Trumpublicons: Foreign Influence/Grifting in '16 US Election

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

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

Postby stillrobertpaulsen » Wed Jul 31, 2019 2:32 pm

seemslikeadream » Tue Jul 30, 2019 7:03 am wrote:

Michael Flynn’s “Middle East Marshall Plan,” Explained
The Mueller investigation is pursuing investigative threads related to the UAE and possible corruption that seemingly have little connection to an investigation into collusion with Russia—but these two investigative threads may in fact be directly connected by way of the “Middle East Marshall Plan” backed by Michael Flynn.

There has been intense speculation around a mysterious meeting in the Seychelles between representatives of the Trump administration and Russia. Right before Trump’s inauguration, Erik Prince, a prominent Trump backer and founder of the Blackwater private security company, met with:

UAE Crown Prince Mohamed Bin Zayed (MbZ)
George Nader, a lobbyist for the UAE who is now cooperating with the Mueller investigation, and
Kirill Dmitriev, the head of the Russia Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), Russia’s sovereign wealth fund.
The Washington Post reported in March that, according to people familiar with the matter, this meeting “was an effort to establish a back channel between the incoming administration and the Kremlin.” The backchannel explanation certainly fits an established pattern — Jared Kushner just a month earlier had suggested one to Russia’s ambassador using their Washington embassy. But this explanation is difficult to comprehend for a few reasons.

Why involve an outside third-party like the UAE when Trump associates and the Kremlin were already secretly meeting about creating a backchannel? Trump’s associates were already in frequent touch with the Russians, with at least two direct meetings and at least five phone calls between the Trump transition team and the Kremlin just in December alone. If a backchannel is going to be as secret as possible, why include outsiders?
Why would MbZ, one of the most powerful leaders in the Middle East, be involved? MbZ would be the one who communicates through a back channel. Setting them up is beneath his stature. While the UAE would want the Russians to change its Middle East policy, as the Washington Post suggested, if MbZ wanted that communicated he would do so directly to the leadership of the US and Russia, not through lower-level intermediaries.
Setting up a back channel might have been an objective of this meeting, but it seems doubtful it was the objective. In fact, the New York Times just reported that the meeting was “brokered in part to explore the possibility of a back channel.” So what was the other part? One possibility is that they were there to cut a deal.

The real story may lie in the so-called “Trump/Putin Middle East Marshall Plan Concept,” a plan pushed by an American company with ties to Michael Flynn that became an immediate and major priority of the Trump White House. It was the kind of deal that would be central to any quid pro quo relating to Russia’s election interference and sanctions relief, and large enough to pull in the Gulf states too.

The Plan and its Backers

The so-called Middle East Marshall Plan was a convoluted idea that brought the US and Russia together to build nuclear power plants in the Middle East, possibly in conjunction with Ukrainian, Israeli, and French interests. The Russians would manufacture much of the nuclear equipment, while the US would provide certain nuclear technology as well as security for the plants to limit the proliferation risk. Hundreds of billions of dollars in funding for the scheme would come from the Gulf States, particularly the UAE and Saudi Arabia. Thus, the three critical players in this scheme would be the US, Russia, and a wealthy Gulf state (or states) — perfectly mirroring the representatives at the Seychelles meeting.

Similar plans had been floating around for years and had been pitched to the Obama administration State Department, where they were non-starters, particularly after Russia’s seizure of Crimea and subsequent US sanctions. However, with Trump, the idea came back to life.

Little more than a week after the 2016 election, a company pushing the plan, ACU Strategic Partners, “bragged” they had the backing of Michael Flynn, incoming National Security Adviser. One ACU email obtained by Reuters from mid-November 2016 said that Flynn had “always been enthusiastic about the project and its objectives, including its role in stabilizing and strengthening US-Russia relations.”

Flynn’s enthusiasm for the plan was understandable; he worked as an advisor to ACU from April 2015 to June 2016 (he was paid more than $5,000) and went on a trip in June 2015 to Egypt and Israel to lobby on behalf of the project. From August-December 2016, Flynn was an advisor to IP3, another company pushing a similar plan that was backed by former Reagan National Security Adviser Bud McFarlane (ProPublica reported, “McFarlane disputed that account but repeatedly declined to specify any inaccuracies.”) According to the Wall Street Journal, Flynn also connected Tom Barrack to “one of the project’s backers. The suggestion kicked off a series of conversations between Mr. Barrack… and Mr. Flynn’s former colleagues, as well as Mr. Kushner.”

The Rationale

The deal had three main rationales motivating the various parties.

The Middle East Marshall Plan would have provided an excuse to remove sanctions against Russia.
US businesses would need to work with sanctioned Russian entities. Striking a deal that the Administration could sell as bringing power and economic development to the Middle East, as well as bolstering the struggling US civilian nuclear industry, might have softened Congressional support for sanctions, particularly among Republicans.
The deal would involve potentially hundreds of billions of dollars in profit.
Why Erik Prince would care: Corporate documents projected the plan would generate “$250 billion in revenue for US companies.” Billions of dollars from a project requiring a lot of private security would pique the interest of Prince, head of a private security company.
Why Tom Barrack would care: Tom Barrack was reportedly looking to invest in the US nuclear industry, which would have received a huge windfall.
Why Russia would care: This deal could also involve massive investment in Russian state-owned companies, which could explain why the CEO of RDIF, Kirill Dmitriev was at the Seychelles meeting. Dmitriev is close to Putin and is charged with shepherding foreign investment into Russia.
There was an economic policy and geopolitical incentive.
Middle Eastern countries are legitimately seeking nuclear power to support their growing populations. The Gulf states’ participation would have supported regional economic development.
More fundamentally, this would also serve a broader geostrategic objective for the Gulf. As part of this deal, Russia would likely need to shift or soften its approach toward Iran and Syria. In exchange, they would not only receive a huge economic windfall, but would become more closely aligned with the US and the wealthy Gulf states.
For the UAE, a deal like this would cement a relationship with the new Trump administration. MbZ’s attendance – even though the other attendees were far lower ranking – could be explained by the huge investment required and the potential geopolitical stakes.
The Push to Implement

January 20th, at 12:11 PM – eleven minutes after Trump was sworn into office: In what was likely his first act as US National Security Adviser, Flynn, according to a whistleblower who spoke to Congress, allegedly texted Alex Copson, the managing partner of ACU, saying “good to go.”

If Flynn was “good to go” and ready to start implementing the plan on day one, what kind of groundwork had been laid during the transition?

The dizzying timeline of meetings and contacts during the transition tracks with a concerted effort to push the Middle East Marshall Plan.

November 2016: ACU pushes the plan to Flynn.
December 1 or 2: Flynn and Kushner meet with Ambassador Kislyak in Trump Tower where Kushner suggests using a backchannel through the Russian embassy.
December 5: Flynn and IP3’s McFarlane are photographed in the Trump Tower lobby together.
December 13th or 14th: Kushner meets with Sergei Gorkov, the head of Vnesheconombank (RDIF was spun-off from VEB), in Trump Tower.
There are differing explanations for this meeting, with Gorkov saying Kushner was representing his family’s company and Kushner saying the meeting was “unrelated to personal business” – of course the Middle East Marshall Plan involved both.
December 14/15th: Gorkov then flies to Japan where Vladimir Putin is on an official visit.
December 16: Flynn, Kushner, and Steve Bannon have a three hour meeting with MBZ in Trump Tower.
The meeting irked the Obama administration, as MbZ did not notify them of his trip to the US.
December 29: Flynn has five phone calls with Kislyak where they discuss sanctions. This conversation prompts Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates to later express concerns about Flynn’s “underlying conduct.”
Early January: Flynn “talked favorably about the deal” with Tom Barrack, head of the inauguration.
January 11th: Seychelles meeting occurs.
The Intercept reports that “Alexander Mashkevich, a Kazakh businessman linkedto a shady Trump investment vehicle known as Bayrock, also arrived to meet with Zayed, who was ‘holding court’ at his mansion on the island, accordin to a source familiar with the meetings. Abdulrahman Khalid bin Mahfouz, a Saudi billionaire whose grandfather founded the first Saudi private bank and whose father allegedly helped Al Qaeda, was also present.”
January 17-20th: At the Davos World Economic Forum, Anthony Scaramucci meets with Dmitriev. He also gives an interview to the Russian news outlet TASS, as a Trump advisor, disparaging sanctions and suggesting US and Russia have “common objectives.”
January 20th, 12:11pm: Flynn allegedly texts “good to go.”
Copson also reportedly says that “Mike has been putting everything in place for us” and that “This is going to make a lot of very wealthy people.”
He also allegedly says that Flynn planned to “ripped up” sanctions upon entering office.
In his first week in office, Flynn pushed to get the plan approved, shocking NSC staffers.

Flynn received an email from McFarlane in late January 2017, containing documents outlining the plan and a draft memo for Trump signature. Flynn told NSC staff to formalize the proposals for Trump to sign.
Reuters reported two US officials said the Flynn policy document was about working with Russia.
In response, career officials on the NSC notified the NSC lawyers about Flynn’s potential conflict of interest.
Harvey, according to ProPublica, even discussed the proposal with Tom Barrack and his representative, the now-indicted Rick Gates.
Barrack was rumored to be under consideration for a top Middle East job, but instead of going into the Administration, he and Gates were reportedly “seeking investment ideas based on the administration’s Middle East policy,” such as by investing in US nuclear company Westinghouse.
After Flynn was fired, Derek Harvey, his Senior Director for the Middle East (who joined Devin Nunes’ House Intelligence Committee Staff after he was later fired from the NSC), continued to push the plan.
The scheme ultimately lost momentum as the Russia scandal exploded.
The flurry of activity around the Middle East Marshall Plan in the crucial first weeks of the new administration demonstrate the priority it was given by Flynn and others. And since this was prioritized from day one, it is reasonable to assume it was prioritized during the transition.

The Middle East Marshall Plan involved lifting Russian sanctions, a key desire of the Kremlin. Was this follow through on a quid-pro-quo — lifting sanctions in return for Russian interference in the 2016 election?

The scheme also involved hundreds of billions of dollars and would have generated enormous profits for the individuals and companies involved. If this scheme was pushed with MbZ at the Seychelles meeting, it would have immediately signaled that this White House can be influenced by money.

As Mueller investigates Russian collusion with the Trump campaign, he may also be coming across other compromising entanglements involving Trump figures – prompting an investigative thread into official corruption. The timeline of activity around the Middle East Marshall Plan during the transition shows that that this was a priority for Flynn. We may soon find out this was a priority for the Seychelles meeting too.
https://themoscowproject.org/explainers ... hall-plan/


It was a little weird to see this story hit the mainstream media this weekend. Of course, they did their best to cover up the really juicy parts, but bury though they tried, they still couldn't avoid mentioning Iran-contra McFarlane. Ever since this disaster-administration started, I've always been more intrigued by the Iran-contra connections and how that is indicative of criminal conspiracy. I appreciate what Cummings is doing - and no doubt that is what really set off Trump's racist tirade - but as usual with Congress, they're barely scratching the iceberg.

Thanks for staying on top of this whole debacle, seemslikeadream! :hug1:
"Huey Long once said, “Fascism will come to America in the name of anti-fascism.” I'm afraid, based on my own experience, that fascism will come to America in the name of national security."
-Jim Garrison 1967
User avatar
stillrobertpaulsen
 
Posts: 2414
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:43 pm
Location: California
Blog: View Blog (37)

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

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Jul 31, 2019 4:08 pm

thanks so much stillrobertpaulsen

Iran Contra ...William Coverup Barr and Hope Hicks is the new Fawn Hall :)

“These words are more than a “dog-whistle.” When such violent dehumanizing words come from the President, they are a clarion call, and give cover, to white supremacists. Violent words lead to violent actions.”
~The National Cathedral




Kyle Cheney

JUST IN: It'll likely be months before Congress gets a ruling on accessing special counsel Mueller's grand jury info.

The Judiciary Committee and DOJ have proposed a schedule that doesn't get to oral arguments until at least October.
Image

Interestingly, the attorney appearing on behalf of DOJ described the Justice Department as the "defendant" in this matter.
Image
https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/ ... 8165712896


Democrats agree to September legal arguments in effort to access secret Mueller evidence
KYLE CHENEY07/31/2019 03:40 PM EDT
Robert Mueller
Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee say accessing Robert Mueller’s files is necessary to determine whether they will ultimately recommend articles of impeachment against the president. | M. Scott Mahaskey/POLITICO
House Democrats weighing the impeachment of President Donald Trump have agreed to a two-month schedule of court filings with the Justice Department in their effort to obtain special counsel Robert Mueller’s grand jury material.

Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee, who say accessing Mueller’s files is necessary to determine whether they will ultimately recommend articles of impeachment against Trump, agreed to the timetable, which would likely result in an October ruling. Though that’s a reasonable pace for legal argumentation, it’s sure to frustrate Democrats agitating for Trump’s impeachment, who have argued that the closer their effort gets to presidential primary season, the more impractical it becomes.

There were indications Wednesday that the Justice Department intends to oppose the Judiciary Committee’s effort to get the grand jury information. Though Democrats had pleaded with Attorney General William Barr to support their effort to access Mueller’s material, a lawyer for the Justice Department described herself as “counsel for Defendant” in a notice to the judge. A second department lawyer in the matter simply described herself as “counsel for the Department.”

Under the schedule, jointly proposed by the committee and Justice Department, department lawyers would file their first brief in the matter by Sept. 13 and the Judiciary Committee would reply by Sept. 30. Justice Department officials said they expected no oral argument would be necessary in the case, but it’s up to the judge — Washington D.C. federal District Court Chief Judge Beryl Howell — to decide.

Democrats have not voted to formally open an impeachment inquiry against Trump but argued in their effort to obtain Mueller’s grand jury material that they don’t need to take a vote to declare an “impeachment investigation.” It was a rhetorical escalation that Republicans rejected as political theater. But it’s a distinction that Democrats made forcefully in their legal filing, suggesting that there are no formal procedures to determine when and whether the House is considered to be in an active “impeachment inquiry.”

In their filing, Judiciary Committee Democrats indicated that they intend to rely on Mueller’s grand jury material to inform their questioning of crucial witnesses in his investigation — including former White House counsel Don McGahn, who provided damaging testimony to Mueller describing potential obstruction of justice by Trump. The committee has indicated that it intends to sue to enforce a subpoena for McGahn’s testimony this week but has so far held off while last-minute talks continue.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/ ... ce-1442700



What "Moscow Mitch" wants: An election overrun by trolls and plunged into chaos
Russian hackers invaded all 50 states. Trump and McConnell want it to continue. The media ponders "who wins"


Bob Cesca
In the interest of big-picturing the past week or so, we learned from the Republican-controlled Senate Intelligence Committee that Russian hackers successfully infiltrated election systems in all 50 states during the 2016 election cycle. We also learned that the accused felon who was installed as commander in chief as a likely consequence of that cyber-attack spent all weekend blurting racist gibberish on Twitter while cable-news talking heads wonder how it will play among the Midwestern diner crowd. Meanwhile, the Republican Senate majority leader refuses to pass any legislation safeguarding future elections.

It’s like finding out you have cancer, only to discover your surgeon is a shaky-handed drunken clown with a malfunctioning weed-whacker, and no one seems to notice.

The truth about what really happened in 2016 has been a slow drip, to put it mildly. Since Nov. 8, 2016, the extent of Russian infiltration of the American democratic process has been routinely and frustratingly underestimated and lowballed, with details gradually expanding from nothing to a few states to 39 states and now, with the 2020 election 15 months away, we’ve reached a full 50 states and, according to the Senate report, “an unprecedented level of activity against state election infrastructure.”

With every horrifying new revelation, investigators keep saying there’s no evidence any votes were changed — no evidence yet — but given how our knowledge of the attack’s extent is growing broader, I’m expecting such news to drop eventually. The trendline is surely moving in that direction, though proof that votes were changed isn’t entirely necessary to prove a catastrophic, election-altering invasion by the Russians.


The social media agitprop front of the attack alone clearly changed the minds of American voters long before ballots were cast. Likewise, the Senate report determined that “Russian cyberactors were in a position to delete or change voter data.” In other words, it might be a red herring to look for votes that were artificially flipped from Hillary Clinton to Donald Trump, or, for that matter, in down-ballot races. If Russia could change enough minds via thousands of trolls equipped with marching orders that micro-targeted Facebook users ripe for being duped, combined with perhaps altered or eliminated voter registrations, then it’s totally unnecessary to actually change votes.

But it’s anyone’s guess about the full arsenal of weapons they’ll deploy next time.

Accordingly, it’s terrifying to note ahead of the colossally important 2020 election that the Senate report, along with analysis from the NSA and other intelligence agencies, indicates that the Russian invasion into all 50 states was intended as a sort of reconnaissance effort to blaze a trail to be exploited “at a later date.” That could mean 2020, or literally any election from today forward.

Rothys
Sponsored by Rothys
Never Travel Without These Shoes Again
On a trip to India, comfortable shoes are a necessity. Rothy's sneakers were the perfect shoe for travel, and even Meghan Markle approves.
See more →
And we’re only talking about one prong of one enemy’s attack. The social media front will surely grow in sophistication, perhaps involving new technology such as "deep fakes," and trolls will grow less obvious to the point where it’s almost impossible to weed them out. Experts, including Robert Mueller himself, believe other nations will borrow Russia’s strategy and muster their own knockoff attacks.

Of course they will. We were ripe for it, and we continue to leave ourselves vulnerable, almost deliberately so. Bear in mind that the Russian attack required unwitting footsoldiers on the ground inside the United States. Every voter who shared a dubious meme or changed his or her vote because of the Russian bombardment of Facebook with bogus ads, paid for in rubles, unknowingly volunteered to become combatants for the enemy. There’s very little indication we’ve learned our lessons, evidenced by the fact that our Facebook newsfeeds continue to be juiced with ludicrously obvious propaganda — each false item circumnavigating the world before the first commenter pops in to note it’s fake.

It’s aggravating enough that the cable news media is casually bending the jaw-dropping news of this crisis into its substance-free horserace script, whittling everything down to who won the week. We also have Mitch McConnell, who controls the agenda in the Senate, apparently believing it’s more important to allow foreign nations to game our system than to pass a House bill to protect that system.

With Robert Mueller’s chair still warm, McConnell refused to bring a vote on a House-passed election security bill last week that provides “funding to protect our state election systems, requires adoption of paper ballots and risk-limit audits and mandates strict cybersecurity notification requirements for election technology vendors.”

Rothys
Sponsored by Rothys
Never Travel Without These Shoes Again
On a trip to India, comfortable shoes are a necessity. Rothy's sneakers were the perfect shoe for travel, and even Meghan Markle approves.
See more →
Wait. Correction. McConnell blocked not one but two election security bills last week. The second required campaign officials to report contacts from foreign actors to the FBI. Neither bill will ever see the light of day, prompting MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough to appropriately nickname the Senate leader “Moscow Mitch.”

One more correction. It’s not two bills. It’s, well … more.

The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank catalogued several other bills blocked by McConnell:

Rothys
Sponsored by Rothys
We Have Officially Found The Perfect Travel Shoe
Shop everyday ballet flats and pointed toe flats - the "go to" shoe that delivers style and comfort. Hand-made from recycled materials. F...
See more →
A Democratic bill passed in the House that would "direct $600 million in election assistance to states and requirebackup paper ballots."

Abipartisan bill requiring Facebook, Google and other Internet companies to disclose purchasers of political ads, to identify foreign influence.

Abipartisan bill to ease cooperation between state election officials and federal intelligence agencies.

Abipartisan bill imposing sanctions on any entity that attacks a U.S. election.

A bipartisan bill with severe new sanctions on Russia for its cybercrimes.

No alternatives have been introduced by the Senate Republicans. Meanwhile, McConnell successfully lifted sanctions against Rusal, a company linked to Russian oligarch and Paul Manafort associate Oleg Deripaska. Shortly after the sanctions were lifted, we learned that Deripaska is investing $200 million in Kentucky, McConnell's home state (where he faces a potentially difficult re-election battle next year). Coincidence? Not a chance in hell.

Imagine for a moment it’s the days after 9/11. Imagine if we heard that al-Qaida had infiltrated all 50 states preparing for another terror attack, and investigators had determined the next attack was imminent. Now imagine if then-Majority Leader Tom Daschle (a Democrat) had refused to hold a vote on the 2001 AUMF or the Patriot Act. Now imagine cable news and GOP heads exploding, rage-crying and targeting everyone responsible as “with the terrorists.”

As of right now, Mad King Donald and his co-conspirators in the Senate are making sure the door is wide open for continued attacks against our elections, the centerpiece of our representative democracy, with the ultimate damage being greatly diminished confidence in the integrity of the vote while the wrong candidates are artificially installed per the wishes of foreign invaders. Simply put: We face total chaos. And the party that controls the Senate, the White House and the Supreme Court is letting it all happen.
https://www.salon.com/2019/07/30/what-m ... nto-chaos/


Ex-McConnell staffers lobbied on Russian-backed Kentucky project
Democrats are pushing the Trump administration to review the project, and they say McConnell indirectly helped facilitate it.

By NATASHA BERTRAND and THEODORIC MEYER
07/31/2019 02:00 PM EDT
Mitch McConnell
The lobbying push by Sen. Mitch McConnell’s former staffers comes as he is being criticized for blocking election security bills in the wake of Russia’s interference in the 2016 campaign. | Win McNamee/Getty Images
Two former top staffers to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have lobbied Congress and the Treasury Department on the development of a new Kentucky aluminum mill backed by the Russian aluminum giant Rusal, according to a new lobbying disclosure.

The disclosure comes as Democrats are pushing the Trump administration to review Rusal’s $200 million investment in the Kentucky project — concerned that the mill will supply the Defense Department — and as McConnell weathers criticism for helping block a congressional effort to stop the investment.

The Russian firm was only able to make the investment after it won sanctions relief from penalties the Treasury Department initially imposed in April 2018 on Rusal and other companies owned by Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch and Kremlin ally accused of facilitating Moscow’s nefarious activities, such as seizing land in Ukraine, supplying arms for the Syrian regime and meddling in other countries’ elections.

Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin announced in December that the department would lift the sanctions on Deripaska's companies, which had roiled global aluminum markets, if the oligarch agreed to drastically reduce his stake in the businesses. The deal was reportedly potentially beneficial to Deripaska, however. Deripaska himself still remains under U.S. sanctions.

Attention over the sanctions relief deal has focused on McConnell, given his role in halting a bipartisan congressional effort to stop the penalties rollback. McConnell told reporters in May that his support for lifting the sanctions was “completely unrelated to anything that might happen in my home state.”

“A number of us supported the administration,” McConnell said. “That position ended up prevailing. I think the administration made a recommendation without political consideration. And that’s — that was how I voted — the reason I voted the way I did.”

It’s unclear whether the former staffers — Hunter Bates, a former McConnell chief of staff, and Brendan Dunn, who advised the Kentucky Republican on tax, trade and financial services matters before heading to K Street last year — directly lobbied McConnell’s office over the aluminum mill project. Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, the law and lobbying firm where Bates and Dunn work, and McConnell’s office declined to comment on whether they had done so.

In Washington, it’s common for congressional staffers to lobby their former colleagues.

Former Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), who’s now a lobbyist representing Rusal’s parent company, EN+ Group, gave McConnell “a heads up” on the Rusal deal prior to its announcement, according to a disclosure filing first spotted by The New York Times.

The lobbying push by McConnell’s former staffers, one of whom left his office in November 2016 and the other who left a year ago, also comes as McConnell is being criticized for blocking election-security bills in the wake of Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election. McConnell took to the Senate floor earlier this week to rebut accusations that he’s kowtowing to Russia, prompting the hashtag #MoscowMitch to begin trending on Twitter.

The lobbying disclosure, made last week, shows Bates, Dunn and three other Akin Gump lobbyists are working for Braidy Industries in the new Ashland, Ky., aluminum mill. Rusal holds a 40 percent stake in the project.

Democratic lawmakers have called for an investigation of the project by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, an interagency body that can recommend the cancellation of foreign financial arrangements with U.S. firms over national security concerns.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/ ... ct-1442550
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
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 Aug 01, 2019 9:36 pm

Glenn Kirschner

An excellent point at last night’s debate: if the House fails to impeach, Trump will declare that PROVES he did nothing wrong. If the House impeaches & #MoscowMitch refuses to convict/remove Trump, it won’t be an exoneration. It’ll be a cover-up/conspiracy/criminal complicity.
https://twitter.com/glennkirschner2/sta ... 3094267904



Tim O'Brien

The Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office has gathered more evidence than previously known in its criminal investigation of hush payments to two women who alleged affairs with Donald Trump, including from members of the president’s inner circle.


Manhattan D.A. Subpoenas Trump Organization Over Stormy Daniels Hush Money
By Ben Protess and William K. RashbaumJuly 18, 2019

State prosecutors in Manhattan subpoenaed President Trump’s family business on Thursday, reviving an investigation into the company’s role in hush-money payments made during the 2016 presidential campaign, according to people briefed on the matter.

The subpoena, issued by the Manhattan district attorney’s office, demanded the Trump Organization provide documents related to money that had been used to buy the silence of Stormy Daniels, a pornographic film actress who said she had an affair with Mr. Trump.

The inquiry from the district attorney’s office, which is in early stages, is examining whether any senior executives at the company filed false business records about the hush money, which would be a state crime, the people said.

Marc L. Mukasey, an attorney for the Trump Organization, called the inquiry a “political hit job.”

“It’s just harassment of the president, his family and his business, using subpoenas as weapons. We will respond as appropriate,” Mr. Mukasey said.

The investigation will focus on a $130,000 payment Michael D. Cohen, the president’s lawyer and fixer at the time, gave Ms. Daniels. Mr. Cohen also helped arrange for a tabloid media company to pay the Playboy model Karen McDougal, a second woman who said she had had an affair with the president. The disclosure of the payments ignited a scandal that threatened to derail the Trump presidency.

The Manhattan district attorney’s office on Thursday separately subpoenaed the media company, American Media Inc., the publisher of the National Enquirer.

The subpoenas from Cyrus R. Vance Jr., the Manhattan district attorney, came only weeks after the Trump Organization had appeared to fend off federal scrutiny of the same payments.

The United States attorney’s office in Manhattan, which charged Mr. Cohen last year with campaign finance violations in the hush-money case, revealed in a court filing last month that prosecutors had “effectively concluded” their inquiry, signaling that it was unlikely they would file additional charges.

But state law makes it a crime to falsify business records, offering the Manhattan district attorney’s office another avenue.

The Trump Organization reimbursed Mr. Cohen for his payment to Ms. Daniels. State prosecutors are examining whether the company — and any of its senior executives — then falsely listed the reimbursement as a legal expense, the people briefed on the matter said.

Following the groundwork laid in the federal investigation, the district attorney’s office is expected to scrutinize the senior ranks of the company, although it is unclear whether the inquiry will reach the president. Mr. Trump has denied the affairs and any wrongdoing.

While Mr. Cohen has said he arranged the hush-money at the direction of Mr. Trump — and federal prosecutors have since repeated that accusation in court papers — less is publicly known about the president’s role. Mr. Cohen is currently serving a three-year prison sentence in Otisville, N.Y.

A spokesman for American Media Inc., the media company that was subpoenaed, did not respond to a request for comment. The company bought the rights to Ms. McDougal’s story of an affair with Mr. Trump and never ran the story. The company, whose leader was friends with Mr. Trump, cooperated with the federal investigation and received a nonprosecution agreement.

The district attorney’s office initially considered mounting the inquiry nearly a year ago, after Mr. Cohen pleaded guilty. Mr. Vance’s office paused at the request of the federal prosecutors.

Mr. Vance’s latest foray into the hush-money case could present a legal and political quandary.

Mr. Trump’s lawyers will try to portray Mr. Vance, a Democrat, as leading a partisan attack. Earlier this year, similar criticism was leveled by a lawyer for Paul J. Manafort, Mr. Trump’s former campaign chairman. After Mr. Manafort was convicted of federal crimes, Mr. Vance’s office charged him with state felonies in hopes he would still face prison if he received a presidential pardon.

Still, if Mr. Vance declined to bring charges in the hush-money case, the decision could fuel criticism that he has pulled punches with the Trump family. His office previously declined to charge two of Mr. Trump’s children, Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump Jr., who were under criminal investigation in 2012 over allegations that they misled buyers interested in the Trump SoHo hotel-condominium project.

A spokeswoman for Mr. Vance declined to comment on Thursday’s subpoenas.

Even if the new investigation ultimately leads to charges, state law would limit the severity of the punishment. A charge of filing false business records could amount to a misdemeanor. It becomes a felony only if prosecutors can prove that the filing was done to commit or conceal another crime.

It is unclear whether, under the law, the state prosecutors can cite the federal campaign finance violations as the other crime.

Maggie Haberman contributed reporting.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/01/nyre ... vance.html




Six House Republicans in the past 2 weeks have decided not to run for re election :)


Abby Livingston


Abby Livingston Retweeted Rep. Will Hurd
This is an absolute earthquake in state and national politics.
Abby Livingston added,
Rep. Will Hurd
Verified account

@HurdOnTheHill
I have made the decision to not seek reelection for the 23rd Congressional District of Texas in order to pursue opportunities outside the halls of Congress to solve problems at the nexus between technology and national security. https://hurd.house.gov/media-center/edi ... ferent-way
Show this thread

1. Here is the first pass at our story on Hurd retiring. We will be updating throughout the night.


2. I wrote a story about coming retirements last November. To give you the scale of what we are looking at in my delegation - Mike Conaway and Will Hurd were not even on my mind when I wrote the story:


My phone is absolutely exploding with texts from Republican operatives reacting to the retirement. ALL have a word I don't normally use on this forum and my mother highly disapproves of...but it rhymes with duck.

There is no better illustration of life in Washington in this era: Two years ago, two House Reps live-streamed a road trip from Texas to DC while extolling the virtues of bipartisanship. I have no idea what Beto O’Rourke’s future holds, but neither man will be in Congress in 2021

This is my third full cycle covering Texas politics. Typically, the retirements drop in November. It’s considered good etiquette to do it then, and give one’s would-be successors at least a month to get their affairs in order and to decide on running.

Three Texas Republicans retired in the last week, one before recess even started. Just seems like people are so done with all of this.

There’s also another reason why these retirements are rough on national Republicans: Texas members traditionally raise a ton of money for the NRCC.

Hurd’s decision was not made impulsively, overnight or in reaction to any specific event, according to a source close to his decision-making process.
https://twitter.com/TexasTribAbby/statu ... 9350134785


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 Aug 05, 2019 6:39 pm




Judge signals interest in removing Mueller report redactions
‘That’s what open government is all about,’ Judge Reggie Walton said during court arguments over a FOIA lawsuit against the Justice Department.

DARREN SAMUELSOHN
08/05/2019 02:51 PM EDT

Monday’s court arguments represent one of the many ways former special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation continues to linger even though his office shuttered earlier this spring. | Getty Images
A federal judge signaled Monday he’s considering removing the Mueller report’s redactions.

During more than two hours of oral arguments in Washington, D.C., U.S. District Court Judge Reggie Walton on several occasions appeared to side with attorneys for BuzzFeed and the non-profit Electronic Privacy Information Center seeking public disclosure of the blacked-out bars covering nearly 1,000 items inside special counsel Robert Mueller’s final 448-page final report.

Walton didn’t issue an opinion from the bench on the case, which centers around a pair of consolidated lawsuits filed against the Justice Department under the Freedom of Information Act. But the judge, an appointee of President George W. Bush, sounded increasingly skeptical of the arguments from the government pressing him to leave the redactions untouched.

“That’s what open government is about,” Walton said during one exchange, citing the controversial resolution of a 2008 sex crimes case against the financier Jeffrey Epstein as an example of how obfuscating the reasons behind not prosecuting high-profile people generates public distrust in the country’s criminal justice system.

Indeed, EPIC and BuzzFeed filed their lawsuit in order to uncover such information — the redacted explanation of why special counsel didn’t bring charges against the likes of Donald Trump Jr. or Jared Kushner. And in court Monday, their attorneys argued that disclosing these details would help resolve whether the president is right to claim that the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election is a “witch hunt.”

“It’s something that frankly ripped this country apart,” argued Mathew Topic, an attorney for Buzzfeed, regarding the competing and often bitterly partisan claims surrounding the credibility of Mueller’s investigation. “The people deserve to know as much as they possibly can.”

Monday’s court arguments represent one of the many ways the Mueller investigation continues to linger even though the special counsel’s office shuttered earlier this spring. House Judiciary Committee Democrats last month asked the chief judge in the D.C.-based district court to issue an order to let them see the underlying materials the special counsel used. The Democrats said they need the information to make a decision about whether to try and impeach the president.

While Walton has the power to issue an opinion that goes directly to the BuzzFeed and EPIC FOIA lawsuit, he’s also weighing another incremental step the two organizations have requested. Essentially, they asked Walton to conduct his own review of the unredacted Mueller report to see if the exemptions the Justice Department is citing to block release of the full document actually line up with what’s allowed under the law.

Several of the judge’s questions appeared designed to understand what he’d get out of doing that kind of in-person analysis himself. But he also made several comments over the course of the hearing suggesting where he’ll fall.

For example, Walton said he had “some concerns” about trying to reconcile public statements that Trump and Attorney General Bill Barr have made about the report with the content of the report itself.

The judge pointed to Trump’s claims that Mueller found “no collusion” between his campaign and Russia, and the president’s insistence that he had been exonerated from a possible obstruction of justice charge. These comments, Walton said, appeared bolstered by Barr’s description of Mueller’s findings made during a DOJ press conference — before the public and media could read the document for themselves.

“It’d seem to be inconsistent with what the report itself said,” Walton said. The judge also cited a letter Mueller’s office sent to Barr questioning the attorney general’s decision to release a four-page summary of the investigation’s conclusions that “did not fully capture the context, nature and substance” of the report.

Separately on Monday, Walton also raised questions about a DOJ submission defending the agency’s decision to black out large portions of the Mueller report.

“I also worked for the department,” Walton said. “Sometimes the body does what the head wants.”

Courtney Enlow, a DOJ trial attorney, defended the Mueller report redactions and insisted they all fall inside the exemptions allowed under the FOIA law, such as the need to keep grand jury information private and protect the government’s investigative methods. The government can also withhold information for national security purposes or to maintain people’s privacy.

Enlow argued that additional disclosures would harm several ongoing investigations Mueller handed off to other federal prosecutors. And she warned that releasing redacted information in the special counsel report could undercut longtime Trump aide Roger Stone’s ability to get a fair trial this November in his case that centers around lying to Congress, witness tampering and obstructing justice.

“Nothing more is required here, your honor,” Enlow said.

Enlow also said Buzzfeed and EPIC lawyers are “speculating” as they seek to highlight potential disclosures that would come should the redactions be removed from the report, which she noted were made with help from Mueller’s team.

“This is not a singular person who was making decisions with redactions,” she said.

At the conclusion of the hearing, Walton acknowledged the likelihood that whatever he does will generate an appeal. “I’ll try to get this done as quickly as I can, so we can have this matter resolved one way or another,” he said.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/ ... ns-1448331


Mueller was NOT tasked to investigate The Middle East Marshall Plan


Seth Abramson

(IMPORTANT) Putin had three plans for getting US sanctions dropped.

1) TRUMP ORG. Putin enticed Trump with deals. Mueller looked at this.

2) UKRAINE. The "peace deal" passed to Cohen. Still being looked at.

3) MIDDLE EAST MARSHALL PLAN. The story of this is just coming to light.


Of these three collusion plots, the TRUMP ORG plot was the simplest and has been proven by public records—Trump secretly negotiated a real estate deal with the Kremlin while pursuing the most pro-Russia policy in U.S. political history, and did so knowing Russia was attacking us.


The UKRAINE plot is slightly stranger—involving Russian oligarchs, an ex-GOP pol, Cohen, Flynn, Sater, and more. It begins with secret Sessions-Kislyak Ukraine negotiations in September 2016, continues in December 2016 Flynn-Kislyak talks, and ends with a January 2017 peace deal.

The MIDDLE EAST MARSHALL PLAN plot is *so* much bigger and more confusing and more populated by strange figures than the other two that you should look at it this way: if (as to its size) the TRUMP ORG plot is X, and the UKRAINE plot is 4X, the MIDDLE EAST MARSHALL PLAN is *20X*.

The TRUMP ORG plot exposed exclusively Trump to new criminal charges—with possible charges being conspiracy, aiding and abetting, bribery, obstruction, and witness tampering. It *looks* like Mueller believes the conduct, while wrong, may have fallen short of 90% proof of a crime.

The TRUMP ORG plot is very much an active counterintelligence issue—inasmuch as the details of the Trump-Kremlin negotiations, only some of which we know, and the details of any kompromat that might have been brought to bear, continues to be a basis for Trump being compromised.

It is hard to tell how deeply into the UKRAINE plot Mueller delved, as it so intersects with the inaugural fund issue and with Cohen's cooperation that it's not clear that Mueller felt it was a case he had to handle. More importantly, it's the *least* criminal of the three plots.

The MIDDLE EAST MARSHALL PLAN plot is not just the biggest but the most criminal and most harrowing of the three plots—by *far*. From what we know, Mueller excused himself from being lead investigator of this plot, leaving it to EDNY, EDVA, USAO-DC, and other federal prosecutors.

To be clear, those are simply the three COLLUSION plots involving TRUMP and SANCTIONS. There were other COLLUSION plots—e.g., Kremlin attempts to use debts owed to Russian oligarchs by Trump's campaign manager to get the campaign to aid the Kremlin's election interference effort.

I don't think that the feds are done with the MANAFORT-KILIMNIK COLLUSION plot, which doesn't involve sanctions—so I didn't list it among those three—but almost certainly involves Trump: it's why Trump told friends Manafort could sink him. Alas—Manafort's silence stymied Mueller.

Kilimnik remains under indictment—and Manafort remains under threat of having to actually serve the long federal prison sentence he's been given—so the possibility remains that some federal prosecutor can prove that Trump knew his campaign manager was colluding with the Kremlin.

The book I'm writing now is about the MIDDLE EAST MARSHALL PLAN collusion plot—100% a Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy and quite clearly something Mueller gave over to others to investigate. Its many suspects include Trump—and Trump's crimes include bribery and money laundering.

As my focus has been on one type of plot—any plot involving TRUMP, RUSSIA and COLLUSION—my two books run through the four plots I've discussed here and several subplots. The biggest of these is active and unprosecuted. Other plots—TRUMP / WHITE-COLLAR CRIME plots—are active. /end

https://twitter.com/sethabramson/status ... 9376217088
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 Elvis » Mon Aug 05, 2019 7:13 pm

seemslikeadream wrote:That’s what open government is all about,’ Judge Reggie Walton said


...says the judge who gagged Sibel Edmonds, etc. etc. Fascinating. I always perk up when I hear Reggie Walton's name.



https://www.google.com/search?client=fi ... tuition.ca
“The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” ― Joan Robinson
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 7432
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

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

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Aug 05, 2019 7:26 pm

odd isn't it Sibel and the Dennis Hastert suitcases full of Turkish heroine money story and Nukes for sale
what's old is new again

I suppose it depends on just who the criminal is that the government is trying to protect by redactions or gags and his decision will be appealed either way...it will probably go all the way to Kavanaugh


every thing you'd want to know about Sibel is here ..it was kinda my place


seemslikeadream Fri Jan-18-08 12:11 PM
Original message
Sibel Edmonds Case: Nukes for sale (Pt 2)




Sibel Edmonds and other Whistleblowers Group
https://www.democraticunderground.com/d ... &forum=344



WHAT I WOULD DO WITH THE MUELLER REPORT IF I WERE REGGIE WALTON

August 5, 2019/0 Comments/in 2016 Presidential Election, Mueller Probe /by emptywheel
According to Politico, a hearing in the EPIC/BuzzFeed effort to liberate the Mueller Report went unexpectedly well today. It seems that Bill Barr’s propaganda effort to spin the results of the Mueller Report got Walton’s hackles up, leading him to believe that Barr’s effort covered up the degree to which Trump “colluded” with Russia.

Walton said he had “some concerns” about trying to reconcile public statements Trump and Attorney General William Barr have made about the report with the content of the report itself.

The judge pointed to Trump’s claims that Mueller found “no collusion” between his campaign and Russia and the president’s insistence that he had been exonerated from a possible obstruction of justice charge. These comments, Walton said, appeared bolstered by Barr’s description of Mueller’s findings during a DOJ news conference — before the public and media could read the document for themselves.

“It’d seem to be inconsistent with what the report itself said,” Walton said. The judge also cited a letter Mueller’s office sent to Barr questioning the attorney general’s decision to release a four-page summary of the investigation’s conclusions that “did not fully capture the context, nature and substance” of the report.

Separately on Monday, Walton raised questions about a DOJ submission defending the agency’s decision to black out large portions of the Mueller report.

“I also worked for the department,” Walton said. “Sometimes the body does what the head wants.”


I thought I’d lay out what I would do if I were Judge Walton. I’d make different decisions if I were a judge, but having covered some of his biggest confrontations with an expansive Executive, I’m pretending I can imagine how he’d think.

I’m doing this not because I think he’ll follow my guidance, but to establish what I think might be reasonable things to imagine he’ll review for unsealing.

UNSEAL THE DISCUSSIONS OF HOW DONALD TRUMP PÈRE AND FILS AVOIDED TESTIFYING TO THE GRAND JURY
As I have noted, there are two passages apiece that describe how Donald Trump Sr and Donald Trump Jr avoided testifying to the grand jury. While they might discuss the grand jury’s interest in subpoenaing the men, and while they might (both!) say that the men would invoke the Fifth if forced to show up and invoke it, those passages likely don’t describe that the men did so.

Particularly given Jr’s willingness to testify to Congressional committees that likely don’t have all the documents from Trump Organization that Mueller had, those passages should be unsealed unless they involve real grand jury decisions.

UNSEAL THE NAMES OF TRUMP FLUNKIES AGAINST WHOM INVESTIGATIONS WERE OPENED IN OCTOBER 2017
The most obviously dishonest thing Bill Barr did in releasing the Mueller Report is claim that those against whom prosecutions were declined were peripheral people. At least one person (and up to three people) in this passage is not: Don Jr. Walton should unseal these names, especially given that Barr lied about how peripheral, at least, the President’s son is.

Image

REVIEW THE LONGER DESCRIPTIONS OF THOSE WHO LIED BUT WEREN’T CHARGED

There are up to three people that Mueller appears to have considered for perjury charges (page 194 and two people on page 199) and at least one more whom he considered charging for false statements. Some of the discussion of the people in the former category include non grand jury material as well.

If I were Walton, I’d review this entire section and (treating Roger Stone separately) would unseal at least the names of the senior Trump officials not charged (one is KT McFarland). Given the treatment of Jeff Sessions — whose prosecution declination was not sealed — DOJ has already treated people inconsistently in this section.

REVIEW THE DECLINATIONS STARTING ON PAGE 176, PAGE 179, AND PAGE 188 FOR POSSIBLE UNSEALING
There are three declinations that are candidates for unsealing. The most important — which describes the office’s consideration of charging WikiLeaks’ releases of stolen emails as an illegal campaign donation — is the last one. It raises real campaign finance questions and would feed right into impeachment.

The charging decision on page 179 may explain why Don Jr wasn’t charged for sharing a link to a non-public site releasing stolen emails (but it could also pertain to someone no one knows who tried to hack Guccifer 2.0). If it’s the former, if I were Walton, I might consider unsealing that.

The most interesting charging decision, starting on page 176, may explain why WikiLeaks wasn’t charged, why Stone wasn’t or why others were not. If it’s WikiLeaks, it’s the kind of decision already made public in the recent SDNY decision and could be released. In any case, that’s a redaction that likely would be worth Walton’s judicial consideration.

ORDER THAT ROGER STONE SECTIONS BE UNSEALED IF THERE’S A SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE IN HIS GAG ORDER
A huge chunk of the remaining redactions pertain to Roger Stone or his trial. They also are among the most damning to Trump, as they implicate him personally in trying to make the most of Russia’s effort to help him. I, as Marcy Wheeler, would love to see them, today.

But Reggie Walton, who presumably eats lunch with Amy Berman Jackson in the DC District Judges cafeteria, will also recognize the difficulties she faces in seating a jury for the trial of the President’s rat-fucker in November. So unless something changes to the status quo — in which ABJ has imposed a strict gag on Stone — then I suspect he’ll cede to her judgment.

And, frankly, anyone who’d like to see Stone face some kind of repercussions for his rat-fuckery should also support him getting a fair trial, meaning they should support the continued sealing.

That doesn’t stop Walton from ordering that if something changes — if Stone wins an appeal he announced today to get his gag overturned, if Trump pardons Stone, or if Stone pleads — then the sections will automatically become unsealed. One of the biggest ways Trump can avoid all repercussion for his efforts to optimize the release of stolen information is to have Stone avoid trial (either by pleading or being pardoned) but preventing a reconsideration of redactions done to protect his right to a fair trial.

LEAVE NATIONAL SECURITY SECTIONS SEALED BECAUSE I’M REGGIE WALTON
I and many others would love to see more of the IRA and GRU sections (though there’s a gag in the IRA case now too), especially those sections about how GRU passed on materials to WikiLeaks.

But I’m not Reggie Walton. While he’s very happy to take on an expansive Executive, he generally shows significant deference for claims of national security. Thus, I expect he’ll likely leave this stuff sealed.

https://www.emptywheel.net/2019/08/05/w ... ie-walton/
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 Aug 08, 2019 11:54 am

WSJ: Banks Hand Over Trump Docs To House, State Investigators
Josh Kovensky

Drew Angerer/Getty Images North America
Investigators targeting President Trump’s financial and business history may have found a way around the White House’s blocking of congressional subpoenas, according to a Wall Street Journal report.

Banks have been handing over thousands of pages of documents related to business ties between Russians and Trump to congressional committees investigating the President, while other banks have been producing information to New York state investigators probing the Trump org.

Letitia James – New York’s attorney general – has reportedly gotten information about loans to the Trump org, potentially offering a tantalizing view of the notoriously opaque group’s financial makeup.

A joint investigation by the House Financial Services and Intelligence committees hit a roadblock in May after Trump sued to block subpoenas issued to two of his longtime lenders – Deutsche Bank and Capital One. Those subpoenas targeted information on the financial history of Trump himself, that of his immediate family, and of his closely held business entities.

But the records being provided by the banks, both to James and to congressional investigators, could shed light on some of the same topics targeted by the subpoenas, providing a potential end-run around the ongoing legal battles.

The banks that have been providing information reportedly include Bank of America, Citigroup, Deutsche Bank, JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley, and Wells Fargo.

James’ office’s investigation into the Trump Org has reportedly yielded emails, loan agreements, and other docs from Deutsche Bank. The same probe reportedly got information from a New Jersey regional bank regarding a 2010 mortgage on Trump Park Avenue.

The New York attorney general’s investigation is a civil probe.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker ... estigators


Major banks hand over wealth of information on Russians linked to Trump family to Congress: report
“Some banks are also giving documents related to Mr. Trump’s business . . . to New York state investigators"

Tom Boggioni
According to a report from the Wall Street Journal, major Wall Street financial institutions have handed a wealth of information on Russians linked to Donald Trump and members of his family to congressional committees.

The report states, there are “thousands of pages of documents related to Russians who may have had dealings with Mr. Trump, his family or his business,” according to sources.

“Some banks are also giving documents related to Mr. Trump’s business, the Trump Organization, to New York state investigators,” the report continues.

Among the institutions turning over documents, are Bank of America Corp. , Citigroup Inc., Deutsche Bank AG , JPMorgan Chase & Co., Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo & Co.


The Journal adds, “The investigators are working on a joint probe into potential foreign influence on Mr. Trump and his family by the House Financial Services Committee and the House Intelligence Committee. More information will likely be handed over in coming weeks as the banks continue to respond to subpoenas sent in April.”


Banks Hand Over Documents on Russians Possibly Linked to Trump
Some documents are related to Russians who may have had dealings with Mr. Trump, his family or Trump Organization
Deutsche Bank, Mr. Trump’s primary bank, has turned over emails, loan agreements and other documents...
Deutsche Bank, Mr. Trump’s primary bank, has turned over emails, loan agreements and other documents related to the Trump Organization to the office of New York Attorney General Letitia James, in response to a civil subpoena sent earlier this year, according to people familiar with the New York investigation. PHOTO: MIKE SEGAR/REUTERS
By Jean Eaglesham, Rebecca Davis O’Brien, Siobhan Hughes and David Benoit
Aug. 8, 2019 5:30 am ET
Major Wall Street banks have given congressional committees investigating President Trump thousands of pages of documents related to Russians who may have had dealings with Mr. Trump, his family or his business, people familiar with the congressional probes said. Some banks are also giving documents related to Mr. Trump’s business, the Trump Organization, to New York state investigators, people familiar with the New York investigation said.
Wall Street firms including Bank of America Corp. , Citigroup Inc., Deutsche Bank AG DB 2.68% , JPMorgan Chase & Co., Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo & Co. have recently provided thousands of financial documents related to Russians who may have had dealings with Mr. Trump or his family or his business to congressional investigators, according to people familiar with the congressional probes. The investigators are working on a joint probe into potential foreign influence on Mr. Trump and his family by the House Financial Services Committee and the House Intelligence Committee. More information will likely be handed over in coming weeks as the banks continue to respond to subpoenas sent in April, the people said.
Separately, Deutsche Bank, Mr. Trump’s primary bank, has turned over emails, loan agreements and other documents related to the Trump Organization to the office of New York Attorney General Letitia James, in response to a civil subpoena sent earlier this year, according to people familiar with the New York investigation.
Ms. James’s office has also in recent weeks received financing documents and emails from Investors Bancorp Inc., the people said. The Short Hills, N.J., regional bank handed over thousands of pages in response to a civil subpoena demanding information on a 2010 mortgage on Trump Park Avenue, a condominium building in Manhattan owned by Mr. Trump, the people said.
Mr. Trump has filed several lawsuits seeking to block lawmakers and states from getting access to his bank, accounting and tax records. The documents being provided by the banks could give investigators some of the same information Mr. Trump is trying to block.
The legal fights “could drag on for months, if not years—and that of course is the president’s strategy,” said Saikrishna Prakash, a law professor at the University of Virginia. “The Democrats are seeking to investigate, embarrass the president, and he’s trying to delay his personal finances becoming public.”
Mr. Trump is fighting in court to try to stop Deutsche Bank and Capital One Financial Corp. , two of the banks with the most information on his business, from handing over information to Congress. A federal appeals court in New York is due this month to consider a challenge by Mr. Trump, his three oldest children and his business to subpoenas from the House Intelligence and Financial Services Committees seeking records from the two banks. The banks have said they aren’t taking any position on whether they should be compelled to provide information.
Trump Park Avenue, a condominium building in Manhattan owned by Mr. Trump.
Trump Park Avenue, a condominium building in Manhattan owned by Mr. Trump. PHOTO: KEITH BEDFORD FOR THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
Another federal appeals court last month considered a bid by Mr. Trump and the Trump Organization to block a subpoena issued by the House Oversight Committee seeking eight years’ worth of financial statements and other records from Mazars USA LLP, Mr. Trump’s longtime accounting firm. Mazars said in a statement it will “respect the legal process and fully comply with its legal obligations.”
Mr. Trump also last month sued the Democratic-led U.S. House Ways and Means Committee, as well as the New York attorney general, to block the disclosure of years of his state tax returns.
Committee investigators are reviewing the documents provided to Congress so far by the Wall Street firms, House Financial Services Committee Chairwoman Maxine Waters (D., Calif.), said in an interview in June. “We’ve gotten [information] from a lot of banks.”
Senior Democrat House intelligence committee officials said last month they are looking for evidence of foreign influence on the administration “whether it was during the campaign, the transition, the inauguration or currently.” Democrats are looking in particular for any evidence of Russian money going into Trump properties, according to a person familiar with the matter.
Mr. Trump has accused New York’s Ms. James, a Democrat who took office in January, of “harassing all of my New York businesses” to make him look bad. Ms. James responded in a tweet that “no one is above the law, not even the President.”
Mr. Trump has publicly declared that he was exonerated by former special counsel Robert Mueller’s nearly two-year probe into alleged Russian influence on the 2016 presidential election. Mr. Mueller in his report said he wasn’t exonerating Mr. Trump.
‘We’ve gotten [information] from a lot of banks,’ House Financial Services Committee Chairwoman Maxine Waters...
‘We’ve gotten [information] from a lot of banks,’ House Financial Services Committee Chairwoman Maxine Waters (D., Calif.), said in an interview in June. PHOTO: STEFANI REYNOLDS/CNP/ZUMA PRESS
The New York attorney general’s subpoenas to Deutsche Bank and Investors Bancorp are part of a civil investigation, which could yield fines or other civil actions if the office alleges illegality. The Deutsche Bank documents relate to three mortgages the bank extended to Mr. Trump’s business, as well as proposed financing that didn’t go through, people familiar with the New York investigation said. CNN reported earlier this year that Deutsche Bank had begun providing financial records to the New York attorney general.
Mr. Trump is seeking to quash the congressional subpoenas by arguing that Democrats are exceeding their constitutional powers by conducting investigations not directly tied to legislation. That legal argument couldn't be used to contest information demands from the New York attorney general, lawyers not involved with the investigation said.
The congressional and state investigations are seeking different types of information. The congressional subpoenas being contested in court are seeking a broad range of financial documents from the Trump family. In contrast, the documents being turned over to the New York attorney general involve loans to the Trump Organization, according to people familiar with the New York investigation.
The information already handed to Congress by banks includes records on Russian business people connected to a Trump Tower meeting in June 2016 involving members of Mr. Trump’s family, the people familiar with the congressional probes said.
The meeting, set up at the request of a billionaire Russian-Azerbaijani real-estate developer’s family, became a focal point in the Mueller investigation. The investigation didn’t establish that anyone affiliated with the Trump presidential campaign knowingly conspired with Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election, the report said.
The congressional subpoenas are also seeking any information the banks may have about Russians connected to conversations the Trump organization officials had about a potential real-estate development in Moscow, one person familiar with the matter said. The Trump Organization had explored the possibility of a new Trump Tower in Moscow before and during the campaign, and Mr. Mueller reported on the discussions about that project.
— Jenny Strasburg contributed to this article.
Write to Jean Eaglesham at jean.eaglesham@wsj.com, Rebecca Davis O’Brien at Rebecca.OBrien@wsj.com, Siobhan Hughes at siobhan.hughes@wsj.com and David Benoit at david.benoit@wsj.com

https://www.wsj.com/articles/banks-give ... _lead_pos2


A Divisive Voice Once Again Has Trump’s Ear
Katie Hopkins, center, has made denunciations of migrants and Muslims — and defenses of President Trump — a staple of her public discourse.
Katie Hopkins, center, has made denunciations of migrants and Muslims — and defenses of President Trump — a staple of her public discourse.CreditCreditJoe Giddens/Press Association, via Associated Press
By Maggie Haberman
Aug 7, 2019

WASHINGTON — As President Trump doubles down on a re-election approach of stoking fear of immigrants, he is once again elevating a voice of validation — and many say racism — that he discovered during his last presidential campaign.
That voice is Katie Hopkins, a far-right British commentator who has made denunciations of migrants and Muslims — and defenses of Mr. Trump — a staple of her public discourse. British headlines have routinely labeled Ms. Hopkins a “racist” and a “bigot” for her views about immigrants.
On Saturday morning, Mr. Trump invoked Ms. Hopkins shortly before a mass shooting that killed 22 in El Paso, where the suspect wrote an anti-immigrant manifesto that echoed Mr. Trump’s inflammatory language about migrants.
The president, at his golf club in Bedminster, N.J., shared a tweet from Ms. Hopkins condemning London’s mayor, Sadiq Khan, over the city’s crime rate. Mr. Trump has feuded with Mr. Khan since 2016, when Mr. Khan criticized his remarks about Islam.
“The nipple-height Mayor of Londonistan has NEVER been so unpopular,” Ms. Hopkins tweeted. “He has MINUS approval ratings because we are stab-city. London deserves better. Get Khan Out.”
The president also retweeted a post by Ms. Hopkins that blamed the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, for crimes committed by immigrants.
On Monday, facing public pressure to address the racism behind the El Paso shooting, Mr. Trump spoke critically of white supremacism, in remarks drafted primarily by an adviser, Stephen Miller. But it is often Mr. Trump’s Twitter feed that carries his authentic voice.
Mr. Trump has a history of promoting inflammatory far-right opinions, including those of white nationalists, conspiracy theorists and critics of Islam. Still, the president’s embrace of Ms. Hopkins, amid a flurry of other news stories, has received little attention, something that has concerned some advocates of immigration reform.
“There is no debate on what sort of person Katie Hopkins is,” said Todd Schulte, the president of the group FWD.us. “The president should have stopped using his platform to spread her ideology long ago. He has not; that tells people all they need to know.”
Ms. Hopkins, a former Sun and Daily Mail columnist who appeared on the British version of “The Apprentice,” has become well known in Britain for her provocative views.
In a 2015 column, she compared migrants to cockroaches. And after a suicide bombing killed 22 people at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester in 2017, Ms. Hopkins tweeted that “we need a final solution” to the terrorism problem. She later deleted the post.
Sowing fear of Muslims — and calling out other politicians for not using the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism” — was a bedrock of Mr. Trump’s run to the presidency in 2016. In an interview that March, he told the CNN anchor Anderson Cooper that “Islam hates us.” The previous year, he would not rule out a mandatory registry of Muslims in the United States in an interview with Yahoo News and, after a mass shooting in San Bernardino, Calif., called for a ban on Muslims entering the country.
Ms. Hopkins’s tweets and commentary were first a source of affirmation for Mr. Trump in his campaign.
“Thank you to respected columnist Katie Hopkins,” Mr. Trump tweeted in 2015, “for her powerful writing on the U.K.’s Muslim problems.” In another tweet, he said, “The politicians of the U.K. should watch Katie Hopkins,” adding, “Many people in the U.K. agree with me!”
Mr. Trump has praised Twitter as a way to speak directly with his supporters, and in turn the platform has become a way for some of his most controversial supporters to reach him directly.
But Mr. Trump had stayed away from Ms. Hopkins’s Twitter feed since he became president. This summer, though, she caught Mr. Trump’s eye again as he attacked Mr. Khan during his state visit to Britain.
And last month, Mr. Trump retweeted Ms. Hopkins’s post suggesting that “send her back” — a chant by Trump supporters directed at one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress — could be a new campaign slogan. “Send her back is the new lock her up,” she wrote.
Managing Mr. Trump’s Twitter habits is sometimes a group effort, done in conjunction with his longtime adviser, Dan Scavino. But on weekends, while alone, Mr. Trump tends to scroll through the replies to his tweets, and will often pick up what he has seen there, a former administration official said.
He is particularly receptive to tweets that reinforce his own views, the official said, as well as posts by people who have blue checks next to their names, designating them as verified by Twitter.
A White House spokesman did not answer a question about how Mr. Trump had found Ms. Hopkins’s tweets.
In an interview, Ms. Hopkins said she had never spoken with Mr. Trump, but she declined to answer whether any of his advisers had ever reached out to her. Still, she described Mr. Trump as a kindred spirit who was being treated unfairly for speaking out about immigration.
“I think it’s not a surprise that Trump would retweet my tweets,” Ms. Hopkins said, adding that she saw Britain and the United States as similar in terms of urban elites speaking with louder voices than others.
“I guess that’s why President Trump and I have ended up with a similar message,” she said. She praised Mr. Trump’s efforts to impose a travel ban on a half-dozen mostly Muslim countries early in his term.
“I think the travel ban was at least a way of saying we need to take back control,” she said.
http://archive.is/8v8Tv#selection-251.0-499.93



There it is. “This IS formal impeachment proceedings,” Nadler tells @ErinBurnett, ending the semantics game about whether they’re in an impeachment inquiry or not. More details here:

.........


House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler backs an impeachment inquiry and has made clear in a series of steps and public statements that he is actively considering recommending articles of impeachment in an attempt to remove Trump from office, something the House made clear in a new lawsuit to force former White House counsel Don McGahn to testify.
"This is formal impeachment proceedings," Nader told CNN's Erin Burnett Thursday on "OutFront."
Nadler has made clear in a series of steps and public statements that he is actively considering recommending articles of impeachment in an attempt to remove Trump from office, something the House made clear in a new lawsuit to force former White House counsel Don McGahn to testify.
In the fall, the House Judiciary Committee plans to hold a set of hearings with key witnesses whose testimony would be part of the committee's impeachment deliberations, according to multiple sources.
And after months of resisting formal impeachment proceedings, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's tone over impeachment has shifted in recent days, endorsing the House Judiciary Committee moves and making clear to her caucus that the panel is considering whether to use its constitutional power to try and remove Trump from office.

........
https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/08/politics ... index.html



RocketMan » Mon Aug 05, 2019 6:45 am wrote:I will quote you on that, you can be sure of that.



you do that and I will quote you, you can be sure of that

you see all the financial information trump is so intent on hiding from the Congress ....well they already have it :D

The report states, there are “thousands of pages of documents related to Russians who may have had dealings with Mr. Trump, his family or his business,” according to sources.

“Some banks are also giving documents related to Mr. Trump’s business, the Trump Organization, to New York state investigators,” the report continues.

Among the institutions turning over documents, are Bank of America Corp. , Citigroup Inc., Deutsche Bank AG , JPMorgan Chase & Co., Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo & Co.




and every day trump is committing more impeachable offenses


"This is formal impeachment proceedings," Nader told CNN's Erin Burnett Thursday on "OutFront."

Nadler's McGahn lawsuit mentions impeachment 16 times
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 Aug 09, 2019 7:00 pm

you see Mueller was NOT tasked to investigate any of this


House Intelligence Committee Revs Up Probe Into Saudi Influence Efforts Targeting Trump

The panel is planning to issue a new “wave” of subpoenas.


Donald Trump and Mohammed bin Salman, Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, with other heads of state at the G20 summit in Osaka, Japan, on June 28, 2019Bernd von Jutrczenka/picture alliance via Getty Images

The House Intelligence Committee is ramping up an investigation into alleged efforts by Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf states to use financial inducements and other means to win favorable policies from the Trump administration. Starting in April, the panel “issued several subpoenas and requests for information relating to Gulf influence, and we have received documents from certain witnesses,” a committee official says. “We expect to issue another wave of requests shortly.”

Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) has previously said the panel would conduct a “deep dive” into US relations with Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries. As part of that effort, the committee is investigating “the extent to which Saudi Arabia or other Gulf states have sought to influence the Trump campaign, transition, and administration so as to encourage the administration to pursue policies antithetical to US interests,” the committee official says.

Schiff said this probe was necessitated by special counsel Robert Mueller’s decision to limit his investigation to Russian interference, even though the order appointing Mueller authorized him to look into “any matters that arose” from his investigation. The Special Counsel did not ask “whether financial inducements financial inducements from any Gulf nations were influencing this US policy, since it is outside the four corners of your report, and so we must find out,” Schiff told Mueller at the conclusion of the special counsel’s testimony before the intelligence committee last month.

There is little question that Trump and his White House have been eager to advance the interests of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, along with those of Israel, an unofficial but close ally of those two states. The administration’s combative policy toward Iran reflects the preference of those three countries, which have lobbied for the United States to take their side in regional disputes. Trump and his top aides have refused to condemn Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s reported role in Khashoggi’s murder. And Trump has rejected congressional efforts to limit arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the UAE and to limit US support for their brutal war in Yemen.

The Intelligence Committee investigation aims at revealing how the Gulf states have gained such influence. The panel is not saying exactly who it is contacting, but there are plenty of previously disclosed matters it could be expected to pursue: Trump and several top aides and associates have had financial dealings or unexplained contacts with Gulf state regimes or their emissaries.

The committee is likely seeking information on an August 3, 2016, meeting in Trump Tower that Donald Trump Jr. held with Erik Prince, the former head of private military contracting firm Blackwater; an Israeli social media specialist named Joel Zamel; and George Nader, then an adviser to the de facto head of the UAE, Mohammed bin Zayed, the crown prince of Abu Dhabi, who goes by MBZ. (Prince, a GOP fundraiser and the brother of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, developed ties to bin Zayed after supplying him with a personal guard of mercenaries from Colombia.) During the meeting, Nader told Trump Jr. that Saudi and Emirati leaders were eager to help his father win the election, according to the New York Times. The three men also offered to help the Trump campaign through social media manipulation by Zamel’s company, Psy-Group, which billed itself as private intelligence firm with expertise at covertly spreading messages to influence voters. Trump Jr. has claimed the campaign rejected that offer. Zamel denied launching any influence campaign to boost Trump. After the election, Nader wired Zamel $2 million. It’s not clear why.

Nader is currently imprisoned on charges of possession of child pornography and transporting a 14-year-old boy for sexual activity. At the time of the Trump Tower meeting, Nader’s record included past convictions for child pornography and sexually abusing minors. Still, after the Trump Tower meeting, he developed ties to multiple Trump campaign officials. According to the Times, Nader, acting as an Emirati emissary, met frequently during the campaign and transition with Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, and Michael Flynn, who became Trump’s national security adviser before he was fired. Nader also helped arrange two mysterious meetings, brokered by MBZ, between Prince and Kirill Dmitriev, the head of Russia’s sovereign wealth fund, in Seychelles in early January 2017. The Mueller report says Dmitriev, acting as an emissary for Russian President Vladimir Putin, hoped to cultivate ties to the Trump administration. The Emirates evidently hoped to gain favor with Trump by arranging the meetings.

Nader also developed ties to Elliott Broidy, then a major Republican fundraiser. In 2017 Nader offered to help a security firm Broidy owns win contracts from the UAE and Saudi Arabia. (Broidy later landed a contract with the UAE worth more than $200 million.) At the same time, Broidy used his contacts with Trump and other administration officials to press Emirati and Saudi interests in Washington, including advocating for the firing of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who the two Gulf states saw as too friendly to Qatar, their rival in a regional dispute. Federal prosecutors are reportedly investigating Broidy’s ties to Nader and other matters.

Kushner, whom Trump tasked with developing a Middle East peace plan, is famously close to bin Salman. The Saudi autocrat known as MBS has bragged that he has Kushner in his pocket, according to the Intercept. Kushner has also faced questions over whether Qatar sought to buy influence with him through the purchase of a 99-year lease on a Kushner family–owned building at 666 Fifth Avenue in Manhattan. Brookfield Asset Management, a firm partly owned by the Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund, made the deal last year. The sale bailed out Kushner, whose 2007 decision to buy the building for a record-setting $1.8 billion threatened to sink the family’s business. Brookfield and Kushner have denied the purchase reflected any political calculus.

Flynn, who admitted as part of a 2017 plea bargain to illegally lobbying for Turkey while advising Trump, also has Saudi ties. He acted as a paid consultant for a US firm that attempted to arrange the transfer of sensitive nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia while it also sought a $120 investment million from MBS, according to a House Oversight Committee report released last week. The report also found that Tom Barrack, a real estate investor and Trump confidant who headed the president’s inaugural committee, lobbied the administration to transfer the technology while also planning to partner with the Saudis to buy a company that would benefit from the policy. (A spokesperson for Barrack said he cooperated with the committee and did nothing wrong.) Prosecutors in the Eastern District of New York are investigating whether Barrack broke the law by working to influence US policy on behalf of Saudi Arabia and the UAE, the Times reported late last month. According to the report, since Trump’s inauguration, Barrack’s investment firm received about $1.5 billion from the two countries, including $474 million from Saudi and Emirati sovereign wealth funds.

Representatives for Prince, Kushner, Flynn, and Broidy did not respond when asked if they had received inquiries from the Intelligence Committee. A spokesperson for Barrack declined to comment.

Trump himself has acknowledged a major conflict of interest in the Gulf. “Saudi Arabia, I get along with all of them,” Trump said at an August 2015 campaign event in Mobile, Alabama. “They buy apartments from me. They spend $40 million, $50 million. Am I supposed to dislike them? I like them very much.” Indeed, at the same time, Trump was registering new corporations to manage a prospective hotel in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Two were created on the day Trump spoke in Mobile. While that project hasn’t panned out, Trump’s business holdings mean he still benefits from Saudi largesse as president. According to the Washington Post, two Trump hotels, in New York and Chicago, received significant boosts in revenue in recent years as a direct result of business from top Saudi officials. In other words, there’s no shortage of angles for Schiff’s committee to investigate.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/20 ... ing-trump/



and that is this


Seth Abramson
@SethAbramson

Dec. 25, 2018 3 min read

Major-media reporting has the UAE—thus Saudi Arabia—secretly aiding the attempted 2016 coup in Turkey. When the coup failed, the UAE—thus Saudi Arabia—needed to get on Erdogan's good side. Now you know why Flynn simultaneously lobbied for UAE/Saudi Arabia and worked for Erdogan.

2/ So those who think Flynn's attempts to kidnap a supposed coup plotter for Erdogan in 2016 mean he *wasn't* simultaneously in bed with two of Turkey's nominal enemies—Saudi Arabia and UAE, nations key to Trump's personal wealth—are wrong. Their interests aligned at that point.

3/ Don't forget, Flynn's secret alliances—lied about on many forms—*before* he was an agent for Turkey were with 1) Israel, 2) Egypt, 3) Saudi Arabia, 4) UAE, 5) Russia. His big efforts for Turkey—on the other side of the fence of 4 of those nations—began *after* the failed coup.

4/ This matters because it was *Trump* who summoned Flynn to *him* in August 2015—and while Trump has a licensing deal in Turkey he knows he stands to make much, *much* more money with Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Egypt, and Israel. And those nations found a way to get him Russia, too.

5/ When George Nader brought MBZ, MBS, and Al-Sissi onto a yacht in the Red Sea in late 2015 to get them all to agree they could remake the Middle East if they simply had a pliable US politician, it's folly to think he wasn't in touch with anyone stateside *prior* to that event.

6/ So a key question that'll eventually be answered publicly (and at length) is *which current or future Trump advisers* were secretly coordinating with that alliance of nations *prior* to the Red Sea Conspiracy being hatched in late 2015. Three key names: Flynn, Prince, Schmitz.

7/ But there are other names that may surprise, and they include Papadopoulos—who was a perfect cutout due to concurrent ties with Egypt and Israel over (not surprisingly) energy, which is just what Flynn, Prince and *Barrack* were working/would work on with UAE and Saudi Arabia.

8/ Did I mention that Saudi Arabia and UAE have for years and years been even more crucial to the Trumps' personal wealth than Russia? That Trump would, if he went into politics, do so at the whim of the Saudis and Emiratis—and with an eye toward future profit—was never in doubt.

9/ So if Nader had a US pol in mind in late 2015, seems like a good chance Flynn helped him to his conclusion, having met with Trump in August 2015 and then working with ACU on behalf of Saudi Arabia—as Nader was. Now read this and wait for the word "ACU": https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN1E02KI

10/ "[T]he informant’s story adds new evidence that the project’s promoters believed that Flynn and Trump backed the plan for a consortium of U.S., Russian and French firms to build and operate 45 nuclear power plants in Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries" (i.e. UAE, Egypt...)

11/ Those plants are Step 1 to the Saudis/Emiratis having nuclear weapons—their ambition, along with a concurrent nuclear *dis*-armament of their enemy, Iran. They wanted Trump to pull out of the Iran deal to maintain the option of using force on Iran to destroy possible weapons.

12/ If you wondered why Trump pulled out of the Iran deal when *everyone* said Iran was in compliance with its terms—that's why. And that's why the Right had to turn the story of Obama honoring Iran's compliance by *giving it its own money back* into a fake "money-to-Iran" story.
https://threader.app/thread/1077687997817122817
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 Aug 13, 2019 6:28 pm

Investigating Trump Family Self-Dealing, the D.C. Attorney General Has Subpoenaed Documents From Melania’s Former Right-Hand Woman
By Emily Jane FoxAugust 12, 2019

Stephanie Winston Wolkoff has handed over a trove of documents related to her inauguration work with Trump family businesses.

The summer swelter lingered in the swamp around President Donald Trump’s Washington in late July. Democrats in Congress continued to mull whether or not they would move to impeach him; Republicans, habitually, turned a blind eye to his hateful rhetoric and compulsive Twitter attacks. In New York the stock market teetered as traders awaited the administration’s next move on tariffs; prosecutors in the Southern District of New York appeared, without great logic or transparency, to close its campaign-finance investigation into Trump’s hush money payments without indicting anyone else involved apart from his longtime attorney Michael Cohen, who, by July, was more than two months into a three-year sentence at a federal facility in the Catskills.

While Cohen reads through the prison library and works out with “The Situation” in the Otisville Correctional Facility’s gym, his former neighbor on Park Avenue Stephanie Winston Wolkoff was having a different sort of summer. Last month, Wolkoff received a subpoena from the Washington, D.C., attorney general’s office, requesting documents related to President Trump’s inauguration, which Wolkoff had a heavy hand in planning. The $107 million event has been under investigation for months, including by federal prosecutors in New York and New Jersey, for profligate spending and questions about foreign donations. The latest subpoena appears to be probing potential self-dealing by the Trump Organization and members of the president’s family, according to two people familiar with the investigation.

Wolkoff complied with the request, according to these sources, by the July 26 deadline, which asked her to turn over records involving the inaugural event, the president’s family and associates, and expenditures by the inaugural committee that could shine a light on whether the nonprofit group provided private benefits to the Trump Organization. The attorney general appears to be particularly interested in payments being made through the inaugural committee to Trump-owned businesses, and whether there was a fair bidding process for contractors.

In response to a request for comment, Wolkoff said she signed a nondisclosure agreement and could not comment on any investigation, subpoena, or her cooperation. “If the [Presidential Inaugural Committee] wants to release me from this obligation, I would be able to speak freely without the fear of legal or financial repercussions,” she said in a statement. “Otherwise, I am regrettably unable to provide substantial comment.” Her lawyer did not respond to a request for comment. The White House declined to comment. A spokesperson for the attorney general’s office did not immediately respond.

The gulf between what Wolkoff knows and what she is publicly able to say can be measured in tens of thousands of documents, email exchanges, meeting minutes, and phone calls. She has, after all, known first lady Melania Trump for years, making her one of a small circle of confidants. As I reported earlier this year, the two were close enough that she would spend the night in the residence at the White House with the first lady. (When Melania floated the idea of calling her official anti-bullying platform “Be Best,” Wolkoff advised her against the name, telling her that it sounded “illiterate.”) A few days after the election, the Trumps tapped Wolkoff, who previously ran the Met ball with enough militaristic precision that it earned her the nickname “the general” around the Vogue office, to plan all the major events for the inauguration. Coming in with little political know-how, she had a matter of weeks to put together dozens of events with: a budget that kept shifting with little explanation; an inaugural chairman, Tom Barrack, and his deputy, Rick Gates, whom she felt were never fully above board with her; and an incoming first family that, for egotistical and business reasons, wanted their hands in all the planning, their company hosting a number of events, and their faces carefully arranged within the frame of all the historic moments that would be captured throughout that weekend.

Wolkoff’s concerns over how the money was being spent, whether or not the Trumps were self-dealing, and if the Trump kids had their dad’s best interests at heart were grave enough that she called Cohen in the midst of it to air her grievances. Cohen, true to form, recorded the phone call with his friend. That recording was one of the many such calls federal agents swept up when they executed a search warrant on his homes and office last spring. Almost exactly a year ago, Cohen called Wolkoff to let her know prosecutors in the Southern District had the recording. By last October, the United States attorney for the Southern District signed off on a grand-jury subpoena, asking her to produce documents related to the inaugural committee. She cooperated with the investigation, sharing thousands of documents and emails she had saved and painstakingly organized in the time since she left her position as an adviser to the first lady in the East Wing in the winter of 2018.

The House Intelligence Committee followed up with a request of its own. In April, chairman Adam Schiff sent Wolkoff’s attorney a letter asking her to turn over information related to efforts by foreign individuals or entities to support or influence Trump’s campaign, transition, and administration. Schiff, who asked Wolkoff to participate in a voluntary interview, was particularly interested in any communications involving Russia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and other foreign governments. Schiff also probed for documents involving communications between Trump businesses, Trump family members (including Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump), and foreign officials, along with inauguration guest lists, budgets, invoices, and efforts to conceal the identity of donors.

The subpoena issued by the D.C. attorney general focused in on potential self-dealing from the inaugural committee to Trump-owned businesses. That narrowed lens seems to stem, in part, from emails between Wolkoff, employees of the Trump Organization, members of the Trump inaugural committee, and the Trump family made public in news reports earlier this year. As I previously reported, both Wolkoff and Gates stayed at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, a stone’s throw away from the White House, throughout the inaugural planning. In all, the Trump International Hotel was paid more than $1.5 million in inaugural funds. (Wolkoff’s contract states that the inaugural committee would reimburse her company for expenses connected to the performance of its work.)

During the course of planning, Wolkoff had corresponded with Ivanka about the cost of using the Trump Hotel for events leading up to the swearing-in ceremony. On December 10, 2016, a Trump Organization employee sent an estimate for a ballroom rental and food-and-beverage minimum to use the Trump Hotel space for eight days. The price she quoted was $3.6 million, according to an email. A week later, Gates emailed Ivanka about the cost. In this exchange, first published last December by ProPublica and WNYC, Wolkoff flagged her concern. “These events are in PE’s [the president-elect’s] honor at his hotel and one of them is for family and close friends. Please take into consideration that when this is audited it will become public knowledge,” she wrote. (Peter Mirijanian, a spokesperson for Ivanka’s counsel Abbe Lowell, said in a statement at the time: “When contacted by someone working on the inauguration, Ms. Trump passed the inquiry on to a hotel official and said only that any resulting discussions should be at a ‘fair market rate.’ Ms. Trump was not involved in any additional discussions.”)

The new subpoena represents a possible new avenue that could ensnare members of Trump world who have previously evaded charges, despite a number of investigations and probes across federal prosecutorial districts and committees on Capitol Hill. Special Counsel Robert Mueller declined to indict Donald Trump Jr. and Kushner, for instance, despite their involvement in the infamous Trump Tower meeting with a Russian lawyer promising dirt on Hillary Clinton. No one from the Trump Organization apart from Cohen has been charged in the campaign-finance investigation, despite the fact that prosecutors in the SDNY stated that the payments were made at the direction of Trump and Don Jr. signed a check that reimbursed Cohen for the payment he made to Stormy Daniels. The government said earlier this summer that the investigation had run its course.

Gates, who had a front-row seat, alongside Wolkoff, to all the inaugural activities, has been cooperating with the government for a year and a half, and is set to testify in several trials this fall. He has not spoken publicly since he testified in Paul Manafort’s trial last summer, which resulted in a judge sentencing him to a combined seven and a half years behind bars. Wolkoff, meanwhile, has had to remain publicly quiet, as long as her nondisclosure agreement holds.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/08 ... ump-family



Kenneth P. Vogel

SCOOP: The government of the United Arab Emirates paid millions of dollars to GEORGE NADER while he was working with TRUMP fundraiser ELLIOTT BROIDY to (1) shape TRUMP’s Middle East policy & (2) win hundreds of millions of dollars worth of UAE contracts.

Kenneth P. Vogel

GEORGE NADER received $5M from the U.A.E. days before a @HudsonInstitute conference he & ELLIOTT BROIDY helped plan & fund to marginalize QATAR.
Nader’s lawyer says the U.A.E. payments were totally unrelated to the conference or other anti-Qatar advocacy.


Bank records show GEORGE NADER received another $5M from the U.A.E. in Nov. 2018.
That was months after he began cooperating with MUELLER's inquiry into whether U.A.E. $$$ was funneled into TRUMP’s operation, per @ddknyt @MarkMazzettiNYT & @adamgoldmanNYT.


WHY IT MATTERS: Prosecutors are examining the financial connections between ELLIOTT BROIDY, GEORGE NADER & the U.A.E. as they investigate whether Broidy’s anti-Qatar advocacy campaign in Washington may have violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act.


Among those whose speaking fees were paid by BROIDY as part of his anti-Qatar campaign:
• BOB GATES*: $100k
• STEVE BANNON: $100k
• DAVID PETRAEUS*: $50k
*Gates & Petraeus said they didn’t know Broidy footed the bill, tho their contracts required them to meet privately w/ him.
https://twitter.com/kenvogel/status/1161324730240159744


How a Trump Ally Tested the Boundaries of Washington’s Influence Game
Aug 13, 2019
Elliott Broidy in 2008. Mr. Broidy, a fund-raiser for President Trump, is the subject of intensifying scrutiny by federal prosecutors.
Elliott Broidy in 2008. Mr. Broidy, a fund-raiser for President Trump, is the subject of intensifying scrutiny by federal prosecutors.David Karp/Associated Press
WASHINGTON — Elliott Broidy had the kind of past that might have given a more traditional White House reason to keep him at a distance: A wealthy businessman, he had pleaded guilty in 2009 to giving nearly $1 million in illegal gifts to New York State officials to help land a $250 million investment from the state’s pension fund.
But on a fall day in 2017, Mr. Broidy was ushered into the West Wing. For about two hours, he met with a handful of the most powerful people on earth, including President Trump, his chief of staff, his national security adviser and Jared Kushner, his son-in-law, discussing everything from personnel recommendations to the Republican Party’s finances.

Mostly, though, according to a detailed account he later sent to an associate, Mr. Broidy talked about the Middle East, a subject that had long been important to him personally and was becoming increasingly important to him financially.
As he sat with Mr. Trump, Mr. Broidy promoted a plan for a counterterrorism force backed by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which he said would be supported by his private security and intelligence company, Circinus, under the leadership of Stanley A. McChrystal, the retired Army general and former commander in Afghanistan.

And at a time when Mr. Broidy was running a multimillion-dollar advocacy campaign to turn Washington against Qatar, a regional rival of the Saudis and the Emiratis, he took the opportunity to tell Mr. Trump that Qatar was part of an “axis of evil,” according to his account of the meeting.

That meeting was one of the high points of a comeback by Mr. Broidy, who after having been shunned by some Republicans in the wake of his 2009 guilty plea had worked himself into Mr. Trump’s inner circle as a top fund-raiser for his 2016 campaign and inauguration.
The stature he suddenly assumed when Mr. Trump won the election allowed him to position himself as a premier broker of influence and access to the new administration. In the process, his international business came to overlap with his efforts to influence government policy in ways that have now made him the subject of an intensifying federal investigation.
But Mr. Broidy’s tour through the White House that day was also further evidence of how Mr. Trump — who initially lacked an established network of high-dollar fund-raisers, held unformed positions on many issues and had difficulty attracting top-tier talent — came to rely on people whose backgrounds and activities would have raised red flags in other campaigns and administrations.

Among them were Paul Manafort, who was the chairman of Mr. Trump’s campaign and was later indicted for lobbying and financial crimes, and Mr. Manafort’s deputy, Rick Gates, who also helped run Mr. Trump’s inauguration. Prosecutors are still investigating whether the chairman of the inaugural committee and a close friend of the president, Thomas J. Barrack Jr., violated lobbying laws.
Few figures exploited the moment more ambitiously than Mr. Broidy, whose Oval Office meeting was just one element of a sophisticated effort to amass and exert influence in Mr. Trump’s Washington.

Bolstering his own access to the administration, Mr. Broidy enlisted a host of prominent figures to advance the interests of his companies, his clients or his causes. In addition to General McChrystal, there was the former Trump adviser Stephen K. Bannon; former defense secretaries including Robert M. Gates and Leon E. Panetta; David H. Petraeus, the former C.I.A. director; and the longtime diplomat Dennis B. Ross. They gave paid speeches to groups he was funding, wrote op-eds or advised Mr. Broidy, wittingly or unwittingly becoming public faces of his efforts.

While Mr. Broidy seemed to find a sympathetic audience for his positions in the upper reaches of the administration, including his campaign against Qatar, other efforts appeared to yield little action, like an arrangement to help a Malaysian financier with legal problems in the United States. And some of Mr. Broidy’s proposals, like his plan to help set up the counterterrorism force in the Persian Gulf, went nowhere.

Stanley A. McChrystal, the retired Army general, accompanied Mr. Broidy and his team on a trip to the Middle East.
Stanley A. McChrystal, the retired Army general, accompanied Mr. Broidy and his team on a trip to the Middle East.Steven Senne/Associated Press
The Justice Department has been investigating, among other issues, whether Mr. Broidy violated the law by not registering as an agent of foreign interests at a time when he was promoting their causes and being paid by them, and whether, in one case, he was paid with laundered money to lobby. The Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA, requires Americans to disclose efforts to shape government policy or public opinion on behalf of foreign governments and political interests. Enforcing FARA has become an increasing priority for the Justice Department.
While Mr. Broidy’s advocacy efforts could have benefited his paying clients, his representatives say the efforts were not directed or funded by those clients in a way that would require FARA registration.

“Elliott Broidy has never agreed to work for, been retained or compensated by, nor taken direction from any foreign government directly or indirectly for any interaction with the United States government, ever,” said his lawyer, Chris Clark. “Any implication to the contrary is a lie.”

But the full scope and intensity of Mr. Broidy’s activities, and the investigations into them, are only now coming into focus. Interviews and records show that:

• Federal investigators are homing in on the question of whether his involvement with the government of the United Arab Emirates and the Malaysian financier may have run afoul of FARA.

• Investigators are exploring the financial links between Mr. Broidy, the government of the United Arab Emirates and one of that government’s advisers, George Nader. According to previously unreported banking records, Mr. Nader was paid millions of dollars by the United Arab Emirates as he was working closely with Mr. Broidy on two fronts: to win security and intelligence contracts from the Emirate and Saudi governments, and to direct and fund the campaign in Washington against Qatar.

• Other banking records show that the government of the United Arab Emirates continued to pay Mr. Broidy’s company tens of millions of dollars, including a payment of $24 million in late March, even as it became public that prosecutors were looking into his activities.

• Officials from one country with which Mr. Broidy has worked, Angola, say they believed his company was being paid to lobby on their behalf, rather than to provide private intelligence services, as Mr. Broidy’s representatives say.

• His efforts to help his clients in Washington were more extensive than previously known. They involved not just prominent political figures but also payments to influential think tanks, lobbyists and a nonprofit conservative media outlet that produced articles promoting his clients’ agendas and criticizing their rivals.

Four people Mr. Broidy worked with on business or advocacy efforts have been indicted. He resigned as deputy finance chairman of the Republican National Committee last year after it was revealed he had agreed to pay $1.6 million in hush money to a former Playboy model he impregnated, in a deal arranged by Michael D. Cohen, the president’s former lawyer.
Business Was Good, and Then It Wasn’t

Mr. Broidy’s current situation is a sharp turnabout from two and a half years ago, when he helped raise a record $107 million for Mr. Trump’s inauguration. He offered to arrange inaugural tickets for politicians from Angola, the Republic of Congo and Romania — countries from which he sought intelligence contracts worth as much as $266 million, documents and interviews show.
He greatly increased his giving to Republicans. He socialized with Mr. Trump at the president’s Mar-a-Lago resort, where he was a member.

Business was good. Mr. Broidy’s company won deals worth more than $200 million from the United Arab Emirates alone. The company established an office there that employs 60 people who compile intelligence reports for the U.A.E. government.

After The New York Times, The Associated Press and other news media outlets revealed last year that he had marketed his access to the Trump team to prospective foreign clients, his company lost lucrative United States government subcontracts. Members of Congress returned donations, as did the Hudson Institute, a think tank, which returned funding for a research project on Qatari influence. Mr. Ross returned $20,000 in consulting fees he had accepted in early 2018, when he was advising Mr. Broidy on how to pursue contracts with foreign governments and how to shape American foreign policy toward those governments.
Mr. Broidy offered inaugural tickets to politicians from Angola, the Republic of Congo and Romania — countries from which he was seeking defense intelligence contracts worth as much as $266 million.Todd Heisler/The New York Times
“There was a cloud that was created, and it made sense just to dissociate,” said Mr. Ross, who worked on Middle Eastern policy for administrations of both parties.

Some of the activities of Mr. Broidy and his associates are detailed in hundreds of documents and emails from the private accounts of Mr. Broidy and his wife, which were distributed to reporters anonymously starting in early 2018. Mr. Broidy sued Qatar and some of its lobbyists, accusing them of orchestrating the theft and dissemination of those documents, which Qatar denies.
Mr. Broidy’s spokesman, Nathan Miller, said those documents “have been altered and cherry-picked out of context to present a false narrative about his business activities and public educational efforts that were entirely legitimate and legal.”

But this account also relies on dozens of interviews, banking records provided by people familiar with Mr. Broidy’s work and other documents submitted in court cases or obtained through the Freedom of Information Act.

“He was certainly trying to influence the administration to adopt a policy that served his political preference,” Mr. Ross said in a July interview with The Times about his work with Mr. Broidy, some of which was subsequently reported by The Daily Beast. “Was he doing it because it would serve his business interests as well? Presumably yes.”
From Guilty Plea to Trump Fund-Raiser

Mr. Broidy, 62, made his own fortune. He grew up middle class in Los Angeles, and paid his way through the University of Southern California by operating a laundromat. After earning a bachelor’s degree in accounting and finance, he went to work for an accounting firm, before he was hired to handle the personal investments of one of the firm’s clients, Taco Bell’s founder, Glen Bell Jr., in the early 1980s.
After about a decade, Mr. Broidy started his own investment firm, Broidy Capital Management. He built a mansion in the hills of Bel Air and established a reputation as a generous philanthropist and pillar of Los Angeles’s Jewish community.

He assembled a large wine collection and indulged a fondness for expensive wristwatches, according to people who know him. They said he boasted that he was among the biggest private buyers of a type of 25-year-old whisky that retails for $1,800 a bottle.

After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Mr. Broidy’s political and business focus turned toward national security in the United States and Israel.

In 2006, he was appointed by President George W. Bush, for whom Mr. Broidy had become a top fund-raiser, to a homeland security advisory panel and the Kennedy Center board of trustees. In October 2006, Mr. Bush attended a dinner at the Bel Air mansion that raised $1 million for the Republican Party.
Weeks later, Mr. Broidy and his wife, Robin Rosenzweig, were on the guest list for a White House reception for the Kennedy Center Honors.
After his 2009 guilty plea in the New York State pension fund case, which a court later reduced from a felony to a misdemeanor, Mr. Broidy retreated from the spotlight. Politicians whose campaigns he once funded turned their backs on him.
But his business ventures continued. He helped start a national security nonprofit group and a cyberdefense contracting company called Threat Deterrence, then purchased Circinus in 2015. Started after the 2001 terrorist attacks, Circinus says it provides cybersecurity, “force protection and operational training,” and open source intelligence services to governments.
Some of the activities of Mr. Broidy and his associates have come to light through the circulation of documents and emails from the private accounts of Mr. Broidy and his wife, Robin Rosenzweig.Alex Berliner/BEI, via Shutterstock
As the 2016 presidential campaign got underway, Mr. Broidy edged back into high-profile electoral politics, supporting a succession of senators seeking the Republican nomination, including Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Marco Rubio of Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas.

When Mr. Cruz dropped out, Mr. Broidy enthusiastically began raising money for the Trump campaign.
On Top of the World at the Inaugural

In the weeks before Mr. Trump’s inauguration, Mr. Broidy was in the center of the action.

He helped organize and fund a private breakfast at the Trump International Hotel two days before the inauguration that was attended by 50 to 60 people, according to people familiar with the event.

The guest list featured officials from Africa, Eastern Europe and Arab nations, as well as Republicans with ties to the incoming administration, including Mr. Trump’s choice for national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn.
Mr. Broidy teamed with a Nigerian-American entrepreneur to pursue an intelligence contract with the Angolan government. An early draft of the deal called for payments of as much as $64 million over five years, but someone familiar with it said the final contract was for a smaller amount.

He offered to arrange access in Washington for a pair of powerful Angolan officials who had a hand in the contract.

Days before the inauguration, the Angolans paid $6 million to Circinus. And Mr. Broidy escorted an Angolan official, André de Oliveira João Sango, then the director of external intelligence, to introductory meetings with Republican lawmakers.

A couple of days later, Mr. Sango sat at a table adjacent to Mr. Broidy’s at an exclusive “candlelight” donor dinner sponsored by Mr. Trump’s inaugural committee and attended by the president-elect, according to another Angolan official.

While Mr. Broidy’s representatives say he was not required to register as a lobbyist because he did not accept funds for lobbying, Angolan diplomats in Washington saw things differently.

“It was basically to help assist in approaching the Trump administration,” Lucombo Joaquim Luveia, a counselor at the embassy, said of the payment to Circinus.

The Angolan ambassador at the time, Agostinho Tavares, said his impression was that Mr. Broidy “sold the invitation” to the inaugural to Mr. Sango.

Mr. Luveia said that “all those arrangements were back-channeled between the lobbyist Broidy and the central government, at the presidential level.” The Angolan president at the time, José Eduardo dos Santos, was replaced last year.
Mr. Broidy also provided access during inauguration week to a pair of Romanian politicians seen as critical to Circinus’s chances for doing business in the country. Mr. Broidy arranged an impromptu introduction to Mr. Trump during an informal dinner at the Trump hotel for Liviu Dragnea, then a powerful Romanian parliamentary leader.

George Nader presented himself as a liaison to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed, center, the de facto ruler of the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia’s crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, right.via Shutterstock
Circinus subsequently competed for Romanian government contracts valued at more than $200 million, according to the Romanian news media and people familiar with the contracting process. But the contracts did not materialize. Mr. Dragnea, who was facing unrelated corruption charges in Romania at the time of the inauguration, has since been convicted. And Romanian and American officials have questioned a former Circinus executive in Romania.

Hours after Mr. Trump’s swearing-in, Mr. Broidy was abuzz as he and his wife, holding hands, walked into a late-night party in a private room at the Trump hotel.

He approached a fellow Republican donor and, in a move the donor interpreted as an early flexing of new status, Mr. Broidy suggested it was time to settle a lingering business dispute between them.

“He was exuding hubris,” said the donor, Yuri Vanetik, a characterization disputed by Mr. Broidy’s representatives. “He wanted to show that it was his world now.”

A Flurry of Deal Discussions

Through the transition and the early days of the administration, Mr. Broidy entertained discussions about using his newfound connections in Washington to help an array of foreign clients.

After being approached by a lawyer working with Russian executives who were under sanctions, Mr. Broidy devised a plan to try to lift the sanctions in exchange for $11 million — a deal that ultimately was not pursued.

Separately, Mr. Broidy discussed helping to end a Justice Department investigation into a flamboyant Malaysian financier who was suspected of embezzling billions of dollars from a Malaysian investment fund.
The financier, Low Taek Jho, known as Jho Low, transferred $6 million to the law firm of Mr. Broidy’s wife, Ms. Rosenzweig, to finance the effort, according to a guilty plea for bank fraud by a former Justice Department employee in a related case.
Allies of Mr. Low also talked with Mr. Broidy about using his connections to force the extradition of a Chinese dissident living in the United States, according to the court filings.
Mr. Broidy’s lawyers said their client never discussed assisting Mr. Low in any criminal matters and never lobbied to resolve the civil issues facing the financier.

A Key Partnership

Mr. Trump took office signaling a new approach to the Middle East, setting off a scramble by governments in the region to assure that their voices would be heard by the new administration. A key figure in Mr. Broidy’s activities was Mr. Nader.

An American citizen born in Lebanon, Mr. Nader, 60, entered Mr. Broidy’s life at a fortuitous moment for both men and for Mr. Nader’s patrons — primarily Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed, the de facto ruler of the United Arab Emirates, though Mr. Nader also presented himself as a liaison to Saudi Arabia’s crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman.
To the princes, whose countries are closely allied, Mr. Broidy was a perfect messenger to try to turn the new American administration against Qatar.

Rick Gates, the former deputy chairman of the Trump campaign, is one of a number of Trump aides to have run into legal problems.Erin Schaff for The New York Times
And to Mr. Broidy, Mr. Nader was a perfect messenger to pitch Circinus’s services to the wealthy governments of the Emirates and Saudi Arabia.

Not long after meeting at the Trump hotel during inauguration week, Mr. Broidy and Mr. Nader were exchanging messages about Circinus’s efforts to win hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of defense contracts with the Persian Gulf nations, and discussing the anti-Qatar campaign, according to documents and interviews.

Mr. Nader wired Mr. Broidy $2.4 million in three installments, starting less than three months after the inauguration, for the anti-Qatar public policy effort. Mr. Broidy contributed his own money, according to people familiar with the campaign. They said other donors contributed as well.

Mr. Broidy donated to two Washington think tanks — the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and the Hudson Institute — to fund conferences he intended to be critical of Qatar. Featured speakers included the former defense secretaries Mr. Panetta and Mr. Gates, as well as Mr. Bannon and Mr. Petraeus.

Mr. Gates and Mr. Bannon were paid about $100,000 each, while Mr. Petraeus was paid $50,000, according to interviews and contracts, which stipulated that Mr. Gates and Mr. Petraeus would meet privately with Mr. Broidy on the sidelines of the conference. The think tanks paid the speakers and were reimbursed by Mr. Broidy. Mr. Nader helped arrange Mr. Bannon’s appearance, The Daily Beast reported.
Mr. Broidy assured the think tanks that he was using only his own money and that it was not from foreign sources, according to people familiar with the conferences, who said he did not disclose that he was simultaneously pursuing business in the region.

But updates sent by Mr. Broidy to Mr. Nader list Circinus as the entity overseeing the advocacy campaign, which included plans for the conferences, op-eds, articles and congressional and media outreach, including to the Fox News host Sean Hannity, a favorite of Mr. Trump.

One update lists the Emirati and Saudi governments as the “clients” of the campaign, and a senior Saudi general, Maj. Gen. Ahmed al-Assiri, who would later be blamed by his country’s leadership for the killing of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi, as a consultant. Mr. Broidy’s lawyers say that the updates were early drafts and that references to the involvement of Circinus and the Saudi and Emirati governments were errors that were corrected in subsequent drafts.
Banking records obtained by The Times show that, months after the first think-tank conference, and days before the second, Mr. Nader received the first of two payments of about $5 million worth of Emirati currency from an entity controlled by the government of the United Arab Emirates.

“Any payments by the U.A.E. to Mr. Nader had absolutely nothing to do with the conferences or the broader educational initiative,” said Tim McCarten, a lawyer with the firm Latham & Watkins, who represents both Mr. Nader and Mr. Broidy. Mr. McCarten declined to specify the purpose of the payments.

The second $5 million payment came months after Mr. Nader began cooperating with prosecutors looking into whether Emirati money was funneled into Mr. Trump’s political operation.
The Justice Department has asked witnesses about the funding of the anti-Qatar campaign, as well as whether foreign money flowed into Mr. Trump’s inaugural.

In April, federal prosecutors in Brooklyn issued a subpoena for documents from the inaugural committee naming Mr. Broidy and companies with which he is associated, as well as Mr. Nader. Among others named were Mr. Dragnea, the Angolan politician Mr. Sango and Angola’s current president, João Lourenço. Mr. Lourenço previously served as the head of the Angolan Defense Ministry, and was also invited by Mr. Broidy to attend the inauguration, but did not go, according to the Angolan diplomats.

Leon E. Panetta, a former defense secretary, is among the prominent figures Mr. Broidy enlisted to advance the interests of his companies, his clients or his causes.Damon Winter/The New York Times
Mr. Nader was charged in June with possession of child pornography, to which he has pleaded not guilty.
Putting Washington to Work

The direct impact of the anti-Qatar advocacy campaign is not clear. It coincided with Mr. Trump’s public criticism of Qatar, and his expression of support for Qatar’s rivals, the Emiratis and the Saudis, though his administration attempted to walk back some of the criticism.
Mr. Broidy paid $10,000 a month to a Democratic firm, Bluelight Strategies, which worked to harness the center-left to press the administration to be tough on Qatar, according to emails and interviews.

Mr. Broidy gave $25,000 to a nonprofit group called the Jewish Institute for National Security of America to write op-eds and host news conferences criticizing Qatar, including with a retired Air Force general, Charles F. Wald.

Another nonprofit listed by Mr. Broidy as part of the advocacy campaign, the American Media Institute, received $240,000 from Mr. Broidy in 2017, according to its tax returns. Mr. Broidy and his allies were in close contact with the group’s staff as it produced articles and op-eds that advanced the interests of his clients and prospective clients, including the government of Malaysia, while criticizing their rivals, including Qatar and the Chinese dissident.
Richard Miniter, the institute’s chief executive, said its decisions were based on news judgment, rather than Mr. Broidy’s wishes. “We get tons of ideas from both donors and nondonors, but there were no conditions on the grant to do those stories,” he said.

Mr. Miniter said he was unaware before being alerted by The Times of overlap between Mr. Broidy’s business and the subjects he wanted covered.

In correspondence around the time of the Hudson Institute conference, Mr. Broidy cited Mr. Panetta and General Wald — as well as General McChrystal — as members of Circinus’s team.

The men or their representatives say those claims were exaggerated or false.

General McChrystal acknowledged that he accompanied Mr. Broidy and his team on a trip to the Middle East, where they met with Prince Mohammed bin Zayed in the summer of 2017.

The trip came after Mr. McChrystal was offered $100,000 by Mr. Broidy, according to documents and interviews.

When Mr. Broidy later dropped the general’s name in the Oval Office, Mr. Trump interjected to say that “he thinks highly of General McChrystal,” according to Mr. Broidy’s readout.

Mr. McChrystal said he accompanied Mr. Broidy to the United Arab Emirates because it seemed as if his company was pursuing worthwhile work. But he said he declined a subsequent offer for a leadership role in the company because “it didn’t fit into my time or my interests to do any more.”

Mr. Panetta’s office said he “is not and has never been involved in” Mr. Broidy’s business.

General Wald said he turned down Mr. Broidy’s invitation to join Circinus because he felt the company’s work was “mercenary,” and because of concerns about Mr. Broidy.

“Broidy is playing for both political and financial reasons,” he said, “and it’s hard to figure out which one he is interested in mostly.”

David D. Kirkpatrick contributed reporting from London, and Declan Walsh from Cairo.
http://archive.is/DpwHd
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 Aug 15, 2019 12:12 pm

National Enquirer and American Media Inc., run by Trump ally David Pecker, investigated by the FBI for possible Saudi influence peddling.

FBI agents have questioned AMI employees as part of an inquiry over whether the firm violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act by publishing a fawning special issue about MBS last year, and other steps. That's in addition to looking into Jeff Bezos' extortion allegation.

"...if investigators are scrutinizing AMI for possible FARA violations, extortion, or other crimes, the company should be worried that its non-prosecution deal for the hush-money payment is in serious jeopardy."


National Enquirer Investigated by FBI Over Possible Saudi Influence Peddling

It all started with Jeff Bezos’ sexts.

James West
50 mins ago

Earlier this year, federal investigators began requesting corporate documents and questioning staff at American Media Inc., the company run by Donald Trump’s longtime friend David Pecker, about a special issue of the National Enquirer it produced that lavished praise on Saudi Arabia and its controversial leader, Mohammed bin Salman, according to two sources with direct knowledge of the investigation. Gathering evidence through at least June and working at the direction of prosecutors from the Southern District of New York, FBI agents zeroed in on the circumstances behind the magazine’s publication and, according to one of the sources, whether AMI had engaged in illegal influence peddling on behalf of a foreign power.

Both AMI and the SDNY declined to comment on the investigation, including whether it remains ongoing.

This probe came amid a lurid controversy involving AMI, which until recently owned the National Enquirer, and Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos. In February, Bezos accused the National Enquirer and AMI of trying to extort him over compromising photos he allegedly exchanged with his girlfriend. Gavin de Becker, a veteran private investigator working for Bezos, soon made a related charge: Saudi Arabia had swiped “private information” from the billionaire’s phone and was “in league” with the Enquirer to bring down Bezos. Days after de Becker went public with this allegation, in late March, FBI agents began interviewing AMI employees over the company’s relationship with Saudi Arabia. The Saudis, the Bezos camp contended, had targeted the billionaire out of revenge: Bezos owns the Washington Post, where relentless coverage of the grisly death of its columnist, Jamal Khashoggi, had enraged the Saudi Crown Prince commonly known as MBS, who was implicated in ordering Khashoggi’s murder. For AMI, the motive was different, according to this narrative: Pecker was purportedly trying to cultivate business ties to the cloistered kingdom and was using his publication to target a mutual enemy of MBS and President Trump.

The Saudi influence probe could have profound implications for AMI.
The Saudi influence probe could have profound implications for AMI, according to former federal prosecutors, because it threatens to undo a deal the company struck last year with the Justice Department over its role in the hush-money case that resulted in campaign finance charges against Donald Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen, who is serving three years in prison for that and other crimes. AMI agreed to cooperate fully with investigators and in return received immunity from prosecution. Yet that deal could be tossed out if AMI was suspected of engaging in other wrongdoing.

The story of how AMI came under scrutiny by the feds as a possible agent of Saudi influence is a dizzying saga of Trumpian proportions, featuring a cast of characters that includes the world’s richest man, a Saudi leader who has forged deep ties to the Trump administration, and an embattled media baron with a reputation for using his flagship tabloid to protect his allies and punish his enemies.

The place to start this sometimes-convoluted tale is where sources say investigators have focused their inquiry: the publication of a magazine dubbed “The New Kingdom.”

Image
The cover of “The New Kingdom,” a special edition of the National Enquirer, published March 2018, touting the reformist successes of MBS, the Saudi crown prince.
Mother Jones illustration.
Intrigue over “The New Kingdom”

The special Enquirer issue hit newsstands across the country in March 2018. The 97-page magazine portrayed MBS as a modern reformer and consisted of puff pieces so flattering they bordered on satire. “THE MOST INFLUENTIAL ARAB LEADER—TRANSFORMING THE WORLD AT 32” boasted the cover, featuring a smiling portrait of the leader. The advertisement-free issue’s opening spread contained an interview with “one of the world’s youngest financial advisers for the Middle East,” a French businessman named Kacy Grine, who the magazine described as a longtime intermediary between Saudi businesses and the West, and an adviser to a member of the Saudi royal family. In the interview, Grine said that Saudi Arabia was on the cusp of a business revolution, poised to lead a “United Arabic Market” that “could be positioned between China and Europe.” And he praised MBS for overhauling the kingdom’s sovereign wealth fund.

Grine is pictured in the magazine standing next to a grinning President Donald Trump in the Oval Office. The photograph was taken during a July 17, 2017, visit to the White House, during which Grine, David Pecker, and top AMI executive Dylan Howard met with Trump and, briefly, with his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who oversees the administration’s Middle East peace initiatives. The sit-down came as Pecker sought to do business in Saudi Arabia, where all aspects of commerce are tightly controlled by the royal family. The New York Times reported that Pecker and Grine’s audience with Trump, which included a dinner, conveyed an important message to the Saudis: Pecker possessed Washington clout and had Trump’s “unofficial seal of approval.” (“The entire conversation was social,” an AMI spokesperson told the Times, “with the exception of a couple very brief mentions of current events.”)


French business leader Kacy Grine appears in this 2017 photo in “The New Kingdom,” a special edition of the National Enquirer.
Mother Jones illustration.
Two months later, Pecker jetted to Saudi Arabia, where he and Grine met with MBS to discuss possible deals, including the expansion of Pecker’s Mr. Olympia bodybuilding competition into Saudi Arabia and North Africa, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The following spring, AMI published “The New Kingdom.” The 200,000-run edition came out shortly before MBS embarked on a publicity tour of the United States aimed at favorably shaping Western opinion about the Saudi prince, who had recently supplanted his cousin as heir to the Saudi throne in what critics have described as a violent power grab in which rival royals were jailed and tortured.

The release of the magazine quickly raised suspicions that it had been commissioned by Saudi Arabia, perhaps by MBS himself. But, after the Daily Beast inquired about the publication, Saudi embassy officials denied any government involvement in its production. Yet the Associated Press subsequently reported that digital copies originating from AMI had been “quietly shared with officials at the Saudi Embassy in Washington almost three weeks before its publication.” An AMI spokesperson insisted to the AP that the magazine was not funded by Saudi Arabia and that the kingdom had played no role in its production: “Absolutely not.” (The Saudi Embassy in Washington did not respond to interview requests.)

The AP story noted that if Saudi Arabia had financed the publication—directly or through an intermediary—AMI had potentially violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act, a law designed to protect American policy from secret foreign influence campaigns by requiring lobbyists on the payroll of foreign governments or promoting foreign interests to register with the Justice Department. After the AP scoop, AMI quietly sought an opinion from the Justice Department about whether it should retroactively register under FARA.

In July 2018, the head of the Justice Department’s FARA unit responded, telling AMI that, based on the information the company had provided, it did not need to register as a foreign agent. But she warned AMI that this judgment could change if facts emerged that “are different in any way from those depicted in your submission.” The letter referenced earlier correspondence with AMI in which the company contradicted its public claims that it had not sought input from Saudi Arabia regarding the magazine, acknowledging that AMI had given an adviser to the kingdom a draft of the publication and subsequently followed that adviser’s editorial suggestions. (The name of the adviser is redacted in the letter.)

Meanwhile, Pecker and his company faced another potential legal imbroglio. That August, Trump’s longtime lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen, pleaded guilty to campaign finance charges related to his role during the 2016 presidential election in helping Trump cover up alleged affairs with porn star Stormy Daniels and a former Playboy model named Karen McDougal. Pecker and Howard, AMI’s chief content officer, had been in regular communication with the Trump campaign, according to court documents in Cohen’s case, and were deeply involved in the hush-money effort. At Cohen’s urging, AMI had paid McDougal $150,000 for the rights to her story in August 2016, three months before the election, to prevent her from taking her tale to other publications—a strategy known as “catch and kill.”

Implicated in potential criminal activity, Pecker and Howard pledged to cooperate with the Southern District of New York’s investigation into wrongdoing by Cohen and, potentially, by Trump, who was named as “Individual 1” in Cohen’s indictment. (When he pleaded guilty, Cohen told the court that he had acted “for the benefit of, at the direction of, and in coordination with ‘Individual 1’. And for the record: ‘Individual 1’ is Donald J. Trump.”)

In exchange for Pecker’s and Howard’s assistance, the SDNY entered into an agreement with AMI that it would not prosecute the company for possible campaign finance violations. There was a catch: It stipulated that the SDNY would rescind the deal if AMI committed any crimes after signing it or if federal prosecutors determined the company or its representatives had provided “false, incomplete, or misleading testimony or information.” If the deal were breached, AMI would be “subject to prosecution for any federal criminal violation of which the Office has knowledge, including perjury or obstruction of justice.”

Within five months of inking that agreement, AMI was at risk of losing its immunity after immersing itself in a new, soap-operatic scandal involving allegations of extortion, betrayal, and an alleged Saudi scheme to get even with Jeff Bezos.


President Trump greets MBS in a photo featured in AMI’s “The New Kingdom.”
Mother Jones illustration.
The “Below the Belt Selfie”

In its January 24, 2019 issue, which was available for purchase on newsstands on January 10, the National Enquirer reported that Bezos was having an affair with a former Los Angeles television host named Lauren Sanchez, disclosing flirty messages Bezos had texted her. Bezos and his wife of 25 years, MacKenzie, announced their plans to divorce the day before the Enquirer bombshell appeared in print. Their eventual $38 billion divorce settlement was the largest in history.

Bezos turned to Gavin de Becker, a well-known private investigator with a lengthy roster of famous clients, to determine how his messages had wound up in the Enquirer‘s hands. And in a February 7 post on Medium, Bezos struck back at AMI and David Pecker. Accusing the company of “extortion and blackmail,” he revealed that AMI officials had threatened to publish more text messages, as well as racy photos, including what an AMI executive described in an email to an attorney for Bezos as a “below the belt selfie,” if he and de Becker did not call off their investigation and publicly state that they had “no knowledge or basis for suggesting that AMI’s coverage was politically motivated or influenced by political forces.” (An AMI representative contended in an interview with ABC News that the company’s communications with Bezos’ team about the photos represented a negotiation, not an attempt at coercion.)

In his post, Bezos hinted at a possible Saudi connection to this scandal. He raised Pecker’s curious dealings with the kingdom and suggested that de Becker’s inquiry was delving into AMI’s Saudi ties. “Several days ago,” Bezos wrote, “an AMI leader advised us that Mr. Pecker is ‘apoplectic’ about our investigation. For reasons still to be better understood, the Saudi angle seems to hit a particularly sensitive nerve.”

The Daily Beast subsequently reported that the source of the salacious messages was Lauren Sanchez’s brother, Michael Sanchez, a Hollywood talent agent. According to the Wall Street Journal, the Enquirer paid him $200,000 for the texts. Sanchez denied to the Washington Post that he revealed his sister’s relationship with Bezos to the Enquirer; he declined to comment on the Wall Street Journal report beyond denying that he provided to AMI “the many penis selfies.” Sanchez declined to comment for this story.

According to de Becker, Michael Sanchez was no more than a bit player in this drama. On March 30, he penned an article for the Daily Beast in which he likened Sanchez to “a low-level Watergate burglar” and accused Saudi Arabia of orchestrating the attack on Bezos as part of an ongoing campaign to “harm” the billionaire in retaliation for the Post‘s aggressive coverage of Khashoggi’s murder. “Our investigators and several experts concluded with high confidence that the Saudis had access to Bezos’ phone, and gained private information,” de Becker wrote. “My results have been turned over to federal officials.” De Becker declined to comment for this story.

After Bezos accused AMI of extortion, the SDNY began examining the allegations and whether AMI had violated its non-prosecution agreement, the AP reported. Shortly after de Becker published his allegations, FBI agents began grilling AMI staffers over the company’s Saudi dealings, according to the two sources familiar with the federal investigation. This phase of the probe, said one of the sources, focused on whether AMI had violated the Foreign Agents Registration Act.

Meanwhile, CNN reported in April that Bezos was “scheduled” to meet with federal prosecutors who were seeking access to his personal devices to assess the hacking claims. Amazon did not respond to questions from Mother Jones.

On Sunday, Fox News reported that the SDNY had convened a grand jury to gather evidence related to Saudi involvement in accessing Bezos’ messages, as well as Bezos’ extortion allegations against AMI. Mother Jones could not independently confirm the Fox report.

Former federal prosecutors say that if investigators are scrutinizing AMI for possible FARA violations, extortion, or other crimes, the company should be worried that its non-prosecution deal for the hush-money payment is in serious jeopardy.

“If you’re a party to a non-prosecution agreement, you should expect you should be investigated if there’s any hint of wrongdoing.”
“If you’re a party to a non-prosecution agreement, you should expect you should be investigated if there’s any hint of wrongdoing,” says Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor in Chicago. “If there are any allegations or suspicions about AMI, there are going to be investigations.”

If prosecutors discover any wrongdoing, “it would be a pretty clear-cut case that they are in violation of the agreement, which could mean getting charged for the conduct we’re giving you immunity for,” says Mimi Rocah, who from 2001 to 2017 served as an assistant US attorney with the SDNY.

Rocah adds that prosecutors don’t need to bring new charges to nullify the immunity deal. The standard, she notes, is, “Did they do something in violation of the law, with some evidence? But it’s not about whether they can win it in court.”

Last month, federal prosecutors told a judge in New York that they had concluded their investigation into Trump’s hush-money payoffs and did not anticipate bringing more charges. But it’s unclear what this means in connection with the SDNY’s AMI inquiry and the possible breach of its non-prosecution deal. (State prosecutors in New York recently launched their own investigation into the hush-money payments.)

As controversy and legal problems have engulfed AMI, the company has faltered. Bloomberg reported earlier this year that the debt-riddled company had a negative net worth. In April, Pecker sold his signature tabloid for $100 million. The Enquirer, an unapologetic peddler of scandal, had become a source of it, featuring in a sordid and too-strange-to-be-true tale of its own creation. And the story, as far as Pecker and the Saudis are concerned, does not appear to be over yet.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/20 ... stigation/



Tom Barrack Snagged Saudi Money After Trump Transition Meetings
Caleb Melby
Tom Barrack, the investor and longtime friend of President Donald Trump, was an early advocate of strengthening ties between the White House and Saudi Arabia.

Now his firm, Colony Capital Inc., is doing business with the kingdom’s sovereign wealth fund.

Key Speakers At The 2018 Milken Conference
Photographer: Patrick T. Fallon/Bloomberg
When Colony decided to invest in digital infrastructure such as cellphone towers and data centers after Trump’s election, it brought in the kingdom’s Public Investment Fund, according to people familiar with the matter. Colony worked with another firm, Digital Bridge, to form a $4 billion investment vehicle that closed in June. Since then, Colony has decided to acquire Digital Bridge of Boca Raton, Florida.

The size of the Saudi investment, not reported previously, hasn’t been disclosed.

Los Angeles-based Colony and PIF are discussing another tie-up. If it happens, the Saudis would become co-investors in a Hollywood studio, Bloomberg News reported this week. The discussions for a stake in Legendary Entertainment would fulfill a longtime goal of the Saudis for a foothold in the entertainment business.

Barrack had pursued business across the Middle East for decades, but he hadn’t done a deal with the massive Saudi fund. That changed after Trump’s 2016 presidential run, a time when Barrack straddled multiple roles -- a leader of Colony, a campaign adviser and a key member of the presidential transition team.

During that time, he also laid groundwork with the Saudis. Those interactions were more extensive than has been previously reported. Barrack jetted to a feast with a prince and also was invited to meet with key diplomats at Treasury, according to people familiar with the matter, whose accounts were supported by flight records and official calendars.

Those people added new details about how the relationship developed with the Saudis as well as their allies in the United Arab Emirates. In one example, Barrack flew overseas in December 2016 to feast with the head of the Saudi wealth fund and Mohammed bin Salman, who is known as MBS and was then the deputy crown prince. At the time, Barrack was overseeing Trump’s inaugural planning and weighing in on cabinet appointments.

Barrack’s Middle East forays are being scrutinized by Democratic lawmakers, who say he and other Trump aides “obliterated the lines” that normally separate policy-making from corporate interests. A new congressional report shows that Barrack attempted to include language in a Trump campaign speech on energy policy that the lawmakers concluded had been vetted by a friend from the U.A.E.

After Trump won, Barrack began working to sell U.S. nuclear technology to the Saudis without restrictions on weapons development -- wielding “outsized influence,” according to the Democratic-led report.

A spokesman for Barrack said it’s well known that he has engaged in “investment and business development throughout the Middle East for the purpose of better aligned Middle East and U.S. objectives.” The spokesman added: “Mr. Barrack’s consistent attempts to bridge the divide of tolerance and understanding between these two great cultures is etched in the annals of time. This is not political, it is essential.”

A representative of the Saudi sovereign wealth fund declined to comment.

Sagging Business

The latest proposed tie-up comes at a fraught time for both Barrack and PIF. Hollywood cooled on the sovereign wealth fund after the Central Intelligence Agency determined that MBS, who’s now the crown prince, ordered the killing of a U.S. resident journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, an allegation the kingdom denies.

Meanwhile, Barrack’s business has been sagging, and investigators have been looking into Trump’s inaugural committee, which raised $107 million under Barrack’s leadership. Federal prosecutors in Brooklyn are probing his relationships in the Middle East, the New York Times reported on Sunday.

President Trump Hosts Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman Of Saudi Arabia At The White House
Photographer: Kevin Dietsch/Bloomberg
Barrack had built his career catering to his powerful clients, helping Middle East royals find a home in the U.S. or good halal food near an investment site. As Trump’s star rose, he presented himself as a connector between Saudi and Emirati leaders and decision-makers in Trump’s orbit.

His efforts didn’t come to much, at least initially. The Mideast nuclear plan he pushed hasn’t come to fruition. Barrack angled for a role as a special envoy to the Middle East, without success. He appeared to lose influence as Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser, developed a close relationship with MBS. Deepening the sting, Barrack’s relationship with Qatar, historically one of his most lucrative in the region, took a hit when the Saudis and Emiratis blockaded the tiny kingdom with Trump’s blessing.

Read More: Tom Barrack Got Trump Right, Then Things Went Wrong

But now Colony is beginning to see some upside. In 2017, as Colony began working with Digital Bridge to raise the infrastructure fund, the Saudis indicated interest -- not just in investing in the Digital Colony vehicle but taking an ownership stake, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Although selling a stake to the Saudis would have given Colony a quick profit, it would have crimped its ability to collect management and performance fees over the longer run, and also risked deterring other investors, including several pension funds that separately committed to Digital Colony. The Saudi investment is in the nine figures, according to one person familiar with the matter.

“We never comment on deals,” Tommy Davis, an adviser to Barrack, wrote in an email, saying that Colony had more than 500 limited partners globally. “Nor do we talk about potential LPs or any discussions we have with them.”

With the combination of Colony and Digital Bridge, Barrack will step down as Colony CEO in 2021. The head of Digital Bridge, a deal-maker named Marc Ganzi, will be the combined company’s new chief executive officer, Colony said last week. Barrack will remain executive chairman. Colony shares, which have collapsed since a disastrous January 2017 merger, popped on the news.

Colony’s latest deal with PIF would be a strategic reversal. The firm, best known for its real estate bets, exited the entertainment business with its 2016 sale of Miramax to a Qatari company. Now it’s dipping back in, seeking a minority stake in Legendary Entertainment, the studio responsible for the “Godzilla” franchise.

Colony’s change of heart came after PIF showed interest in Legendary last year. Legendary management told the Saudis that it had “no interest in conducting a transaction” with the wealth fund, according to the Hollywood Reporter. Barrack’s deep ties in Hollywood could help smooth sensitivity there around the Khashoggi murder. PIF is discussing investing in Legendary through a new vehicle called Colony Media Partners.

Representatives of Legendary, owned by Beijing-based Dalian Wanda Group, declined to comment.

Multiple Hats

Barrack’s relationship with the Saudis blossomed as he worked with key members of the Trump transition. On a morning in early December 2016, he met with Kushner in Colony’s New York offices, according to people familiar with the situation. At the time, Barrack was the chairman of Trump’s inaugural committee, and was in the midst of shaping the incoming cabinet.

Hours after meeting Kushner, Barrack flew to the gulf region, returning through London. In an intimate banquet with platters of Middle Eastern food, he and MBS were joined by Yasir Al-Rumayyan, an ally of the prince and a managing director of the Saudi sovereign wealth fund, according to people familiar with the gathering.

Barrack was accompanied by Sylvio Sharif Tabet, a former Hollywood producer who, like his boss, is of Lebanese descent. Tabet helps manage Barrack’s business affairs in the Middle East as Colony’s global head of investor relations.

The next month, several figures from the region were on Barrack’s personal guest list for his chairman’s dinner, one of the inaugural week’s most lavish events. Among them was Rashid al-Malik, an ally of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed of the United Arab Emirates, an advocate of MBS’s ascent in Saudi Arabia. Barrack’s relationship with Malik is of interest to prosecutors, according to the Times.

Later, as Barrack pushed the Saudi nuclear deal, his path crossed often with others in the Trump administration, including Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin.

In April 2017, at the Fiola Mare restaurant in Washington, Barrack and Mnuchin met with seven Gulf ambassadors, according to Treasury calendars obtained by American Oversight, a nonprofit organization. At the time, Barrack was proposing that PIF, the Saudi sovereign fund, play a role in the acquisition of Westinghouse, a bankrupt U.S. nuclear company.

Earlier that day, Barrack received an email from a partner in the Saudi nuclear effort stating that Gary Cohn, then Trump’s chief economic adviser, had “agreed to signal support to the PIF” on the Westinghouse venture.

Though Barrack had no formal role in the administration, he remained in demand. That June, he was invited along with representatives from Middle Eastern countries to the U.S. Treasury for dinner, according to calendar entries obtained by American Oversight and not previously reported.

The guest list included 24 dignitaries and finance officials. Yousef Al Otaiba, the United Arab Emirates ambassador to Washington and an old friend of Barrack’s, was invited. So was an executive of Thrive Capital, the venture firm managed by Josh Kushner, Jared’s brother. It’s not clear what was discussed.

Everyone was identified on the calendar by name and title, except for Mnuchin’s wife and the man whose multiple roles may have made it hard to pick just one -- Tom Barrack.

— With assistance by Matthew Martin

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... n-meetings
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 » Sat Aug 17, 2019 6:38 pm

House Intel Committee could bolster Dem case for impeaching Trump

Democrats are using the House Intelligence Committee in an unprecedented way as they consider whether to remove the president.

By KYLE CHENEY and ANDREW DESIDERIO
08/16/2019 05:09 AM EDT
Adam Schiff
House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff makes closing remarks with ranking member Devin Nunes after questioning former Special Counsel Robert Mueller. | Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
When Congress initiated impeachment proceedings against President Richard Nixon 45 years ago, the House Intelligence Committee didn’t exist.

Now, Democrats plan to use the panel — and its access to the nation’s most closely guarded counterintelligence secrets — to help guide a potential impeachment of President Donald Trump, according to Democratic aides.

The Intelligence Committee’s involvement could provide Democrats with more evidence against Trump that could strengthen their case against him.

The intelligence panel's role is a sign of the unprecedented nature of the questions surrounding Trump's relationship with Russia, as well as the uncharted territory House Democrats find themselves in as they consider whether to formally recommend Trump’s removal from office.

Typically, impeachment proceedings are the province of the House Judiciary Committee — and the panel, led by Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), has taken the lead in a nascent legal fight that its members say could lead to articles of impeachment. But Nadler isn’t going it alone.

Sources involved in the process say Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) signed off on the panel’s legal strategy and suggested approaches that would closely bind the Judiciary and Intelligence Committees together as the process unfolds. Allegations that Trump welcomed Russian interference in the 2016 election while pursuing a business deal in Moscow have taken center stage for Schiff's panel.

“In a case as unique as Trump, it is important to consider the totality of the evidence, including classified information,” said a source close to Schiff. “We’ve been working closely with the Judiciary Committee throughout this process and will continue to provide support as needed.”

A spokesman for California Rep. Devin Nunes, the top Republican on the Intelligence panel, did not respond to a request for comment. Schiff declined to comment for this story.

The relationship between the committees became clearest in the Judiciary Committee’s request last month for a federal judge to release reams of former special counsel Robert Mueller’s secret evidence, collected through the use of a grand jury. House lawyers have said the committees require this information to determine whether to recommend articles of impeachment against Trump.

“In light of the nature of the special counsel’s investigation and [the House Intelligence Committee’s] jurisdiction over intelligence and counterintelligence-related matters,” the House’s grand-jury petition states, “the Judiciary Committee will seek [the Intelligence Committee’s] assistance in reviewing grand jury materials and other evidence and in assessing whether to recommend articles of impeachment against the president.”

Traditionally, an impeachment process has involved the public airing of allegations and evidence against a sitting president. But counterintelligence information, by its nature, is classified and cannot be publicly released or discussed — presenting lawmakers with a new challenge when making the public case for Trump’s ouster.

“The Constitution doesn’t contemplate the notion of having a classified portion of an impeachment process, and it would be political malpractice to try to pursue such a drastic remedy without fully informing the public of the complete factual record,” said Bradley Moss, a prominent national security attorney. “If articles of impeachment are pursued, the House will have to rely upon unclassified information or, as a last resort, use its own Article I authority to disclose otherwise classified information.”

Others noted that the House would have to weigh taking the extraordinary step of revealing classified information if it felt that information contained in secret files were crucial to prove their case.

"It's going to be a challenge because if they were to bring articles of impeachment and get to the point where there's a trial, ostensibly the president should be able to see all the evidence against him," said Asha Rangappa, a former FBI counterintelligence agent. "Are they willing to make that tradeoff? They would need to work with the CIA and allies to get particular sources to safety if they're human sources. They would have to be willing to dry up particular methods of collection because they would be getting exposed. That would be a decision they would need to make."

The committee has the option to disclose classified information, but it has only been used once in its history: under Nunes’ leadership, when his staff drafted a memo intended to cast doubt on the origins of the investigation of Russia’s links to the Trump campaign. The process, laid out in the House rules, allows lawmakers to reveal classified information if the full House deems it in the public interest, even over the objection of the president. But in Nunes’ case, Trump, over public protests of the FBI, ultimately opted to declassify the material.

Similarly, grand-jury evidence is sensitive and kept secret by law, with few exceptions. The Intelligence Committee is well suited to handle such materials, and its involvement could alleviate concerns about grand-jury information being leaked.

“The Intelligence Committee’s ability to handle high levels of classification — that’s what they’re designed to do. And because of that, what they can do is they can sign in and sign out anyone who needs to review it. They can create a record of who looks at the material,” said Mieke Eoyang, a former subcommittee staff director for the panel, adding: “We don’t people who have a history of dealing with this at a presidential level.”

One former Judiciary Committee official said the Intelligence Committee's involvement could assuage a court's concern about how grand jury information would be handled.

"It’s possible, but unproven, that this collaboration may give the legal arguments more jet fuel in the courts for grand jury document access," said Julian Epstein, who was on the Democratic staff of the Judiciary Committee during the Clinton impeachment process.

The Intelligence Committee, which was created as an outgrowth of the Watergate era to police the intelligence community, was never intended as a vehicle for impeachment. The process of drafting articles of impeachment is well outside the panel’s traditional jurisdiction. But in this unique case, Schiff’s committee would review the sensitive grand-jury information related to volume one of Mueller’s report, which details Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election.

In addition, the panel could provide Nadler’s staff with documents and testimony gleaned as part of its own probes and its general oversight of the intelligence community. The Intelligence Committee — first under Republican leadership in 2017 and then Democratic leadership this year — conducted dozens of interviews with witnesses connected to the Mueller investigation.

Schiff has remained aligned with Speaker Nancy Pelosi in opposing a formal impeachment inquiry, opting to rely on the evidence-gathering process to guide lawmakers. But in signing off on the Judiciary Committee’s court filings and actively suggesting language to bolster its legal arguments, the chairman could be signaling a shift.

In an MSNBC interview last week, Schiff said the House could move forward with articles of impeachment as soon as fall if the White House continues to stonewall congressional inquiries to the point of dragging out the various court fights.

“If the litigation takes too long — that is, if they are able to legally string this out too long — we will have to make a judgment about whether to go forward with articles of impeachment, even in the absence of being able to bring these witnesses in and obtain these documents, because the obstruction of Congress itself will have risen to that level,” Schiff said.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/ ... nt-1463467
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 Aug 19, 2019 10:28 am

RISKY BUSINESS
Influence Peddling, Double-Dealing, and Trumpworld Swampmen: How U.S. Plans for the World’s Fair Fell Apart

The mission was to highlight the best of America. But they had other jobs in mind.

Erin Banco
National Security Reporter
Updated 08.19.19 9:15AM ET
Published 08.19.19 4:45AM ET
EXCLUSIVE

He was supposed to help lead a non-profit effort, overseen by the U.S. government, to showcase American business, culture, and technology to the world.

Instead, Alan Dunn was using his position on the U.S. World’s Fair team to promote the interests of one of the most controversial and politically connected firms in Washington, according to documents reviewed by The Daily Beast, and interviews with half a dozen people familiar with the matter.

Dunn, the former assistant secretary of commerce and member of Donald Trump’s transition team, helped start and provide legal counsel for a non-profit to build a $60 million U.S. pavilion for the World’s Fair in Dubai in 2020. At the same time, Dunn worked as the chief legal officer of IP3—a firm currently being investigated by a congressional committee for pushing the Trump administration to approve a deal to export nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia. Members of Congress have openly denounced the firm’s plan, saying it threatens U.S. national security interests.

Dunn denies any wrongdoing. But according to documents reviewed by The Daily Beast and according to individuals on the team, most of whom requested to remain anonymous for fear of retribution, he blurred the lines between the work he was tasked to do for the pavilion and the work he carried out for IP3.

Those sources said Dunn used his position on the project team to advance IP3’s core mission and to get it access to the administration, all while receiving higher payments from the pavilion. Although IP3’s connection to the Trump team has been documented in the past, communications reviewed by The Daily Beast show the firm’s links to the Trump administration, and to the State Department in particular, were significantly cozier than previously understood.

Dunn’s work worried some individuals working for the pavilion, to the point where they started to ask whether it might tarnish the reputation of the team. The concern was over Dunn’s connection to IP3 and the news that it was being scrutinized by various lawmakers on Capitol Hill, particularly because of its connection to former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

Trump Pals Pushed Nuke Firm—Even if It Led to a Saudi Bomb
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-pal ... -bombBanco


There were other worrying scenarios throughout the two-year Dubai pavilion saga, according to documents reviewed by The Daily Beast. Leadership fought constantly about the direction of the project, who to bring in for help and how to work with the government. Some were viewed as caring more about how the pavilion effort would benefit them professionally, according to former board members and individuals associated with the team. And, those sources said, individuals on the project used their positions to gain access to the White House and other parts of the Trump administration for outside business, according to emails and other forms of communications handed over to the State Department earlier this year.

Documents obtained by The Daily Beast and interviews with members of the original team raise questions about the State Department’s oversight of the pavilion, how it handled complaints by pavilion board members and why it approved the inclusion of individuals who were either actively trying to influence the Trump administration on Middle East policy, or who headed businesses with overlapping interests. Stories of the chaotic pavilion team and the State Department’s oversight have reached Capitol Hill, and two government sources say they are looking into the matter.

The State Department did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Almost everyone interviewed for this story said they were relieved they left the team or that the work ended. Two individuals said they were “embarrassed” to have been part of the process. The group officially disbanded this spring after multiple failed attempts to raise money for the pavilion. Some individuals left earlier in the process, claiming the dysfunctional management and constant in-fighting was impossible to navigate. They also said leaders of the project, including Bush, had made promises to vendors that were impossible to keep.

“Beyond any personality clashes or other dysfunctions, this is by no means the first time the U.S. has missed wildly at World’s Fairs,” said one source associated with the 2020 pavilion. “As the wealthiest country on Earth, projects like this should be an easy win that tells the world what’s right with the United States for an investment that’s essentially a rounding error. While many of us from the original consortium now watch from the sidelines, we remain hopeful that public funding is secured, that all past debts are paid, that the Department of State prioritizes the right internal management changes.”

The whole idea of a “World’s Fair” might seem a little quaint, in an era in which the planet is so deeply interconnected. But it’s still hugely important, with each event bringing in millions of visitors and billions in revenue—and providing a forum for each country to present its best face to every other.

When the State Department found out in April 2017 that the United Arab Emirates would host the next World Fair in Dubai, it immediately began looking for a crack team to raise money and build a structure for the U.S.. Like all other countries, the administration wanted to showcase the most promising innovations in the U.S.—including Virgin’s ultra high-speed hyperloop transportation system that could, one day, allow a passenger to travel from Los Angeles to New York in under five hours.

The department solicited bids from multiple different groups to run the U.S. pavilion, but had its eyes on one in particular—a cohort that included well-liked department contractors, architects, and designers. Greg Houston, a state department contractor who works in public diplomacy, was tapped to be the pavilion’s CEO; Mark Giuliani, an architect in Virginia, would handle design management, with other architects and advisers based in Colorado.

But the team also included Fred Bush, who failed to clinch the ambassadorship to Luxembourg in 1990 because of allegations he engaged in influence peddling at the Department of Housing and Urban Development. He was in charge of fundraising and was chairman of the pavilion board. Bush’s son is a Trump appointee at the State Department. Dunn was responsible for legal work on the pavilion and is the chief legal officer of IP3, the firm targeted by congressional investigators.

The House Oversight Committee released a report on IP3 and its nuclear plan last month, saying executives at the firm gained access to the highest echelons of the U.S. government—including the White House—in their attempt to win favors with Riyadh, which was accepting bids from countries across the world to help it develop its nuclear sector.

“The Trump administration virtually obliterated the lines normally separating government policymaking from corporate and foreign interests,” the report said. “Documents show the administration’s willingness to let private parties with close ties to the president wield outsized influence over U.S. policy towards Saudi Arabia.”

Before that investigation even took off, pavilion members say they were wary of working with Dunn because of his relationship to IP3 and its connection to Flynn. Some of those who spoke to The Daily Beast said they signed on to the project because they genuinely wanted to help the U.S. build a pavilion in Dubai. But they’d only do that if they could keep their reputation intact throughout the process. And, they said, the more they learned about IP3 and the more they saw signs of Dunn overlapping his work with the firm and the pavilion, the more they became concerned about staying on the project. Several individuals did say, however, that there was more at play on the team that contributed to them leaving, including the constant bickering among leadership and the chaotic nature of fundraising.


Former U.S. national security adviser Michael Flynn departs after his sentencing was delayed at U.S. District Court in Washington, U.S., Dec. 18, 2018.
Joshua Roberts/Reuters
As the project moved forward, and IP3 came under scrutiny by lawmakers on Capitol Hill and other national security wonks, the team grew increasingly frustrated with Dunn and worried about potential conflicts of interests with his work. Several said Dunn did work for IP3 out of the pavilion offices, conducting phone calls and meetings, including with his brother Rep. Neal Dunn (R-FL), about the firm’s plans for nuclear exports. In 2018 Rep. Dunn (R-FL) put forward a resolution with Rep. Donald Norcross (D-NJ) and Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) using language that mimicked that of IP3’s stated mission. Asked about his brother’s resolution, Dunn said “neither Representative Norcross nor Dunn submitted that bi-partisan resolution at my request or the request of my company.”

According to interviews with pavilion members and documents reviewed by The Daily Beast, Dunn mixed his work on the pavilion and IP3, and used his role on the pavilion to push forward the mission of IP3.

At one point in the summer of 2018, Dunn emailed his colleagues to ask them to consider hiring one of the associates at IP3. At another point in time, Dunn suggested to his colleagues that he had used IP3’s connections with the State Department to influence hiring decisions that would benefit the project and his firm.

Today Dirk Vande Beek is the director of the office of public affairs at the Department of Energy. But at the time of Dunn’s email, he was interviewing for a senior personnel job at the State Department. Vande Beek did not respond to a request for comment.

“I’ve now spoken with the both of you re the potential new senior personnel at State —Vande Beek. In addition, I have learned that the Secretary also is interviewing a person for the Economics Under Secretary job today,” Dunn wrote in August 2018. “Bud McFarlane, one of the IP3 founding directors and very close friend & adviser of SecState Pompeo has agreed to meet with Vande Beek this afternoon as well.” (McFarlane was national security advisor to President Ronald Reagan.)

“Clearly, SecState Pompeo is staffing up and ensuring that he has the political team in place to manage State and direct it toward goals aligned with the Administration,” Dunn’s email continued. “I believe this effort by the Secretary will give Pavilion USA 2020 a much better opportunity to get the flexibility to operate effectively.”

At the same time that Dunn was helping gain access to Trump administration for the team, he and his firm were also trying to clinch meetings with top officials in an attempt to push the IP3 plan for Saudi forward, according to documents reviewed by The Daily Beast and three individuals associated with the project. IP3, according to three sources familiar, was having difficulty moving the ball forward on the idea of exporting American technology to Saudi in the wake of the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

Just weeks after the pavilion secured a meeting with White House officials, Vande Beek was hired at the Department of Energy. Just weeks after that, IP3 gained access to the president, sitting down with other energy executives for a high-profile roundtable discussion on nuclear power.

Dunn insists this was all on the up-and-up. “I never used my position as a director or counsel to the pavilion company for anything to do with IP3 except that I recommended to the pavilion that they consider a very capable candidate for employment who had previously worked for IP3. If I set up any meetings or made any introductions, it was a perfectly legitimate attempt to discuss collaboration with the USG on advancing the project,” Dunn told The Daily Beast. “Both my work for IP3 and Pavilion involved issues of international trade in goods and services and compliance with U.S. law as well as policies related to U.S. national economic interests and, in the case of the U.S. pavilion at the World’s Fair, tangentially involved U.S. national security interests.”

But while Dunn was pushing the State Department to hire his old colleague, the pavilion’s leadership was butting heads with Foggy Bottom officials, including Jim Core, the director of international expositions unit office. The pavilion board wanted to find other people in the Trump administration who could help with fundraising issues.That’s when it brought in Mike Jones, a registered lobbyist for Capitol Capital Group in Boston, who works on behalf of U.S. chambers of commerce in the Middle East and is a longtime friend of Bush.

Jones invoiced the pavilion for “introduction to key leaders in the American international business community” and “business development”—connecting the pavilion team to executives in the Middle East. But behind closed doors, documents show, he used his connection to White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney to advocate for help attracting funds for the project in exchange for personal payment from the pavilion. In those meetings, Jones also spoke on behalf of the businessmen he lobbied for, sources said.

In the weeks following Jones’ outreach to the White House in December 2018, members of the Middle East Council of American Chambers of Commerce (MECACC)—a lobbying client of Jones’—met with the Trump administration, including with Mulvaney, in March 2019.

Jones was advised by Bush and others, including Dunn, that there was no need to sign a formal contract with the pavilion in the beginning, though he did end up entering into one later, according to documents reviewed by The Daily Beast.

“When asked for comment via email, Jones said in a text message: ‘Are you CNN? Because this is ridiculous. What the hell are you doing?’ Jones went on to ask in a phone call: ‘Why do you have inflection at the end of your sentences? Are you 20 years old?’”
During the beginning of Jones’ $10,000-per-month contract with the pavilion, individuals involved in its efforts raised concerns about the optics of having a registered lobbyist work on behalf of the project, especially when that individual was at the same time lobbying the administration for his clients in the Middle East —some of whom also happened to support the pavilion. Those concerns were largely shot down by Dunn and Bush. The pavilion needed Jones’ help trying to convince the office of management and budget, housed inside the White House, to help oversee the pavilion process and to support federal funding for the project, several individuals involved in the pavilion said. According to sources familiar, Jones was told he could invoice the pavilion for “business development” work and the brokering of meetings could be considered “favors.”

When asked for comment via email, Jones said in a text message: “Are you CNN? Because this is ridiculous. What the hell are you doing?” Jones went on to ask in a phone call: “Why do you have inflection at the end of your sentences? Are you 20 years old?”

The pavilion team disbanded this spring after the leaders of the project, Bush and Houston, had a massive falling out, according to three people associated with the project. Bush and Houston, among other things, disagreed on Dunn’s position, work and payment, spurring a fight to oust the other from the team. As individuals associated with the project described it, the board investigated accusations each man made of the other. In the end, members of the board resigned, several on the same day. The non-profit dissolved, leaving some vendors out to dry. Some of those financial commitments are still being dealt with today by the new team in charge, which is desperately trying to raise funds for the pavilion by this fall.

Now, the Trump administration is bracing for the chance that the U.S. may not appear at the 2020 world expo at all. The State Department is overseeing a new team of individuals who are working to find new, better funding, for the pavilion in 2020. So far, though, those efforts are off to a rough start.

“Having seen the power of the USA Pavilion at the 2017 World Expo, which was due to the enormous effort by its partners and stakeholders, I know that the key to success in Dubai is absolute focus and unity,” said Josh Walker, the CEO and president of the 2017 Expo in Astana, Kazakhstan. “As someone who led an effort that resulted in a lauded pavilion experience for hundreds of thousands, I know what success looks like; this isn’t it.”
https://www.thedailybeast.com/influence ... ref=scroll



Mike Flynn Pushed Saudi Nuclear-Plant Plan despite warnings, per House Report - Flynn & Derek Harvey who Flynn brought to National Security Council to oversee Middle East affairs pushed "Middle East Marshall Plan" ignoring repeated legal & ethical warnings

House Committee on Oversight and Reform Report prepared for Chairman @RepCummings

Whistleblowers Raise Grave Concerns with Trump Administration’s Efforts to Transfer Sensitive Nuclear Technology to Saudi Arabia

https://assets.documentcloud.org/docume ... uclear.pdf



Wendy Siegelman

Per whistleblowers Derek Harvey said during 1st week of Trump Admin decision to adopt IP3’s plan to develop dozens of nuclear power plants was made by Flynn during transition when he was IP3 advisor

WH staff agreed Harvey's directive could violate the law
https://assets.documentcloud.org/docume ... uclear.pdf


Days after the inauguration IP3 officials sent docs directly to Flynn for Trump to approve including a draft Cabinet Memo stating Trump had appointed Tom Barrack as special rep

After Trump fired Flynn the plan continued w/Harvey, Tom Barrack & Rick Gates
https://assets.documentcloud.org/docume ... uclear.pdf


IP3 leaders stated in letter: “agreements by President Trump and Mohammed bin Salman have established the framework for our unique opportunity to take the next steps with IP3 and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia” & referenced partnership to acquire Westinghouse
https://assets.documentcloud.org/docume ... uclear.pdf


A striking part in report says Deputy Nat'l Security Advisor McFarland said Trump told Barrack he could lead implementation of Middle East Marshall Plan - but Trump said Barrack could not be paid for his role

Why?

A bit like Manafort working for free?

https://assets.documentcloud.org/docume ... uclear.pdf


Jan 2018 Brookfield Business Partners, subsidiary of Brookfield Asset
Management, announced plans to buy Westinghouse Electric (part of IP3’s proposed consortium) for $4.6 billion

Brookfield Asset Management bailed out Kushner Cos 666 Fifth Ave property

https://assets.documentcloud.org/docume ... uclear.pdf


Derek Harvey who Flynn brought to NSC to run Middle East affairs and is at the center of House Oversight & Reform report today on effort to push Saudi nuclear plan - had worked for Devin Nunes and returned to work for him after McMaster fired him from NSC
Wendy Siegelman added,
Stacy Jannis

@StacyJannis
and then there's this to throw in here: https://www.thedailybeast.com/controver ... evin-nunes

This Dec 2017 story by @iarnsdorf reported on the secretive lobbying push involving Michael Flynn, Tom Barrack, Rick Gates and Iran-Contra figure Robert McFarlane - many of the details highlighted in today's report


Wendy Siegelman Retweeted Wendy Siegelman
A few related items to keep an eye on

Before advising IP3 Flynn was in talks with Alex Copson at ACU Strategic Partners about a Middle East plan w/Russian co Rosatom
https://twitter.com/WendySiegelman/stat ... 0814574592

As of Nov 2018 Rosatom and Saudi Arabia were continuing talks

While there's no reporting that Flynn or members of Trump's inner circle are involved - this week Tass reported that discussions for Rosatom to build nuclear plants in…


Last month Senate Republicans questioned Rick Perry’s decision to award an $115 million no-bid contract to Centrus Energy to develop a nuclear enrichment facility & if $ would go to Russia, Centrus buys enriched uranium from Tenex, part of Russia's Rosatom



@ChristinLuvsSno
Feb 19
More
Replying to @WendySiegelman
Please tell me someone has reached out to Sec of Nukes and former Dancing With The Stars alum, Rick Perry, to see what he knows and when did he know it or was he left out of the loop cause he's Rick Perry.
https://twitter.com/WendySiegelman/stat ... 8129075202
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 Aug 20, 2019 8:14 am

PROOF OF CONSPIRACY
HOW TRUMP'S INTERNATIONAL COLLUSION IS THREATENING AMERICAN DEMOCRACY
SETH ABRAMSON
PROOF OF CONSPIRACY
THE SECOND EXCERPT FROM PROOF OF CONSPIRACY

FROM CHAPTER FOUR:

During the same forty-eight-hour period in March 2016 in which Donald Trump meets with his national security advisory committee for the first time, Paul Manafort and Rick Gates pitch Trump on bringing aboard Fabrizio—an employee of Finkelstein and Birnbaum—and Gates meets with Birnbaum in Washington.121 The two men discuss whether Birnbaum, with his “close ties to current and former Israeli government officials,” can link up the Trump campaign with Psy-Group.122 Gates “request[s] proposals [from Psy-Group’s Joel Zamel] to create fake online identities, to use social media manipulation and to gather intelligence to help defeat . . . Clinton, according to interviews and copies of the proposals.”123 According to the New York Times, “the documents show that a senior Trump aide [Trump’s deputy campaign manager] saw the promise of a [digital] disruption effort to swing voters in Mr. Trump’s favor.”124 Because it is Birnbaum, the “senior aide” to Netanyahu who had previously co-managed one of the Israeli prime minister’s campaigns—and who the Times of Israel notes has “closely worked with a wide range of Israeli politicians over the years”—who makes the Gates-Zamel introduction, Gates and Birnbaum’s late March 2016 meeting bears many of the hallmarks of an attempt by a foreign power to tamper in the 2016 election through a trusted intermediary.125 Indeed, the chief identification the Times of Israel gives to Finkelstein and Birnbaum is as “longtime” Netanyahu advisers.126

The possibility that Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu sought to tamper with America’s 2016 presidential election is a grave one, requiring some consideration not only of whether it was within his power but in the character of the man to do so. Apropos of this inquiry, in 2018 Israeli police will recommend not just once or twice but three times that Netanyahu face criminal charges for “taking bribes, fraud, and breach of trust,” allegations that ultimately do lead to Netanyahu becoming the first sitting Israeli prime minister to face criminal charges (see chapter 10).127 The first allegation against Netanyahu involves him secretly colluding with a foreign billionaire (Australian entrepreneur James Packer) to advance his own interests; the second allegation submits that Netanyahu attempted to secretly collude with top Trump donor Sheldon Adelson in an effort to manipulate media coverage; and the third allegation, like the second, involves an attempt at clandestine collusion with a telecommunications and media conglomerate.128 Consequently, while Netanyahu has not to date been linked with his former top aide’s attempt to—possibly illegally—connect an Israeli company specializing in telecommunications and media strategy with the Trump campaign, neither can it be said that such an act of collusion would lie outside Netanyahu’s reputed sphere of activity.

As for whether interference by Zamel and Psy-Group in the 2016 election offers some additional evidence of involvement by the Israeli government, worth noting is a New York Times report confirming that Psy-Group is indeed “staffed by former Israeli intelligence operatives.”129 The Daily Beast and the Times of Israel have both reported that not just Gates but two members of “Trump’s inner circle” reached out to Psy-Group looking for election assistance; the names of these top-level Trump aides are at present unknown.130 What is known is that Zamel was so determined to get to Trump he “even asked Newt Gingrich, the former House Speaker, to offer Zamel’s services to Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law.”131 Gingrich was at the time a member of Psy-Group’s advisory board, as was Elliott Abrams, a man Trump has since named as his special envoy “to oversee U.S. policy toward Venezuela,” per the New Yorker.132 Gingrich forwarded Zamel’s May 2016 email to Jared Kushner; as already noted, Kushner’s family is close to Netanyahu, and it is Kushner who ultimately decides, over objections from both Corey Lewandowski and Paul Manafort, to hire Cambridge Analytica—a decision that may well have meant, too, hiring an Israeli business intelligence firm run by Zamel.133 Zamel, for his part, admired “Trump’s vocal support for Israel and his hardline views on Iran,” according to the New Yorker, saying in his email to Gingrich that ended up in Kushner’s in-box that Psy-Group could “provide the Trump campaign with powerful tools that would use social media to advance Trump’s chances. Zamel suggested a meeting in Washington to discuss the matter further.”134 Kushner thereafter discussed the idea with Brad Parscale, then Trump’s digital campaign director; subsequently, Rick Gates requested that Zamel send additional proposals to the campaign, which the Israeli business intelligence expert did in June.135

In June 2016, the same month Zamel sends three full-length social-media disinformation campaign proposals to the Trump team, the Israeli businessman meets with MBZ adviser George Nader—whom he has known for years, having been introduced by former Dick Cheney aide John Hannah—at the very economic forum in St. Petersburg that Felix Sater had been trying to get Michael Cohen to attend, and that Deripaska associate (and Russian deputy prime minister) Sergei Prikhodko had invited Trump to attend on two separate occasions. In St. Petersburg, Zamel tells Nader that he is “trying to raise money for a social-media campaign in support of Trump”—an entreaty strongly suggesting that the Trump campaign was willing to use Zamel’s work, but not to pay for it directly, and that Zamel had reason to believe Nader’s patron MBZ, for whom Zamel was already a consultant, would be willing to secretly do so.136 And indeed, according to the New Yorker, Zamel ultimately does ask Nader for “Nader’s Gulf contacts . . . [to] contribut[e] financially.”137

According to the Times of Israel, one of the three campaigns Psy-Group proposes to the Trump team in June 2016 in response to contact with multiple top campaign advisers suggests “us[ing] fake online profiles to bombard [targets] with messages” that appear to come from American voters and decry Trump opponents’ “ulterior motives or hidden plans.” Meanwhile, a second proposal solicited by the Trump campaign would use an identical strategy to “target female minorities . . . in swing states to push them toward Trump and away from Clinton.”138 A third proposal “sketche[s] out a monthslong plan to help Mr. Trump by using social media to help expose or amplify division among rival campaigns and factions”—an idea that dovetails with the Kremlin’s effort to suppress Democratic turnout in November 2016 by exacerbating divisions between supporters of Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Jill Stein.139 These proposals, submitted formally to the Trump campaign in the spring and summer of 2016 under the code name Project Rome, are thus substantively indistinguishable from the interference the Kremlin was orchestrating during the general election.

That Psy-Group knows the activities it proposes to Gates and two other top Trump aides will have to be covert is confirmed by its proposals using code words for Trump and Clinton and discussing the need for “intelligence activities”—which the proposals explicitly contrast with “open source methods”—for the plans to come off properly.140 One plan even discusses using “clandestine means to build ‘intelligence dossiers’ on Clinton,” a strategy that mirrors the one the Trump campaign will accuse the Clinton campaign of using once the Steele dossier, which outlines serious allegations of Trump-Russia collusion, is published in January 2017 by BuzzFeed News.141 That Psy-Group knows its proposals are illegal appears to be confirmed by a subsequent Times of Israel investigation, which finds that Psy-Group “was reportedly told by an American law firm that its activities would be illegal if non-Americans were involved.”142 The top brass at Psy-Group, including Zamel himself, are all foreign nationals; moreover, the Times of Israel will note that in at least one other sphere—anti-BDS (boycott-divest-sanction Israel) campaigns—Psy-Group is working covertly overseas in a way that is “known to the Israeli government, and specifically the Ministry of Strategic Affairs.”143

According to an investigative report by the Daily Beast, Rick Gates and the two unnamed aides in Trump’s “inner circle” who solicit digital campaign ideas from Psy-Group are “very, very interested” in Zamel’s proposals, despite the campaign’s future protestations to the contrary.144 These protestations, which also insist that the campaign never used Psy-Group’s services, will be challenged by several “former employees” of Psy-Group who “dispute[ ] [the] claim” that “the firm never went forward with its plan to help the [Trump] campaign.”145
https://read.macmillan.com/lp/proof-of- ... excerpt-2/
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 Aug 20, 2019 9:51 am

The Epoch Times is the largest pro-Trump spender on Facebook.

It's run by a religious sect that believes judgment day, which sends those they label “communists” to Hell⁠, is 30 years late—and that Trump is making it happen




Ben Collins

MoreSo @BrandyZadrozny and I have been working on a story for about five months. It's almost definitely the wildest story I've ever covered. Sounds like it's coming out early tomorrow.

New from me + @brandyzadrozny:

The Epoch Times is the largest pro-Trump spender on Facebook.

It's run by a religious sect that believes judgment day, which sends those they label “communists” to Hell⁠, is 30 years late—and that Trump is making it happen



It's impossible to get through the scope of this story in a few tweets, but I'm going to try.

The Epoch Times is sometimes the most-viewed news creator on all of Facebook, Youtube and Twitter.

In April, it outranked ANY other news outlet in video views.

It's run by people who “believe that Trump was sent by heaven to destroy the Communist Party”

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/ ... h-n1044121
Image

Epoch Times' senior editorial are quietly Falun Gong practitioners, a religious group now based in a compound in Dragon Springs, NY.

At the compound, use of medicines is discouraged, and visa-based arranged relationships are common, ex-practitioners say.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/ ... h-n1044121
Image

The Epoch Times hired non-Falun Gong members to cover the 2016 election.

“It’s like we were supposed to be fighting so-called liberal propaganda by making our own,” said a former Trump campaign reporter.

He said it was like working at a troll farm.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/ ... h-n1044121

Image

The Epoch Times' senior editorial staff, sometimes the largest video publisher on all of social media, quietly runs one of the largest Qanon channels on YouTube.

It has over 33 million views, including “13 BLOODLINES & their Diabolical End Game.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/ ... h-n1044121

Image

The Epoch Times, whose staff believe judgment day is 30 years late and Trump is helping it go down, has allies in the White House.

It had a 40-minute Trump Tower interview with Lara Trump this year. The president's FB page shared them a half-dozen times.

No one on Facebook spends more promoting Donald Trump than the Epoch Times. Millions were dropped on 11,000 ads in the last six months, more than most Democratic presidential candidates.

They use the ad money to push Qanon-lite.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/ ... h-n1044121

Image

But wait! Isn't The Epoch Times a non-profit dedicated to providing "information to Chinese communities to help immigrants assimilate into American society"?

How and why are they spending millions to boost Trump on Facebook?

Good question!

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/ ... h-n1044121

Image
When we reached out to The Epoch Times for comment on this story, they responded by publishing an article called "Our Response to NBC News’ Inappropriate Questions."

It included this line.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/ ... h-n1044121

Image

Not knowing what was in our story, conservative figureheads quickly rallied around The Epoch Times.

This is a Devin Nunes tweet linking to their response to us.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/ ... h-n1044121

Image
Another Epoch Times mystery we couldn't figure out:

On September 12th of last year, an Epoch Times photographer handed Donald Trump a manila envelope as he exited the East Room of the White House.


Screen Shot 2019-08-20 at 9.48.53 AM.png

https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/sta ... 3101016064







Trump, QAnon and an impending judgment day: Behind the Facebook-fueled rise of The Epoch Times
Started almost two decades ago with a stated mission to “provide information to Chinese communities to help immigrants assimilate into American society,” The Epoch Times now wields one of the biggest social media followings of any news outlet.

Aug. 20, 2019, 3:12 AM CDT
By the numbers, there is no bigger advocate of President Donald Trump on Facebook than The Epoch Times.

The small New York-based nonprofit news outlet has spent more than $1.5 million on about 11,000 pro-Trump advertisements in the last six months, according to data from Facebook’s advertising archive — more than any organization outside of the Trump campaign itself, and more than most Democratic presidential candidates have spent on their own campaigns.

Those video ads — in which unidentified spokespeople thumb through a newspaper to praise Trump, peddle conspiracy theories about the “Deep State,” and criticize “fake news” media — strike a familiar tone in the online conservative news ecosystem. The Epoch Times looks like many of the conservative outlets that have gained followings in recent years.

But it isn’t.

Behind the scenes, the media outlet’s ownership and operation is closely tied to Falun Gong, a Chinese spiritual community with the stated goal of taking down China’s government.

It’s that motivation that helped drive the organization toward Trump, according to interviews with former Epoch Times staffers, a move that has been both lucrative and beneficial for its message.

Former practitioners of Falun Gong told NBC News that believers think the world is headed toward a judgment day, where those labeled “communists” will be sent to a kind of hell, and those sympathetic to the spiritual community will be spared. Trump is viewed as a key ally in the anti-communist fight, former Epoch Times employees said.

In part because of that unusual background, The Epoch Times has had trouble finding a foothold in the broader conservative movement.

“It seems like an interloper — not well integrated socially within the movement network, and not terribly well-circulating among right-wingers,” said A.J. Bauer, a visiting professor of media, culture and communication at New York University, who is part of an ongoing study in which he and his colleagues interview conservative journalists.

“Even when discussing more fringe-y sites, conservative journalists tend to reference Gateway Pundit or Infowars,” Bauer said. “The Epoch Times doesn’t tend to come up.”

That seems to be changing.

Before 2016, The Epoch Times generally stayed out of U.S. politics, unless they dovetailed with Chinese interests. The publication’s recent ad strategy, coupled with a broader campaign to embrace social media and conservative U.S. politics — Trump in particular — has doubled The Epoch Times’ revenue, according to the organization’s tax filings, and pushed it to greater prominence in the broader conservative media world.

Started almost two decades ago as a free newspaper and website with a stated mission to “provide information to Chinese communities to help immigrants assimilate into American society,” The Epoch Times now wields one of the biggest social media followings of any news outlet.

In April, at the height of its ad spending, videos from the Epoch Media Group, which includes The Epoch Times and digital video outlet New Tang Dynasty, or NTD, combined for around 3 billion views on Facebook, YouTube and Twitter, ranking 11th among all video creators across platforms and outranking every other traditional news publisher, according to data from the social media analytics company Tubular.

Facebook ads from The Epoch Times.
That engagement has made The Epoch Times a favorite of the Trump family and a key component of the president’s re-election campaign. The president’s Facebook page has posted Epoch Times content at least half a dozen times this year— with several articles written by members of the Trump campaign. Donald Trump Jr. has tweeted several of their stories, too.

In May, Lara Trump, the president’s daughter-in-law, sat down for a 40-minute interview in Trump Tower with the paper’s senior editor. And for the first time, The Epoch Times was a main player at the conservative conference CPAC this year, where it secured interviews with members of Congress, Trump Cabinet members and right-wing celebrities.

At the same time, its network of news sites and YouTube channels has made it a powerful conduit for the internet’s fringier conspiracy theories, including anti-vaccination propaganda and QAnon, to reach the mainstream.

Despite its growing reach and power, little is publicly known about the precise ownership, origins or influences of The Epoch Times.

The outlet’s opacity makes it difficult to determine an overall structure, but it is loosely organized into several regional tax-free nonprofits. The Epoch Times operates alongside the video production company, NTD, under the umbrella of The Epoch Media Group, a private news and entertainment company whose owner executives have declined to name, citing concerns of "pressure" that could follow.

The Epoch Media Group, along with Shen Yun, a dance troupe known for its ubiquitous advertising and unsettling performances, make up the outreach effort of Falun Gong, a relatively new spiritual practice that combines ancient Chinese meditative exercises, mysticism and often ultraconservative cultural worldviews. Falun Gong’s founder has referred to Epoch Media Group as “our media,” and the group’s practice heavily informs The Epoch Times’ coverage, according to former employees who spoke with NBC News.

Executives at The Epoch Times declined to be interviewed for this article, but the publisher, Stephen Gregory, wrote an editorial in response to a list of emailed questions from NBC News, calling it “highly inappropriate” and part of an effort to “discredit” the publication to ask about the company’s affiliation with Falun Gong and its stance on the Trump administration.

Interviews with former employees, public financial records and social media data illustrate how a secretive newspaper has been able to leverage the devoted followers of a reclusive spiritual leader, political vitriol, online conspiracy theories and the rise of Trump to become a digital media powerhouse that now attracts billions of views each month, all while publicly denying or downplaying its association with Falun Gong.

Behind the times

In 2009, the founder and leader of Falun Gong, Li Hongzhi, came to speak at The Epoch Times’ offices in Manhattan. Li came with a clear directive for the Falun Gong volunteers who comprised the company’s staff: “Become regular media.”

The publication had been founded nine years earlier in Georgia by John Tang, a Chinese American practitioner of Falun Gong and current president of New Tang Dynasty. But it was falling short of Li’s ambitions as stated to his followers: to expose the evil of the Chinese government and “save all sentient beings” in a forthcoming divine battle against communism.

Roughly translated by the group as “law wheel exercise,” Falun Gong was started by Li in 1992. The practice, which combines bits of Buddhism and Taoism, involves meditation and gentle exercises and espouses Li’s controversial teachings.

“Li Hongzhi simplified meditation and practices that traditionally have many steps and are very confusing,” said Ming Xia, a professor at the City University of New York who has studied Falun Gong. “Basically it’s like fast food, a quickie.”

Li’s teachings quickly built a significant following — and ran into tension with China’s leaders, who viewed his popularity as a threat to the communist government’s hold on power.

In 1999, after thousands of Li’s followers gathered in front of President Jiang Zemin’s compound to quietly protest the arrest of several Falun Gong members, authorities in China banned Falun Gong, closing teaching centers and arresting Falun Gong organizers and practitioners who refused to give up the practice. Human rights groups have reported some adherents being tortured and killed while in custody.

The crackdown elicited condemnation from Western countries, and attracted a new pool of followers in the United States, for whom China and communism were common adversaries.

"The persecution itself elevated Li’s status and brought tremendous media attention,” Ming said.


It has also invited scrutiny of the spiritual leader’s more unconventional ideas. Among them, Li has railed against what he called the wickedness of homosexuality, feminism and popular music while holding that he is a god-like figure who can levitate and walk through walls.

Li has also taught that sickness is a symptom of evil that can only be truly cured with meditation and devotion, and that aliens from undiscovered dimensions have invaded the minds and bodies of humans, bringing corruption and inventions such as computers and airplanes. The Chinese government has used these controversial teachings to label Falun Gong a cult. Falun Gong has denied the government's characterization.

The Epoch Times provided Li with an English-language way to push back against China — a position that would eventually dovetail with Trump’s election.

In 2005, The Epoch Times released its greatest salvo, publishing the ''Nine Commentaries," a widely distributed book-length series of anonymous editorials that it claimed exposed the Chinese Communist Party’s “massive crimes” and “attempts to eradicate all traditional morality and religious belief.”

The next year, an Epoch Times reporter was removed from a White House event for Chinese President Hu Jintao after interrupting the ceremony by shouting for several minutes that then-President George W. Bush must stop the leader from “persecuting Falun Gong.”

But despite its small army of devoted volunteers, The Epoch Times was still operating as a fledgling startup.

Ben Hurley is a former Falun Gong practitioner who helped create Australia’s English version of The Epoch Times out of a living room in Sydney in 2005. He has written about his experience with the paper and described the early years as “a giant PR campaign” to evangelize about Falun Gong’s belief in an upcoming apocalypse in which those who think badly of the practice, or well of the Chinese Communist Party, will be destroyed.

Hurley, who wrote for The Epoch Times until he left in 2013, said he saw practitioners in leadership positions begin drawing harder and harder lines about acceptable political positions.

“Their views were always anti-abortion and homophobic, but there was more room for disagreements in the early days,” he said.

Hurley said Falun Gong practitioners saw communism everywhere: former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, movie star Jackie Chan and former United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan were all considered to have sold themselves out to the Chinese government, Hurley said.

This kind of coverage foreshadowed the news organization’s embrace of conspiracy theories like QAnon, the overarching theory that there is an evil cabal of “deep state” operators and child predators out to take down the president.

“It is so rabidly pro-Trump,” Hurley said, referring to The Epoch Times. Devout practitioners of Falun Gong “believe that Trump was sent by heaven to destroy the Communist Party.”

A representative for Li declined an interview request. Li lives among hundreds of his followers near Dragon Springs, a 400-acre compound in upstate New York that houses temples, private schools and quarters where performers for the organization’s dance troupe, Shen Yun, live and rehearse, according to four former compound residents and former Falun Gong practitioners who spoke to NBC News.

They said that life in Dragon Springs is tightly controlled by Li, that internet access is restricted, the use of medicines is discouraged, and arranged relationships are common. Two former residents on visas said they were offered to be set up with U.S. residents at the compound.

Tiger Huang, a former Dragon Springs resident who was on a U.S. student visa from Taiwan, said she was set up on three dates on the compound, and she believed her ability to stay in the U.S. was tied to the arrangement.

“The purpose of setting up the dates was obvious,” Huang said. Her now-husband, a former Dragon Springs resident, confirmed the account.

Huang said she was told by Dragon Springs officials her visa had expired and was told to go back to Taiwan after months of dating a nonpractitioner in the compound. She later learned that her visa had not expired when she was told to leave the country.

Campaign season

By 2016, The Epoch Times Group appeared to have heeded the call from Li to run its operation more like a typical news organization, starting with The Epoch Times’ website. In March, the company placed job ads on the site Indeed.com and assembled a team of seven young reporters otherwise unconnected to Falun Gong. The average salary for the new recruits was $35,000 a year, paid monthly, according to former employees.

Things seemed “strange,” even from the first day, according to five former reporters who spoke with NBC News — four of whom asked for anonymity over concerns that speaking negatively about their experience would affect their relationship with current and future employers.

As part of their orientation, the new reporters watched a video that laid out the Chinese persecution of Falun Gong followers. The publisher, Stephen Gregory, also spoke to the reporters about his vision for the new digital initiative. The former employees said Gregory’s talk framed The Epoch Times as an answer to the liberal mainstream media.

Their content was to be critical of communist China, clear-eyed about the threat of Islamic terrorism, focused on illegal immigration and at all times rooted in “traditional” values, they said. This meant no content about drugs, gay people or popular music.

The reporters said they worked from desks arranged in a U-shape in a single-room office that was separated by a locked door from the other staff members who worked on the paper, dozens of Falun Gong volunteers and interns. The new recruits wrote up to five news stories a day in an effort to meet a quota of 100,000 page views, and submitted their work to a handful of editors — a team of two Falun Gong-practicing married couples.

“Slave labor may not be the right word, but that’s a lot of articles to write in one day,” one former employee said.

It wasn’t just the amount of writing but also the conservative editorial restrictions that began to concern some of the employees.

“It’s like we were supposed to be fighting so-called liberal propaganda by making our own,” said Steve Klett, who covered the Trump campaign for The Epoch Times as his first job in journalism. Klett likened The Epoch Times to a Russian troll farm and said his articles were edited to remove outside criticism of Trump.

“The worst was the Pulse shooting,” Klett said, referring to the 2016 mass shooting in which 50 people including the gunman were killed at a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida. “We weren’t allowed to cover stories involving homosexuality, but that bumps up against them wanting to cover Islamic terrorism. So I wrote four articles without using the word gay.”

Klett said that the publication also began to skew in favor of Trump, who had targeted China on the campaign trail with talk of a trade war.

“I knew I had to forget about all the worst parts of Trump,” Klett said.

Klett, however, would not end up having to cover the Trump administration. Eight days before the election, the team was called together and fired as a group.

“I guess the experiment was over,” a former employee said.

The content

The Epoch Times, digital production company NTD and the heavily advertised dance troupe Shen Yun make up the nonprofit network that Li calls “our media.” Financial documents paint a complicated picture of more than a dozen technically separate organizations that appear to share missions, money and executives. Though the source of their revenue is unclear, the most recent financial records from each organization paint a picture of an overall business thriving in the Trump era.

The Epoch Times brought in $8.1 million in revenue in 2017 — double what it had the previous year — and reported spending $7.2 million on “printing newspaper and creating web and media programs.” Most of its revenue comes from advertising and “web and media income,” according to the group’s annual tax filings, while individual donations and subscriptions to the paper make up less than 10 percent of its revenue.

New Tang Dynasty’s 2017 revenue, according to IRS records, was $18 million, a 150 percent increase over the year before. It spent $16.2 million.

That exponential growth came around the same time The Epoch Times expanded its online presence and increased its ad spending, honing its message on two basic themes: enthusiastic support for Trump’s agenda, and the exposure of what the publication claims is a labyrinthian, global conspiracy led by Clinton and former President Barack Obama to tear down Trump. One such conspiracy theory, loosely called “Spygate,” has become a common talking point for Fox News host Sean Hannity and conservative news websites like Breitbart.


The paper’s “Spygate Special Coverage” section, which frequently sits atop its website, theorizes about a grand, yearslong plot in which former Obama and Clinton staffers, a handful of magazines and newspapers, private investigators and government bureaucrats plan to take down the Trump presidency.

In his published response, publisher Gregory said the media outlet’s ads “have no political agenda.”

While The Epoch Times usually straddles the line between an ultraconservative news outlet and a conspiracy warehouse, some popular online shows created by Epoch Times employees and produced by NTD cross the line completely, and spread far and wide.

One such show is "Edge of Wonder," a verified YouTube channel that releases new NTD-produced videos twice every week and now has more than 33 million views. In addition to claims that alien abductions are real and the drug epidemic was engineered by the “deep state,” the channel pushes the QAnon conspiracy theory, which falsely posits that the same “Spygate” cabal is a front for a global pedophile ring being taken down by Trump.

One QAnon video, titled “#QANON - 7 facts the MEDIA (MSM) Won’t Admit” has almost 1 million views on YouTube. Other videos in the channel’s QAnon playlist, which include videos about 9/11 conspiracy theories and one titled “13 BLOODLINES & their Diabolical End Game,” gained hundreds of thousands of views each.

Travis View, a researcher and podcaster who studies the QAnon movement, said The Epoch Times has sanitized the conspiracy theory by pushing Spygate, which drops the wildest and more prurient details of QAnon while retaining its conspiratorial elements.

“QAnon is highly stigmatized among people trying to push the Spygate message. They know how toxic QAnon is,” View said. “Spygate leaves out the spiritual elements, the child sex trafficking, but it’s certainly integral to the QAnon narrative.”

Gregory denied any connection with "Edge of Wonder," writing in a statement that his organization was “aware of the entertainment show,” but “is in no way connected with it.”

But The Epoch Times has itself published several credulous reports on QAnon and for years, the webseries hosts Rob Counts and Benjamin Chasteen were employed as the company’s creative director and chief photo editor, respectively. In August 2018, six months after the creation of "Edge of Wonder," Counts tweeted that he still worked for Epoch Times. Counts and Chasteen did not respond to an email seeking clarification on their roles.

Meanwhile The Epoch Times has promoted "Edge of Wonder" content in dozens of Facebook posts, still visible on its official Facebook page. That page is currently topped with a pinned ad for its Trump coverage that reads, “Where can you get real news that doesn't push any hidden agendas?”
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/ ... h-n1044121
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
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 Aug 21, 2019 10:00 am

U.S. Farmers Stung by Tariffs Now Face a $3.5 Billion Corn Loss

trump real goal is to bankrupt small farmers


Mega-donor Miriam Adelson, Now Israel's Richest Person, Is Beholden to No One
Israeli-born Dr. Adelson, wife of U.S. casino tycoon and philanthropist Sheldon Adelson, is a new addition to Israel's rich list this year — jumping straight to first place

Nati Tucker Jun 20, 2019 2:54 AM
Total worth in 2019: $22,000,000,000
Stock market value: $20,800,000,000

Dr. Miriam Adelson, wife of U.S. casino tycoon and philanthropist Sheldon Adelson, is the wealthiest person in 2019 Israel. Israeli-born Adelson is a new addition to the rich list this year, jumping straight to first place thanks to a recent transfer of assets from her husband.

Adelson had mostly stayed out of the public eye until recently, with media attention centered on her husband, who is now 85. That has started to change – perhaps due to Sheldon’s age, or perhaps because of his cancer, which has kept him away from his business activities and public appearances for several months.
Image
Miriam Adelson, Israel's wealthiest person.
Miriam Adelson.Doron Flamm
Over the past year, Dr. Adelson, 73, a dual Israeli and American citizen, became Israel’s wealthiest individual by a long stretch. Her personal wealth is now $22 billion, most of it in shares in the Las Vegas Sands Corporation, gifted to her by her husband during the previous year. In May 2018, Adelson also took control of her husband’s freebie newspaper Israel Hayom, considered a mouthpiece for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, when she declared herself its publisher. In an unusual move, she penned an opinion piece in favor of Israel’s controversial nation-state law. Her role at the daily gives her significant influence over the everyday lives of Israelis.

In November 2018, Adelson was granted the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian honor in the United States, by President Donald Trump. The criticism wasn’t long in coming: The Adelsons are known for donating hundreds of millions of dollars to Republican causes, including Trump’s campaign.

Miriam Farbstein was born in Tel Aviv and studied internal medicine at Tel Aviv University. A few years after divorcing her first husband, she moved to the United States, where she specialized in treating drug addictions. Her patients included Sheldon Adelson’s son from his first marriage, who later died of an overdose. She went on to found drug treatment centers in Las Vegas and Tel Aviv. By the time she met Sheldon, whom she married in 1991, he was already extremely well off.

The two became a couple with massive influence over U.S. and Israeli political developments. People who know them personally say Miriam has always been a powerful presence, even if that wasn’t widely known to the public. They credit her for shifting her husband’s political views to the Republican Party; previously he had donated to Democratic candidates.
Image
U.S. President Donald Trump presents the Presidential Medal of Freedom to physician Miriam Adelson.ALEX WONG / AFP

Miriam Adelson is also responsible for the couple’s decision to donate to Israeli causes, including massive ventures such as Birthright; for the broad scope of their political influence in Israel; and for her husband’s decision to found Israel Hayom. She is motivated by ideological causes. Her opinions are right-wing in every respect, nationalist and Zionist, and she believes that the Israeli right must remain in power: From her perspective, it is “saving Israel.” She sees Israel Hayom as a means of preserving that situation; prior to the newspaper’s founding in 2007, the country was ruled by centrist parties. One friend says that Adelson believes that her right-wing views impeded her career as a doctor in Israel in the 1980s.

A close acquaintance says that Israel Hayom was entirely her project. For Miriam Adelson, it was first a matter of ideology, and thereafter of supporting Netanyahu; for her husband Sheldon, it was a matter of first choosing Netanyahu and adopting the ideology afterward, says the friend.

While many well-to-do families with ties to the Netanyahus have a give-and-take relationship with them, it’s not that way with Miriam Adelson. At some point she had a close relationship with Sara Netanyahu, but they later grew apart. Adelson is not beholden to anyone. People who know her say that for her Benjamin Netanyahu is only the means: If he doesn’t “deliver the goods,” the Adelsons will switch their allegiance elsewhere. Which is why Israel Hayom started embracing right-wing politician Naftali Bennett.

Image
Miriam Adelson and her husband, Casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, listen to U.S. President Donald Trump address the Republican Jewish Coalition 2019 Annual Leadership Meeting in Las Vegas, Nevada, U.S.,REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque
The relationship between the Adelsons and Netanyahu broke down in the wake of Case 2000, in which Netanyahu is suspected of trying to strike a deal with Yedioth Ahronoth publisher Arnon Mozes to weaken Israel Hayom in exchange for more positive coverage in Mozes’ newspaper. Sources close to the Adelsons say that the parties are still not speaking. A 2017 expose by Haaretz journalist Uri Blau, revealing that up until 2014 Israel Hayom had lost 700 million shekels ($190 million), also shocked the public.

These developments may have led the Adelsons to oust Israel Hayom’s previous publisher and editor in 2017. They appointed journalist Boaz Bizmuth as editor and some sources say he convinced Adelson herself to take the job as publisher. The Adelsons are still financing the newspaper, although it may be costing them less than in the past.

Miriam Adelson maintains ties with old friends in Israel, and meets them frequently on visits. Despite living in the United States, she still considers herself an Israeli and wants to remain involved in goings-on there. She is sophisticated enough to influence U.S. policy regarding Israel from behind the scenes. OnE example is the Trump’s decision to move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, although Adelson denies any involvement in that.

With her husband’s declining health and her control over Israel Hayom, it’s likely that Miriam Adelson will continue to be the one to set the couple’s political agenda going forward.
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/bus ... -1.7366413





Aug 20 at 11:02pm
Craig Unger on Kleptocracy
GN Craig Unger FINAL WITH AD.mp3
Our Get Un-Gaslit Summer Reading Series continues with Vanity Fair contributor Craig Unger, the author of the New York Times-bestselling book House of Trump, House of Putin: The Untold Story of Donald Trump and the Russian Mafia, a must-read and deeply researched book. This guide on how kleptocracy works reminds us yet again that Trump properties are a laundromat for Russian mafia money, have been for years, and that Trump’s ambition to run for president and efforts to run for president go back several years, and so do his contacts with the Soviet Union and Russian oligarchs close to Putin. Unger is also the author of House of Bush, House of Saud: The Secret Relationship Between the World’s Two Most Powerful Dynasties.

As an all-purpose expert on atrocious criminals, Unger is obviously an ideal Gaslit Nation interview. In this explosive conversation we discuss the Russian mafia and its exploitation of legal loopholes in the U.S., the failure of law enforcement and intelligence agencies to take on Trump’s criminal squad before it was too late, the use of kompromat and threats by Trump mentor Roy Cohn and by the KGB, the abrupt end of the Mueller probe, the real deal with Felix Sater, the failure of the media to realize any of this was even happening, and more. This is a can’t-miss Gaslit Nation crime scene that answers old questions and leaves you with new ones!
https://www.patreon.com/posts/craig-unger-on-27823736



Image



So, for those waking up, Donald Trump is embracing the idea that he’s considered a messiah. It’s a phenomenon inside apocalyptic Christianity that began within the evangelical community and the New World Order fad of the 1990’s.

Image
Image
https://twitter.com/wendysiegelman?lang=en
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 51 guests