With all the eye on former Donald Trump marketing campaign chairman Paul Manafort‘s prison case, it may be simple to neglect there’s a gag order on it. Manafort didn’t neglect although, and his authorized workforce continues to butt heads with Particular Counsel Robert Mueller‘s workplace over alleged leaks to the media.

A brand new submitting from prosecutors on Monday downplays and opposes Manafort’s demand for a listening to over the leaks as a result of the alleged leaks cited by the defendant don’t have anything to do with a grand jury investigation.

“The federal government attorneys and brokers concerned on this case perceive and respect their obligation to protect grand-jury secrecy as required by Rule 6(e) and to keep away from public disclosures that would jeopardize a defendant’s proper to a good trial,” they write, dismissing Manafort’s allegations as a “speculative declare of improper conduct” and saying pretrial listening to on alleged authorities leaks “would itself generate publicity on the very matter that Manafort finds prejudicial.”

Manafort is being prosecuted in connection to the defendant’s work with the Ukrainian authorities. Costs embody cash laundering and financial institution fraud, however whereas the case spun out of Mueller’s probe into Russian interference, the accusations towards the defendant don’t have anything to do with alleged collusion between the Trump marketing campaign and Moscow. Co-defendant Richard Gates has pleaded responsible. In actual fact, it’s media experiences previous the plea deal that Manafort cited in his April 30 demand for a listening to on the alleged leaks.

For instance, CNN caught wind of Gates’ pending plea deal. Manafort’s submitting argued that the “solely cheap inference” is that the background sources on this story have been authorities officers.

In Monday’s submitting, prosecutors dismissed the inference as “something however cheap.” From the submitting [citations eliminated]:

As an preliminary matter, neither of the 2 articles identifies its sources as a legislation enforcement or different authorities official. They as a substitute hyperlink the knowledge to “folks aware of the probe” (or “the case”), … a phrase that’s broad sufficient to incorporate people outdoors of the federal government. Additional, even when a reported refusal to remark is taken as facially legitimate, the cited CNN article states solely that three of Gates’s attorneys had “declined to remark,” at a time when Gates had 4 counsel of document and his illustration was in flux.

You possibly can learn the remainder of the submitting right here.

[Image via Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)]