leaders and businessmen with questionable pasts -- most notably with his involvement in Ukraine  where he represented pro-Russian interests.
No one -- and I mean no one -- in political Washington didn't know that about  Manafort . Which leads to one of two conclusions about  [TGT] neither of which are a terribly good look):
1) He knew about  Manafort 's sketchy past and didn't care -- or thought it was not a big deal
2) He didn't know about  Manafort 's sketchy past.
I'm not sure which one reflects more poorly on  [TGT]  . In the first scenario  he's willing to overlook what had to be doubts raised by his advisers about the issues of bringing  Manafort  on in such a senior role. In  [TGT] simply didn't do the research necessary when hiring someone at such a senior level.
Either way  the Manafort indictment -- along with that of Rick Gates  a Manafort protege who served as liaison between even the   [TGT]   campaign and the Republican National Committee even after  Manafort  was fired in August 2016 -- raises real questions about   [TGT]  's judgment in regard to staffing at the highest levels of not just  his  campaign but the federal government.
  [TGT] repeatedly made   [TGT]   judgment an issue during the campaign. "I'm going to surround  [TGT]  only with the best and most serious people "   [TGT] told the Washington Post during the 2016 race. "We want top of the line professionals."
That quote seems a million miles away from  Manafort 's indictment.
Now to what  Manafort 's indictment doesn't mean for   [TGT] 
Remember that   [TGT] has been adamant -- as recently as Sunday on Twitter -- that there is no proof (and there will be no proof) of collusion between   [TGT]   campaign and the Russians. Manafort's indictment deals specifically with financial dealings -- money laundering etc. -- and therefore allows   [TGT]   to insist that what Manafort did is all about Manafort and nothing about   [TGT]   or the 2016 campaign.