Trumpublicons: Foreign Influence/Grifting in '16 US Election

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Trumpublicons: Foreign Influence/Grifting in '16 US Elec

Postby seemslikeadream » Fri Sep 28, 2018 7:46 am

Image

Big donor to Trump campaign made overture to top Russian official, boasting of connections

A Russian-born American businessman who gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to support Donald Trump's run for president in 2016 offered to brief a high-ranking Russian official during the final months of the campaign, according to a series of emails reviewed by NBC News.

The businessman, Simon Kukes, a Houston-based oil executive, sent an email to the official in Moscow in July 2016, boasting of his connections to the Trump campaign and requesting a face-to-face meeting.

“I have been actively involved in Trump’s election campaign, and am part of the group on strategy development,” Kukes wrote in the email to Vyacheslav Pavlovsky, vice president of the state-owned Russian Railways and a former Russian ambassador to Norway. “I will be in Switzerland July 20th till August 2nd. Let me know how you are doing, and whether you want to meet.”

Watch "On Assignment with Richard Engel" at 10 p.m. ET on Sunday on MSNBC.

The emails were obtained through the Dossier Center, a London-based investigative project funded by Russian opposition figure Mikhail Khodorkovsky. The Center gathers information to try to expose high-level corruption in Moscow. NBC News reviewed the emails in conjunction with The Guardian. They cannot be independently verified, but the account from which Kukes's messages originated is one that he currently uses.

Kukes, who donated $273,000 to the Trump Victory Committee during the 2016 cycle, later sent a photograph of himself posing with Rudy Giuliani, a close associate of the president, at what appears to be a fundraising event. “I was at a dinner with Donald Trump,” Kukes wrote. “I think his chances are very good.”

A second photograph, taken at a different event, pictured Kukes’ then-girlfriend (now his wife) standing between the candidate and his running mate Mike Pence.
Image
Image: Svetlana Stanovkina, Donald Trump, Mike Pence
Svetlana Stanovkina, Kukes's then girlfriend (and now his wife), flanked by the president and vice president, both candidates at the time, at a fundraiser on Sept. 29, 2016.The Dossier Center
Intelligence experts told NBC News that Kukes's communication with Pavlovsky invited questions about his involvement in the Trump campaign.

“To me this reads like an email exchange between a source and a handler, or a source and headquarters,” said Lindsay Moran, a former CIA officer, to whom NBC News showed the emails. Moran worked at the CIA for five years under the administrations of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, and later wrote a memoir highly critical of the agency.

Kukes told NBC News by email that he thought his donations would help him make contacts in Houston, but that he regrets having made them in light of the press coverage they generated. Pavlovsky did not respond to requests for comment.

Kukes is one of several Americans with deep ties to Russia who donated to Trump in 2016. Leonard Blavatnik, a Ukrainian-born billionaire, donated $1 million to the inauguration through his company Access Industries, a sprawling firm with interests in natural resources, chemicals, and media. New York businessman Andrew Intrater, who oversees the U.S. arm of the Russian mining and telecoms conglomerate Renova Group, donated $250,000 to the inauguration. Those gifts are now being investigated by special counsel Robert Mueller as part of his probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election, several people familiar with the investigation told NBC News.

Moran, the ex-CIA officer, described the donations as part of an “operation” to influence the election and the future administration. “The end goal,” she suggested, “was not only to get Trump elected but to get Trump elected and continue to be able to exert influence, if not control, through access...They’ve bought a ticket into the West Wing.”

Kukes, Blavatnik and Intrater have ties to each other through a Russian oil firm, TNK, which Kukes ran as president from 1998 until 2003. Blavatnik was a shareholder in the company; Intrater is the relative of another former TNK shareholder, Viktor Vekselberg, who was placed under U.S. sanctions in April, one of several oligarchs designated because of their “key role in advancing Russia’s malign activities.”

In one email Kukes tells Pavlovsky, “At a dinner with Trump I saw Blavatnik, we had a very friendly conversation.”

In response to written questions from NBC News, a spokesperson for Blavatnik wrote by email: “Len Blavatnik has been an American citizen for 35 years and in that time he has donated to both the Democratic and Republican parties, as well as to presidential candidates. His donations reflect his support for a pro-business agenda and have always been made directly, in line with regulations.”

A spokesman for Andrew Intrater’s firm told NBC News that his client’s donations had never been directed by other parties. He added that, although Intrater had met Kukes, they hadn’t seen each other for a decade and never did business together.

A spokesperson for the Trump campaign said that neither Kukes nor Blavatnik nor Intrater had a role in the campaign other than as a donor.

An RNC official confirmed that Kukes had attended some fundraising events, but added that all guests at fundraisers attended by the then-candidate underwent security service vetting.

A prominent figure in the Russian oil industry, Kukes was born in Moscow in 1946. He moved to Houston in 1977 and worked for two American oil companies. In 1982, he became an American citizen, before returning to Russia in 1996 to run several of the country’s largest oil firms — including Yukos, where he replaced Mikhail Khodorkovsky as CEO, after Khodorkovsky was arrested and jailed on charges that were widely seen as politically motivated.

“That tells me he was in favor with the Kremlin,” said Moran of Kukes’s selection to the Yukos role. “They’re not going to get rid of Khodorkovsky and then replace him with one of his cronies, they’re going replace him with someone who is acceptable to the Kremlin.”

By 2016, Kukes had returned to the United States, where he started giving large amounts to Trump Victory, a joint fundraising committee that distributed donations between the Trump campaign, the RNC, and state Republican parties. Kukes had never before donated to political groups, a search of publicly available campaign finance data showed.

The donations caught the attention of Robert Maguire, formerly with the Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan group tracking money in U.S. elections. “0.4% of the population gives a contribution more than $200,” Maguire said.

Donating large sums of money within set limits is legal for Americans “as long as it wasn’t orchestrated or done at the behest of a foreign power,” said Maguire.

On Nov. 9, the morning after Trump won the election, Pavlovsky emailed Kukes to congratulate him. “I have been meaning to call Andrei Fursenko,” Pavlovsky wrote, referring to aide to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“I don’t think we would see Fursenko’s name in these emails if he wasn’t part of the operation,” said Moran. “I do think it’s part of a network and part of a concerted effort to influence.”

“I think the Mueller investigation absolutely should be looking into this, and I would be surprised if they weren’t,” she added.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald ... ng-n913791

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018 ... -for-trump
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trumpublicons: Foreign Influence/Grifting in '16 US Elec

Postby seemslikeadream » Fri Sep 28, 2018 12:59 pm

House intel panel to release transcripts of now-defunct Russia probe

KYLE CHENEY09/28/2018 10:16 AM EDT

Devin Nunes
Republicans intend to release 53 transcripts of witness interviews in the now-defunct Russia investigation in bulk after an intelligence community review to screen for classified information. | AP Photo/Cliff Owen
The House Intelligence Committee voted Friday to publicly release transcripts of 53 witness interviews — amounting to thousands of pages — in the panel’s now-defunct Russia investigation.

The measure passed unanimously, though not until Republicans swatted down efforts by Democrats to release a handful of additional transcripts — including those of Reps. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) and Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.).

Republicans intend to release the transcripts in bulk after an intelligence community review to screen for classified information. Democrats sought to release many of the transcripts immediately, noting that the bulk of witnesses hold no security clearances and would not have discussed classified intelligence.

Democrats had sought the release of the transcripts months ago, and after they joined Republicans in supporting their release raised questions about whether the decision was made in coordination with the White House or President Donald Trump's legal team, a suggestion they said went unanswered by committee chairman Devin Nunes.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the top Democrat on the panel, noted that the decision to release the transcripts was announced shortly after Trump proposed declassifying key documents related to the ongoing special counsel investigation into his campaign's ties to Russian — an effort he has said would expose corruption in the Justice Department and FBI but that Democrats say is part of an effort to undermine special counsel Robert Mueller's work.

Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas) told POLITICO that the two lawmakers' transcripts weren't marked for release because of "speech-and-debate" issues inherent with lawmakers testifying. He also said Republicans intended to release all the transcripts at once so they couldn't be accused of selectively releasing information to push a particular narrative.

Democrats said additional efforts to release transcripts of intelligence community leaders — as well as of internal committee debates in which Republicans previously opposed releasing witness transcripts — were defeated as well.

Schiff said Democrats would also release transcripts of the interviews they conducted without Republicans present — including of Cambridge Analytica whistleblower Chris Wylie and Simona Mangiante Papadopoulos, whose husband George Papadopoulos, a former Trump campaign aide, pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI last year about his interactions with a Russia-linked professor.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/ ... obe-851355
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trumpublicons: Foreign Influence/Grifting in '16 US Elec

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Oct 01, 2018 7:12 am

DEVIN NUNES’S FAMILY FARM IS HIDING A POLITICALLY EXPLOSIVE SECRET
Rep. Devin Nunes is head of the House Intelligence Committee and one of President Trump’s biggest defenders. For years, he’s spun himself as a straight talker whose no-BS values are rooted in his family’s California dairy farm. So why did his parents and brother cover their tracks after quietly moving the farm to Iowa? Are they hiding something politically explosive? On the ground in Iowa, Esquire searched for the truth—and discovered a lot of paranoia and hypocrisy.
image
BY RYAN LIZZA
SEP 30, 2018
9.5K
Devin Nunes has a secret. Nunes is the California Republican and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee who has become famous in the Trump era for using his position as a battering ram to discredit the Russia investigation and protect Donald Trump at all costs, even if it means shredding his own reputation and the independence of the historically nonpartisan committee in the process.

Image
Ed Steed
First elected to Congress in 2002, Nunes wasn’t always like this. At one time he was known for his independent streak. When a new class of radical House Republicans pushed its leadership to shut down the government in 2013, Nunes attacked them as “lemmings with suicide vests.” In 2015, during another tumultuous period of House GOP infighting, I interviewed a broad cross section of the chamber’s Republican leadership, and Nunes stood out for comments he made about how his colleagues and constituents were siloed in right-wing echo chambers and increasingly reliant on this or that “conspiracy theory” rather than “something that is mostly true.” In hindsight, he was prescient about the direction of his party: A few years later, a bona fide conspiracy theorist, one who credited Alex Jones with his victory, was elected president.


Instead of continuing the fight, Nunes served on the president’s transition team and became Trump’s most important defender in Congress. He has used the Intelligence Committee to spin a baroque theory about alleged surveillance of the Trump campaign that began with a made-up Trump tweet about how “Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower.” Indeed, Nunes has worked closely with the White House to investigate the FBI rather than the FSB (the KGB’s successor), most famously by attempting to undermine the Russia investigation by releasing a partisan report—the so-called “Nunes memo”—that cherry-picked evidence to accuse the FBI of bias in its effort to obtain a warrant to monitor the communications of Carter Page, a Trump foreign-policy advisor.

Nunes has always been reliably conservative, but on some issues, he has broken with his party. He has long supported moderate immigration reform, for instance, including amnesty for many undocumented people living and working in the U. S. But as Trump has instituted a draconian policy of zero tolerance for all undocumented people and argued that every undocumented individual should be deported, Nunes has been silent. More recently, as Trump and the House Republicans have celebrated Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the agency’s aggressive tactics, Nunes has followed suit. On CaRepublican.com—a Nunes-created news site, which mimics the Drudge Report—he now regularly highlights articles attacking Democrats for being insufficiently supportive of ICE’s raids and deportations.

image
Devin Nunes (R-CA)
Getty Images
Which brings us back to Nunes’s secret.

Nunes grew up in a family of dairy farmers in Tulare, California, and as long as he has been in politics, his family dairy has been central to his identity and a feature of every major political profile written about him. A March story in National Review is emblematic. It describes how Nunes’s family emigrated from the Azores in Portugal to California’s Central Valley, “a fertile, sunny Eden,” and how the family “worked and saved enough money to buy a 640-acre farm outside Tulare.” The soil of the Central Valley is depicted as almost sacred in these articles. National Review quotes a 1912 Portuguese immigrant farmer who wrote that when he grabs a clump of dirt, “I feel as if I had just shaken hands with all my ancestors.” As recently as July 27, the lead of a Wall Street Journal editorial-page piece about Nunes, which featured a Tulare dateline, emphasized the dairy: “It’s 105 degrees as I stand with Rep. Devin Nunes on his family’s dairy farm.” Last year, Nunes noted in an interview with the Daily Beast—headline: “The Dairy Farmer Overseeing U. S. Spies and the Russia Hack Investigation”—“I’m pretty simple. I like agriculture.” The Daily Beast noted, “The cows are not far from his mind. He keeps in regular contact with his brother and father about their dairy farm.”

WHAT IS STRANGE IS THAT THE FAMILY HAS APPARENTLY TRIED TO CONCEAL THE MOVE FROM THE PUBLIC—FOR MORE THAN A DECADE.

So here’s the secret: The Nunes family dairy of political lore—the one where his brother and parents work—isn’t in California. It’s in Iowa. Devin; his brother, Anthony III; and his parents, Anthony Jr. and Toni Dian, sold their California farmland in 2006. Anthony Jr. and Toni Dian, who has also been the treasurer of every one of Devin’s campaigns since 2001, used their cash from the sale to buy a dairy eighteen hundred miles away in Sibley, a small town in northwest Iowa where they—as well as Anthony III, Devin’s only sibling, and his wife, Lori—have lived since 2007. Devin’s uncle Gerald still owns a dairy back in Tulare, which is presumably where The Wall Street Journal’s reporter talked to Devin, and Devin is an investor in a Napa Valley winery, Alpha Omega, but his immediate family’s farm—as well as his family—is long gone.

There’s nothing particularly strange about a congressman’s family moving. But what is strange is that the family has apparently tried to conceal the move from the public—for more than a decade. As far as I could tell, until late August, neither Nunes nor the local California press that covers him had ever publicly mentioned that his family dairy is no longer in Tulare.

Steve King (R-Iowa)
Getty Images
For example, in 2010 Nunes traveled to northwest Iowa to campaign for Steve King, the most anti-immigrant member of Congress, who now represents Nunes’s parents, brother, and sister-in-law in Sibley. It was an unusual place to find Devin Nunes, given that at the time he wasn’t known to be hostile to immigrants in the way that has made King, who has called illegal immigration a “slow-motion terrorist attack,” so infamous.

King’s office posted a press release online announcing that the town-hall event would be in Le Mars, a town fifty miles southwest of Sibley, and included some biographical information about Nunes, including this fact: “Congressman Nunes’ family has operated a dairy farm in Tulare County, California for three generations.” There was no mention that the Nunes family actually lived up the road in Sibley, where they operated a dairy. Strange.

In June 2009, an obscure dairy trade publication, Dairy Star, ran a profile of the Nunes family dairy in Sibley. The article documents how the Nunes family, “recent transplants to the Midwest,” emigrated from Portugal to California to Iowa and started NuStar Farms, which Anthony Jr. manages with his son and wife.

The article mentions numerous Nunes family members, including Uncle Gerald, who was still back in California, and baby Maci, “the first Nunes to be born outside of California or Portugal,” but there is one person missing from the article: Devin Nunes.

Why would the Nuneses, Steve King, and an obscure dairy publication all conspire to hide the fact that the congressman’s family sold its farm and moved to Iowa? I went to Sibley to find out. Things got a little strange.

The first thing I did when I landed in Iowa, on August 27, was call Jerry Nelson, the author of the Dairy Star article. I’d read through Nelson’s other online articles. He’s funny and smart and could easily be a columnist at a major newspaper. When he was thirty, he almost died in a bizarre manure-pit accident, and he told me that since then he’s lived every day like it’s a blessing.

He was upfront and clear about why Representative Nunes wasn’t included in the Dairy Star profile of the Nunes family and the move to Iowa: The family asked him not to mention Devin. “They said, ‘Our brother’s involved in politics and we’re not going to talk about it and that’s that,’ ” Nelson told me. “And I said, ‘Okay, we’re here to talk about dairy farms.’ ”

Sibley, Iowa, is in the far north of the state, twenty minutes from the Minnesota border. It has twenty-six hundred people and feels smaller. The biggest attractions in town are a well-groomed golf course and a high-end coffee shop, the Lantern, which was named the best in Iowa by the Food Network. I stopped in at the Lantern, a big exposed-brick space with fancy espresso equipment, to meet with Joshua Harms, a web developer and local troublemaker who became a First Amendment cause célèbre this year after the town threatened to sue him if he didn’t take down his website, shouldyoumovetosibleyia.com, which documented a foul smell emanating from one of Sibley’s major businesses, a pig-blood processing plant. The ACLU championed Harms’s case and sued Sibley. The town quickly folded, wrote Harms an apology, and agreed to train its staff and lawyers in First Amendment law. The case made international headlines and embarrassed Sibley.

Image
.
Harms is a Bernie Sanders supporter, which makes him an outlier in the town. Sibley is the seat of Osceola County, which voted 79 percent to 17 percent for Trump over Clinton, making it one of the most pro-Trump bastions in America. Steve King won the county in 2016 with a similar margin. The locals “tend to be very conservative, and of course they all are Trump backers,” said Nelson. Art Cullen, a Pulitzer prize–winning journalist at the nearby Storm Lake Times, told me that much of the population is “Dutch Reform and very religious.” So I was only a little surprised when the owner of the coffee shop, Brenda Hoyer, asked, “Are you a believer?” as she came over to take my order. I muttered something about growing up Catholic and ordered an iced tea.

Hoyer’s extended family, including grandkids, were milling around the shop. The place had a welcoming family vibe and more diversity than you might expect. I noticed several Hispanic women eating pastries and speaking Spanish at a nearby table. Sibley is actually 8 percent Hispanic, and that growing population largely provides the labor for the area’s meatpacking, poultry, and dairy industries. Immigrants are essential to Iowa, which has an estimated forty thousand undocumented residents, mostly Hispanics, according to a 2014 report from the Pew Research Center. I was visiting the state just days after police found the body of Mollie Tibbetts, who was allegedly killed by an undocumented worker from a dairy farm, and everyone was talking about immigration. In a speech, Trump had used Tibbetts’s murder as a cudgel to bash “Democrat immigration policies” that he said were “spilling very innocent blood.”

Hoyer and I talked about Trump. She admitted she wasn’t crazy about the tweets and his messy personal life. She liked Mike Pence and noted “it would be a good deal” if Trump were impeached and replaced by Pence. When I told her I was working on a story about dairy farms, her ears perked up. She and her husband, Gene, were dairy farmers and had recently sold their business. “You should talk to Gene,” she said. When I mentioned Trump’s immigration policy, she was quick to add, “Well, we don’t agree with him on that!”

Then she told me something that knocked the wind out of me: “My son recently took his life.” It came out of nowhere, and I barely knew how to respond. His name was Bailey. He was seventeen and he had died thirteen days ago. This was the first day the coffee shop had been open since his death. I noticed a Bible verse in chalk behind the counter: “Do not fear for I have redeemed you. I have summoned you by name. You are mine.” The Lantern, I later learned, was actually a ministry that, according to its website, provides “a safe place where everyone is welcome.” I liked it there and decided to make it my office while I was in Sibley.

Jerry Johnson, Sibley’s mayor, walked in. He was wearing golf attire, and whatever ill will existed between him and Harms over what Harms called “the blood plant” seemed to have faded. Perhaps because of the town’s troubles with First Amendment law, Johnson was especially gracious to me. I explained why I was in Sibley, and he immediately suggested that I stop by Anthony Nunes Jr.’s house to interview him. When the subject turned to Trump’s zero-
tolerance policy on immigration, the mayor replied with what was already becoming a familiar refrain: “I don’t agree with him on that!”

image
Getty Images
The Nunes family dairy, NuStar Farms LLC, sits on forty-three acres surrounded by corn on the southern outskirts of Sibley, off Highway 60, a main route between Sioux City and Minneapolis. According to Dairy Star, they have about two thousand Jersey cows. A source told me that NuStar sells almost all of its milk to Wells, an ice cream company in Le Mars, which makes the Blue Bunny brand. The NuStar cows are housed in two seven-hundred-foot, white aluminum barns that are the most prominent feature of the farm. The western sides of the barns are outfitted with dozens of steel ventilation fans that look like rocket engines from a distance, almost as if a pair of space-shuttle boosters had dropped in the middle of a cornfield. I visited during silage season, when dairymen are out cutting corn to make winter feed for their cows. It had just rained, and the smell of fresh silage, like an intense version of freshly cut grass, filled my car as it rumbled down a dirt road to Nu­Star. As I approached the dairy, a white Yukon SUV exited from NuStar’s muddy parking lot and passed me. I saw Anthony Nunes Jr. in the cab of a tanker truck. Instead of bothering him at work, I decided to take the mayor’s advice and visit him at home the next day

It didn’t go well.

I found the Nunes home on the far north edge of town, where the leafy neighborhood bumps up against the surrounding farmland. In the driveway was another white Yukon—the fancier Denali version. Anthony Jr. was pulling out of the driveway in a farm truck. I waved at him, and he abruptly stopped the truck in the street and walked over to my car. He was wearing jeans and a work shirt. I told him my name and asked him if I could talk to him for an article about his dairy. “I’m taking your license plate down and reporting you to the sheriff,” he said. “I don’t want to be bothered.” I asked him again if I could interview him and he repeated himself, but this time a lot louder. “I don’t want to be bothered anymore.” As he walked to his truck, he looked back and warned me: “If I see you again, I’m gonna get upset.” Apparently Sibley’s First Amendment training hadn’t filtered down to all its residents.

Other dairy farmers in the area helped me understand why the Nunes family might be so secretive about the farm: Midwestern dairies tend to run on undocumented labor. The northwest-Iowa dairy community is small. Most of the farmers know one another, and most belong to a regional trade group called the Western Iowa Dairy Alliance (though WIDA told me NuStar is not a member). One dairy farmer said that the threat of raids from ICE is so acute that WIDA members have discussed forming a NATO-like pact that would treat a raid on one dairy as a raid on all of them. The other pact members would provide labor to the raided dairy until it got back on its feet.

image
Getty Images
In every conversation I had with dairy farmers and industry insiders in northwest Iowa, it was taken as a fact that the local dairies are wholly dependent on undocumented labor. The low unemployment rate (it’s 2 percent in Osceola County), the low profit margins in the dairy business, and the global glut of milk that keeps prices low make hiring outside of the readily available pool of immigrants from Mexico and Guatemala unthinkable.

“Eighty percent of the Latino population out here in northwest Iowa is undocumented,” estimated one dairy farmer in the area who knows the Nunes family and often sees them while buying hay in nearby Rock Valley. “It would be great if we had enough unemployed Americans in northwest Iowa to milk the cows. But there’s just not. We have a very tight labor pool around here.” This person said the system was broken, leaving dairy farmers no choice. “I would love it if all my guys could be legal.”

The farmer explained that all the dairies require their workers to provide evidence of their legal status and pay the required state and federal taxes. But it’s an open secret that the system is built on easily obtained fraudulent documents. “I just look at the document—Hey, this looks like a good driver’s license, permanent resident card, whatever the case is—and that’s what you go with,” the farmer said. A second northwest-Iowa dairy farmer who knows the Nunes family told me, “They show you a Social Security card, we take out Social Security taxes. Where’d they get the card? I have no idea.” I asked what the chances are that a farm the size of NuStar uses only fully legal dairy workers. “It’s next to impossible,” the first dairy farmer said. “There’s no dang way.” This was speculation, but here is the logic that informed it: Most workers start at fourteen or fifteen dollars an hour, the first farmer said. If dairies had to use legal labor, they would likely have to raise that to eighteen or twenty dollars, and many dairies wouldn’t survive. “People are going to go broke,” the farmer said. The story was similar in the poultry, meatpacking, and other agricultural industries in the area.

What this person was describing was hard to wrap my head around. In the heart of Steve King’s district, a place that is more pro-Trump than almost any other patch of America, the economy is powered by workers that King and Trump have threatened to arrest and deport. I checked Anthony Nunes Jr.’s campaign-­donor history. The only federal candidate he has ever donated to, besides his son, is Steve King ($250 in 2012). He also gives to the local Republican party of Osceola County, which, records show, transfers money into King’s congressional campaigns.

“I’VE TALKED TO STEVE KING FACE-TO-FACE, AND THAT GUY DOESN’T CARE ONE IOTA ABOUT US. HE DOES NOT CARE."
The absurdity of this situation—funding and voting for politicians whose core promise is to implement immigration policies that would destroy their livelihoods—has led some of the Republican-­supporting dairymen to rethink their political priorities. “Everyone’s got this feeling that in agriculture, we, the employers, are going to be criminalized,” the first area dairy farmer I had spoken to said. “I’ve talked to Steve King face-to-face, and that guy doesn’t care one iota about us. He does not care. He believes that if you have one undocumented worker on your place, you should probably go to prison and we need to get as many undocumented people out of here as possible.” (A spokesman for King did not respond to multiple interview requests.) The second dairy farmer, speaking of Trump’s and King’s views on undocumented immigrants, added, “They want to send ’em all back to Mexico and have them start over. What a crock of malarkey. Who’s gonna milk the cows?”

After my encounter with Anthony Jr., I met Jerry Nelson, the Dairy Star reporter, down at the Lantern. He wasn’t surprised by the hostil­ity. Think about the story from the family’s perspective, he told me: “They are immigrants and Devin is a very strong supporter of Mr. Trump, and Mr. Trump wants to shut down all of the immigration, and here is his family benefiting from immigrant labor,” documented or not.

Brenda Hoyer came by and said hello. I told her that I hoped it was okay to use her coffee shop for interviews. “Sure,” she said, “if you’re kind and truthful and honest.”

I asked Nelson what would happen, hypothetically, if ICE raided every dairy farm in the area tomorrow. “It would be a disaster for the dairies,” he said. “They would suddenly have nobody to milk or feed the cows. I don’t know what they would do.” The bell on the Lantern’s front door rang, and Hoyer huddled in the corner with a chubby man with dark, curly hair. After a few minutes, she came back over.

Image
Getty Images
“You have a phone call,” she told Nelson.

“A phone call?” he asked. It made no sense. Anybody who knew where he was would call his cell. She asked him to come with her. A few minutes later, he returned in a panic and gathered his belongings. “We gotta go!” he told me.

On the way out I talked to Hoyer. Her demeanor had changed. I asked if I could still talk to Gene, her husband. She said it was no longer possible. I had to leave the coffee shop, she told me. “This article,” she said, “is going to destroy families.” As I walked out, I noticed the mysterious chubby man eyeing me.

Nelson was freaked out. There was no phone call, of course. The mysterious chubby man had asked Hoyer to have us ejected. According to Nelson, she had told him that an article about dairies and immigration would “destroy our lives out here.” It was an incredibly sensitive subject. “It’s kind of a third rail among dairy farmers,” Nelson said. “Whenever I go to a dairy farm, I never ask about the immigrant-labor thing unless they bring it up themselves.”

Later Nelson left me a voice mail in which he tried to explain the reaction. “Dairy farmers are very deeply patriotic and American, and yet here they are hiring these people who are not American,” he said. “And maybe they feel a little shame over that or feel like they are exploiting [people] and they don’t want that to come to light.”

Mayor Johnson was concerned about the run-in with Anthony Jr. He had suggested that I knock on the man’s door, and now he felt like the awkward encounter was his fault. He said he’d once had his own strange experience. A few years ago, the mayor reported one of Anthony Jr.’s workers, who was Hispanic, to the sheriff’s office because Johnson believed the worker’s yard was so messy it constituted a violation of the city property code. According to Johnson, Anthony Jr. called the sheriff on the worker’s behalf and insisted that the only reason anyone had complained was that they were prejudiced. (Several people I talked to in Sibley assumed Anthony Jr. himself is Mexican, not Portuguese, and he has no doubt experienced discrimination himself.)

The mayor, though, was impressively enlightened when it came to Sibley’s immigrant population. Perhaps because of the Nunes debacle, he invited me to his office to talk to him and the city administrator, Glenn Anderson. “I told him to go see Nunes, and that didn’t go very good,” he told Anderson as we sat down.

Anderson voted for Trump, but he exploded every Trump myth about immigration. The rise in Sibley’s Hispanic population hasn’t been accompanied by a rise in crime. Most of the crime in Sibley is connected to drug-related traffic stops on Highway 60, he said. Kevin Wollmuth, a deputy in the county sheriff’s office, told me that the rise in immigration “doesn’t have any bearing on our crime rate at all.” Worried that the community is underrepresented in city government, Anderson has tried to get the Hispanic population to run for city council, though without much success yet. He had no interest in knowing what anyone’s immigration status was. “If I see something, I’m not going to report it to ICE,” he said. “It’s not my job.” He added, “That’s not to say that everybody in town that lives here is legal. We don’t go knocking door-to-door to say, ‘Are you, are you not?’ ” He had much the same view of the local immigrant population as Rob Tibbetts, Mollie’s father, who two days before had said at a memorial service for his daughter, “The Hispanic community are Iowans. They have the same values as Iowans. As far as I’m concerned, they’re Iowans with better food.”

Sibley is emblematic of a lot of small towns in Iowa that are dependent on an agricultural economy: They know they cannot survive without immigrants, and they have worked hard to integrate the foreign-born population, despite the legal limbo faced by employers and employees alike. When I asked what would happen if ICE turned its attention to Sibley, the mayor shuddered. Anderson noted that he has never seen an ICE agent in the four years he’s been at his job. He didn’t seem eager to get to know any. “If they come in town, then we have to talk about it, find out what’s going on, why, whether to participate, and make sure our town’s not disrupted,” he said. I asked him what he thought of King’s view that all undocumented immigrants should be deported. He paused and said, diplomatically, “He has a right to his opinion.”

image
Getty Images
When I walked in the front door of the mayor’s office, I had noticed a mud-spattered white Yukon parked outside. As I was driving to my next interview, I looked in the rearview mirror and noticed the white Yukon again. I drove aimlessly, crisscrossing streets from one end of town to the other. Everywhere I turned, the white Yukon appeared. I was being followed. When I turned the tables and followed the car back, it raced off. We played cat and mouse like that for more than an hour until I finally got a good glimpse of the driver: It was a middle-aged woman with curly, red hair who had a cell phone stuck to her left ear. The cat-and-mouse game started to feel a little dangerous, so I left town for a couple hours. On my way back into Sibley, the same car passed me on the highway. This time, the chubby man from the Lantern was driving. He smiled and waved.

Or maybe I’d made a mistake. White SUVs are common. Could I really be sure that was the same guy and the same Yukon? A woman was driving the car earlier; now it was a man. It didn’t make sense. Maybe I was just being paranoid.

I had a particularly sensitive interview that afternoon with a source who I knew would be taking a risk by talking to me about immigration and labor at NuStar. When I arrived, we talked for a few minutes before the source’s cell phone suddenly rang. The conversation seemed strained. “Sí, aquí está,” the source said. I learned that on the other end of the phone was a man named Flavio, who worked at NuStar. Somehow Flavio knew exactly where I was and whom I was talking to. He warned my source to end the conversation. Not only was I being followed, but I was also being watched, and my sources were being contacted by NuStar.

I left and drove to the local grocery store, where I parked in the open, hoping to draw out whoever was tailing me. I suddenly noticed a man in jeans, a work shirt, and a baseball cap pulled down low. He was talking on his cell phone and walking suspiciously. Was he watching me? I held up a camera to take pictures and he darted away. I followed. His car was parked haphazardly on the side of the road half a block away. He got in and took off while I followed. It was a dark Chevrolet Colorado pickup truck—with California license plates. I ran the license-plate number through a database. The car was registered in Tulare, California.


On December 13, 2011, ICE agents raided the home, business, and farms belonging to Mike Millenkamp, a dairy farmer in eastern Iowa. It was the beginning of a seven-year ordeal that would upend Millenkamp’s life. At the time of the raid, he had just four employees. Three of them were undocumented. ICE hauled away his business records, arrested his employees, and launched an aggressive investigation. After sifting through his files, the government said that about three quarters of the thirty-eight workers he had employed over a four-year period were undocumented. Millenkamp pleaded guilty to “illegal alien harboring” and agreed to pay $250,000 in fines and penalties. Despite a relatively clean record, he was sentenced to three months in federal prison and three years of supervised probation, which just ended this past summer.

Prosecutors used Millenkamp to send a warning to other Iowa dairy farmers. As part of his plea deal, they forced him to submit an op-ed to major Iowa newspapers describing his experience. His article, which was preapproved by the local U. S. attorney’s office, appeared in The Des Moines Register on June 29, 2016. “If you employ someone you know is not legal, you are committing a federal crime,” he wrote.

The Millenkamp prosecution seemed unjust—capricious. And it helped explain the reaction I received in Sibley. “That’s why they are so concerned,” Nelson told me when I mentioned that I was being followed and that my sources were being harassed. “They think you are going to mess with their lifestyle or take it away, interfere with it.”

Image
Getty Images
He and I discussed the ethics of reporting on immigration and politics. What if an article triggered an ICE raid? Was there even a story here, anyway? Devin Nunes was the public figure at the heart of this, and he had no financial interest in his parents’ Iowa dairy operation. On the other hand, he and his parents seemed to have concealed basic facts about the family’s move to Iowa. It was suspicious. And his mom, who co-owns the Sibley dairy, is also the treasurer of his campaign. In 2007, Devin and his wife, Elizabeth, used the NuStar dairy’s Iowa post-office-box address on a filing with the SEC regarding a financial holding company the family co-owns, even though Devin and Elizabeth live in California.

And even without the connection to Devin, who is one of Trump’s most important allies, there was a bigger story. The American dairy industry is at the center of an international trade war. Trump frequently attacks Canada for protecting its dairy farmers. “We love Canada,” Trump said on September 18. “They cannot continue to charge us 300 percent for dairy products.” At a hearing on the issue in March, Nunes attacked Canada for “getting away with murder in their dairy industry.” Canadian officials have responded by noting that the American dairy industry is artificially protected by both federal subsidies—NuStar, according to figures based on USDA numbers, has received $140,938 since it started—and its reliance on low-wage, undocumented labor. “The industry itself in the United States has admitted they wouldn’t be viable if they couldn’t use undocumented workers,” a former Canadian trade minister, Ed Fast, recently complained to the country’s Financial Post. The same could be said for much of the broader American agricultural industry—from poultry to meatpacking to grape-picking to cotton—which represents 6 percent of the U. S. economy.

There is massive political hypocrisy at the center of this: Trump’s and King’s rural-farm supporters embrace anti-immigrant politicians while employing undocumented immigrants. The greatest threat to Iowa dairy farmers, of course, is not the press. It’s Donald Trump.

But that’s not how the Nunes family apparently saw it. On my third day in Sibley, I became used to the cars tailing me. In the morning, I was followed by the redhead in the muddy white Yukon. In the afternoon, there was a shift change and I was followed by a different, later-model white Yukon. I stuck a GoPro on my dashboard and left it running whenever I parked my car. When I reviewed the videos, one of the two Yukons could always be seen slowly circling as I ate lunch or interviewed someone.

There was no doubt about why I was being followed. According to two sources with firsthand knowledge, NuStar did indeed rely, at least in part, on undocumented labor. One source, who was deeply connected in the local Hispanic community, had personally sent undocumented workers to Anthony Nunes Jr.’s farm for jobs. “I’ve been there and bring illegal people,” the source said, asserting that the farm was aware of their status. “People come here and ask for work, so I send them over there.” When I asked how many people working at dairies in the area are documented citizens, the source laughed. “To be honest? None. One percent, maybe.”

The source added, “Who is going to go work in the dairy? Who? Tell me who? If people have papers, they are going to go to a good company where you can get benefits, you can get Social Security, you can get all the stuff. Who is going to go [work in the dairy] to make fourteen dollars an hour doing that thing without vacation time, without 401(k), without everything?”

“IN THE HEART OF STEVE KING’S DISTRICT, A PLACE THAT IS MORE PRO-TRUMP THAN ALMOST ANY OTHER PATCH OF AMERICA, THE ECONOMY IS POWERED BY WORKERS THAT KING AND TRUMP HAVE THREATENED TO ARREST AND DEPORT.”

A second source, who claimed to be an undocumented immigrant, also claimed to have worked at NuStar for several years, only recently leaving the dairy, which this source estimated employed about fifteen people. (As a rule of thumb, dairies need one employee for every eighty to one hundred cows, so fifteen workers would be a lean operation given the dairy’s two-thousand-head herd.) The former NuStar employee, who is middle-aged, claimed to have arrived in the United States from Guatemala in 2011. This source was nervous to talk to me and did not want to speculate about the immigration status of fellow employees. “I worked for Anthony for four years,” the source said, speaking in Spanish through a translator. “First milking cows and after that feeding the baby calves.” It was “very hard work,” but the employee and others were “treated well.”

A third source, who claimed to work at a nearby dairy, not NuStar, explained what the local dairy jobs are like. This source claimed to be eighteen years old and to have come from Guatemala two years ago, after paying smugglers $10,000, raised by extended family, to provide transit through Mexico and across the U. S. border. The source said the pay at the dairy was fourteen dollars an hour for milking cows twelve hours a day, six days a week, which, after taxes—the source had provided the dairy with a fake Social Security number—worked out to about $1,600 every two weeks. When I asked how many dairy workers in the area are undocumented, the source replied, “Todos”—everybody.

When I left the interview with the third source, I got in my car and reviewed the GoPro footage. The car had been circled by the newer white Yukon the entire time I was gone. I decided I needed to get out of Sibley for a while and get some advice about how to tell this story ethically. So I drove to Worthington, Minnesota, to meet a priest.

Worthington is just over the border, less than thirty minutes away. I found Father Jim Callahan at his kitchen table, wearing a Hawaiian shirt and chain-smoking Winstons. Worthington, which is five times the size of Sibley, is a hub for Hispanic immigrants in the Midwest. The influence is unmistakable as you drive down the main street, which is dominated by stores and restaurants that cater to the Hispanic population. More than 70 percent of the students in the local elementary school speak Spanish as their first language. Callahan, whose church, St. Mary’s, conducts Mass in both English and Spanish, estimates that 90 percent of the Hispanic population in the city is undocumented.

Trump’s election was a seismic event here. “Absolute fear” is how Callahan described the postelection atmosphere. “Some people were saying they’re going back. Then we saw spikes in domestic abuse, alcoholism, drug addiction.” In December 2016, he declared St. Mary’s a sanctuary church, which means it shelters undocumented immigrants and protects them from arrest and deportation. “ICE has been active,” he said. “They’re in town two or three times a week.” He added, “But they haven’t targeted farms as such yet.”

I laid out the facts I had uncovered in Sibley, including the intimidation of sources and the Devin Nunes angle, and asked him for advice. “I’d tell that story,” he said. He paused and added, “We’re a sanctuary church, if you need a place to stay. You’re safe here!”

image
Getty Images
On the way back to Sibley, I stopped at Hawkeye Point, the highest elevation (1,670 feet) in Iowa, and flipped through my GoPro videos and pictures, zooming in on the drivers and cars. I clicked over to Facebook and searched for any Nuneses in Sibley, Iowa. I saw some familiar faces. It all started to click. There was the redheaded woman from the muddy white Yukon; she was Devin’s sister-in-law, Lori Nunes. There was the chubby guy with curly hair from the Lantern who had also waved at me from the same Yukon; he was Devin’s brother and Lori’s husband, Anthony Nunes III. There was the woman from the newer Yukon. I zoomed in on a picture of the car’s license plate: nustar. Not very subtle. The driver was Devin’s mother and campaign treasurer, Toni Dian Nunes. The guy in the pickup truck with California plates was, of course, Devin’s dad, Anthony Jr.

I learned that Anthony Jr. was seemingly starting to panic. The next day, the 2009 Dairy Star article about NuStar, the one that made me think the Nuneses were hiding something and that had led me to Sibley in the first place, was removed from the Dairy Star’s website. Anthony Jr., I was told, had called the newspaper and demanded that the editors take the nine-year-old story down. They relented. The article wasn’t captured by the Internet Archive, which provides cached versions of billions of web pages, and it can no longer be found anywhere online. According to someone who talked to him that day, Anthony Jr. allegedly said that he was hiring a lawyer and that he was convinced that his dairy would soon be raided by ICE. (Is it possible the Nuneses have nothing to be seriously concerned about? Of course, but I never got the chance to ask because Anthony Jr. and Representative Nunes did not respond to numerous requests for interviews.)

“I DROVE AIMLESSLY, CRISSCROSSING STREETS FROM ONE END OF TOWN TO THE OTHER. EVERYWHERE I TURNED, THE WHITE YUKON APPEARED. I WAS BEING FOLLOWED.”
I hope ICE stays the hell away from Sibley. The immigration system that powers Iowa’s dairies is undoubtedly broken. The dairy owners live with the ever-present fear of becoming the next Mike Millenkamp. The undocumented workers live in the shadows and, especially in the era of Trump and zero tolerance, constantly fear arrest and deportation. Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress, including Devin Nunes (per his CaRepublican website), have decided that unwavering support for ICE is crucial to their efforts to attack Democrats and help the GOP keep control of the House of Representatives after the midterm elections. Naturally, the prospect of passing legislation that would create a guest-worker program for dairy workers who are undocumented—an idea overwhelmingly supported by the industry—is a fantasy in the current environment; Trump, King, and their allies describe such policies as “amnesty.” The Washington debate is completely detached from what is actually going on in places like Sibley.

The relationship between the Iowa dairy farmers and their undocumented employees is indeed fraught. I cringed at the way some of the dairy farmers talked about their “help.” When I asked one dairy farmer, who admitted many of the farm’s workers are undocumented but who also inexplicably claimed to be “very supportive of Trump” and “kind of in favor of his immigration laws,” what a solution would be, this farmer suggested a guest-worker program but compared the workers to farm animals. “It’s kind of like when you bought cattle out of South Dakota, or anyplace, you always had to have the brand inspected and you had to have the brand sheet when you hauled them across the state line,” the farmer said. “Well, what’s the difference? Why don’t they have to report to the city hall or county office and say we’re here working and everybody knows where they’re at?”

As bad as this paternalistic and exploitative system can be, Nelson and the dairy farmers insisted that most dairies are family-owned and -operated and that the workers, documented or not, often become part of the family. This somewhat clichéd view can be overblown and sometimes used to defend an unfair system, but the sentiment helped me understand Brenda Hoyer’s chilling warning to me at the Lantern. During her son’s wake, four Hispanic employees from their former dairy came to express their condolences. They had worked there so long that their children refer to her husband, Gene, as Grandpa.
https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a ... alifornia/
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trumpublicons: Foreign Influence/Grifting in '16 US Elec

Postby seemslikeadream » Thu Oct 04, 2018 7:33 am

Erik Prince’s Russian Connection Trawled Trumpland for ‘Boss’ Putin - days after the 2016 election, Moscow exec & RDIF head Kirill Dmitriev started pitching Trump associates on a bold plan for renewed US-Russian cooperation


Erik Prince’s Russian Connection Trawled Trumpland for ‘Boss’ Putin

In the days after the 2016 election, a well-connected Moscow executive started pitching Trump associates on a bold plan for renewed U.S.-Russian cooperation.

10.03.18 9:01 PM ET
That now-infamous meeting in the Seychelles with Trumpworld associate Erik Prince was a single strand of a broader campaign. In the days before Donald Trump’s inauguration, an ally of Vladimir Putin’s reached out to at least three additional individuals in close contact with the Trump transition team, according to materials reviewed by The Daily Beast.

“We want to start rebuilding the relationship in whatever is a comfortable pace for them. We understand all of the sensitivities and are not in a rush,” according to a November 9, 2016 communication from Kirill Dmitriev, the head of one of Russia’s sovereign wealth funds. That communication was sent to George Nader, the Lebanese-American businessman who helped broker the meeting between Dmitriev and Prince in the Seychelles, and forwarded on to third parties. Nader is cooperating with Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe of foreign influence in the American political system.

“I am at their disposal to discuss things anytime as I think that we can be helpful in guiding this relationship understanding each of the sides well,” Dmitriev’s communication continued. “My boss sends his warmest greetings and I will see him again early next week.” Dmitriev and Russian president Vladimir Putin both attended a financial summit in Lima, Peru the following week.

It’s unclear from communications reviewed by The Daily Beast if Dmitriev was representing himself as the CEO of the RDIF. RDIF in past statements to The Daily Beast has categorically denied that the fund is influenced by the Kremlin or President Putin. International businessmen, too, told The Daily Beast that they view the fund as a purely financial institution that has gained notoriety for successful investment deals.

On January 11, 2017, Dmitriev held his meeting on the Indian Ocean archipelago with Prince, the former head of Blackwater. Shortly afterwards, he distributed a memo to various Trumpworld figures proposing that Washington partner with Moscow on a number of military, energy, and financial projects. The memo, revealed exclusively by The Daily Beast last week, was characterized as a readout of the Seychelles confab. In a statement, a representative for Dmitriev denied the existence of a memo or read-out related to conversations that took place in the Seychelles.

Sent from the 2017 World Economic Forum in Davos, the memo appears to be one of the earliest reported documents that set out a blueprint for how to improve U.S.-Russia relations under a Trump presidency.

The memo was distributed to individuals who represented themselves as having the ability to get the document into the hands of President Trump’s senior aides, according to materials viewed by The Daily Beast. The memo circulated just days before President Trump’s inauguration at a time when his team was actively forming plans on how to improve relations with Russia, including easing sanctions against the country. Dmitriev’s fund, the Russian Direct Investment Fund, was and still is under U.S. sanctions, though it is legal to conduct business with the entity under certain circumstances. It is also legal to meet with its leaders.

Dmitriev was one of more than a dozen Russians that reached out to the Trump team during the transition period. Many of those individuals have come under scrutiny by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who is investigating foreign interference in the American political system. Dmitriev, who heads arguably one of the most powerful entities in Russia, has flown under the radar despite his repeated communications with individuals that met several times with Trump’s main advisors, according to materials reviewed by The Daily Beast.

“We believe that the ultimate goal of these reports is to attack and smear those persons who are making an effort to improve relations between Russia and the United States,” a spokesperson for RDIF said in a written statement to The Daily Beast. “RDIF firmly believes that restoration of good relations is in the interests of both Russia and the U.S.”

“I think that we can be helpful in guiding this relationship understanding each of the sides well . My boss sends his warmest greetings and I will see him again early next week.”

— Kirill Dmitriev

During the past two years, Dmitriev has emerged as an influential player in working to broker better relations between the U.S. and Russia. Dmitriev worked not only to promote trade between the two countries—a topic he often speaks about on television—but also to normalize diplomacy between Washington and Moscow, according to materials reviewed by The Daily Beast and interviews with those who know him professionally.

“Dmitriev is a very westernized guy who is the face of Russia, at least of Russian business, at conventions and forums all over the world,” according to one individual who spoke on a panel with Dmitriev at Davos in 2017 and is connected to investment leaders across the globe. “Everyone views him as a really influential person with a lot of political connections.”

Although the U.S. has continued to sanction Russian oligarchs and individuals close to Putin since Trump’s election in 2016, the U.S. and Russian business communities have done their best to carry on as usual.

“The business relationship is better than it might seem,” said Alexis Rodzianko, the CEO of the American Chamber of Commerce in Moscow, an organization that advocates for U.S. business in Russia. “The sanctions have so far been a problem like weighing things down and slowing people’s decisions. Both investors and U.S. companies are thinking twice or ten times about in investing in Russia. That said, businesses are doing relatively well.”

Sectoral sanctions—part of the sanctions passed in 2014—do not rule out business cooperation between the U.S. and Russia altogether. And Dmitriev over the years has latched on to that reality, promoting increased trade between the two countries on countless television shows across the world.

“These restrictions do not preclude from co-investing with us, do not preclude from meeting with us,” Dmitriev said in a recent CNBC interview. “We will continue to work with top investors from all over the world. None of this is restricted activity.”

Part of Dmitriev’s power, those who have worked with him said, comes from his reputation in the both the political and financial realms in Russia. Three people who either know Dmitriev or have worked with him say he has been in close contact with President Vladimir Putin. In fact, Dmitriev, the CEO of RDIF, at times refers to Putin as his “boss,” according to communications reviewed by The Daily Beast. By Russian law, Putin appoints the CEO and the supervisory board of RDIF. Dmitriev met publicly with Putin several times throughout 2017 and 2018.

“Dmitriev is a very mild guy--a calming influence. He is very much a bureaucratic player in Russia and is good in his role.” Rodzianko said. “RDIF is the Russian doorfront for investment. If you look at their supervisory board its a who's who of the Russian government. If you open their website there are pictures—the faces of those who run the country.”

Despite his high-profile position as the head of one an investment fund sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury, Dmitriev has evaded any sort of official public scrutiny, at least until reporters revealed he had met with Prince in the Seychelles in an apparent effort to set up a backchannel between Trump and Vladimir Putin.

“Prince testified in front of Congress that the meeting was a chance encounter and that the two men discussed trade relations ‘over a beer.’ But materials reviewed by The Daily Beast show the meeting was set up in advance... and included a much wider range of topics.”

Prince testified in front of Congress that the meeting was a chance encounter and that the two men discussed improved trade relations "over a beer." But materials reviewed by The Daily Beast show the meeting was set up in advance. And the memo, which The Daily Beast viewed, includes a much wider range of topics than what Prince revealed during his testimony.

The memo not only proposes that the U.S. and Russia worked together to fight ISIS in Syria via a joint military operation that would take out a key leader of the terrorist group. The document also suggests a U.S.-Russia financial partnership, which would include RDIF investing in the Midwest. Lastly, the memo proposed the U.S. and Russia set up a small working group with “2-3 people from each side authorized to finalize an action plan for a major improvement in the U.S.-Russia relationship.”

Whatever the conversation in the Seychelles, the memo appears to deal with subjects outside the scope of Dmitriev’s formal responsibilities as CEO of RDIF.

“We believe there is a huge opportunity to reset Russian relations with the U.S. We are very impressed with President-elect Trump’s position that he wants to have good cooperation with Russia,” Dmitriev said in a November 2016 interview with CBS. “We believe with [Trump] there is a possibility to work jointly between Russia and U.S. on such issues as fighting terrorism and to make sure that our economies continue to grow as we provide access to each other to our markets.”

From the Davos World Economic Forum, five days after his meeting with Prince, Dmitriev appeared yet again on CNBC, reiterating several points from the memo and praising the incoming Trump administration for its “professionalism.”

Dmitriev echoes his televised comments in communications in the days following the forum. In those communications, Dmitriev acknowledges concerns by members of Congress regarding sanctions and his interactions with Americans at Davos.

“We are aware of the comments of some of the senators,” he says. “I just wanted to sent this to clarify things and believe that we can majorly improve U.S.-Russia relations.”

At the Davos forum, Dmitriev distributed a letter to multiple American attendees––including senior executives and CEOs of private equity companies and other financial services companies––on relations between the Russian and American business communities, according to one Davos attendee.

The letter expanded on Dmitriev proposed to recipients a conference in Moscow focused on mutually beneficial business opportunities, the source added. The conference never came to fruition.

“I don’t think people in the U.S. wanted to touch it because of the specter of the sanctions,” the source said.

However, U.S. individuals involved in the investment community did attend the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum in June 2017 and met with Dmitriev, President Putin as well as other world business leaders. Ari Emanuel, Trump’s longtime friend and former agent, attended the invitation-only meeting. Emanuel is also the co-CEO of William Morris Endeavor (WME), an entertainment and media agency. Emanuel, the owner of Ultimate Fighting Championship, would one year later announce a joint venture with Dmitriev’s RDIF as well as China and the UAE’s sovereign wealth funds to promote events in Russia.

Dmitriev’s efforts to normalize trade relations between the U.S. and Russia may be in jeopardy. Congress is in the midst of deciding what steps to take to prevent Russia from interfering in the 2018 midterms. Several members have drafted sanctions bills that would exact tougher measures on the country, including sanctioning Russia’s sovereign debt—a move that would represent one of the toughest hits to the Russian economy since its annexation of Crime in 2014. It is unclear when Congress will vote on the measures.

“As a sovereign wealth fund, sanctioning us strongly would create a precedent for other sovereign wealth funds to really pull their money out of the U.S. economy,” Dmitriev said in a CNBC interview in May. “We think that frankly sanctions are just ridiculous to begin with.”
https://www.thedailybeast.com/erik-prin ... boss-putin


FBI Cyber Division refers two-year-old email hacking case to Special Counsel's Office, per the GOP operative whose emails were hacked in 2016

GOP operative who sued Trump says FBI referred hacking of her email to Mueller

Cheri Jacobus says she was subjected to a campaign of online harassment and sabotage after a public fight with the president and one of his top advisers.

BEN SCHRECKINGER10/02/2018 05:06 AM EDT

Special counsel Robert Mueller
It is not clear what led the FBI to conclude that special counsel Robert Mueller has jurisdiction over the matter. | Win McNamee/Getty Images
Federal law enforcement officials have referred a 2-year-old email hacking investigation to special counsel Robert Mueller, according to the Republican operative who was the target of the hack.

The referral adds yet another dimension to the special counsel’s sprawling probe, even as some of President Donald Trump’s allies portray Mueller’s work as nearing its conclusion.

The operative and Trump critic, Cheri Jacobus, told POLITICO that FBI agents in the bureau’s cyber division informed her in September that they had forwarded their investigation to Mueller because the matter came to exceed the bounds of computer intrusion, the crime that had been the initial focus of the investigation.

It is not clear what led the FBI to conclude that Mueller has jurisdiction over the matter. The special counsel has been investigating Russian election meddling, links between Trump’s campaign and the Kremlin, and other suspected wrongdoing, including undisclosed lobbying by foreign governments. Both the FBI’s press office and a spokesman for the special counsel’s office declined to comment. Jacobus said she has not had contact with Mueller’s team.

Jacobus alleges the hacking of her personal email account was part of a broader campaign of harassment and intimidation that followed critical comments she made about Trump during the 2016 Republican primaries. Jacobus, a political PR specialist, served as a source for a 2015 Washington Post investigation that forced a pro-Trump super PAC to shut down. She later sued Trump for defamation.

POLITICO first reported an online catfishing scheme targeting anti-Trump Republican operatives and the hacking of Jacobus’ emails in August 2016, and the FBI opened an investigation of the hack shortly thereafter. The episode was largely forgotten in the chaos of the presidential campaign.

The chain of events that triggered the initial FBI investigation dates to the spring of 2015. On the eve of Trump’s presidential bid, Jim Dornan, a Republican operative then working for Trump, approached Jacobus about a potential job as the campaign’s communications director, according to electronic messages Jacobus has posted to Twitter.

Though Jacobus entered talks with the campaign, the job never panned out. Jacobus said she told Dornan she was not interested. Another person with direct knowledge of the interactions said it was clear after two often-contentious interviews that the role was not a good fit.

Several months later, in October 2015, the Post quoted her saying that in conversations with Trump’s team that spring, campaign manager Corey Lewandowski disclosed plans for a pro-Trump super PAC. Lewandowski insisted to the Post that the Trump campaign had no ties to and did not sanction the group, Make America Great Again PAC. Days after the story, the PAC shut down.

In the fall of 2015, around the time she was quoted discussing Trump’s super PAC by the Post, Jacobus was contacted online by a person posing as a representative of deep-pocketed political donors. The person proceeded to conduct a bizarre, monthslong catfishing scheme that sought to obtain personal and political information from Jacobus and other anti-Trump Republican operatives during the Republican primary.

Posing as an English barrister with rich clients, the person struck up a chat with Jacobus on Twitter, exchanged private messages with her and raised the prospect of a large donation to fund an anti-Trump super PAC. Jacobus put the person in touch with Republican operatives Rick Wilson and Liz Mair, who were then running such a PAC. The person asked Wilson and Mair sophisticated questions about their polling and opposition research on Trump, leading the pair to suspect a fraud and to cut off contact. Jacobus received phone calls and emails from other fake personas who posed as associates of the barrister before discovering it was all a fraud.

Much about the catfishing scheme remains unknown. But in the spring of 2016, Jacobus traced a website domain involved in the scheme to Steven Wessel, a notorious New York con man. At the time, Wessel was out on bail preparing to serve jail time for an unrelated fraud. After Jacobus brought the Wessel connection to the attention of prosecutors in the Southern District of New York, a judge sent Wessel to jail for violating the conditions of his bail, which forbade him from using the Internet.

But Wessel was clearly not acting alone. In August 2016, four months after he was sent to jail — and as POLITICO was preparing to publish news of the catfishing scheme — Jacobus reported that that her personal email account had been hacked and its contents deleted.

At the same time, Jacobus was embroiled in an apparently separate legal fight with the Trump camp. During the 2016 primaries, Jacobus was a regular Fox News and CNN commentator, and she both praised and criticized Trump. One particularly critical segment drew the ire of Trump, who pronounced her a “dummy” on Twitter, as well as Lewandowski, who, like Trump, portrayed her as a disgruntled job-seeker.

Jacobus sued them for defamation in New York. As she feuded publicly with Trump, Jacobus was subjected to a sustained barrage of physical and sexual threats on social media. In January 2017, her defamation case was dismissed.

Emails reviewed by POLITICO show that Jacobus has been in regular contact with FBI agents since the bureau opened an investigation into the hacking of her email after Jacobus filed a complaint around September 2016.

Following Trump’s election, Jacobus relayed additional incidents she considered suspicious to the agents investigating the hack.

Jacobus said she was also interviewed by FBI agents in the Southern District of New York for several hours in February 2017 and has had dozens of phone calls with the agents over the past two years. A lawyer who worked for Jacobus at the time, Jay Butterman, said he also attended the February 2017 meeting and had follow-up conversations with FBI agents.

In November 2017, the FBI asked Jacobus to turn over the remainder of her communications related to the catfishing scheme, some of which she had already submitted, according to an email reviewed by POLITICO.

On Sept. 10 of this year, an FBI agent wrote to Jacobus that he would be calling her, which is when, she said, the bureau informed her of the case’s referral to Mueller.

Jacobus said the agents instructed her to send any new information that arises to the special counsel’s office.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/10/ ... ack-857288
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trumpublicons: Foreign Influence/Grifting in '16 US Elec

Postby seemslikeadream » Thu Oct 04, 2018 12:14 pm

Olga Lautman


Putin’s top legal adviser Dep AG Saak Karapetyan died in a helicopter crash yesterday.

Among his duties was investigating & disputing Skripal attack, handling the Litvinenko and Berezovsky investigation, and setting up the Trump Tower Don Jr-Russia meet to deliver Hillary dirt

Image
Image


Source for his department being involved in the 2016 election
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-tow ... ption-case


Oct. 04 2018 - 13:10
Senior Russian Prosecutor Killed in Helicopter Crash

Saak Karapetyan (Valery Sharifulin / TASS)


A leading law enforcement official has been killed in a helicopter crash in central Russia.

Russia’s Investigative Committee said three bodies were identified in the Kostroma region crash. It opened a criminal case into safety rule violations that led to the deadly crash. The incident became the second aviation accident this week after a helicopter crashed in Siberia on Monday, killing two passengers.

Helicopter Crash Kills 2 in Siberia
The Prosecutor General’s Office confirmed to news agencies that deputy prosecutor Saak Karapetyan was among the victims.

“Early indications suggest Saak Albertovich, 58, was among the passengers aboard this helicopter,” the Prosecutor General’s spokesman Alexander Kurennoy was quoted as saying by the state-run TASS news agency.

Initial reports said the Eurocopter AS530 belonged to Heliport Moscow, a three-hectare multifunctional center for storing and servicing helicopters. The company said the single-engine French chopper belonged to an unidentified private company based at the multifunctional center.

Kurennoy denied the regional administration’s claims that the helicopter had been on an unauthorized flight.
https://themoscowtimes.com/news/senior- ... rash-63083



Didn't fall out of a window? Well, that's a refreshing change.
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trumpublicons: Foreign Influence/Grifting in '16 US Elec

Postby seemslikeadream » Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:19 am

Russian Official Linked to Natalia Veselnitskaya, the Trump Tower Lawyer, Is Dead

A Russian official accused of directing the foreign operations of Natalia Veselnitskaya, the lawyer who met senior Trump campaign officials in 2016, has plummeted to his death in a helicopter crash.

Russian Deputy Attorney General Saak Albertovich Karapetyan was exposed in a Swiss court this year for a plot to enlist another nation’s law-enforcement official as a double-agent for the Kremlin.

Media reports in Russia say he died Wednesday night when his helicopter crashed into a forest during an unauthorized flight in the Kostroma region, northeast of Moscow.

Karapetyan, 58, was intimately familiar with some of the most notorious operations carried out under the orders of Vladimir Putin. He worked closely with Veselnitskaya as well as running some of Moscow’s most high-profile efforts to thwart international investigations into Russia’s alleged crimes.

It was Karapetyan who signed a letter from the Russian government refusing to help the U.S. in a civil case it was pursuing linked to the death of Sergei Magnitsky, a Russian lawyer who was trying to expose a $230 million fraud in Russia. Leaked emails have since shown that Veselnitskaya helped to draft the document sent with that letter.

Karapetyan has been involved in efforts to foil international investigations for more than a decade. The Daily Beast reported that he was present for a meeting in Moscow where British detectives claim they were poisoned during efforts to track down the killers of Alexander Litvinenko, who died after a dose of radioactive poison in London in 2006.

Despite claims that they were trying to help, the general prosecutor’s office did everything it could to block the Scotland Yard investigation.

Earlier this year, Karapetyan lashed out at Britain in the aftermath of the Novichok attack against former Russian spy Sergei Skripal. He linked Skripal, Litvinenko, and Boris Berezovsky, a high-profile critic of Putin who died of suspected suicide in 2013.

“The British authorities have based the anti-Russian campaign surrounding the poisoning of former GRU officer Skripal and his daughter on a provocative scenario. A similar scenario was used in baseless allegations of Russia’s attempt on the life of Boris Berezovsky in London in summer 2003 and the circumstances surrounding the death of Alexander Litvinenko in the U.K. in November 2006,” Karapetyan said, according to Interfax.

On Wednesday night, the wreckage of a helicopter believed to have been carrying Karapetyan was found near the village of Vonyshevo. Video purported to be from the scene shows the chopper mangled and burnt out amid twisted tree trunks.

It is not known why experienced pilot Stanislav Mikhnov, 54, reportedly decided to take off after nightfall in adverse conditions without authorities’ approval. A third man, Arek Harutyunyan, was also killed, according to the Russian news agency Interfax.

Karapetyan’s links to Veselnitskaya emerged this year, when a case in Switzerland exposed the pair’s operation to recruit a high-level law-enforcement official who was supposed to be investigating the Swiss bank accounts of Russian oligarchs and mobsters.

The top investigator was fired for “unauthorized clandestine behavior,” and allegations of bribery and breaching secrecy laws. The Swiss authorities discovered that the officer—who was identified only as Victor K.—had met Karapetyan in Geneva and Zurich. Before Christmas 2016, Karapetyan telephoned the official and invited him to Moscow, where he was put up in a luxury hotel and asked to attend a meeting with Veselnitskaya.

It is likely that the meeting with Veselnitskaya concerned the fallout from the death of Magnitsky, who had been working to expose a massive fraud that implicated the Kremlin when he was incarcerated, beaten, and left to die.

In the aftermath of his death, the lawyer’s client, Bill Browder, campaigned to enact a series of anti-corruption laws all over the world in his name. The U.S. Magnitsky Act was passed in 2012.

Veselnitskaya was one of the top advocates lobbying to overturn these global Magnitsky laws, which have reportedly absolutely infuriated Putin.

When she arranged to meet Paul Manafort, Donald Trump Jr., and Jared Kushner at the infamous Trump Tower meeting in 2016, she was offering dirt on Hillary Clinton allegedly given to her by Karapetyan’s general prosecutor’s office, according to the emails of introduction, which have since been leaked. Once inside, we now know that she attempted to lobby the senior Trump officials on the Magnitsky case.

Karapetyan and Veselnitskaya also worked together on another job linked to Magnitsky. The U.S. authorities brought a civil case against a company called Prevezon for its alleged links to laundering proceeds of the fraud that Magnitsky uncovered.

In April, emails obtained by Dossier, an anti-Putin campaign set up by former oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and published by The New York Times, showed that Veselnitskaya had helped to draft a document on behalf of the Russian government that explained why Moscow would not help with the fraud case against Prevezon.

Rather than engage with the allegations against Prevezon, much of the document was a personal attack on Browder. The cover letter that accompanied the document was signed by Karapetyan.

The refusal to help provide documents from inside Russia—orchestrated by Karapetyan and Veselnitskaya—likely contributed to the authorities’ ultimate decision to settle the case. Prevezon agreed to pay $5.9 million, but it did not admit any role in laundering the proceeds of the fraud.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/russian-o ... ia=desktop
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trumpublicons: Foreign Influence/Grifting in '16 US Elec

Postby seemslikeadream » Fri Oct 05, 2018 4:14 pm

A TALE OF TWO GRU INDICTMENTS

October 5, 2018/1 Comment/in 2016 Presidential Election, emptywheel, Mueller Probe, WikiLeaks /by empty wheel

Yesterday, DOJ indicted a bunch of GRU hackers again, in part for hacks in retaliation for anti-doping associations’ reports finding a state-run Russian effort to help its athletes cheat (though also including hacks of Westinghouse and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)).

As the DNC GRU indictment did, this indictment provides a snapshot of the division of labor in GRU, made easier by the capture of four of these guys, with all their hacking toys in the trunk of their rented car, in the Netherlands. I find a comparison of the two indictments — of some of the same people for similar activity spanning the same period of time — instructive for a number of reasons.

THE TEAM

Consider the team.

There are Aleksei Morenets and Evgenii Serebriakov, whom the indictment calls “on-site GRU hackers who traveled to foreign countries with other conspirators, in some instances using Russian government issues diplomatic passports to conduct on-site operations.” Serebriakov even has a title, “Deputy Head of Directorate,” which sounds like a pretty senior person to travel around sniffing WiFi networks.

There are the three men we met in the DNC indictment, Ivan Yermakov, Artem Malyshev, and Dmitriy Badin, all of whom work out of Moscow running hacks. Yermakov and Malyshev were closely involved in both hacks in 2016 (as demonstrated by the timeline below).

Finally, there are Oleg Sotnikov and Alexey Minin, who joined Morenets and Serebriakov as they tried to hack the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and tried to hack the Spiez Chemical laboratory that was analyzing the Novichok used to poison Sergei Skripal.

There are slightly different tactics than in the DNC hack. For example, GRU used a bunch of bit.ly links in this operation (though some of those are an earlier campaign against Westinghouse). And they sent out hackers to tap into targets’ WiFi networks directly, whereas none of the DNC hackers are alleged to have left Russia.

But there’s a ton of common activity, notably the spearphishing of targeted individuals and the use of their X-Agent hacking tool to exploit targeted machines.

OVERLAPPING HACK SCHEDULE

I’m also interested in the way the WADA hack, in particular, overlaps with the DNC one. I’ve got a timeline, below, of the two indictments look like (I’ve excluded both the Westinghouse and OPCW hacks from this timeline to focus on the overlapping 2016 operations).

Yermakov and Malyshev are described by name doing specific tasks in the DNC hack though May 2016. By August, they have turned to hacking anti-doping targets. Yermakov, in particular, seems to play the same research role in both hacks.

Given the impact of these operations, it’s fairly remarkable that such a small team conducted both.

COMMON BITCOIN HABITS AND POSSIBLY EVEN INFRASTRUCTURE

There are also paragraphs in the WADA indictment, particularly those pertaining to the use of bitcoin to fund the operation used to substantiate the money laundering charge, that appear to be lifted in their entirety from the DNC one (or perhaps both come from DOJ or Western PA US Attorney boilerplate — remember that the DNC hack was originally investigated in Western PA, so this language likely originates there).

These include:

58/106: Describing how conspirators primarily used bitcoin to pay for infrastructure
59/107: Describing how bitcoin works, with examples specific to each operation provided
60/108: Describing how conspirators used dedicated email accounts to track bitcoin transactions
61/109: Describing how conspirators used the same computers to conduct hacking operations and facilitate bitcoin payments
62/110: Describing how conspirators also mined bitcoin and then used it to pay for servers, with examples specific to each operation
64/111: Describing how conspirators used the same funding structure and sometimes the same pool of funds to pay for hacking infrastructure, with examples specific to each operation provided
The similarity of these two passages suggests two things. First, it suggests that the August 8, 2016 transaction in the WADA indictment may have been orchestrated from the gfade147 email noted in the DNC indictment. With both, the indictment notes that “One of these dedicated accounts … received hundreds of bitcoin payment requests from approximately 100 different email accounts,” with the DNC indictment including the gfade147 address. (Compare paragraphs 60 in the DNC indictment with 108 in the WADA one.) That would suggest these two operations overlap even more than suspect.

That said, there’s one paragraph in the DNC indictment that doesn’t have an analogue in the WADA one, 63. It describes conspirators,

purchasing bitcoin through peer-to-peer exchanges, moving funds through other digital currencies, and using pre-paid cards. They also enlisted the assistance of one or more third-party exchangers who facilitated layered transactions through digital currency exchange platforms providing heightened anonymity.


Given how loud much of these operations were, it raises questions about why some of the DNC hack (but not, at least by description) the WADA one would require “heightened anonymity.”

DIFFERENT TREATMENT OF INFOOPS

I’m perhaps most interested in the different treatment of the InfoOps side of the operation. As I noted here, in general there seems to be a division of labor at GRU between the actual hackers, in Unit 26165, which is located at 20 Komsomolskiy Prospekt, and the information operations officers, in Unit 74455, which is located in the “Tower” at 22 Kirova Street, Khimki. Both units were involved in both operations.

Yet the WADA indictment does not name or charge any Unit 74455 officers, in spite of describing (in paragraphs 1 and 11) how the unit acquired and maintained online social media accounts and associated infrastructure (paragraph 76 describes that infrastructure to be “procured and managed, at least in part, by conspirators in GRU Unit 74455”). Five of the seven named defendants in the WADA indictment are in Unit 26165, with Oleg Sotnikov and Alexey Minin not identified by unit.

By comparison, three of the 11 officers charged in the DNC indictment belong to Unit 744555.

And the WADA campaign did have a significant media component, as explained in paragraphs 76-87. The indictment even complains (as did DOJ officials as the press conference announcing this indictment) about,

reporters press[ing] for and receiv[ing] promises of exclusivity in such reporting, with one such reporter attempting to make arrangements for a right of first refusal for articles on all future leaks and actively suggesting methods with whicch the conspiracy could search the stolen materials for documents of interest to that reporter (e.g., keywords of interest).


That said, the language in much of this discussion (see paragraphs 77 through 81) uses the passive voice — “were registered,” “were named,” “was posted,” “were released,” “were released,” “were released,” “were released” — showing less certainty about who was running that infrastructure.

That’s particularly interesting given that the government clearly had emails between the Fancy Bear personas and journalists.

One difference may be, in part, that in the DNC indictment, there are specific hacking (not InfoOps) actions attributed to two of the Unit 74455 officers: Aleksandr Osadchuk and Anatoliy Kovalev. Indeed, Kovalev seems to have been added on just for that charge, as he doesn’t appear in the introduction section at the beginning of the indictment.

Whereas Unit 74455’s role in the WADA indictment seems to be limited to running the InfoOps infrastructure.

IMPORTANCE OF WIKILEAKS AND SHARING WITH REPUBLICANS

It’s not clear how much we can conclude form all that. But the different structure in the DNC indictment does allow it to foreground the role of a number of others, such as WikiLeaks and Roger Stone and — as I suggested drop in some or all of those others in a future conspiracy indictment — that were a key part of the election operation.

TIMELINE

February 1, 2016: gfade147 0.026043 bitcoin transaction

March 2016: Conspirators hack email accounts of volunteers and employees of Hillary campaign, including John Podesta

March 2016: Yermakov spearphishes two accounts that would be leaked to DC Leaks

March 14, 2016 through April 28, 2016: Conspirators use same pool of bitcoin to purchase VPN and lease server in Malaysia

March 15, 2016: Yermakov runs technical query for DNC IP configurations and searches for open source info on DNC network, Dem Party, and Hillary

March 19, 2016: Lukashev spearphish Podesta personal email using john356gh

March 21, 2016: Lukashev steals contents of Podesta’s email account, over 50,000 emails (he is named Victim 3 later in indictment)

March 25, 2016: Lukashev spearphishes Victims 1 (personal email) and 2 using john356gh; their emails later released on DCLeaks

March 28, 2016: Yermakov researched Victims 1 and 2 on social media

April 2016: Kozachek customizes X-Agent

April 2016: Conspirators hack into DCCC and DNC networks, plant X-Agent malware

April 2016: Conspirators plan release of materials stolen from Clinton Campaign, DCCC, and DNC

April 6, 2016: Conspirators create email for fake Clinton Campaign team member to spearphish Clinton campaign; DCCC Employee 1 clicks spearphish link

April 7, 2016: Yermakov runs technical query for DCCC’s internet protocol configurations

April 12, 2016: Conspirators use stolen credentials of DCCC employee to access network; Victim 4 DCCC email victimized

April 14, 2016: Conspirators use X-Agent keylog and screenshot functions to surveil DCCC Employee 1

April 15, 2016: Conspirators search hacked DCCC computer for “hillary,” “cruz,” “trump” and copied “Benghazi investigations” folder

April 15, 2016: Victim 5 DCCC email victimized

April 18, 2016: Conspirators hack into DNC through DCCC using credentials of DCCC employee with access to DNC server; Victim 6 DCCC email victimized

April 19, 2016: Kozachek, Yershov, and co-conspirators remotely configure middle server

April 19, 2016: Conspirators register dcleaks using operational email dirbinsaabol@mail.com

April 20, 2016: Conspirators direct X-Agent malware on DCCC computers to connect to middle server

April 22, 2016: Conspirators use X-Agent keylog and screenshot function to surveil DCCC Employee 2

April 22, 2016: Conspirators compress oppo research for exfil to server in Illinois

April 26, 2016: George Papadopolous learns Russians are offering election assistance in the form of leaked emails

April 28, 2016: Conspirators use bitcoin associated with Guccifer 2.0 VPN to lease Malaysian server hosting dcleaks.com

April 28, 2016: Conspirators test IL server

May 2016: Yermakov hacks DNC server

May 10, 2016: Victim 7 DNC email victimized

May 13, 2016: Conspirators delete logs from DNC computer

May 25 through June 1, 2016: Conspirators hack DNC Microsoft Exchange Server; Yermakov researches PowerShell commands related to accessing it

May 30, 2016: Malyshev upgrades the AMS (AZ) server, which receives updates from 13 DCCC and DNC computers

May 31, 2016: Yermakov researches Crowdstrike and X-Agent and X-Tunnel malware

June 2016: Conspirators staged and released tens of thousands of stolen emails and documents

June 1, 2016: Conspirators attempt to delete presence on DCCC using CCleaner

June 2, 2016: Victim 2 personal victimized

June 8, 2016: Conspirators launch dcleaks.com, dcleaks Facebook account using Alive Donovan, Jason Scott, and Richard Gingrey IDs, and @dcleaks_ Twitter account, using same computer used for other

June 9, 2016: Don Jr, Paul Manafort, Jared Kushner have meeting expecting dirt from Russians, including Aras Agalarov employee Ike Kaveladze

June 10, 2016: Ike Kaveladze has calls with Russia and NY while still in NYC

June 14, 2016: Conspirators register actblues and redirect DCCC website to actblues

June 14, 2016: WaPo (before noon ET) and Crowdstrike announces DNC hack

June 15, 2016, between 4:19PM and 4:56 PM Moscow Standard Time (9:19 and 9:56 AM ET): Conspirators log into Moscow-based sever and search for words that would end up in first Guccifer 2.0 post, including “some hundred sheets,” “illuminati,” “think twice about company’s competence,” “worldwide known”

June 15, 2016, 7:02PM MST (2:02PM ET): Guccifer 2.0 posts first post

June 15 and 16, 2016: Ike Kaveladze places roaming calls from Russia, the only ones he places during the extended trip

June 20, 2016: Conspirators delete logs from AMS panel, including login history, attempt to reaccess DCCC using stolen credentials

June 22, 2016: Wikileaks sends a private message to Guccifer 2.0 to “send any new material here for us to review and it will have a much higher impact than what you are doing.”

June 27, 2016: Conspirators contact US reporter, send report password to access nonpublic portion of dcleaks

Late June, 2016: Failed attempts to transfer data to Wikileaks

July, 2016: Kovalev hacks into IL State Board of Elections and steals information on 500,000 voters

July 6, 2016: Conspirators use VPN to log into Guccifer 2.0 account

July 6, 2016: Wikileaks writes Guccifer 2.0 adding, “if you have anything hillary related we want it in the next tweo [sic] days prefabl [sic] because the DNC [Democratic National Convention] is approaching and she will solidify bernie supporters behind her after”

July 6, 2016: Victim 8 personal email victimized

July 10-19: Morenets travels to Rio de Janeiro

July 14, 2016: Conspirators send WikiLeaks an email with attachment titled wk dnc link1.txt.gpg providing instructions on how to access online archive of stolen DNC documents

July 18, 2016: WikiLeaks confirms it has “the 1Gb or so archive” and would make a release of stolen documents “this week”

July 22, 2016: WikiLeaks releases first dump of 20,000 emails

July 27, 2016: Trump asks Russia for Hillary emails

July 27, 2016: After hours, conspirators attempt to spearphish email accounts at a domain hosted by third party provider and used by Hillary’s personal office, as well as 76 email addresses at Clinton Campaign

August 2016: Kovalev hacks into VR systems

August 2-9, 2016: Conspirators use multiple IP addresses to connect to or scan WADA’s network

August 2-4, 2016: Yermakov researches WADA and its ADAM database (which includes the drug test results of the world’s athletes) and USADA

August 3, 2016: Conspirators register wada.awa.org

August 5, 9, 2016: Yermakov researches Cisco firewalls, he and Malyshev send specific WADA employees spearfish

August 8, 2016: Conspirators register wada-arna.org and tas-cass.org

August 8, 2016: .012684 bitcoin transaction directed by dedicated email account

August 13-19, 2016: Morenets and Serebriakov travel to Rio, while Yermakov supports with research in Moscow

August 14-18, 2016: SQL attacks against USADA

August 15, 2016: Conspirators receive request for stolen documents from candidate for US congress

August 15, 2016: First Guccifer 2.0 exchange with Roger Stone noted

August 19, 2016: Serebriakov compromises a specific anti-doping official and obtains credentials to access ADAM database

August 22, 2016: Conspirators transfer 2.5 GB of stolen DCCC data to registered FL state lobbyist Aaron Nevins

August 22, 2016: Conspirators send Lee Stranahan Black Lives Matter document

September 1, 2016: Domains fancybear.org and fancybear.net registered

September 6, 2016: Conspirators compromise credentials of USADA Board member while in Rio

September 7-14, 2016: Conspirators try, but fail, to use credentials stolen from USADA board member to access USADA systems

September 12, 2016: Data stolen from WADA and ADAMS first posted, initially focusing on US athletes

September 12, 2016 to January 17, 2018: Conspirators attempt to draw media attention to leaks via social media

September 18, 2016: Morenets and Serebriakov travel to Lausanne, staying in anti-doping hotels, to compromise hotel WiFi

September 19, 2016 to July 20, 2018: Conspirators attempt to draw media attention to leaks via email

September 2016: Conspirators access DNC computers hosted on cloud service, creating backups of analytics applications

October 2016: Linux version of X-Agent remains on DNC network

October 6, 2016: Emails stolen from USADA first released

October 7, 2016: WikiLeaks releases first set of Podesta emails

October 28, 2016: Kovalev visits counties in GA, IA, and FL to identify vulnerabilities

November 2016: Kovalev uses VR Systems email address to phish FL officials

December 6, 2016 – January 2, 2017: Using IP frequently used by Malyshev, conspirators compromise FIFA’s anti-doping files

December 13, 2016: Data stolen from CCES released

January 19-24, 2017: Conspirators compromise computers of four IAAF officials

June 22, 2017: Data stolen from IAAF’s network released

July 5, 2017: Data stolen from IAAF’s network released

August 28, 2017: Data stolen from FIFA released

As I laid in July, I provided information to the FBI on issues related to the Mueller investigation, so I’m going to include disclosure statements on Mueller investigation posts from here on out. I will include the disclosure whether or not the stuff I shared with the FBI pertains to the subject of the post.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2018/10/05/a ... dictments/


DOJ announces charges against 7 Russian intelligence officers, accusing them in a sprawling indictment of hacking, wire fraud, identity theft & money laundering as part of effort to distract from Russia’s state sponsored doping program.

US charges 7 Russian intel officers as West condemns GRU
Gregory Katz, Raphael Satter and Lorne Cook, Associated Press Updated 10:29 am EDT, Thursday, October 4, 2018


In this Friday, April 21, 2017, image the headquarters of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, OPCW, are seen in The Hague, Netherlands. The Dutch defense minister on Thursday Oct. 4, 2018, accused Russia's military intelligence unit of attempted cybercrimes targeting the U.N. chemical weapons watchdog and the investigation into the 2014 Malaysian Airlines crash over Ukraine. Photo: Peter Dejong, AP / Copyright 2018 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

In this Friday, April 21, 2017, image the headquarters of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, OPCW, are seen in The Hague, Netherlands. The Dutch defense minister on Thursday Oct. 4, 2018, ... more

BRUSSELS (AP) — The U.S. Justice Department on Thursday charged seven Russian intelligence officers with hacking anti-doping agencies and other organizations hours after Western officials leveled new accusations against Moscow's secretive GRU military spy agency.
Hours before the U.S. indictment was announced, Western nations accused the GRU of new cybercrimes, with Dutch and British officials labeling the intelligence agency "brazen" for allegedly targeting the international chemical weapons watchdog and the investigation into the 2014 downing of a Malaysian Airlines flight over eastern Ukraine.
The U.S. indictment said that the GRU targeted its victims because they had publicly supported a ban on Russian athletes in international sports competitions and because they had condemned Russia's state-sponsored athlete doping program.
Prosecutors said that the Russians also targeted a Pennsylvania-based nuclear energy company and an international organization that was investigating chemical weapons in Syria and the poisoning of a former GRU officer.
The indictment says the hacking was often conducted remotely. If that wasn't successful, the hackers would conduct "on-site" or "close access" hacking operations with trained GRU members traveling with sophisticated equipment to target their victims through Wi-Fi networks
The GRU's alleged hacking attempts on the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons took place in April and were disrupted by authorities, Dutch Defense Minister Ank Bijleveld said. Four Russian intelligence officers were immediately expelled from the Netherlands, she said.
Speaking about Russia's hacking attempts into the MH17 crash investigation, she said: "We have been aware of the interest of Russian intelligence services in this investigation and have taken appropriate measures."
The cascade of condemnation — from the Australian, British and Dutch governments — does more than just point the finger at Moscow. It also ties together a series of norm-shattering spy operations that have straddled the physical world and the digital sphere.
The British ambassador to the Netherlands said that the men caught with spy gear outside The Hague-based OPCW, for example, were from the very same GRU section (Unit 26165) accused by American investigators of having broken into the Democratic National Committee's email and sowing havoc during the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
The OPCW, in turn, was investigating the poisoning of GRU defector Sergei Skripal in which the nerve agent Novichok was used, a bold operation that British authorities dissected in a minute-by-minute surveillance camera montage last month.
At the same time, Australian and British spies have now endorsed the American intelligence community's reported attribution of the catastrophic June 2017 cyberattack on Ukraine to the GRU. The malicious software outbreak briefly knocked out cash machines, gas stations, pharmacies and hospitals and, according to a secret White House assessment recently cited by Wired, dealt $10 billion worth of damage worldwide.
The hack and release of sports figures' medical data in 2016 and the downing of MH17 over eastern Ukraine in 2014 also allegedly carry the GRU's fingerprints. Dutch investigators said the snoopers nabbed outside the OPCW also appear to have logged into the Wi-Fi networks near the World Anti-Doping Agency and the Malaysian hotels where crash investigators had gathered.
Moscow has issued the latest in a series of denials, but the allegations leveled by Western intelligence agencies, supported by a wealth of surveillance footage and overwhelmingly confirmed by independent reporting, paint a picture of the GRU as an agency that routinely crosses red lines — and is increasingly being caught red-handed.
Moscow has denied the allegations, but Russia's interests were at stake in both cases: the OPCW was investigating reports that a Soviet-made nerve agent had been used against a Russian ex-spy in England, and Russia has been blamed by some for being involved in shooting down MH17.
The leaders of Britain and the Netherlands condemned the GRU for "reckless" activities and vowed to defend vital international agencies from Russian aggression.
"This attempt, to access the secure systems of an international organization working to rid the world of chemical weapons, demonstrates again the GRU's disregard for the global values and rules that keep us all safe," British Prime Minister Theresa May and Dutch counterpart Mark Rutte said in a joint statement.
The coordinated actions by both countries came hours before an expected U.S. indictment involving Russian attempts to hack into computer systems.
The Dutch and British blamed Russia's GRU for "brazen" activities across the globe and for trying to cover up Russia's alleged participation in the nerve agent poisoning in March of Skripal and his daughter, and the downing of MH17 over Ukraine that killing all 298 people on board during a period of intense fighting between Ukrainian government forces and pro-Russia rebels. Russia has consistently denied involvement in the events.
Britain's ambassador to the Netherlands, Peter Wilson, said the GRU would no longer be allowed to act with impunity. Britain blames the secretive military intelligence unit for the nerve agent attack in March on former Russian spy Skripal and his daughter, Yulia, in the English city of Salisbury.
He said Russia's actions against the Netherlands-based OPCW came as the agency was conducting an independent analysis of the nerve agent used against the Skripals. Britain says the nerve agent was Novichok, produced in the Soviet Union, a finding later confirmed by the chemical weapons watchdog.
Earlier, British Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson branded a series of global cyberattacks blamed on Russia as the reckless actions of a "pariah state," saying that the U.K. and its NATO allies would uncover such activities in the future.
"Where Russia acts in an indiscriminate and reckless way, where they have done in terms of these cyberattacks, we will be exposing them," Williamson told reporters in Brussels at talks with U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and their NATO counterparts.
Britain's National Cyber Security Center said Thursday that four new attacks are associated with the GRU as well as earlier security hacks.
It cites attacks on the World Anti-Doping Agency, Ukrainian transport systems, the 2016 U.S. presidential race and others as very likely the work of the GRU.
"We are going to actually make it clear that where Russia acts, we are going to be exposing that action," Williamson said.
"This is not the actions of a great power. This is the actions of a pariah state, and we will continue working with allies to isolate them; make them understand they cannot continue to conduct themselves in such a way," he said.
Earlier, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Foreign Minister Marise Payne issued a joint statement that Australian intelligence agencies agreed that GRU "is responsible for this pattern of malicious cyber activity." They said Australia wasn't significantly impacted, but the cyberattacks caused economic damage and disrupted civilian infrastructure in other places.
___
A previous version of this story was corrected to show the chemical weapons watchdog is an international organization, not a U.N. agency.
___
Gregory Katz and Raphael Satter reported from London. Raf Casert in Brussels, and Michael Balsamo and Eric Tucker in Washington, contributed to this report.
https://www.westport-news.com/business/ ... 280908.php


Andrew Roth


One of the alleged GRU agents expelled from the Netherlands literally signed a document saying I work at the computer hacking unit located at Russian military university. It is on the first page of results when you Google his name. http://hub.sfedu.ru/media/diss/5bd4ba89 ... 26165%20(1).pdf …
Image

https://twitter.com/Mike_Eckel



Mike Eckel

the fact that the GRU were targeting Westinghouse-- a major US nuclear energy manufacturer-- with spearphising/hacking might be the most worrying aspect of this indictment. Why does Russia want to control of control systems of US-built nuclear power systems?


Image

Carl Schreck

So U.S. indicted the same four Russians expelled by the Dutch, plus three others. https://www.justice.gov/opa/page/file/1098481/download
Image
https://twitter.com/CarlSchreck
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trumpublicons: Foreign Influence/Grifting in '16 US Elec

Postby seemslikeadream » Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:02 am

BREAKING: GOP Operative Working With Mike Flynn to Contact Russians Over Clinton Emails in Summer 2016 Had Just Begun New Project He Was Very Excited About Mere Hours Before His "Suicide"


GOP Operative Secretly Raised at Least $100,000 in Search for Clinton Emails
Opposition researcher’s efforts are of intense interest to investigators probing Russian election interference

By Byron Tau, Dustin Volz and Shelby Holliday
Oct. 7, 2018 8:00 a.m. ET
WASHINGTON—A veteran Republican operative and opposition researcher solicited and raised at least $100,000 from donors as part of an effort to obtain what he believed to be emails stolen from Hillary Clinton, activities that remain of intense interest to federal investigators working for special counsel Robert Mueller’s office and on Capitol Hill.

Peter W. Smith, an Illinois businessman with a long history of involvement in GOP politics, sought and collected the funds from at least four wealthy donors as part of the plan to obtain Mrs. Clinton’s stolen emails from hackers just weeks before election day in 2016, according to people familiar with the matter and documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

Mr. Smith’s effort to find what he believed were some 33,000 deleted emails Mrs. Clinton said were personal was first reported by the Journal in a 2017 story, but the extent of his planning went far beyond what was previously known. Mr. Smithdied 10 days after describing his efforts to a reporter for the Journal newspaper.

The documents and people familiar with the matter depict a veteran political operative with access to wealthy donors and deep connections in Republican politics on a single-minded quest to find incriminating information about Mrs. Clinton even after government officials warned of Russian involvement in U.S. politics. People familiar with the investigations described Mr. Smith’s activities as an area of expanding interest.

Mr. Smith went to extraordinary lengths to ensure the privacy and secrecy of his projects, according to emails and court records reviewed by the Journal and a person familiar with the matter.

One email showed the anti-Clinton funds referenced as donations that were to be sent to a Washington, D.C.-based scholarship fund for Russian students.

Mr. Smith often communicated with associates using a Gmail account under the name “Robert Tyler” that both he and several others had access to, according to emails and a person familiar with the matter. He sometimes asked associates to communicate with him by writing a note and saving it the draft folder of the account, according to correspondence reviewed by the Journal.

He also had one phone number that he used for sensitive matters and a commercially available encrypted email account. Hard drives that Mr. Smith’s estate turned over to federal investigators were also encrypted, according to people familiar with the matter.

According to an email in the “Robert Tyler” account reviewed by the Journal, Mr. Smith obtained $100,000 from at least four financiers as well as a $50,000 contribution from Mr. Smith himself. People familiar with Mr. Smith’s financial transactions confirm there were donations.

The email, dated Oct. 11, 2016, in the “Robert Tyler” account, included the subject line “Wire Instructions—Clinton Email Reconnaissance Initiative” and was addressed to Mr. Smith. The writer, who identified himself as “ROB, ” said: “This $100k total with the $50k received from you will allow us to fund the Washington Scholarship Fund for the Russian students for the promised $150K.” The Journal couldn’t determine if such a fund actually exists.

“The students are very pleased with the email releases they have seen, and are thrilled with their educational advancement opportunities,” the email read. Because multiple people had access to the “Robert Tyler” email account, it couldn’t be determined who sent the email to Mr. Smith.

The email about obtaining the pledges came just days after WikiLeaks and the website DCLeaks began releasing emails damaging to Mrs. Clinton’s campaign and four days after the U.S. government publicly warned that Russia was attempting to interfere in the U.S. election through the hacking and release of stolen emails and doing so at the direction of the Kremlin’s “senior-most officials.” Russia denies interfering in the election.


The activities of Mr. Smith—who died in May 2017 at 81—remain an active area of interest to investigators, according to people familiar with the investigation. An autopsy report said he had killed himself in a Minnesota hotel room.Mr. Smith left behind carefully prepared documents including a statement, which police deemed a suicide note, that read: “NO FOUL PLAY WHATSOEVER,” according to the Chicago Tribune.

In addition to giving hard drives to the House and Senate intelligence committees, which are also investigating election interference by Russia, Mr. Smith’s estate has given documents to Mr. Mueller’s team, people with the matter said. Associates of Mr. Smith have been interviewed by investigators or summoned before a grand jury as recently as this summer, according to documents and people familiar with the matter. BuzzFeed has also reported that Mr. Smith’s bank transfers are under scrutiny.

John Szobocsan, a business associate of Mr. Smith, appeared before a federal grand jury in August, according to one person familiar with the matter. Mr. Szobocsan, who emails show was involved in Mr. Smith’s pursuit of Mrs. Clinton’s emails, also was interviewed by Mr. Mueller’s team three times earlier in the year, according to court records that were reviewed by the Journal.

Mr. Szobocsan is seeking repayment from Mr. Smith’s estate for the legal costs he has accrued, according to court records. He and an attorney representing him didn’t respond to requests for comment.

The focus from investigators on Mr. Smith’s quest to obtain Mrs. Clinton’s emails may be especially significant because Mr. Smith had implied in conversations with people in his circle and others he tried to recruit to help that he was working with retired Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn, at the time a senior adviser to then-candidate Donald Trump, the Journal has reported.

Mr. Flynn pleaded guilty last December to lying to investigators about his calls with Russia’s ambassador a month before Mr. Trump’s inauguration. Prosecutors said at the time Mr. Flynn was cooperating with their investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and possible links to the Trump campaign.

After an extended period in limbo, prosecutors said last month they were ready for a federal judge to sentence Mr. Flynn and the court has scheduled proceedings for Dec 18. An attorney for Mr. Flynn didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Mr. Trump has repeatedly denied collusion between his campaign and Russia.

Retired Wall Street financier Charles Ortel said he spoke with Mr. Smith on the phone in the hours before his death about a new project to brief the Obama Foundation and warn its leaders against the mistakes they believed were made by the Clinton Foundation. According to Mr. Ortel, Mr. Smith sounded excited, and he began brainstorming who to contact and how to proceed.

“I came away from that conversation saying this is great. We’re going to make progress,” said Mr. Ortel, who had previously communicated with Mr. Smith about efforts to obtain Clinton’s emails but was not one of the four people named in the email account as financial contributors. He said he was stunned when news outlets reported that Mr. Smith had taken his life shortly after their conversation.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/gop-operat ... rGjlBoZtp7



Seth Abramson

: I can't help wondering if Peter W. Smith was referring to Alexander Torshin, who once ran a US-Russia exchange program for US students and who clearly brought a Russian student to DC to "study" (Butina). Longshot, but it would track...

Handler of alleged spy Butina tied to suspicious U.S.-Russia exchange program
Russian politician Alexander Torshin’s meetings with American students, coupled with his role managing alleged covert Russian agent Mariia Butina, suggest he may be a more important Kremlin operative than previously known.

JOSH MEYER08/14/2018 05:18 AM EDT
Alexander Torshin is pictured
Alexander Torshin‘s alleged collaboration with accused Russian spy Mariia Butina is not his first connection to a Kremlin-linked effort to recruit Americans. | Denis Sinyakov/AFP/Getty Images
Six years before he was exposed for allegedly managing a covert agent on U.S. soil, the Russian politician Alexander Torshin hosted young Americans visiting Moscow as part of two cultural exchange programs, including one that has drawn the FBI’s scrutiny.

The gregarious Torshin regularly hosted U.S. visitors in the ornate chambers of Russia’s parliament, where he gushed about his love of guns, bourbon and America.

“He was friendly, traveled to the U.S. often and enjoyed sharing his experiences of visiting small-town America,” recalls one participant who went on two trips sponsored by the Russian government.

A photo posted on Facebook by one of the exchange programs shows several young visitors, including the student body president of Princeton University, meeting with Torshin over tea and cookies. (The FBI is not known to have investigated that program. None of the students, or Torshin, has been accused of wrongdoing.)

It wasn’t until years later that Torshin would emerge as a major figure in the Trump-Russia saga — a man whom federal prosecutors say oversaw the accused Russian operative Mariia Butina’s efforts to infiltrate Republican Party circles, including the National Rifle Association, to push them toward more pro-Russia policies. Torshin himself has attended annual NRA meetings dating back to at least 2011.

Many of the first-class student exchanges were officially organized by the Russian Cultural Center in Washington, D.C., and included top-flight meals, airfare and hotel accommodations. But the center’s exchange programs abruptly stopped in fall 2013, after FBI counterintelligence agents urgently located dozens of trip participants and told them the program was an elaborate cover for a Washington-based Russian spy recruiting effort.

The agents said the Russians had prepared dossiers on some of the most promising participants, two of the former students told POLITICO. They pressed for every detail of the program, including whom the students met, where they went and what they discussed. They also said that Russian government official who oversaw the program — from a mansion about a mile and a half from the White House — was a suspected spy and would be kicked out of the U.S. soon.

“They said they had a great degree of confidence that the trips were part of an effort to spot and assess future intelligence assets,” the participant, a former student government leader and Russian-language student, said of the three FBI agents who questioned him for more than an hour. “They told us it was standard Russian spycraft.”

The FBI’s interest in that cultural exchange program for young American political and business leaders was reported at the time, including a single, passing reference to Torshin. But the details of his involvement in the exchanges is a new revelation, as is his participation in the second exchange program for student body presidents at American universities dating back to at least 2010.

The new detail fills out the picture of the Russian lawmaker — now deputy governor of his country’s central bank — who is a longtime close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin. It shows that Torshin’s collaboration with Butina was not his first connection to a Kremlin-linked effort to recruit Americans, and underscores that covert Russian spy operations in the U.S. have been underway for years, well before Trump launched his 2016 presidential bid.

While Torshin is not identified by name in the Butina court filings, several sources close to the investigation told POLITICO he is the Russian official described as directing Butina’s alleged efforts to establish “unofficial lines of communications with U.S. politicians and political organizations" and “to send reports, seek direction, and receive orders in furtherance of the conspiracy” from Moscow.

His name has also shown up in investigations by Congress, the Federal Election Commission and, reportedly, special counsel Robert Mueller, into Russia’s attempts to interfere with the 2016 presidential election. Those include examinations of possible attempts to establish a back channel between Trump and Putin, as well as possible efforts to illegally funnel Russian campaign contributions to Trump.

But his meetings with American students earlier in the decade, coupled with the government’s recent allegations in the Butina case, suggest that Torshin may be a more significant Kremlin operative, and for a longer time, than was previously understood.

“All of that needs to be explored now through the lens that Torshin is a handler for Russian intelligence operatives,” said Max Bergmann, a State Department senior international security adviser in the Obama administration. “The suspicion has to be raised, given what is laid out in [the Butina] indictment, that this wasn’t his first rodeo.”

Torshin did not respond to requests for an interview, but has denied any wrongdoing related to the current investigations. The 29-year-old Butina, indicted by federal prosecutors in July, has pleaded not guilty to charges of acting as an illegal foreign agent — including, according to prosecutors, by using sex as a means of influence.

U.S. government Kremlinologists have tracked Torshin, 64, for years, at least since his first known visit to the U.S. in 2004.

As a rising star in Putin’s United Russia Political party, Torshin became an ally of the Russian leader. Putin tapped him that same year to run a sensitive parliamentary investigation investigating the horrific terrorist siege of a school in the Russian town of Beslan; many observers considered the resulting report a whitewash that absolved Russian security forces.

By 2010, Torshin had become a leading United Russia voice in the Russian Duma, a trusted Putin aide on sensitive security issues and, most likely, a go-to ally for important missions that didn’t fall under his official portfolio, according to Bergmann and other former officials.

Later that year, for instance, Torshin helped orchestrate a secret spy swap between the U.S. and Russia after the FBI arrested 10 Russian operatives who had been living undercover in America for years.

Also in 2010, Torshin met with a delegation of 15 student body presidents from American universities as part of an exchange program paid for, and sponsored by, a Russian government agency focused on “youth affairs.” Because the trip was designed to mirror a popular and high-profile congressional exchange program, the students were given a briefing by top White House and congressional Russia hands, including Michael McFaul, then the National Security Council’s director for Russian affairs and later the U.S. ambassador to Russia.

On the conference call, which has not previously been reported, McFaul and others gave the students background about Russia — but also cautioned them to be on guard about unusual overtures, including from their Russian student counterparts, said one participating student who, like others interviewed for this article, spoke on the condition of anonymity because they fear the trips risk could taint their professional reputations. McFaul told POLITICO he doesn’t recall the discussion, but his role in the pre-trip briefing was referenced in some university news releases at the time.

Thanks to the briefing, “we went in with our eyes open” about how, in Russia, even a friendly interest in sharing information or establishing long-term relationships, might not be what it seemed, the former student said. He added that the trip went smoothly and nothing appeared suspicious about meetings with Torshin and at least two other Putin allies connected to the current Trump-Russia saga.

The next March, Torshin met with another set of students on an exchange program organized through the same youth affairs agency, in the meeting posted on Facebook.

And the year after that, he met with older groups of young leaders sponsored by the Russian Cultural Center, according to the participant on two trips and another person who went on one exchange.

By the fall of 2013, the FBI was well into an investigation into that exchange program, and had come to believe it was a front for developing young Americans as assets, the two participants said. The D.C. chapter is just one of more than 80 Russian cultural and science centers in various countries that U.S. intelligence officials suspect of being a front for all manner of spy operations.

The cultural center trips were popular among well-connected young Washingtonians interested in spending a week in an exotic foreign country with everything, down to the visa application fee, covered by the sponsor.

But the young former student government leader, who went on two trips in 2012 and 2013, said the organizers also “recruited on their own and made the determination who to select.”

“They had a specific type of person they were looking for,” he said. “Future leaders.”

When the FBI began contacting trip participants in late September and October of 2013, many were shocked at what the agents were telling them. The agents began by reading from a printed card with details of about what they were investigating, including how they believed Russian Cultural Center Director Yury Zaitsev was overseeing the alleged spy recruitment operation, according to the two participants, both of whom shared details of their trips and FBI interviews with POLITICO.

The discussions were “very frank,” according to one of the FBI’s top counterintelligence officials at the time. The official said the agents’ interviews were exhaustive, in part because Russian intelligence operatives excel at being unobtrusive and patiently laying the groundwork for relationships they hope to develop over years or even decades.

In hindsight, the second trip participant said there were indications that the group’s extremely generous Russian hosts might have had ulterior motives.

During his interview, that participant told the FBI agents that he thought it was “unusual” that the group had been granted such high-level meetings, including with top-ranking officials from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The agents were particularly interested in any details about those meetings, he said, “and why are these kids meeting with these super high-level people.”

“It seemed like they were trying to foster the exchange in a professional and productive way,” the second participant said. But, he added: “If one person out of a group of 20 becomes an asset for them, then I suppose it’s worth it for them to pay the whole group for the trip.”

After hearing from the FBI, some students backed out of the next scheduled trip. The former participant on two trips, who remains active in other efforts to promote U.S.-Russian relations, said he believed the FBI investigation — reported at the time by Mother Jones and the Washington Post — effectively ended the Russian Cultural Center exchange programs.

In all, the FBI believes that at least 125 people went on cultural exchange programs involving Zaitsev and the Russian Cultural Center, including grad students, non-governmental organization staffers, political aides to national and state officials and business executives. The former FBI official declined to comment on whether agents have investigated other cultural exchange programs, such as those sponsored by Moscow’s youth affairs agency, that also included Torshin.

As Butina and Torshin allegedly ramped up their U.S.-based influence operation ahead of the 2016 presidential election, Butina attended numerous events at the Russian Cultural Center. She even met with the organization’s director for a dinner that was caught on camera by FBI officials, as POLITICO recently reported.

That director was a suspected Russian intelligence operative just like his predecessor, Zaitsev, and also left the U.S. following FBI investigations, federal authorities allege in Butina’s case. Both men denied wrongdoing.

Robert Driscoll, Butina’s lawyer, scoffed at the notion that Torshin is a master spy, and said his client’s connections to the Russian Cultural Center were merely social. He added that in his frequent talks with Butina, she has described Torshin as someone who genuinely has come to love America — especially Nashville, where the two attended an Alan Jackson country music concert while there for the NRA convention.

“My impression of him from knowing Mariia is that she viewed him as a mentor and as someone who was helpful to her, with her gun rights group and personally,” Driscoll said. “He helped raise her profile, and she got to travel and attend different events with him.”

The participant on two of the cultural trips said Torshin was especially popular with U.S. visitors, in part because he seemed most interested in small talk and sharing his tales of traveling to the far corners of the United States.

“He was always eager and happy to meet with Americans,” he said.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/ ... hin-776237


Seth Abramson

What the WSJ fails to note in burying its lede re: Smith's "suicide" is that his note (was it?) indicating he killed himself said it was due to insurance payments and his impending death from sickness—meaning he'd planned it *a long time*. The WSJ info suggests that's impossible.

: Not only is Hungary the HQ in Europe for Putin's FSB, but Schmitz, another member of Trump's NatSec team, went to Hungary while searching for the Clinton emails in Summer 2016. And I have long thought he knew of Smith's effort at the time. Worth considering.

: In mid-October, Butina was in contact with J.D. Gordon, who was technically under Mike Flynn on the Trump campaign national security apparatus. Gordon's services were mysteriously not retained post-election... *allegedly*. (He went to Hungary post-election.)
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trumpublicons: Foreign Influence/Grifting in '16 US Elec

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Oct 08, 2018 9:14 am

Jed Shugerman


@jedshug
Follow Follow @jedshug
More
Jed Shugerman Retweeted Franklin Foer
1. The Trump/Alfa Bank server connection during the campaign wasn't random.
2. Trump and the GOP just appointed Brian Benczkowski, a lawyer who worked for Alfa Bank, to lead the DOJ's criminal division, and he refuses to recuse himself.
What the hell is going on here?Jed Shugerman added,




Franklin Foer


Dexter Filkins does a meticulous job revisiting the Trump/Alfa Bank server connection--and lands at about the same conclusion I did a few years back: This wasn't random.

Dean Baquet didn't run the Times story on the subject--and he slammed my piece on Alfa to @ErikWemple . But he now says, "It felt like there was something there.”

One investigator told Filkins: “Is it possible there is an innocuous explanation for all this? Yes, of course. And it’s also possible that space aliens did this. It’s possible—just not very likely.”


Filkins also notes that Alfa "began trying to uncover the anonymous sources" in my piece. And sent intimidating letters to my named sources, hoping to uncover the ultimate source of the data.



Was There a Connection Between a Russian Bank and the Trump Campaign?

A team of computer scientists sifted through records of unusual Web traffic in search of answers.

Dexter Filkins
October 8, 2018 5:00 AM
A set of cryptic data has inspired a years-long argument over its meaning.

Illustration by Jarek Waszul
In August, 2016, Max decided to reveal the data that he and his colleagues had assembled. “If the covert communications were real, this potential threat to our country needed to be known before the election,” he said. After some discussion, he and his lawyer decided to hand over the findings to Eric Lichtblau, of the Times. Lichtblau met with Max, and began to look at the data.

Lichtblau had done breakthrough reporting on National Security Agency surveillance, and he knew that Max’s findings would require sophisticated analysis. D.N.S. lookups are metadata—records that indicate computer interactions but don’t necessarily demonstrate human communication. Lichtblau shared the data with three leading computer scientists, and, like Max, they were struck by the unusual traffic on the server. As Lichtblau talked to experts, he became increasingly convinced that the data suggested a substantive connection. “Not only is there clearly something there but there’s clearly something that someone has gone to great lengths to conceal,” he told me. Jean Camp, of Indiana University, had also vetted some of the data. “These people who should not be communicating are clearly communicating,” she said. In order to encourage discussion among analysts, Camp posted a portion of the raw data on her Web site.

As Lichtblau wrote a draft of an article for the Times, Max’s lawyer contacted the F.B.I. to alert agents that a story about Trump would be running in a national publication, and to pass along the data. A few days later, an F.B.I. official called Lichtblau and asked him to come to the Bureau’s headquarters, in Washington, D.C.

At the meeting, in late September, 2016, a roomful of officials told Lichtblau that they were looking into potential Russian interference in the election. According to a source who was briefed on the investigation, the Bureau had intelligence from informants suggesting a possible connection between the Trump Organization and Russian banks, but no data. The information from Max’s group could be a significant advance. “The F.B.I. was looking for people in the United States who were helping Russia to influence the election,” the source said. “It was very important to the Bureau. It was urgent.”

The F.B.I. officials asked Lichtblau to delay publishing his story, saying that releasing the news could jeopardize their investigation. As the story sat, Dean Baquet, the Times’ executive editor, decided that it would not suffice to report the existence of computer contacts without knowing their purpose. Lichtblau disagreed, arguing that his story contained important news: that the F.B.I. had opened a counterintelligence investigation into Russian contacts with Trump’s aides. “It was a really tense debate,” Baquet told me. “If I were the reporter, I would have wanted to run it, too. It felt like there was something there.” But, with the election looming, Baquet thought that he could not publish the story without being more confident in its conclusions.

Over time, the F.B.I.’s interest in the possibility of an Alfa Bank connection seemed to wane. An agency official told Lichtblau that there could be an innocuous explanation for the computer traffic. Then, on October 30th, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid wrote a letter to James Comey, the director of the F.B.I., charging that the Bureau was withholding information about “close ties and coordination” between the Trump campaign and Russia. “We had a window,” Lichtblau said. His story about Alfa Bank ran the next day. But it bore only a modest resemblance to what he had filed. The headline— “Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia”—seemed to exonerate the Trump campaign. And, though the article mentioned the server, it omitted any reference to the computer scientists who had told Lichtblau that the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank might have been communicating. “We were saying that the investigation was basically over—and it was just beginning,” Lichtblau told me.

That same day, Slate ran a story, by Franklin Foer, that made a detailed case for the possibility of a covert link between Alfa Bank and Trump. Foer’s report was based largely on information from a colleague of Max’s who called himself Tea Leaves. Foer quoted several outside experts; most said that there appeared to be no other plausible explanation for the data.

One remarkable aspect of Foer’s story involved the way that the Trump domain had stopped working. On September 21st, he wrote, the Times had delivered potential evidence of communications to B.G.R., a Washington lobbying firm that worked for Alfa Bank. Two days later, the Trump domain vanished from the Internet. (Technically, its “A record,” which translates the domain name to an I.P. address, was deleted. If the D.N.S. is a phone book, the domain name was effectively decoupled from its number.) For four days, the servers at Alfa Bank kept trying to look up the Trump domain. Then, ten minutes after the last attempt, one of them looked up another domain, which had been configured to lead to the same Trump Organization server.

Max’s group was surprised. The Trump domain had been shut down after the Times contacted Alfa Bank’s representatives—but before the newspaper contacted Trump. “That shows a human interaction,” Max concluded. “Certain actions leave fingerprints.” He reasoned that someone representing Alfa Bank had alerted the Trump Organization, which shut down the domain, set up another one, and then informed Alfa Bank of the new address.

A week after the Times story appeared, Trump won the election. On Inauguration Day, Liz Spayd, the Times’ ombudsman, published a column criticizing the paper’s handling of stories related to Trump and Russia, including the Alfa Bank connection. “The Times was too timid in its decisions not to publish the material it had,” she wrote. Spayd’s article did not sit well with Baquet. “It was a bad column,” he told the Washington Post. Spayd argued that Slate had acted correctly by publishing a more aggressive story, which Baquet dismissed as a “fairly ridiculous conclusion.” That June, Spayd’s job was eliminated, as the paper’s publisher said that the position of ombudsman had become outdated in the digital age. When I talked to Baquet recently, he still felt that he had been right to resist discussing the server in greater depth, but he acknowledged that the Times had been too quick to disclaim the possibility of Trump’s connections to Russia. “The story was written too knowingly,” he said. “The headline was flawed. We didn’t know then what we know now.”

In April, 2017, Lichtblau left the Times, after fifteen years—in part, he said, because of the way that the Alfa Bank story was handled. He went to work for CNN, but resigned less than two months later, amid controversy over another story that he had worked on, about the Trump aide Anthony Scaramucci. This April, Lichtblau returned to the Times newsroom for a celebration: he had been part of a team of Times reporters that was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for its work on other aspects of the Trump campaign. “It was quite a year,” he said.

Meanwhile, the Trump-Alfa Bank story seemed to fade. The Trump campaign dismissed any connection, saying, “The only covert server is the one Hillary Clinton recklessly established in her basement.” Bloggers and tech journalists assailed the Slate piece online. The cybersecurity researcher Robert Graham called the analysis “nonsense,” and complained, “This is why we can’t have nice things on the Internet.” He pointed out several problems. For instance, Foer’s sources had found that the Trump domain was blocking incoming e-mail, and argued that this was evidence that Trump and Alfa Bank were maintaining a private communications network; in fact, Listrak routinely configured its marketing servers to send e-mail but not to receive it. Graham also noted that the domain was administered not by Trump but by Cendyn, a company in Boca Raton that handled his company’s marketing e-mail.

Alfa Bank hired two cybersecurity firms, Mandiant and Stroz Friedberg, to review the data. Both firms reported that they had found no evidence of communications with the Trump Organization. The bank also began trying to uncover the anonymous sources in the Slate piece. Attorneys representing Alfa contacted Jean Camp, telling her that they were considering legal action and asking her to identify the researchers who had assembled the data. She declined to reveal their names. “This is what tenure is for,” she told me.

While Republicans in Congress have rejected the possibility of collusion, with some joining Trump in calling the Mueller inquiry a politically motivated “witch hunt,” a few Democrats have continued to pursue the matter. After Trump’s Inauguration, two Democratic senators who had reviewed the data assembled by Max’s group—Mark Warner and a colleague who requested anonymity—asked the F.B.I. for an assessment of any potential contacts between Alfa Bank and the Trump Organization. The material was also brought to the attention of the C.I.A., which found it substantial enough to suggest that the F.B.I. investigate. In March, 2017, a Pennsylvania news outlet called Lancaster Online reported that F.B.I. agents had visited the offices of Listrak, the company that housed the Trump server. Ross Kramer, Listrak’s C.E.O., told me, “I gave them everything they asked for.”

Around the same time, the second Democratic senator approached a former Senate staffer named Daniel Jones and asked him to give the data a closer look. Jones had served as a counterterrorism investigator for the F.B.I. and then spent ten years working for the Senate Intelligence Committee, where he led the inquiry into the use of torture under the George W. Bush Administration. Now he was running an investigations firm, the Penn Quarter Group, and a nonprofit initiative called the Democracy Integrity Project, which was intended to help keep elections free from foreign interference.

To assess the Alfa Bank data, Jones assembled a team of computer scientists, divided into two groups, one on each coast. (They also consulted with Jean Camp, who agreed to coöperate despite the possibility that Alfa Bank might take legal action.) All these experts have national reputations in the field. Some have held senior cybersecurity jobs in the Pentagon, the White House, and the intelligence services, as well as in leading American technology companies. In order to encourage an unbiased outcome, Jones never introduced the East Coast group to the West Coast group.

I met several times with the two members of the East Coast group and spoke with them repeatedly. They used pseudonyms, Paul and Leto, in part because they had been alarmed by encounters with Russia while they were working at high levels of government. Leto said that, in 2016, as he was investigating cyber intrusions that seemed to originate in Russia, he became convinced that he was being followed. Both he and Paul believed that their phones had been hacked. These incursions coincided with a period of intense Russian activity in the U.S., including the hacking of the D.N.C., a pro-Trump social-media blitz, and the arrival of Maria Butina, who is accused of being a Russian agent sent to ingratiate herself with American conservative leaders. (Butina has denied the accusations.)

As Paul and Leto began working, they needed to verify that Max’s data presented an accurate picture of the traffic. After the Slate story appeared, skeptics pointed out that no one has a comprehensive view of the Domain Name System. They speculated that other entities, besides Alfa Bank and Spectrum Health, had looked up the Trump domain, and that Max had failed to see them. The D.N.S. company Dyn told a reporter that it had seen lookups from other computers around the world. But Dyn turned out to have registered only two additional lookups, both from the same address in the Netherlands.

Max and his colleagues maintain that they are able to see nearly all the D.N.S. lookups on a given domain; the senior Capitol Hill aide I spoke to affirmed that Max’s group is widely understood to have this capability. Paul Vixie, one of the original architects of the D.N.S. network, examined the data and told me, “If this is a forgery, it’s better than any forgery I’ve seen.” Jones’s team also ran analyses and real-time tests to check Max’s access to D.N.S. records. “It’s completely implausible that he could have fooled us,” Paul said.

Max had provided the Jones team with thirty-seven million D.N.S. records, enough to fill thousands of screens with time stamps and I.P. addresses—long strings of numbers and letters in green type. Over the course of several months, Paul and Leto examined the data for patterns and anomalies. “We stared at a lot of green screens,” Paul said. They regarded their inquiry as a statistical enterprise, capturing each Alfa Bank D.N.S. query from the ocean of data that they had been given and plotting it over a four-month period. Both said that they began their work as skeptics. “I started from an assumption that this is a bunch of nonsense,” Leto told me.

Much of the information that was publicly available might well have supported that assumption. Foer’s article in Slate had prompted online discussions, in which commentators offered explanations ranging from the benign to the sinister. The timing of the lookups, which came in the summer just before the election, invited speculation. Foer claimed that the biggest flurries of traffic coincided with major campaign events, including the party conventions. Paul and Leto were dubious. If anything, the traffic coincided with Paul Manafort’s time as Trump’s campaign manager—but the D.N.S. queries continued after Manafort stepped down. “A lot of people are seeing faces in clouds,” Leto said.

The Trump Organization had done little to clarify the matter. In October, 2016, it released a statement denying interactions with Alfa Bank “or any Russian entity.” Instead, it offered a peculiar explanation for the D.N.S. traffic: it had been triggered when “an existing banking customer of Cendyn”—the marketing firm—had used the company’s systems to send communications to Alfa Bank. Such a scenario would be highly irregular; it was as if Gmail had allowed a user to send e-mail from another user’s account. “It makes no sense,” Paul told me.

Trump’s advocates claimed that the investigations sponsored by Alfa Bank had proved that Alfa and the Trump Organization were not communicating. In fact, they sidestepped the question. Mandiant, one of the cybersecurity firms, said that it was unable to inspect the bank’s D.N.S. logs from 2016, because Alfa retained such records for only twenty-four hours. The other firm, Stroz Friedberg, gave the same explanation for why it, too, was “unable to verify” the data.

As Jones’s team vetted the data, they examined various possible explanations. One was malware, which had played a role in the hack of the D.N.C.’s computers. Most malware has “distinctive patterns of behavior,” Camp told me. It is typically sent out in a blast, aimed simultaneously at multiple domains. There is a “payload”—a mechanism that activates the malicious activity—and a “recruitment mechanism,” which enables the malware to take over parts of a vulnerable computer. None of the experts whom Jones assembled found any evidence of this behavior on the Trump server. “Malware doesn’t keep banging on the door like that,” Paul said.

A second possibility was marketing e-mail. After the Slate article appeared, some commentators suggested that Trump’s server had innocently sent promotional e-mails to Alfa Bank, and that a computer there had responded with queries designed to verify the identity of the sender. This became a catchall answer for anyone who couldn’t explain what had happened. “Either this is something innocuous, like spam,” Rachel Cohen, a press secretary for Senator Warner, told me, “or it’s completely nefarious.”

Alfa Bank had received Trump marketing e-mails in the past. But Cendyn had told CNN that it stopped sending e-mails for the Trump Organization in March, 2016, before the peculiar activity began; Trump had transferred his online marketing to another company, called Serenata. Jones’s team investigated, and found additional evidence that the server wasn’t sending marketing e-mails at the time. One indicator was the unusually limited traffic. Kramer, of Listrak, told me that a typical client sends “tens of thousands of e-mails a day” to huge numbers of recipients. If the Trump server was following that pattern, it would have generated significant D.N.S. traffic. To establish a kind of control group, Jones’s team asked Max to capture the D.N.S. logs for the Denihan Hospitality Group—a hotel chain, similar in size to Trump’s, which was using Cendyn and Listrak to send marketing e-mails. In a sample spanning August and September, 2016, a Denihan domain received more than twenty thousand D.N.S. queries, from more than a thousand I.P. addresses. In the same period, the Trump domain had twenty-five hundred lookups, nearly all of them from Alfa Bank and Spectrum Health.

The timing and the frequency of the D.N.S. lookups also did not suggest spam, Paul and Leto believed. Mass-marketing e-mails are typically sent by an automated process, one after another, in an unbroken rhythm. The Alfa queries seemed to fall into two categories. Some came in a steady pulse, while others arrived irregularly—sometimes many in a day, sometimes a few. “The timing of the communication was not random, and it wasn’t regular-periodic,” Paul said. “It was a better match for human activity.”

But, if the Trump server wasn’t sending or receiving e-mail, what could explain the traffic? There was the possibility of “spoofing”—essentially, faking an identity. Did someone try to make it appear, falsely, that Alfa Bank was reaching out to the Trump Organization? Jones’s team concluded that such an attack would have been unlikely to produce thousands of D.N.S. lookups, over such a long time. “Maybe for a few days, but not four months,” Leto said. There was also a question of motive. In the spring of 2016, very few people knew that Max and his colleagues were able to monitor D.N.S. traffic so comprehensively, so any spoofers would have been impersonating Alfa Bank with little expectation of being detected. News stories investigating the links between Trump and Russia were months away. “Why would someone do that?” Steven Bellovin, of Columbia, said. “And why would they pick those organizations?”
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018 ... ssion=true


Spectrum Health’s Role in the Trump-Russia Server Scandal

teapainusaJuly 10, 2017
Much speculation and rumor has surrounded the mysterious data connections that bounced back and forth between Russia’s Alfa Bank, Trump Tower and the DeVos family’s Spectrum Health in Michigan prior to the 2016 election. Rather than concentratin’ on whether it was top-secret spyware, database replication or some other whiz-bang data transmittin’ software, let’s step back and look at the role each site played and what value each player might have added to this little Trump-spiracy.

Now that some of the smoke has cleared, we know two basic facts.

Russian hackers were able to acquire voter rolls from a number of key battleground states.

Russian bot-farms were able to inundate social media with fake news, propaganda and Trump-friendly talkin’ points in the run-up to the election.


The question we must ask is a simple, but important one, because the plausibility of this whole data-sharin’ shindig rests on it…

How did the Russians convert generic voter roll information into a specific list of targeted social media contacts?

In simpler terms…

Image
From This To This

Voter rolls have basic information: name, address, maybe a phone number, but that’s it. Unless you plan a massive door-knockin’ campaign, it’s pretty useless. So, to repeat the question, how do you get from generic voter rolls to micro-targeted social media lists? What’s the one thing that ties all these things together? An email address!

Image
From This To This

All Russian intelligence needed was to associate an email address with a name and address of a voter and bingo! Every social media account you own is tied to your email address, right? Once they had an email, they could data-mine everything about you from your social media feeds. They immediately knew if you were a Trumper, a Hill-bot, a Bernie Bro or a Stein fanatic, and could tailor a bot-campaign custom-made for you!

So where did they get the email addresses? This is where Spectrum Health comes in. Located in Grand Rapids, Michigan, Spectrum is smack dab in the middle of one of the states the Trump campaign had to tip to win. They are a huge health-care provider with subsidiaries that include hospitals treatment facilities, urgent-care clinics, as well as physician practices that serve the western Michigan area. But the big enchilada for this caper is their access to insurance provider databases from all over the United States. And what do those insurance database all have? Email addresses tied to a name and address!

Bam! This is the key to tied the whole operation together.

Image
EmailSpectrumChart

So what did the DeVos family get in return for Spectrum’s role in this little ping-ping wing-ding? You’ll have to ask the new Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos!

https://teapainusa.wordpress.com/2017/0 ... r-scandal/


Polly Sigh

DNS traffic between Russia's Alfa Bank and Trump Tower coincided with Manafort’s time as campaign chair and continued after he left. "It could have been a messaging system" using Webmail to facilitate secret communications via 'foldering,' a method favored by Manafort.

Image
Image
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trumpublicons: Foreign Influence/Grifting in '16 US Elec

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Oct 08, 2018 9:44 pm

Amy Fiscus
·
3h
NEW: Rick Gates, the Trump campaign deputy, sought proposals in 2016 from an Israeli intel firm, which suggested creating fake online profiles to convince RNC delegates not to vote for Cruz, and gathering intel on Clinton

The Israeli firm gave code names to the players involved (link: https://nyti.ms/2E6xgmD) nyti.ms/2E6xgmD

Trump was Lion
Cruz was Bear
Clinton was Forest

Trump Campaign Aide Requested Online Manipulation Plans From Israeli Intelligence Firm
Oct. 8, 2018

Rick Gates, a top Trump campaign aide, expressed interest in an Israeli company’s proposal for a social media manipulation effort in 2016, documents and interviews show.Damon Winter/The New York Times
WASHINGTON — A top Trump campaign official requested proposals in 2016 from an Israeli company to create fake online identities, to use social media manipulation and to gather intelligence to help defeat Republican primary race opponents and Hillary Clinton, according to interviews and copies of the proposals.

The Trump campaign’s interest in the work began as Russians were escalating their effort to aid Donald J. Trump. Though the Israeli company’s pitches were narrower than Moscow’s interference campaign and appear unconnected, the documents show that a senior Trump aide saw the promise of a disruption effort to swing voters in Mr. Trump’s favor.

The campaign official, Rick Gates, sought one proposal to use bogus personas to target and sway 5,000 delegates to the 2016 Republican National Convention by attacking Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, Mr. Trump’s main opponent at the time. Another proposal describes opposition research and “complementary intelligence activities” about Mrs. Clinton and people close to her, according to copies of the proposals obtained by The New York Times and interviews with four people involved in creating the documents.


Documents from Psy-Group laying out its proposals for the Trump campaign.
A third proposal by the company, Psy-Group, which is staffed by former Israeli intelligence operatives, sketched out a monthslong plan to help Mr. Trump by using social media to help expose or amplify division among rival campaigns and factions. The proposals, part of what Psy-Group called “Project Rome,” used code names to identify the players — Mr. Trump was “Lion” and Mrs. Clinton was “Forest.” Mr. Cruz, who Trump campaign officials feared might lead a revolt over the Republican presidential nomination, was “Bear.”

[An Israeli company drew up digital manipulation proposals for a Trump campaign aide. Read them here.]

There is no evidence that the Trump campaign acted on the proposals, and Mr. Gates ultimately was uninterested in Psy-Group’s work, a person with knowledge of the discussions said, in part because other campaign aides were developing a social media strategy. Psy-Group’s owner, Joel Zamel, did meet in August 2016 with Donald Trump Jr., Mr. Trump’s eldest son.

Investigators working for Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel investigating Russia’s campaign to disrupt the 2016 election and whether any Trump associates conspired, have obtained copies of the proposals and questioned Psy-Group employees, according to people familiar with those interviews.

The scope of the social media campaigns, essentially a broad effort to sow disinformation among Republican delegates and general election voters, was more extensive than the work typically done by campaign operatives to spread the candidate’s message on digital platforms. The proposal to gather information about Mrs. Clinton and her aides has elements of traditional opposition research, but it also contains cryptic language that suggests using clandestine means to build “intelligence dossiers.”

Mr. Gates first heard about Psy-Group’s work during a March 2016 meeting at the Mandarin Oriental hotel along the Washington waterfront with George Birnbaum, a Republican consultant with close ties to current and former Israeli government officials. Mr. Gates had joined the Trump campaign days earlier with Paul Manafort, his longtime business partner, to try to prevent a revolt of Republican delegates from Mr. Trump toward Mr. Cruz, who was the favored candidate among the party’s establishment.

According to Mr. Birnbaum, Mr. Gates expressed interest during that meeting in using social media influence and manipulation as a campaign tool, most immediately to try to sway Republican delegates toward Mr. Trump.

“He was interested in finding the technology to achieve what they were looking for,” Mr. Birnbaum said in an interview. Through a lawyer, Mr. Gates declined to comment. A person familiar with Mr. Gates’s account of the meeting said that Mr. Birnbaum first raised the topic of hiring an outside firm to conduct the social media campaign.

The special counsel’s office indicted Mr. Manafort and Mr. Gates last year on multiple charges of financial fraud and tax evasion. Mr. Gates pleaded guilty to several of the charges this year, and he is cooperating with Mr. Mueller’s investigation.

It is unclear whether the Project Rome proposals describe work that would violate laws regulating foreign participation in American elections. Psy-Group hired Covington & Burling, a Washington-based law firm, to conduct a legal review. Stuart Eizenstat, a former American diplomat and a partner at the firm who participated in the legal review, declined to comment on its conclusions.

Mr. Birnbaum was a protégé of Arthur J. Finkelstein, the legendary Republican political operative, and has spent years as a consultant working on behalf of candidates in foreign elections. In 1996, he helped Mr. Finkelstein engineer Benjamin Netanyahu’s victory over Shimon Peres to become the prime minister of Israel.

Since then, Mr. Birnbaum has worked extensively as a campaign consultant for Israeli politicians and has developed a network of contacts with current and former Israeli security officials. He served as a foreign policy adviser to the 2016 presidential campaign of Ben Carson, the neurosurgeon who is now the secretary of housing and urban development.

Donald J. Trump and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas at a debate in 2016. Mr. Gates joined the Trump campaign to try to prevent a revolt of Republican delegates toward Mr. Cruz.Todd Heisler/The New York Times
Mr. Birnbaum appeared to initiate the contact with Mr. Gates, asking for his email address from Eckart Sager, a political consultant who had worked with both men, to pitch Mr. Gates on a technology that could be used by Mr. Gates’s and Mr. Manafort’s clients in Eastern Europe. Mr. Sager’s name emerged this year in a filing by Mr. Mueller’s team, which claimed that Mr. Manafort had tried to influence Mr. Sager’s court testimony in the special counsel’s case against Mr. Manafort.

After the hotel meeting with Mr. Gates in March 2016, Mr. Birnbaum worked directly with Psy-Group employees to refine the proposals for the Trump campaign, according to people familiar with the work.

The proposals all promise the utmost secrecy, including the use of code names and password-protected documents. Filled with jargon and buzzwords, they sketch out a vigorous campaign where Psy-Group employees would conduct the tedious work of creating messages that could influence delegates based on their personalities.

The first document, dated April 2016, said that the company “was asked to provide a proposal” for “campaign intelligence and influence services.” Psy-Group promised that “veteran intelligence officers” would use various methods to assess the leanings of the roughly 5,000 delegates to the Republican nominating convention.

After scouring social media accounts and all other available information to compile a dossier on the psychology of any persuadable delegate, more than 40 Psy-Group employees would use “authentic looking” fake online identities to bombard up to 2,500 targets with specially tailored messages meant to win them over to Mr. Trump.

The messages would describe Mr. Cruz’s “ulterior motives or hidden plans,” or they would appear to come from former Cruz supporters or from influential individuals with the same background or ideology as a target. The barrage of messages would continue for months and include “both online and offline” approaches, even telephone calls.

Psy-Group also said that it would obtain “unique intel” by different means, including “covert sources” and “tailored avatars.”

Each approach would “look authentic and not part of the paid campaign,” the proposal promised. The price tag for the work was more than $3 million. To carry out the plan, Psy-Group intended to double its size, hiring an additional 50 employees — some of them American citizens — and renting new office space, according to former employees of the company.

A second proposal focused on gathering information about Mrs. Clinton and 10 of her associates through publicly available data as well as unspecified “complementary intelligence activities.” Psy-Group promised to prepare a comprehensive dossier on each of the targets, including “any actionable intelligence.”

A third document emphasized “tailored third-party messaging” aimed at minority, suburban female and undecided voters in battleground states. It promised to create and maintain fake online personas that would deliver messages highlighting Mr. Trump’s merits and Mrs. Clinton’s weaknesses or revealing “rifts and rivalries within the opposition.”

Though it appears that Trump campaign officials declined to accept any of the proposals, Mr. Zamel pitched the company’s services in at least general terms during a meeting on Aug. 3, 2016, at Trump Tower with Donald Trump Jr. That meeting, revealed in May by The Times, was also attended by George Nader, an emissary from the ruler of the United Arab Emirates, and by Erik Prince, a Republican donor and the founder of the private security company formerly known as Blackwater.

Former Psy-Group employees said that, in anticipation of the Trump Tower meeting, Mr. Zamel asked them to prepare an updated version of the third proposal. A lawyer for Mr. Zamel said that Mr. Zamel had not personally discussed specific proposals with Donald Trump Jr. or anyone else from the Trump campaign.

“Mr. Zamel never pitched, or otherwise discussed, any of Psy-Group’s proposals relating to the U.S. elections with anyone related to the Trump campaign, including not with Donald Trump Jr., except for outlining the capabilities of some of his companies in general terms,” said the lawyer, Marc Mukasey.

Mr. Nader and Mr. Zamel have given differing accounts over whether Mr. Zamel ultimately carried out the social media effort to help the Trump campaign and why Mr. Nader paid him $2 million after the election, according to people who have discussed the matter with the two men.

The reason for the payment has been of keen interest to Mr. Mueller, according to people familiar with the matter.

It is unclear how and when the special counsel’s office began its investigation into Psy-Group’s work, but F.B.I. agents have spent hours interviewing the firm’s employees. This year, federal investigators presented a court order to the Israel Police and the Israeli Ministry of Justice to confiscate computers in Psy-Group’s former offices in Petah Tikva, east of Tel Aviv.

The company is now in liquidation.

Mark Mazzetti reported from Washington, Ronen Bergman from Tel Aviv, David D. Kirkpatrick from London and Maggie Haberman from New York.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/08/us/p ... TFDpNtJYpX






Barrett Brown


The operation Trump campaign asked this Israeli firm to conduct for them is called persona management. It was among those things I was persecuted by the DOJ for helping to uncover in 2011. It strikes directly at our ability to perceive the world as it is.

Project PM’s page on persona management, based on what we’d uncovered as of 2012 http://wiki.project-pm.org/wiki/Persona_Management
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trumpublicons: Foreign Influence/Grifting in '16 US Elec

Postby seemslikeadream » Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:34 am

TRUMP’S OPEN BOOK TEST STILL POSES A BIG PERJURY RISK

Octber 12, 2018/0 Comments/in 2016 Presidential Election, Mueller Probe /by emptywheel
In spite of a great deal of encouragement to do so on Twitter, I can’t muster a victory lap from the news that the Mueller team has agreed that Trump’s first round of open book test will focus only on conspiracy with Russia.

President Donald Trump’s legal team is preparing answers to written questions provided by special counsel Robert Mueller, according to sources familiar with the matter.

The move represents a major development after months of negotiations and signals that the Mueller investigation could be entering a final phase with regard to the President.

The questions are focused on matters related to the investigation of possible collusion between Trump associates and Russians seeking to meddle in the 2016 election, the sources said. Trump’s lawyers are preparing written responses, in part relying on documents previously provided to the special counsel, the sources said.

[snip]

Negotiations for Trump’s testimony lasted for the better part of a year. The two sides nearly reached a deal in January for Trump to be questioned at the presidential retreat in rural Maryland, Camp David, only for talks to break down at the last minute. What followed was a series of letters and meetings — some hostile — in which Trump’s lawyers raised objections and sought to limit any potential testimony.

For months, Mueller told Trump’s lawyers that he needed to hear from the President to determine his intent on key events in the obstruction inquiry.


While I find it significant that this report came first from Evan Perez and (?!?!) Dana Bash, not Maggie and Mike (suggesting it may come from different sources than the people who fed the NYT the line that Mueller was primarily interested in obstruction), this report seems to suggest that after letting Trump stall for almost a year, Mueller has decided to finally get him on the record on the key crimes.

While CNN has not said anything about timing — that is, how long Trump’s lawyers will stall over an open book test that they claim they’ve already written many of the answers to — this agreement may have as much to do with preparation for the post-election period in which Mueller can roll out any indictments he has been working on and Trump can start firing people. That is, before he makes any big moves in the case in chief, he has to get Trump on the record in some form or other. Better to get him on the record in sworn written statements than launch a subpoena fight that will last past that post-election period.

So I don’t think this says much about the relative legal exposure Mueller thinks Trump has for obstruction versus conspiracy (though, again, if you’ve got the conspiracy charges, the obstruction charges will be minor by comparison). It says that Mueller has decided it’s time to get Trump committed to one story, under penalty of perjury.

That said, consider two details about obstruction.

First, Mueller has gotten both of the men Trump reportedly dangled pardons to, Mike Flynn and Paul Manafort, to enter cooperation agreements. That means he’s got both men — possibly along with the non-felon lawyers who passed on the offer — describing that they were offered pardons if they protected the President. That, to my mind, is the most slam dunk instance of obstruction even considered. So by obtaining Manafort’s cooperation, Mueller may have already obtained the most compelling evidence of obstruction possible.

Also, it’s not at all clear that Trump can avoid perjury exposure even on an open book test. We’ve already seen that some of the written responses the Trump team has provided Mueller — such as the two versions of their explanation for the Flynn firing — obscure key details (including Trump’s own role in ordering Flynn to tell Russia not to worry about sanctions). Plus, Trump’s lawyers have recently come to realize they not only don’t know as much as they thought they did about what other “friendly” witnesses had to say (Bill Burck seems to have reconfirmed last week that his clients — which include, at a minimum, Don McGahn, Steve Bannon, and Reince Priebus — don’t have Joint Defense Agreements with Trump), but that they don’t actually know everything they need to know from Trump. Trump is unmanageable as a client, so it’s likely he continues to lie to his own lawyers.

Most importantly, on all of the key conspiracy questions Mueller posed to Trump last March (the first two were also in his first set of questions in January), Mueller has at least one and sometimes several cooperating witnesses.

What did you know about phone calls that Mr. Flynn made with the Russian ambassador, Sergey I. Kislyak, in late December 2016? [Flynn]

When did you become aware of the Trump Tower meeting? [Manafort]

During a 2013 trip to Russia, what communication and relationships did you have with the Agalarovs and Russian government officials? [Cohen, Goldstone, Kaveladze]

What communication did you have with Michael D. Cohen, Felix Sater and others, including foreign nationals, about Russian real estate developments during the campaign? [Cohen, Sater]

What discussions did you have during the campaign regarding any meeting with Mr. Putin? Did you discuss it with others? [Manafort, Gates, Cohen]

What discussions did you have during the campaign regarding Russian sanctions? [Manafort, Flynn]

What involvement did you have concerning platform changes regarding arming Ukraine? [Manafort, Gates]

During the campaign, what did you know about Russian hacking, use of social media or other acts aimed at the campaign? [Stone’s associates, Gates, Manafort]

What knowledge did you have of any outreach by your campaign, including by Paul Manafort, to Russia about potential assistance to the campaign? [Manafort]

What did you know about communication between Roger Stone, his associates, Julian Assange or WikiLeaks? [Stone’s associates, Manafort]

What did you know during the transition about an attempt to establish back-channel communication to Russia, and Jared Kushner’s efforts? [Flynn]

What do you know about a 2017 meeting in Seychelles involving Erik Prince? [Flynn]

What do you know about a Ukrainian peace proposal provided to Mr. Cohen in 2017? [Cohen]

The one area where that’s not true is with Roger Stone (though Rick Gates, at least, seems to have been in the loop on some of that), but then Mueller has spent the last 10 months collecting every imaginable piece of evidence pertaining to Stone.

Between Trump’s lawyers’ incomplete grasp of what their client did and the witnesses and other evidence regarding these activities, Mueller has a much better idea of what happened than Trump’s lawyers do. Which means they may not be able to help their client avoid lying.

As I disclosed in July, I provided information to the FBI on issues related to the Mueller investigation, so I’m going to include disclosure statements on Mueller investigation posts from here on out. I will include the disclosure whether or not the stuff I shared with the FBI pertains to the subject of the post.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2018/10/12/t ... jury-risk/
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trumpublicons: Foreign Influence/Grifting in '16 US Elec

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Oct 16, 2018 8:46 am

“He Is Trying to Make It Right”: As the Midterms Approach, Michael Cohen Is Doubling Down on His Civic Duty

As Trump campaigns, Cohen has willingly talked to government investigators for more than 50 hours.

Emily Jane FoxOctober 15, 2018 7:19 pm
The Cohen Files


By Richard Drew/AP/
Over the weekend, Michael Cohen, the former Trump lawyer who famously facilitated a $130,000 payout to the adult-film star Stormy Daniels, demonstrated the ostensibly civic side of his personality. “The #MidtermElections2018 might be the most important vote in our lifetime,” Cohen tweeted on Sunday morning. ”#GetOutAndVote #VoteNovember6th.” The message came days after Cohen’s attorney, Lanny Davis, confirmed that his client had indeed re-registered as a Democrat in advance of the forthcoming midterm elections. It was Cohen’s second go around on the left. He had voted for Obama in 2008 and remained registered as a Democrat until 2017—despite the fact that he was already serving as the Republican National Committee’s deputy finance chair, and only after Steve Wynn, then the R.N.C.’s finance chairman, insisted that he switch.

Other than a few tweets and statements, Cohen has remained relatively quiet since pleading guilty, in August, to violating campaign laws by paying off women who claimed to have had affairs with Donald Trump at what he said, in open court, was the “direction” of the then-candidate. Behind the scenes, however, Robert Mueller’s special investigation into collusion and obstruction of justice continues apace. So does the Southern District’s probe into campaign-finance violations. Despite having no formal cooperation agreement with the government, Cohen has willingly assisted and provided information critical to several ongoing investigations, according to two sources familiar with the situation, in a string of meetings that have exceeded more than 50 hours in sum. (A spokesman for the S.D.N.Y. declined to comment. A spokesperson for the special counsel’s office declined to comment. Cohen declined to comment.) These conversations are the latest manifestation of Cohen's brand of patriotism. In June, Cohen told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos that he would no longer be protecting Trump or the Trump family. “To be crystal clear,” he said, “my wife, my daughter, and my son, and this country have my first loyalty.”

Cohen’s disclosures to investigators remain an enigma, but his proximity to the president and his family make him a valuable witness. As The Wall Street Journal first reported earlier this month, and two sources independently confirmed to me, Trump directed Cohen to enforce the non-disclosure agreement with Daniels after the paper first broke the news of its very existence. Trump then deputized his son, Eric Trump, who is currently minding the family business, to coordinate the legal response to confidential arbitration proceedings, which would have prevented Daniels from telling her story publicly. (Daniels taped an interview with 60 Minutes in March. Trump has denied the affair.) Using his Trump Organization e-mail address, Eric approved the statement that the company’s lawyers offered the Journal about the arbitration. (Eric Trump did not respond to a request for comment, nor did a representative from the Trump Organization. The Trump Organization had publicly denied any role in the arbitration, and the president had vowed to cut ties with his business once he took office.) On Monday, a court dismissed the defamation suit brought against Trump by Daniels, ordering her to pay reasonable attorney’s fees.

Cohen has said to friends that he has regrets about his work on behalf of Trump in his capacity as a Trump Organization employee. “What you see now is a return to who he was before all of this,” one longtime friend of his told me. “He’s an open book, and he’s adamant to make it right.”

His old boss, meanwhile, seems equally galvanized by the political moment. As Axios recently noted, Barack Obama had partaken in nine political rallies during his first two years in office. Trump, on the other hand, has attended 33, from Nevada to Ohio and Kentucky to Montana. One theory for the activity is simple: fear. With three weeks to the midterm elections, Trump is staring down what could be the greatest threat to his presidency. Should Democrats flip the House of Representatives, or, in a decidedly less likely scenario, take the Senate, the Trump-administration agenda would be effectively stalled. Furthermore, a Democratic-controlled legislature, freed from the kinds of constraints Republican lawmakers have relied on to protect the president, could prompt investigations into the Trump Organization, his payment to Daniels, as well as Jared Kushner’s security clearance and business dealings. They could investigate his Cabinet secretaries’ travel and businesses, his administrations’ handling of the travel ban, the hurricane in Puerto Rico, and, of course, the firing of James Comey.

Emily Jane FoxEmily Jane Fox is a reporter for the Hive covering Wall Street, Silicon Valley, and the .001 percent everywhere.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/10 ... estigation


Federal prosecutors confirm grand jury investigation related to Michael Cohen case

Christal HayesUpdated 8:24 p.m. ET Oct. 14, 2018
President Donald Trump's former personal attorney Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to campaign finance and other charges. Deputy U.S. Attorney Robert Khuzami told reporters that Cohen thought "he was above the law." USA TODAY

WASHINGTON – Federal prosecutors on Friday confirmed an ongoing grand jury investigation related to Michael Cohen, the president's former attorney and fixer.

The revelation came in a response to a request in a letter sent by The New York Times to Judge William Pauley III, who is presiding over the case in New York's Southern District.

The Times requested Thursday that Pauley unseal materials related to the raids done on Cohen's home, hotel and office earlier this year before he pleaded guilty to eight criminal counts.

"The Times seeks copies of search warrants, search warrant applications, supporting affidavits, court orders and returns on executed warrants," the newspaper's attorneys wrote in a letter.

Prosecutors responded by saying they were against the request and releasing the documents would affect "an ongoing grand jury investigation," a letter to Pauley on Friday reads.

Prosecutors asked the judge if they could file a full response with portions under seal, meaning for Pauley's eyes only.

Pauley gave prosecutors until Oct. 26 to file a response and granted the request that a portion could be placed under seal.

The April raids came as a shock to the nation. Federal agents took more than a dozen cellphones, business documents, electronic communications and a number of secret recordings, including at least one between Cohen and Donald Trump talking about a hush payment.

The hush payments to several women before the 2016 election, including one to adult film star Stormy Daniels, led to Cohen pleading guilty to federal campaign finance violations.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 628367002/
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trumpublicons: Foreign Influence/Grifting in '16 US Elec

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Oct 16, 2018 4:09 pm

Fusion GPS co-founder pleads the Fifth following House GOP subpoena

Olivia Beavers10/16/18 12:00 PM EDT
Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson on Tuesday pleaded the Fifth following a GOP-issued subpoena to testify behind closed doors before two House committees.

Joshua Levy, a lawyer representing Simpson and the opposition research firm behind the “Steele dossier," said his client would not be participating in the House Judiciary and House Oversight and Government Reform committees' joint investigation, calling it a smear campaign that aims to undermine special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia probe.

Simpson's attorney said the Republican-led Judiciary Committee has turned a blind eye to “White House efforts to influence and interfere with the Justice Department’s investigation in this administration,” noting that it has gone after whistleblowers and Mueller.

Levy compared their efforts to McCarthyism.

“Like Sen. [Joseph] McCarthy, this committee has largely conducted its business in secret confidential interviews and depositions, binding witnesses and their counsels to silence, while the members walk outside to all of you and the media and the public and selectively leak from those interviews to tell you what they want you to hear," Levy added.

Levy, who said his client has cooperated with the investigations of three other congressional committees, has recently taken aim at the GOP lawmakers on the Judiciary and Oversight committees.

In a letter last week, Levy said Simpson will “invoke his constitutional rights not to testify under the First and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution” because this inquiry “is not designed to discover the truth.”

“Consistent with the September 27, 2018 letter we sent to you, Mr. Simpson, whose testimony is a matter of public record, will not be participating in a confidential deposition before this Committee,” lawyers for Simpson wrote to Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) in an electronic letter, according to a copy obtained by The Hill.

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.), one of the two GOP lawmakers present for Tuesday's interview led by committee staff, said the panel will be having discussions in the “coming days” on whether they will move to hold Simpson in contempt for refusing to testify.

“Simpson has to have a reasonable apprehension of criminal prosecution in order to validly invoke the Fifth … but if not, you cannot just invoke the Fifth to avoid answering congressional questions,” Meadows told reporters.

He also connected Simpson’s decision to plead the Fifth as a way to “protect himself” from a potential crime he may have committed.

Simpson, a former journalist who later co-founded Fusion GPS, hired former British spy Christopher Steele to help compile a dossier on Trump that ended up making a series of allegations about the president's possible ties to Russia -- some that have been verified and some that remain unsubstantiated.

The opposition research against Trump was funded in part by 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton's campaign — a flashpoint for Republicans, who have pointed to ties between Fusion GPS and top federal officials as evidence to support their claims that there was political bias against Trump among the top brass at the FBI and Department of Justice.

Some conservative House members have alleged that a contractor working for Simpson's firm, Nellie Ohr, could have passed the dossier on to her husband, Bruce Ohr, who worked as a top official with the Justice Department during the election.

Simpson is one of several witnesses tied to the dossier whom Republicans have sought to interview as part of their joint investigation. Congressional investigators are expected to interview Nellie Ohr on Friday.

Levy on Tuesday said there seems to be a double standard when it comes to congressional testimony.
https://thehill.com/policy/national-sec ... p-subpoena
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trumpublicons: Foreign Influence/Grifting in '16 US Elec

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Oct 17, 2018 10:04 am

Mueller Ready to Deliver Key Findings in His Trump Probe, Sources Say
Chris Strohm

Robert Mueller Photographer: Zach Gibson/Bloomberg
Special Counsel Robert Mueller is expected to issue findings on core aspects of his Russia probe soon after the November midterm elections as he faces intensifying pressure to produce more indictments or shut down his investigation, according to two U.S. officials.

Specifically, Mueller is close to rendering judgment on two of the most explosive aspects of his inquiry: whether there were clear incidents of collusion between Russia and Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, and whether the president took any actions that constitute obstruction of justice, according to one of the officials, who asked not to be identified speaking about the investigation.

That doesn’t necessarily mean Mueller’s findings would be made public if he doesn’t secure unsealed indictments. The regulations governing Mueller’s probe stipulate that he can present his findings only to his boss, who is currently Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. The regulations give a special counsel’s supervisor some discretion in deciding what is relayed to Congress and what is publicly released.

The question of timing is critical. Mueller’s work won’t be concluded ahead of the Nov. 6 midterm elections, when Democrats hope to take control of the House and end Trump’s one-party hold on Washington.

But this timeline also raises questions about the future of the probe itself. Trump has signaled he may replace Attorney General Jeff Sessions after the election, a move that could bring in a new boss for Mueller. Rosenstein also might resign or be fired by Trump after the election.

Rosenstein has made it clear that he wants Mueller to wrap up the investigation as expeditiously as possible, another U.S. official said. The officials gave no indications about the details of Mueller’s conclusions. Mueller’s office declined to comment for this story.

Pre-Election Lull

With three weeks to go before the midterm elections, it’s unlikely Mueller will take any overt action that could be turned into a campaign issue. Justice Department guidelines say prosecutors should avoid any major steps close to an election that could be seen as influencing the outcome.


Mueller Expected to Deliver Key Trump Probe Findings After Midterms
Mueller is expected to make known the probe’s findings soon after the midterms. Bloomberg’s Jodi Schneider reports.
Source: Bloomberg
That suggests the days and weeks immediately after the Nov. 6 election may be the most pivotal time since Mueller took over the Russia investigation almost a year and a half ago. So far, Mueller has secured more than two dozen indictments or guilty pleas.

Read More: Ex-Trump Fixer Cohen Said to Have Lengthy Talks With Mueller

Trump’s frustration with the probe, which he routinely derides as a “witch hunt,” has been growing, prompting concerns he may try to shut down or curtail Mueller’s work at some point.

There’s no indication, though, that Mueller is ready to close up shop, even if he does make some findings, according to former federal prosecutors. Several matters could keep the probe going, such as another significant prosecution or new lines of inquiry. And because Mueller’s investigation has been proceeding quietly, out of the public eye, it’s possible there have been other major developments behind the scenes.

Mueller only recently submitted written questions to Trump’s lawyers regarding potential collusion with Russia, and his team hasn’t yet ruled out seeking an interview with the president, according to one of the U.S. officials. If Trump refused an interview request, Mueller could face the complicated question of whether to seek a grand jury subpoena of the president. The Justice Department has a standing policy that a sitting president can’t be indicted.

At the same time, Mueller is tying down some loose ends. Four of his 17 prosecutors have left the special counsel’s office in recent months. Three are going back to their previous Justice Department jobs, and the fourth has become a research fellow at Columbia Law School.

After several postponements, Mueller’s team has agreed to a sentencing date for Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser, who pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements last year. The Dec. 18 date comes more than a year after Mueller secured a cooperation deal with Flynn, suggesting that Mueller’s team has all it needs from him.

Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, struck his own cooperation agreement with Mueller last month, after being convicted at trial in Virginia on eight counts of bank fraud, filing false tax returns and failure to file a foreign bank account. The plea agreement let him avoid a second trial in Washington. The judge in the Virginia trial, who wasn’t part of the plea agreement, has scheduled a sentencing hearing Friday, which could complicate Manafort’s cooperation agreement with Mueller.

Mueller’s prosecutors also have met with Michael Cohen, Trump’s former personal lawyer. Cohen pleaded guilty in New York in August to tax evasion, bank fraud and violations of campaign finance laws. That separate investigation, headed by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan, is one of several New York probes involving the Trump Organization, and could ultimately prove to be more damaging to the president than Mueller’s work.

Manafort’s Plea

Former federal prosecutors said that Manafort’s plea deal probably advanced Mueller’s timeline for determining whether there was collusion.

Manafort could be assisting Mueller’s team on questions related to whether the Trump campaign changed the Republican party’s stance on Ukraine as part of an understanding with the Russian government, and whether the Russians helped coordinate the release of hacked emails related to Democrat Hillary Clinton with members of Trump’s campaign, said another former prosecutor who asked not to be named.

QuickTake: From Cohen to Collusion, Tallying Trump’s Legal Risks

Manafort is also key to understanding a June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower between Donald Trump Jr. and a group of Russians who had promised damaging information concerning Clinton, the former official said.

Manafort appears to have good material to offer, said Samuel Buell, a former federal prosecutor who teaches at Duke University School of Law. “He’s not going to get that deal unless he can help Mueller make a case against one or more people,” Buell said. Cooperators can’t expect leniency unless they provide "substantial assistance in the prosecution of others," Buell added, citing sentencing guidelines.

Although the days and weeks after the election might test Mueller in new ways, he has confronted pressure before to shut down.

Done by Thanksgiving

Trump’s lawyers have attempted to publicly pressure Mueller into wrapping up his investigation, setting artificial deadlines since the early days of the probe when they predicted it would wrap by the end of 2017. In August 2017, then-White House lawyer Ty Cobb said he would be “embarrassed”if the investigation dragged on past Thanksgiving.

Even if Mueller’s probe stretched through 2019, the timeline wouldn’t be unprecedented. Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr spent four years investigating President Bill Clinton before releasing his report on the Monica Lewinsky affair, which spun out of a probe into an Arkansas land deal known as Whitewater.

It took almost two years for Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to indict Scooter Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, for lying to investigators and obstruction of justice in October 2005 in the investigation into the public outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... rump-probe
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Trumpublicons: Foreign Influence/Grifting in '16 US Elec

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Oct 17, 2018 3:30 pm

Ukrainian gas mogul may be close to extradition to Chicago


Dmitry Firtash, 53, made a fortune trading natural gas and is now charged in Chicago in a mining project bribery scheme.
By Chuck Goudie and Christine Tressel and Ross Weidner

Tuesday, October 16, 2018 09:10AM
A Ukrainian oligarch with ties to President Donald Trump's convicted former campaign chairman Paul Manafort could be close to extradition to Chicago where he faces a racketeering indictment.

Federal prosecutors in Chicago have been angling for the return of wealthy industrialist Dmitry Firtash since 2014 when he was charged in the Northern District of Illinois as the mastermind of an international titanium scheme.

Firtash has been essentially under national house arrest in Austria for four years as a team of top international attorneys tries to keep him from being shipped to Chicago to stand trial.

Now, one of his defenders-former U.S. Attorney Dan Webb, says that Firtash "could face extradition in a short time frame following the decision by the Court of Justice."

In a letter Webb has notified U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer in Chicago that a final decision in Firtash's case is due on October 24 from the Court of Justice of the European Union in Luxembourg, followed by ax extradition decision by the Austrian Supreme Court.

"While it remains impossible to predict with certainty, Mr. Firtash's lawyers believe that the Austrian Supreme Court will move quickly" Webb states in a letter to Judge Pallmeyer. "Mr. Firtash could face extradition in a short time frame following the decision by the Court of Justice" he wrote.

Webb has filed motions asking that the case against Firtash be tossed out, claiming assorted legal issues with the case and the charges-not the least of which is that the Ukrainian magnate has never stepped foot in Chicago.

The I-Team first began reporting on Firtash in 2014 because of his business ties to Paul Manafort, who was the chairman of Donald Trump's presidential campaign. Firtash and Manafort had concerted on a 2008 New York real estate deal that ended up scrubbed. Manafort has since been convicted in one financial fraud case and pleaded guilty in another-implicated also as an unregistered agent of former pro-Russian Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, a close ally of President Putin.

He awaits sentencing and has agree to cooperate with federal authorities-although it is not known the extent of his role in a Firtash prosecution.

Since his indictment, the I-Team has also reported on Firtash's alleged links to Russian organized crime and to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Prosecutors in Chicago say Firtash oversaw a plot that involved selling titanium to Chicago-based aerospace giant Boeing through middle-men in India

https://abc7chicago.com/4491598/


Why A Powerful Russian Oligarch Was Furious With Paul Manafort

By Seth Hettena | May 7, 2018 10:42 am

Alexander Zemlianichenko/AP
Editor’s note: The following article is an excerpt from investigative journalist Seth Hettena’s new book, “Trump / Russia: A Definitive History.” This chapter delves deep into Paul Manafort’s work for Viktor Yanukovych, the Putin-aligned former President of Ukraine, and his other business dealings in the region. Hettena’s book is out tomorrow, May 8, 2018, from Melville House.

Although he was earning millions for his political consulting work in Ukraine, Paul Manafort began using his connections to make even more money. He met Dmitry Firtash, a wealthy Ukrainian businessman involved in the natural gas trade who had friends in top posts in Yanukovych’s administration, and pitched him on his grand vision for Bulgari Tower, a $1.5 billion skyscraper project in midtown Manhattan on the corner of Park Avenue and Fifty-Sixth Street. It was said to be one of the most valuable development sites in North America.

The Ukrainian natural gas tycoon had millions to invest because Gazprom, the natural gas giant controlled by the Kremlin, had given his unpronounceable company, RosUkrEnergo, a monopoly on all gas trades between Russia and Ukraine. This incredibly lucrative deal was widely viewed as a partnership with organized crime. Firtash was believed to be a front man for Semion Mogilevich. In court papers in Chicago, where Firtash was indicted in a separate international racketeering conspiracy, prosecutors described him as an “upper-echelon” associate of Russian organized crime. In 2008 Firtash agreed to commit $112 million to Manafort’s Bulgari Tower project and wired in a $25 million deposit. The deposit came from Raiffeisen Zentralbank, the Austrian bank that U.S. officials believed served as a Mogilevich front. The tower deal later collapsed.

While he was lining up investments from Firtash, Manafort proposed to Oleg Deripaska that they go into business together. The resulting company was Pericles Emerging Market Partners LP, a private equity fund in the Cayman Islands. Manafort described it to Deripaska as a vehicle to pursue investments that “leverage [our] business and political relationships” in Ukraine. Pericles sought to achieve an impressive compound annual return rate of 30 percent by investing in Ukraine, as well as other areas of interest to Deripaska — Russia, the former Soviet republics, Montenegro, and eastern and southern Europe. The offering memorandum touted Davis and Manafort’s experience with political campaigns “at the highest level.” The Russian oligarch gave Manafort a tentative commitment to invest $200 million in the fund.

Manafort tasked the management of Pericles to Rick Gates, who visited Deripaska’s representatives in Moscow and provided a “fund plan” that described various investment opportunities. Of the many ideas Gates pitched, Deripaska’s team felt only one had merit: the acquisition of Chorne More (“Black Sea”), a Ukrainian telecommunications firm.

In April of 2008, Deripaska paid nearly $19 million to fund the acquisition of Chorne More, then paid Manafort an additional $7.35 million in fees. Years later, Deripaska learned that the purchase price of Chorne More was $1.1 million less than Manafort and Gates had led him to believe. Gates and Manafort had simply pocketed the difference, laundering it through accounts in Cyprus that the two men used as “their personal piggy banks,” the oligarch said in a lawsuit.

What Gates and Manafort also withheld was the fact that Chorne More wasn’t worth nearly what Deripaska paid for it. Chorne More was valued at only $4.5 million and took in only $1.5 million in revenue. To top it off, the company was run not in a proper office, but in “a dingy, Soviet-style apartment building about six miles (10 kilometers) from the city center.”

Around the time of the Chorne More purchase in early 2008, Forbes ranked Deripaska as the ninth-wealthiest man on the planet, with a net worth estimated at $28 billion. The telecommunications company investment was a trifling fraction of his wealth, and it would hardly ruin him if the venture sank. With the advent of the global financial crisis in the fall of 2008, however, Deripaska’s businesses were hit particularly hard. Much of his wealth was wiped out and the struggling tycoon went hat in hand to the Kremlin for a $4.5 billion bailout. Putin put Deripaska in his place the following year in Pikalevo, a town that was struggling following the closure of one of Deripaska’s aluminum refineries. In a televised broadcast, Putin compared factory owners who didn’t pay workers’ wages to cockroaches, and then forced Deripaska to sign a document restarting the plant. As the oligarch walked away, Putin snapped, “Give me back my pen.”

A humbled Deripaska went looking for pennies wherever he could find them, and he instructed Manafort and Gates to liquidate Pericles and sell off Chorne More. Manafort and Gates agreed, but for the next two years, Pericles neither shuttered its doors nor sold off Chorne More. In fact, investigators later discovered that Chorne More was not owned by Pericles, but by a mysterious British company. The last Deripaska heard from Manafort was in June 2011. After that, Manafort and Gates stopped responding to Deripaska’s team. “It appears that Paul Manafort and Rick Gates have simply disappeared,” Deripaska’s lawyers wrote in a Cayman Islands petition.

Manafort hadn’t disappeared; he remained in Kiev with Yanukovych, who was still cutting his checks. As Deripaska worked to keep his empire intact, Manafort worked his sorcery on Yanukovych’s presidential campaign in Ukraine’s 2010 election. Once again it became a battle of Western and Eastern ideologies, with no clear favorite among the candidates. The administration of President Yushchenko, the man who had defeated Yanukovych in the days of the Orange Revolution, was widely seen as chaotic, with infighting taking precedence over policymaking. Yanukovych had been dismissed as prime minister after a year. His replacement was the co-leader of the Orange Revolution, Yulia Tymoshenko, a steely, blond-bunned politician dubbed “the gas princess” for the enormous fortune she amassed in the 1990s with sweetheart deals in the natural gas business.

In the first round of voting in the 2010 Ukrainian presidential election, Prime Minister Tymoshenko and Manafort’s man Viktor Yanukovych emerged as the front-runners. To prep for the second round, Tymoshenko hired AKPD, a consulting firm run by David Axelrod, Obama’s former chief strategist, to help bolster her campaign. But AKPD couldn’t navigate the complex world of Ukrainian politics like Manafort, and after the dust settled from the second round, his years of steering Yanukovych toward his goal paid off. On February 7, 2010, Yanukovych emerged as the winner and was declared Ukraine’s fourth president. Manafort was exalted in the Ukrainian press as a “mythical figure.”

Almost as soon as he was sworn in, Yanukovych embarked on a platform to rebuild Ukraine’s political alliance with Russia and counter his predecessor’s pro-Western initiatives. He bluntly quashed the long-running NATO membership debate among Ukrainian politicians. And while he publicly called for a free and democratic Ukraine, reports of press censorship proliferated, and his political opponents, including the defeated Tymoshenko, landed in jail on trumped-up charges.

Tymoshenko’s imprisonment triggered a fierce international outcry, among them a call to boycott Ukraine’s bid to host the 2012 European soccer championship. Yanukovych stressed that Tymoshenko “broke the rules” and wagged his finger at her champions. “I am disappointed by the premature conclusions of some European politicians who do not understand the depth of these issues and rush to make political pronouncements. This practice pushes me away from Europe. It pushes me away.”

The one Westerner he didn’t alienate was Paul Manafort, who continued working behind the scenes for President Yanukovych. Manafort had “walk-in” privileges that allowed him to enter the president’s office unannounced. Yanukovych placed such faith in his American advisor that his staff started using Manafort to deliver messages they really wanted the president to hear. “Paul has a whole separate shadow government structure,” Rick Gates, his right-hand man, told a group of Washington lobbyists. “In every ministry, he has a guy.”

Manafort arranged political cover in the United States for President Yanukovych. He hired two firms in Washington — Mercury Public Affairs and the Podesta Group — to lobby members of Congress on behalf of Ukraine and President Yanukovych’s interests, paying both firms $1.1 million each. When Tymoshenko was put on trial, Manafort directed his Washington lobbyists to assure Congress that it was all perfectly legal and appropriate. Manafort secretly paid $4 million to the prominent New York law firm of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom for a supposedly independent report on Tymoshenko’s trial. The report found no political motivation in Tymoshenko’s prosecution. Skadden Arps’ work was led by Gregory B. Craig, a former White House counsel under President Obama. Later, a Skadden Arps attorney named Alex van der Zwaan would plead guilty to lying to prosecutors about a conversation he had with Rick Gates over the Tymoshenko report. He also admitted to deleting records of email exchanges sought by prosecutors.

Manafort was making good money with Yanukovych, very good money. The only problem was that it was dirty. It was hard to miss how deep Yanukovych’s corruption and cronyism went. Much of the funding allocated for Ukraine’s economic development went to Donbas, Yanukovych’s home region, and a majority of key governmental and economic posts were given to friends of his from that region, many of whom were clearly unqualified for their positions. That was icing on the cake compared to the staggering $70 billion taken from the Ukrainian treasury and secreted away in foreign accounts, including those of Yanukovych’s son Oleksandr, who during his father’s presidency became one of the wealthiest people in the country. The cherry on top was the presidential palace Yanukovych had built — a giant monument to corruption, complete with a private zoo and a faux galleon moored on a private lake.
Manafort had been stashing away his paychecks from Ukraine in banks registered to shell companies in Cyprus, the tiny European nation that has long served as an offshore financial center for Russian oligarchs. Manafort used his Cyprus accounts to pay for $5.4 million worth of home improvements at his house in the Hamptons, an exclusive community at the tip of New York’s Long Island. Another $1.3 million from Cyprus went to a “home automation, lighting and home entertainment company” in Florida, where Manafort had another home. Money from Cyprus also bought a $3 million brownstone in Brooklyn, a $2.85 million condo in SoHo that he rented on Airbnb, and a property in Arlington, Virginia. Special Counsel Robert Mueller would later follow this money trail to return an indictment charging Manafort in a conspiracy to launder money and evade taxes.

The beginning of the end of Manafort’s sojourn in Ukraine came in the winter of 2013, when Yanukovych broke with his American advisor and rejected a major trade deal with the European Union, opting instead for closer ties with Russia. For the second time in his career, a major protest broke out, this time in Kiev’s Euromaidan Square. Protestors amassed to demand his impeachment for plundering the country’s wealth and turning Ukraine into a police state. Tension mounted as the demonstrations, which began peacefully, went on for months. Violence broke out on February 18, 2014, in clashes between protesters and police that lasted several days. At least 82 people were killed over the next few days, including 13 policemen; more than 1,100 people were injured. In the pandemonium, President Yanukovych boarded a helicopter and, with help from Vladimir Putin, fled to Russia where he remained.

Now effectively unemployed, Manafort and Gates shuttered their Ukraine operation. Manafort faded from the scene as he dealt with his mounting personal problems back home, but his wealth and his Ukrainian connections became something of an inside joke back in Washington. Roger Stone, Manafort’s old friend and business partner, sent out an email in 2014 to a group of friends asking “Where is Paul Manafort?” The choices were:

“Was seen chauffeuring Yanukovych around Moscow.”
“Was seen loading gold bullion on an Army transport plane from a remote airstrip outside Kiev and taking off seconds
before a mob arrived at the site.”
“Is playing golf in Palm Beach.”
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/why- ... l-manafort
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 52 guests