Paul Manafort

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Paul Manafort

Postby seemslikeadream » Sat Aug 05, 2017 5:39 pm

U.S. Reportedly Intercepted Suspected Russian Agents' Chatter That Manafort Asked for Their Help With Clinton

By Elliot Hannon

Paul Manafort's Russian connections are dodgy and deep.


Buried in a long story on CNN Thursday recapping the current state of play in the Russia investigation was a reminder that former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who is largely out of the spotlight at the moment, may not be for long. Manafort, who had spent years on the political fringes helping dictators and strongmen get elected around the world and then lobbying on their behalf in Washington, came out of nowhere to join the Trump campaign, and then take over the reins when Cory Lewandowski was fired in June 2016. By that time, unusual communications between the Trump campaign and Russian officials had pinged on U.S. intelligence agencies’ radar. As did Trump’s new right hand man.

In the summer of 2016, US intelligence agencies noticed a spate of curious contacts between Trump campaign associates and suspected Russian intelligence, according to current and former US officials briefed on the investigation… CNN has learned that investigators became more suspicious when they turned up intercepted communications that U.S. intelligence agencies collected among suspected Russian operatives discussing their efforts to work with Manafort, who served as campaign chairman for three months, to coordinate information that could damage Hillary Clinton's election prospects, the US officials say. The suspected operatives relayed what they claimed were conversations with Manafort, encouraging help from the Russians.
There are obviously multiple investigative balls in the air, and the public focus has shifted of late to Donald Trump Jr. and Jared Kushner, who certainly have had longer and more lasting influence on Donald Trump, but keep an eye on Paul Manafort, his Russia connections are deep and dodgy.

Update, Aug. 4, 2017: Jason Maloni, a spokesman for Manafort, issued this statement on the latest round of accusations: “Paul Manafort did not collude with the Russian government to undermine the 2016 election or to hack the DNC. Other than that comment, we aren't going to respond to anonymous officials illegally peddling second hand conspiracy theories. But the Justice Department, and the courts if necessary, should hold someone to account for the flood of unlawful government leaks targeting Mr. Manafort."
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... about.html
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: Paul Manafort

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:28 am

FBI conducted predawn raid of former Trump campaign chairman Manafort’s home

Paul Manafort, seen in July 2016 when he was chairman of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, is a focus of a special counsel investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. (Matt Rourke/AP)
By Carol D. Leonnig, Tom Hamburger and Rosalind S. Helderman August 9 at 9:53 AM
FBI agents raided the Alexandria home of President Trump’s former campaign chairman late last month, using a search warrant to seize documents and other materials, according to people familiar with the special counsel investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

Federal agents appeared at Paul Manafort’s home without advance warning in the predawn hours of July 26, the day after he met voluntarily with the staff for the Senate Intelligence Committee.

The search warrant was wide-ranging and FBI agents working with special counsel Robert S. Mueller III departed the home with various records.

The raid came as Manafort has been voluntarily producing documents to congressional committees investigating Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election. The search warrant indicates investigators may have argued to a federal judge they had reason to believe Manafort could not be trusted to turn over all records in response to a grand jury subpoena.

It could also have been intended to send a message to President Trump’s former campaign chairman that he should not expect gentle treatment or legal courtesies from Mueller’s team.

Play Video 1:40
Four controversial figures Paul Manafort did business with

As a lobbyist and political consultant in the 1980s, Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort worked with international clients that included two dictators who were then allied with the United States. (Bastien Inzaurralde/The Washington Post)
The documents included materials Manafort had already provided to Congress, said people familiar with the search.

“If the FBI wanted the documents, they could just ask [Manafort] and he would have turned them over,” said one adviser close to the White House.

Josh Stueve, spokesman for Mueller, declined to comment, as did Reginald Brown, an attorney for Manafort.

The search came as Mueller has increased legal pressure on Manafort, consolidating under his authority a series of unrelated investigations into various aspects of Manafort’s professional and personal life.

Manafort’s allies fear that Mueller hopes to build a case against Manafort unrelated to the 2016 campaign, in hopes that the former campaign operative would provide information against others in Trump’s inner circle in exchange for lessening his own legal exposure.

The significance of the records seized from Manafort’s apartment is unclear.


Manafort has provided documents to both the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate and House intelligence committees. The documents are said to include notes Manafort took while attending a meeting with Donald Trump Jr. and a Russian lawyer at Trump Tower in June 2016.

[Manafort turns over notes from Trump Tower meeting with Russian lawyer]

Emails show Trump Jr. took the meeting and invited Manafort after he was promised the lawyer would deliver damaging information about Hillary Clinton as part of a Russian government effort to assist his father’s campaign.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... b76a7061f6


Meanwhile, in the Russia Investigation: The FBI Raided Paul Manafort's Home

You might remember him as Trump's former campaign manager.

AUG 9, 2017
The FBI raided the home of former Donald Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort late last month, The Washington Post reports. In an unannounced pre-dawn raid on July 26, agents working with Special Counsel Robert Mueller seized documents and other materials related to the investigation he is leading into Russia's meddling in the 2016 election, including whether associates of Trump's campaign colluded in those efforts. While Manafort was turning over documents voluntarily to various congressional committees at the time, according to the Post, the "wide-ranging" search warrant "indicates investigators may have argued to a federal judge they had reason to believe Manafort could not be trusted to turn over all records in response to a grand jury subpoena."

A source close to the White House told the Post the FBI could have just asked Manafort for the documents and he would have provided them, and the paper grants that the raid could have been meant to send a message to the political operative that Mueller's probe is not messing around or playing nice. But the report also contends the raid comes as Mueller is "consolidating under his authority a series of unrelated investigations into various aspects of Manafort's professional and personal life," as those close to Manafort fear he is trying to flip the operative against others in Trump's circle.http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/ne ... -manafort/


BREAKING: Paul Manafort’s Home Raided by FBI


POSTED BY: ALAN M. FRANCO AUGUST 9, 2017

While the public has known to some degree that Paul Manafort was being looked at by Special Counsel Robert Mueller for potential ties to Russia, as far as the investigation goes, we have been led to believe that Manafort was cooperating with investigators by handing over pertinent documents, and that up until this point, the relationship between investigators and Manafort has mostly been cooperative in nature.

This morning though, the Washington Post has dropped a bombshell of an article. According to Carol D. Leonnig, Tom Hamburger and Rosalind S. Helderman of the Post, a search warrant was issued by FBI agents in the pre-dawn hours of July 26 — exactly 2 weeks ago today — as the agents raided the Alexandria, Virginia home of Trump’s former campaign manager, Paul Manafort. As part of the raid, the agents seized documents, records and other materials.

This is also the day after Manafort had met with the Senate Intelligence Committee and voluntarily provided them with documents they had requested. It is interesting to note that in order to obtain a search and seizure warrant, the Special Counsel would have had to provide probable cause to a federal judge, and that judge would have had to agree that evidence of a crime was “probably” in the home of Manafort.

“If the FBI wanted the documents, they could just ask [Manafort] and he would have turned them over,” said a adviser close to the White House.

Obviously the FBI and Robert Mueller did not feel confident that Manafort would in fact turn over all pertinent documents voluntarily, and believed that he was hiding something.

Let us know your thoughts on this breaking news in the comment section below.
http://ir.net/news/politics/126665/brea ... aided-fbi/
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: Paul Manafort

Postby Iamwhomiam » Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:17 am

Boy, never underestimate the FBI.
There's just no stopping them when they're determined to get a copy of the Donald's "pee" tape.
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Paul Manafort

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:20 am

yea ya think Paul was in charge of keeping the Kompromat? :bigsmile
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: Paul Manafort

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Aug 09, 2017 10:06 pm

:P


Paul Manafort Spends Afternoon Making House Look Presentable For Next FBI Raid


ALEXANDRIA, VA—Embarrassed by the piles of clutter in virtually every room, former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort reportedly spent the afternoon Wednesday making his house look presentable before the next predawn FBI raid. “The next time the FBI shows up at my door without advance warning, this place is going to be spick and span,” said Manafort, who fluffed couch cushions, folded a basket of freshly washed laundry, and then went room to room to empty waste baskets, noting that the house was so messy that the agents searching for incriminating documents must have thought he was a total slob. “It was humiliating standing there and watching them rifling through my desk drawers, which were just crammed with loose papers and unopened junk mail. Then I almost died when they were rummaging around under the couch and discovered the missing television remote, pieces of popcorn, and these huge clumps of dog hair—at that moment, with all those FBI officers crawling around, I wished more than anything that I had vacuumed.” At press time, an extremely anxious Manafort was hoping the FBI agents that had just entered his home wouldn’t notice he had forgotten to dust around the bookshelf.
http://www.theonion.com/article/paul-ma ... ok-p-56613




the timing of this raid is very interesting

this is a really big deal ... PROBABLE CAUSE..Mueller has shown the judge evidence of a crime.......probable cause ...very serious

July 26 SHOCK AND AWE for Manafort ...the day after he met with Senate hearing

Manafort should not be the only one concerned about this raid :D

trump trying very hard to change the subject of Manafort raid on his home......SO HE TWEETS!!!....about banning transgender from military ....N. Korea


National Enquire reports this.....at the instructions from trump I would guess
Image
FIRST TO KNOW!
Trump Advisor Sex Scandal — Paul Manafort’s Sick Affair
Target in FBI-Russia probe also cheated with woman half his age!

By National ENQUIRER Staff
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/photos/ ... -mistress/
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: Paul Manafort

Postby seemslikeadream » Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:43 pm

Is Trump Worried About the Manafort Raid?

By JOSH MARSHALL Published AUGUST 10, 2017 1:36 PM

President Trump’s lawyer John Dowd allegedly sent an email to The Wall Street Journal in which he said, among other things, that the raid on Paul Manafort’s home was a gross abuse of power. The FBI definitely used aggressive tactics. I said as much yesterday. But the part that jumps out to me is that Dowd is threatening to make a motion to have the fruits of the search suppressed.

According to Fox News, Dowd said this: “These failures by Special Counsel to exhaust less intrusive methods is a fatal flaw in the warrant process and would call for a Motion to Suppress the fruits of the search…”

This seems highly irregular on a few fronts, both legally and politically. To state the obvious, Paul Manafort is not Dowd’s client. Dowd is Donald Trump’s lawyer. So it’s not even clear to me he would have standing to make a motion to suppress this evidence, let alone an interest in doing so that the President would want to be admitting publicly. He might have standing if the evidence ended up being used against Dowd’s client, Donald Trump. But is that true? And is it something Dowd wants to be admitting?

If it’s not true, why does Dowd care about the Manafort raid at all? His job is to defend his client, not Paul Manafort.

What’s going on here? According to James Comey, Trump once said it would be acceptable and perhaps good if the FBI caught “satellite associates” who colluded with Russia. Is Manafort a “satellite associate”? Does Donald Trump think those FBI agents may have found evidence that incriminates him? That’s certainly what this looks like from the outside. And Dowd may even be saying as much in legal terms.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/is- ... re-1075881


Really Focused on Manafort


By JOSH MARSHALL Published AUGUST 10, 2017 4:44 PM

Picking up on my earlier post about why Trump’s lawyer appears to be signaling that he fears materials seized from Paul Manafort’s home may incriminate the President, let me say this. It’s quite possible that John Dowd is just being stupid. Or, more specifically, it’s possible Dowd is just sounding up for the benefit of Trump’s political supporters and doesn’t care if his comments make sense in other contexts or might even appear incriminating. Unlike the now semi-canned Marc Kasowitz, he’s a real DC lawyer. He’s also got a reputation as a hothead. But I want to zoom in on the issue of Paul Manafort.

Manafort’s lawyers have consistently said he is cooperating with the investigation. But everyone says that. What we further know is that the first word about the June 2016 meeting with the Russian lawyer came from Manafort. He turned over documents – seemingly notes rather than emails – to one of the congressional committees and possibly also directly to the Special Counsel investigation. Don Jr. didn’t. And even though Jared Kushner appears to have subsequently disclosed the meeting in a revised federal filing, that appears to have come after Manafort revealed it.

So Manafort has provided significant leads to the various investigations. But he clearly hasn’t cooperated enough or as much as Mueller would like. Remember, the raid on Manafort’s home came weeks or possibly months after he shared those Trump Tower meetings notes with investigators. Manafort appears to be doing his utmost to both cooperate and conceal. He’s trying a balancing act that Mueller and his investigators want to upend. At a minimum he clearly hasn’t convinced the office of Special Counsel that he wasn’t hiding information and documents. Otherwise, no raid.

Mueller’s team seems to view gaining the cooperation of Manafort as critical to the larger investigation. They have a lot to work with. Manafort appears to have a long list of dubious business transactions that can be used to pressure him. Is Trump worried about that? It certainly sounds like he and his lawyer are. And that strongly suggests that Manafort knows things that could be damaging to Trump. Think about it: if Manafort has been laundering money out of Ukraine for years, why does Trump care? That’s Manafort’s problem. All of the potential bad acts, undeclared earnings, tax evasion, money laundering, whatever – none of those really make a bit of difference to Trump. Unless, Manafort has information to trade against Trump or his family members for leniency.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/rea ... re-1075946
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: Paul Manafort

Postby seemslikeadream » Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:12 pm

With Bank Subpoenas, Mueller Turns Up the Heat on Manafort
By Christian Berthelsen and Greg Farrell
August 10, 2017, 9:08 AM CDT August 10, 2017, 5:47 PM CDT
Investigators seek account records linked to Trump ex-adviser
Special counsel pressuring Manafort’s son-in-law, associates

U.S. special counsel Robert Mueller is bearing down on former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort as he directs a wide-ranging probe into Russian interference in last year’s presidential election.

Mueller’s team of investigators has sent subpoenas in recent weeks from a Washington grand jury to global banks for account information and records of transactions involving Manafort and some of his companies, as well as those of a long-time business partner, Rick Gates, according to people familiar with the matter.

The special counsel has also reached out to other business associates, including Manafort’s son-in-law and a Ukrainian oligarch, according to one of the people. Those efforts were characterized as an apparent attempt to gain information that could be used to squeeze Manafort, or force him to be more helpful to prosecutors.

Manafort’s spokesman confirmed that FBI agents raided the political consultant’s home in Virginia two weeks ago to secure documents related to the investigation. That raid was initially reported by the Washington Post.

As prosecutors gather many years of information about his financial affairs, Manafort could be dragged deeper into any number of legal disputes. He has a history of doing business with oligarchs and politicians in Ukraine and Russia that predates his political work for President Donald Trump, with payments routed through foreign banks and investments in U.S. real estate.

Investigations

Part of the reason Manafort is getting intense early scrutiny is that Mueller is drawing on investigations that were well underway, including one by federal prosecutors in Manhattan, when he was appointed in May.

With prosecutors combing through his financial life, the 68-year-old has been toeing a fine line, cooperating with congressional requests for information about the campaign, and insisting he has nothing to hide from Mueller’s team of prosecutors who are delving into his past. Privately, his supporters question Mueller’s work to unearth conduct with no apparent connection to the 2016 election.

Manafort’s spokesman, Jason Maloni, declared last month that Manafort was not a “cooperating witness” -- a legal term for someone who agrees to provide evidence and testimony to prosecutors. When reached Wednesday, he only addressed the revelation of the Federal Bureau of Investigation raid, saying, “Mr. Manafort has consistently cooperated with law enforcement and other serious inquiries and did so on this occasion as well.”

Late on Thursday, Maloni said in a statement that Manafort was retaining a new law firm, Miller & Chevalier, to replace WilmerHale.

As a practical matter, the blitz of recent subpoenas to global banks poses a challenge to Manafort’s ability to continue his day-to-day business activities as a consultant and investor, said one of the people familiar with the matter.

Broad Probe

Of course, the Manafort inquiry is just one thread of Mueller’s multifaceted effort, which includes the purchase of Trump real estate properties by wealthy Russians going back a decade, the foreign ties of Michael Flynn, who was briefly the administration’s National Security Adviser, and the dismissal of FBI chief James Comey by the President.

Federal prosecutors in Manhattan were investigating Manafort earlier this year, examining allegations that he laundered money from eastern Europe into New York properties, according to two people familiar with the earlier inquiry. The Southern District of New York handed off their work to the special counsel’s team once Mueller was appointed, the people said.

Along with the real-estate inquiry, the special counsel has taken over a review of Manafort’s late filings to comply with the foreign-agent registration act, known as FARA, according to one of the people.

A spokesman for Mueller’s office, Joshua Stueve, declined to comment.

The 6 a.m. raid on Manafort’s Virginia home last month seemingly caught his legal team by surprise. It came the day after he testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee, and after he had provided his notes to the committee.

Trump was asked about the raid on Thursday. “I was surprised to see it,” he said. “I’ve always found Paul Manafort to be a very decent man.”

Russian Meeting

In fact, Manafort had alerted authorities to a controversial meeting on June 9, 2016, involving Trump’s son Donald Jr., other campaign representatives and a Russian lawyer promising damaging information on Hillary Clinton, according to people familiar with the matter. The president and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, were dragged into the matter in July as details repeatedly emerged that contradicted the initial accounts of that meeting.

Manafort disclosed the meeting to lawmakers about three months ago in response to a congressional request for any information related to Russia during his time on the campaign. He also provided more than 300 relevant documents to Congress, though he no longer had access to emails from the campaign.

Manafort’s business associates also risk being engulfed by the probe.

Jeffrey Yohai, who is the estranged husband of Manafort’s daughter, is under investigation by FBI agents working with prosecutors in the U.S. attorney’s office in Los Angeles, according to people familiar with their work.

With cash infusions from Manafort, Yohai formed real-estate partnerships that took in investor money in New York and Los Angeles. Some of the partnerships subsequently declared bankruptcy, court filings show. U.S. authorities are now looking into claims by an investor that Yohai operated a Ponzi scheme, the people explained. Yohai is contesting a civil lawsuit over one of the soured deals, having won an initial round challenging the jurisdiction.

Yohai’s lawyer, Aaron May, declined to comment.

How a Grand Jury Fits in the Trump-Russia Probe: QuickTake Q&A

Rick Gates’s relationship with Manafort dates to at least 2006, when the younger man joined Davis Manafort, a consulting firm that re-packaged a pro-Russian Ukrainian politician as a leader friendly to the West. Eventually, Gates helped manage a Manafort-directed private equity fund called Pericles, which was supposed to invest in Ukraine.

Michael Dry, a lawyer for Gates, also declined to comment.

Dmitry Firtash, a Ukrainian oligarch, invested $25 million in a real-estate venture started by Manafort a decade ago that subsequently attracted the attention of investigators. Now in Austria, Firtash has been charged in an unrelated case with paying bribes in India in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. He is facing a Justice Department request for extradition to the U.S. in that matter.

Firtash’s attorney, Dan Webb, said, “My client is not in any way cooperating with the special counsel office on Paul Manafort or any other issue. Because of the indictment pending in Chicago, I will not make any other comment.”

$25 Million

The inquiry by the U.S. Attorney in Manhattan initially focused on a Manafort-backed business called CMZ Ventures, which sought to develop a luxury skyscraper on Park Avenue in 2008. The partnership received $25 million from Firtash, according to court records filed in a New York federal lawsuit. But the money was never invested in a project, and the firm was shuttered in 2009.

The plaintiffs in that CMZ civil suit, including the former prime minister of Ukraine, Yulia Tymoshenko, alleged the real purpose of the firm was to launder money through the U.S. financial system that Firtash had obtained improperly by skimming sales of natural gas to Ukraine.

In court papers, lawyers for CMZ Ventures and fellow defendants argued that U.S. laws didn’t apply to gas transactions abroad and that the New York court had no jurisdiction in the matter. A federal judge agreed, dismissing the lawsuit in 2015.

By the time Mueller inherited the New York investigation, it extended well beyond the Manafort-Firtash relationship, according to a person briefed on the special counsel’s probe.

Those circling Manafort include various congressional committees, the New York Attorney General and the Manhattan District Attorney. The New York authorities are examining an unusual combination of mortgages and loans assembled by Manafort.

Even the National Enquirer, which veered away from celebrity news to endorse Trump during the campaign, took a swing at Manafort. The tabloid published a story Wednesday with embarrassing details about his personal life.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... n-manafort


Manafort switching legal team as feds crank up heat on him
By JOSH DAWSEY 08/10/2017 06:27 PM EDT Updated 08/10/2017 06:34 PM EDT

Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort is changing his attorneys as a federal investigation heats up into his financial transactions, according to people familiar with the matter.

Manafort's case will now be handled by Miller and Chevalier, a boutique firm in Washington that specializes in complicated financial crimes among other issues, these people said.

A spokesman confirmed the change. “Mr. Manafort is in the process of retaining his former counsel, Miller & Chevalier, to represent him in the office of special counsel investigation. As of today, WilmerHale no longer represents Mr. Manafort," Jason Maloni said in a statement.

Kevin Downing, a former senior Department of Justice official known for his work representing clients and firms facing complex financial investigations, will be working on the case, one of these people familiar with the matter said. Downing will have help from other lawyers also working on the case.

Manafort is cutting ties with WilmerHale, the firm that has represented him in the matter so far. His former lawyer there, Reg Brown, led the congressional investigations practice.

The move could signify a realization that the case has heated up, one of these people said, and that Manafort needs specialized criminal counsel. The switch comes after the FBI raided his home last month and a number of financial institutions were subpoenaed, these people said. The Washington Post first reported the home search, and Bloomberg first reported the bank subpoenas.

While Manafort has emerged as a key figure in the various probes into whether Trump's campaign colluded with Russian officials to influence the 2016 election, special counsel Robert Mueller has also been examining Manafort's personal finances and consulting work
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/08/1 ... old-241507
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: Paul Manafort

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Aug 15, 2017 7:03 pm

CREAM TEAM
Paul Manafort Sought $850 Million Deal With Putin Ally and Alleged Gangster

Trump’s one-time campaign chairman has a history of unorthodox real-estate deals. But this may have been the wildest of all.

LACHLAN MARKAY
SPENCER ACKERMAN
08.14.17 8:00 PM ET
Paul Manafort partnered on an $850 million New York real-estate deal with an ally of Vladimir Putin and a Ukrainian moneyman whom the Justice Department recently described as an “organized-crime member.”
That’s according a 2008 memo written by Rick Gates, Manafort’s business partner and fellow alumnus of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. In it, Gates enthused about finalizing with the financing necessary to acquire New York’s louche Drake Hotel.
Two former federal prosecutors told The Daily Beast that the hotel deal was likely to be an item of focus for special counsel Robert Mueller’s inquiry into ties between Trump associates and the Kremlin.
Some White House officials, who spoke to The Daily Beast on condition of anonymity, are also wary. They feel Manafort may have made President Trump more legally vulnerable through his decades of business deals with foreign governments and shady Eastern European power brokers. Those deals, these White House aides suspect, led federal investigators down a money trail that threatens to plunge the Trump White House further into legal jeopardy.
Asked whether any Manafort deals seemed particularly troubling in retrospect, a senior administration official replied, “You mean like this one?” and appended a link to a 2016 story on Manafort’s alleged attempts to launder a Ukrainian oil and gas billionaire’s ill-gotten fortune through New York real estate—including the Drake.
The Justice Department is now seeking the extradition of that billionaire, Dmitry Firtash, so he can stand trial for a 2013 racketeering indictment in a Chicago federal court. Two weeks ago, in response to a legal filing from Firtash seeking dismissal of the case, the acting U.S. attorney in Chicago termed Firtash and a deputy as “two organized-crime members” and people “identified by United States law enforcement as two upper-echelon associates of Russian organized crime.” Years before the indictment, Firtash was a major moneyman for the Party of Regions in Ukraine, the pro-Kremlin political faction for which Manafort consulted.
Partners With Putin’s Pal


White House Senior Advisor and President Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner leaves the Hart Senate Office Building after testifying behind closed doors to the Senate Intelligence Committee about Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election July 24, 2017 in Washington, DC. In a statement released before the meeting, Kushner said he met with people who represented or may have represented the Russian government four times.
Wyden: When It Comes to Trumpkins—‘Follow the Money’
Firtash’s alliance with Manafort to acquire the Drake has been reported before. But far less attention has gone to the involvement of another party: Oleg Deripaska, one of the wealthiest men in Russia—and a longtime Putin associate. In 2006, according to the Associated Press, Deripaska signed a $10 million annual contract with Manafort for what Manafort pitched as political and economic efforts inside the U.S. to “greatly benefit the Putin Government.”
But Manafort was more than Deripaska’s political operative. They were business partners, as well.
“When Paul met with Mr. D last month he told Paul to lock in the other financing elements and then come back to him for the final piece of investment,” Gates wrote to two longtime business associates of Deripaska, Anton Vishnevsky and Andrey Zagorskiy, on July 1, 2008.
According to ex-prosecutors, a business relationship between a Kremlin-tied oligarch, an accused gangster and the manager of Donald Trump’s campaign is the sort of arrangement currently occupying Mueller’s time.
“Any financial dealings with Russia and Ukraine would be considered within the scope of [Mueller’s] current mandate,” said Barbara McQuade, the U.S. attorney in Detroit until Trump fired her in March. “With the search warrant executed on Manafort’s home, looking for bank records, tax records, and the like, it seems like this is the kind of thing that Mueller would be interested in.”
GET THE BEAST IN YOUR INBOX!

By clicking “Subscribe,” you agree to have read the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy
SUBSCRIBE
In his 2008 memo, Gates wrote to Deripaska’s associates: “We need to finalize Pericles’ participation in this deal, as the final component in the financing structure, in the next two weeks to lock in the deal,” and signed off by saying he would be “available to come to Moscow immediately to discuss and finalize the details of the transaction.”
“Pericles” refers to Pericles Emerging Market Partners, a private-equity fund Manafort and Deripaska established in the Cayman Islands in March 2007. Gates assisted in Pericles’ management.
Court documents from the dissolution of the Pericles partnership, filed by Deripaska’s Surf Horizon Ltd., claimed to hold “the majority (if not all) of the economic interest in the Partnership.”
In other words, Deripaska’s company invested with Manafort in Pericles, and Pericles was set to be a prime investor in the Drake Hotel.
Manafort, Firtash, and Deripaska intended to convert the Drake into a luxury office and residential space called Bulgari Tower. Gates, in his July 2008 memo, estimated that the revamped, 70-story Bulgari Tower would generate “over $3 billion in value as a result of the unique combination of retail, smart office space, residential, and a luxury hotel.”
Money-Laundering Allegations in Court

The Drake Hotel deal did not materialize, and attorneys for a Manafort co-defendant told a New York federal court that project “never proceeded beyond due diligence.” But the former prime minister of Ukraine, Yulia Tymoshenko, alleged in a federal lawsuit that it was intended as a vehicle to launder illegal funds.
Gates’ memo was entered into the court record in Tymoshenko’s lawsuit after it was part of batches of documents recovered from a river following the 2014 flight from power of Viktor Yanukovich—the pro-Putin Ukrainian prime minister that Manafort and Firtash aided—and the sauna of Yanukovich’s prosecutor-general.
Tymoshenko, whom the Yanukovich government jailed, accused several Party of Regions figures of retaliating against her, in part for her move to eliminate Firtash’s firm “as the middleman in the natural-gas transactions between Ukraine and Russia.” But in September 2015, New York Federal Judge Kimba Wood dismissed Tymoshenko’s suit against Firtash, Manafort, and several other co-defendants. (Deripaska was not a defendant in the case.)
In her dismissal, Wood did not dispute the authenticity of the memos or other facts of the relationships between Manafort, Firtash, and other foreign partners, but considered them ultimately legally irrelevant to Tymoshenko’s misfortunes.
“Without specifying the particular contribution of each defendant to the money-laundering scheme,” Wood found, “plaintiffs fail to establish the requisite directness of relationship between each defendant’s conduct and the harm suffered by Tymoshenko.”
Tymoshenko’s attorneys initially did not know whether the “Mr. D” in Gates’ memo referred to Dmitry Firtash or Deripaska. But other documents they discovered from the Manafort team referred to Firtash and his economic interests with acronyms like “DF” and “DF Group.” Subsequently, they filed in April 2014 a memo to the court explaining Gates’ recipients were “associates of Oleg Deripaska,” referred to “in the memo only as Mr. D.”
Kenneth McCallion, Tymoshenko’s attorney and a former federal prosecutor, subsequently asserted in court that the memo “confirms that Paul Manafort had direct contacts with high-level Russian figures who were, upon information and belief, under investigation by the FBI and the U.S. Dept. of Justice for alleged money laundering and other criminal activities within (and without) the U.S.,” and that Manafort, Gates, and their U.S. partners “were directly conspiring to defraud” the parties Gates proposed to Deripaska’s people to enlist in the venture.
“Based on what we now know, it appears that both Deripaska and Firtash were involved in the Drake Hotel deal,” McCallion told The Daily Beast. “I am reasonably certain now that Mr. D is Deripaska, since it is referenced in relationship to Pericles, which was definitely Deripaska’s company, not Firtash’s.”
Alleged Ties to Organized Crime

On Nov. 6, 2008, the CEO of Group DF Real Estate (“a subsidiary company of Group DF Limited, the holding company of Dmitry Firtash”) wrote to Manafort to confirm “our commitment to the Bulgari Tower project following our recent meetings in Kiev.”
Group DF CEO David Brown wrote that Firtash was prepared “to provide $112 million in equity for the project.” To demonstrate Firtash’s seriousness, Brown continued, “Group DF has executed a deposit of $25 million into escrow for the project,” documented through an escrow agreement with the First American Title Insurance Co. that day. The insurance company noted that the delivery was “in the form of cash funds by wire transfer” and that Manafort had access to the account.
Moscow-based representatives for Deripaska would not comment for this story nor answer questions about whether the oligarch had foreknowledge that the accused criminal Firtash was part of the Drake deal.
Allegations of ties to organized crime have long dogged Deripaska, who has consistently denied them. Yet the State Department temporarily yanked his visa in 2006 over concerns about criminal connections, The Wall Street Journal reported the following year—concerns now exacerbated by his prospective involvement in a deal alongside an indicted figure like Firtash. Reportedly, Deripaska is seeking cooperation with Senate investigators scrutinizing Trump-Russia.
A spokesman for Manafort, Jason Maloni told The Daily Beast: “We’re not going to comment on a complaint by an adverse party in litigation that was dismissed.”
Gates made his financing request to Deripaska’s associates on July 1, 2008—right as, other court records indicate, Team Pericles was falling apart.
“After July 2008,” Deripaska’s attorneys write, Deripaska’s Surf Horizon Ltd. “did not receive any further invoices from [Manafort’s end of Pericles] in respect of Management Fees or for the purpose of funding further investments of the Partnership.” By September, Deripaska informed Team Manafort “it was suspending further investment into the Partnership.”
But, as has been widely reported, Deripaska took them to court in 2014 for ghosting on them. “It appears,” his Cayman filing says, “that Paul Manafort and Rick Gates have simply disappeared.” Deripaska separately claimed in 2015 that Manafort and associates owe him $19 million, which Manafort denies.
Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor in Chicago, considered the Drake deal to be significant to Mueller’s inquiry.
“There’s no question that Mueller is gonna be interested in communications between Manafort and individuals who are close to Putin & the Russian government,” Mariotti said.
“The fact that Manafort has a close business relationship with at least two of these people means that Mueller will scour Manafort’s finances and the records of these transactions to determine what benefits Manafort received and whether he owed something to these individuals. He’ll also look to see anything about Manafort’s relationship with these individuals that could have been used as leverage by them.http://www.thedailybeast.com/paul-manaf ... via=mobile
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: Paul Manafort

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Aug 29, 2017 4:39 pm

Special counsel subpoenas Manafort's former attorney and spokesman

By Evan Perez, CNN Justice Correspondent
Updated 4:02 PM ET, Tue August 29, 2017

STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Manafort is under investigation for possible tax and financial crimes
Manafort has not been accused of any wrongdoing
Washington (CNN)Special Counsel Robert Mueller has issued subpoenas to a former lawyer for Paul Manafort and to Manafort's current spokesman, an aggressive tactic that suggests an effort to add pressure on the former Trump campaign chairman.

The subpoenas seeking documents and testimony were sent to Melissa Laurenza, an attorney with the Akin Gump law firm who until recently represented Manafort, and to Jason Maloni, who is Manafort's spokesman, according to people familiar with the matter.
Manafort is under investigation for possible tax and financial crimes, according to US officials briefed on the investigation. The allegations under investigation largely center on Manafort's work for the former ruling party in Ukraine, which was ousted amid street protests over its pro-Russian policies.
Exclusive: How a request about Russians made its way from West Virginia to Trump's team
Exclusive: How a request about Russians made its way from West Virginia to Trump's team
It's unclear what specific information the Mueller investigators believe Laurenza and Maloni may have. But issuing subpoenas to a lawyer of someone under investigation is unusual, in part because it raises potential attorney-client privilege issues that prosecutors tend to try to avoid. Maloni, as a public relations representative, doesn't have the same attorney-client privilege protections.
Subpoenas have not been sent to WilmerHale, Manafort's other most recent lawyers. WilmerHale is the law firm where Mueller worked before being appointed special counsel.
Manafort has not been accused of any wrongdoing.
Maloni declined to comment. A spokesman for Mueller declined to comment. Laurenza referred questions to a spokesman who didn't immediately comment.

The subpoenas are among dozens that the Mueller investigative team has sent out in recent months since taking over the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election.
The Manafort investigation has been ongoing for years and as recently as last summer appeared to be stagnated. At the time, Justice Department officials had come to believe there wasn't enough evidence to pursue charges, as CNN has previously reported.
The probe has taken on new life since the beginning of this year, and appears to be taking an aggressive turn under the Mueller investigators.
Andrew Weissmann, who is one of the senior lawyers overseeing the investigation, is known for aggressive tactics. Last month, the Mueller team ordered a dawn raid on Manafort's home in Washington's Virginia suburbs, as Manafort slept in his bedroom. The financial documents retrieved were largely ones Manafort had already turned over to congressional investigators.
Manafort is now represented by Kevin Downing, a Washington lawyer and former Justice Department prosecutor who specializes in tax issues.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/29/politics/ ... index.html
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: Paul Manafort

Postby seemslikeadream » Fri Sep 01, 2017 9:18 am

Manafort Notes From Russian Meet Contain Cryptic Reference to ‘Donations’
by KEN DILANIAN and CAROL E. LEE

WASHINGTON — Paul Manafort's notes from a controversial Trump Tower meeting with Russians during the 2016 presidential campaign included the word "donations," near a reference to the Republican National Committee, two sources briefed on the evidence told NBC News.

The references, which have not been previously disclosed, elevated the significance of the June 2016 meeting for congressional investigators, who are focused on determining whether it included any discussion of donations from Russian sources to either the Trump campaign or the Republican Party.

It is illegal for foreigners to donate to American elections. The meeting happened just as Trump had secured the Republican nomination for president, and he was considered a longshot to win. Manafort was the campaign chairman at the time.

Image: Trump, Manafort
Donald Trump, with then-campaign manager Paul Manfort, in Cleveland in July 2016. Bill Clark / CQ-Roll Call,Inc.

Manafort's notes, typed on a smart phone and described by one source briefed on the matter as cryptic, were turned over to the House and Senate intelligence committees and to Special Counsel Robert Mueller. They contained the words "donations," and "RNC" in close proximity, the sources said.

Manafort spokesman Jason Maloni told NBC News that "it is 100 percent false to suggest this meeting included any discussion of donations from Russian sources to either the Trump campaign or the Republican Party. Mr. Manafort provided the Senate Intelligence Committee with the facts and his notes so this speculation and conjecture is pointless and wrong."

As NBC News has reported, Mueller is closely scrutinizing the Trump Tower meeting, which was hosted by President Trump's son, Donald Trump Jr., and was attended by his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, along with Manafort.

Related: Mueller, NY Attorney General Joining Forces on Manafort Probe

They gathered in an office to hear from Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, who has represented clients with links to the Kremlin.

She was accompanied by Russian-American lobbyist Rinat Akhmetshin, who testified recently before a grand jury in Washington, a source with direct knowledge of the matter told NBC News.

Akhmetshin declined to comment on his testimony.

NBC News reported earlier this week that Mueller's investigators are keenly focused on President Donald Trump's role in crafting a response to the New York Times article that first disclosed the meeting.

FBI recently raided home of Paul Manafort, Trump's ex-campaign chairman Play Facebook TwitterEmbed
FBI recently raided home of Paul Manafort, Trump's ex-campaign chairman 0:38

The sources told NBC News that prosecutors want to know what Trump knew about the meeting and whether he sought to conceal its purpose.

The president dictated a statement sent out under the name of his son that was drafted aboard Air Force One, people familiar with the matter have said.

It described the 2016 meeting as "a short introductory meeting."

"I asked Jared and Paul to stop by," the statement said. "We primarily discussed a program about the adoption of Russian children that was active and popular with American families years ago and was since ended by the Russian government, but it was not a campaign issue at the time and there was no follow up."

According to the New York Times, he added: "I was asked to attend the meeting by an acquaintance, but was not told the name of the person I would be meeting with beforehand."

In fact, as subsequent emails and interviews revealed, the meeting was scheduled with a promise from a Russian oligarch to convey damaging information about Hillary Clinton and her campaign.

In a June 3, 2016, email, publicist Rob Goldstone told Trump Jr. that a Russian prosecutor had "offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary [Clinton] … and would be very useful to your father."

Goldstone said he was representing Aras Agalarov, a Russian businessman with close ties to Vladimir Putin.

Trump Jr. responded, "[I]f it's what you say, I love it."

Emails show that the following day, Goldstone and Trump Jr. began arranging the Trump Tower meeting.

Veselnitskaya told NBC News that she did not provide any meaningful information about Clinton.

A person familiar with Mueller's strategy said that whether or not Trump made a "knowingly false statement" is now of interest to prosecutors.

"Even if Trump is not charged with a crime as a result of the statement, it could be useful to Mueller's team to show Trump's conduct to a jury that may be considering other charges," the person said.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ma ... ns-n797816
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: Paul Manafort

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:53 pm

EXCLUSIVE: Former Trump Aides Think Manafort Will Be Indicted For Financial Crimes

Alex Pfeiffer and Chuck Ross
4 hrs ago


Former Trump campaign aides are telling The Daily Caller that they increasingly believe former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort will be indicted for crimes such as money laundering or tax evasion.

One of the former campaign advisers has knowledge of the ongoing investigations into Manafort, a longtime Republican operative who joined the Trump campaign last March. Another former aide said that his knowledge of Manafort’s history of working with despots, coupled with news reports about Mueller’s investigation, led him to believe that an indictment of Manafort is becoming more likely.

Reuters reported that Mueller might use money laundering charges in order to flip Manafort into cooperating with their probe into Russian election interference. Roger Stone, a Trump confidant and former business partner of Manafort’s, pointed TheDC to Manafort’s Italian heritage.

“We Italians are tough. I predict Mueller is unsuccessful in his efforts to blackmail Manafort into bearing false witness against the president,” Stone said.

A Washington insider described Manafort to TheDC as notoriously sketchy with money. Manafort has not been accused of wrongdoing, but speculation has grown in recent months that he could be in dire legal trouble over his real estate dealings and foreign business activities.

The former Trump advisers told TheDC they have no knowledge of any collusion with the Russian government on the presidential campaign. One aide stressed that any financial crimes by Manafort are his own problem and not that of the White House.

“Ill-informed speculation has become the new Washington parlor game. Despite breathless headlines, it is increasingly clear the Russia Collusion story is eroding,” Manafort’s spokesman Jason Maloni told TheDC. Maloni declined to comment when asked specifically about financial crimes.

One of the former aides was interviewed by a Congressional committee investigating Russian interference and told TheDC that many of the questions were about Manafort’s finances.

“Investigators appeared focused on finances and business relationships of the Trump family and top associates such as Paul Manafort and General Michael Flynn,” the former Trump campaign adviser told TheDC.

“They are casting an extremely wide net and speaking with anyone who might have any relevant information,” the former adviser added.

Mueller has ramped up the investigation of Manafort. In July, Mueller, a former FBI director, got approval to conduct a raid of Manafort’s Virginia home, reportedly to search for business records. A source close to Manafort suggested that the former Trump campaign manager might sue Mueller over the raid due to legal issues with the action.

Paul Manafort, senior advisor to Republican U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump, exits following a meeting of Donald Trump's national finance team at the Four Seasons Hotel in New York City, U.S., June 9, 2016. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid: Paul Manafort, senior advisor to Republican U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump, exits following a meeting of Donald Trump's national finance team in New York
© REUTERS/Brendan McDermid Paul Manafort, senior advisor to Republican U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump, exits following a meeting of Donald Trump's national finance team in New York
Mueller is also using a federal grand jury to obtain subpoenas for records regarding Manafort’s activities and to compel witnesses to cooperate with the investigation.

Subpoenas were recently issued for Manafort’s former attorney and his spokesman Maloni. And according to Politico, Mueller’s investigators have also met with Manafort’s son-in-law, Jeffrey Yohai, in an effort to get him to work as a cooperating witness against his father-in-law.

Yohai and Manafort have partnered together on various real estate deals.

Manafort’s daughter has also indicated that she believes some of her father’s activities could be illegal. Politico reported in February that Andrea Manafort told a friend in text messages that her father’s “work and payment in Ukraine is legally questionable.”

The White House has been distancing itself from Manafort for some time, but few in the Trump orbit have gone as far as discussing indictments against Manafort. The two former advisers who spoke to TheDC did so on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.

In a March press briefing, former White House press secretary Sean Spicer claimed Manafort, who managed Trump’s campaign for three months, actually had “played a very limited role for a very limited amount of time.”

Prior to joining the Trump campaign, initially as its convention manager, Manafort worked for individuals like Philippines dictator Ferdinand Marcos and a Ukrainian political party that supported Viktor Yanukovych, Ukraine’s former president and an ally of Vladimir Putin. The Justice Department has been investigating Manafort’s work in Ukraine since early 2014, according to the Associated Press.

Manafort was paid millions of dollars for his work for Yanukovych, who fled Ukraine in 2014. In June, Manafort registered as a foreign agent with the Justice Department for his work for Yanukovych, revealing that he was paid $17 million.

Manafort’s New York real estate dealings are also said to be of interest to Mueller.

Ron Hosko, a former FBI assistant director who retired in 2014, says that from his vantage point, he cannot say whether or not an indictment is forthcoming. But he says that the pre-dawn raid of Manafort’s home was “a pretty big and public step forward by Mueller” that “strongly suggests” that there is probable cause that Manafort committed a crime.

“Mueller is a serious minded investigator and prosecutor. He has surrounded himself with a lot of financial crimes talent,” Hosko told The Daily Caller.

Hosko said it’s possible the raid was intended to serve as a message to others involved in the Trump matter.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... m8?ocid=st
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: Paul Manafort

Postby seemslikeadream » Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:58 am

Lawyer says extradition of oligarch tied to Trump campaign chief imminent
AUSTRIA-UKRAINE-US-EXTRADITION-BRIBERY-COURT
Ukrainian oligarch Dmitry Firtash could be extradited “within weeks,” his lawyer said Monday. (GEORGES SCHNEIDER/AFP/Getty Images)
Kim JanssenContact Reporter
Chicago Tribune
Billionaire Ukrainian oligarch Dmitry Firtash is at "great risk" of being brought from Austria to face justice in a Chicago courtroom "within weeks," his lawyer told a federal judge Monday.

But prosecutors say they are concerned that Firtash — who is wanted on racketeering charges and has ties to President Donald Trump's former campaign manager Paul Manafort — will jump on a private jet to Russia if a Chicago judge rules against him before he is handed over to U.S. authorities.

They revealed in court for the first time that they wiretapped telephone conversations in which Firtash allegedly discussed a co-defendant's trip to Chicago to meet with Boeing executives.

Firtash, who has friends in Russian President Vladimir Putin's Kremlin, has been fighting extradition from Austria since his high profile 2014 arrest in Vienna. Accused of masterminding an international titanium-mining racket involving Boeing, he claims he was targeted by the Obama administration as punishment for Putin's annexation of Crimea.

His lawyer, former U.S. Attorney Dan Webb, on Monday told U.S. District Court Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer that Firtash has never been to the U.S., and the crimes of which he is accused all happened in India and had no impact on the U.S.

Webb said he feared Firtash's extradition is imminent, and urged Pallmeyer to throw out the case before Firtash can be put on a Chicago-bound plane.

But prosecutor Amarjeet Bhachu told the judge that the wiretapped conversations linked Firtash to Chicago, and that a bribery scheme also used U.S. banks and cellphones.

He warned the judge that if she ruled against Firtash before he is in U.S. custody, he may "hop on a private plane and head over to Moscow, or to some other country where we can't extradite him."

Extradition of Ukrainian oligarch with links to Trump campaign inches closer
In a joke about Firtash's enormous wealth (he posted a $174 million bond in Austria), Bhachu added, "We will pay for his travel here."

U.S. interest in the case in recent months has focused on Firtash's links to Manafort, with whom he discussed a New York real estate deal in 2008. Though Manafort is not named in the Chicago case, his home has been raided as part of special prosecutor Robert Mueller's probe of the Trump campaign's alleged ties to Russia.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chic ... story.html


Dem senator: Manafort likely facing 'serious criminal charges'
BY ROBIN EBERHARDT - 09/06/17 08:22 AM EDT 192


Dem senator: Manafort likely facing 'serious criminal charges'
© Getty
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said Paul Manafort is likely facing “serious criminal charges” in the investigation into possible ties between President Trump's campaign and Russia's efforts to influence the outcome of the election, according to The Washington Post.

Blumenthal said Manafort, Trump's former campaign manager, has been “resistant” to the probe and suggested that he is nervous about charges that he might be facing, according to the Post. Blumenthal added Manafort was more resistant than Donald Trump Jr.

“Manafort probably is confronting some fairly serious criminal charges,” Blumenthal said. “Manafort has been resistant, to be very blunt.”

Manafort has already spoken with the Senate Intelligence Committee about the election, but the Senate Judiciary Committee has not been able to schedule him to testify, the Post reported.
Blumenthal added that the Judiciary Committee will not grant Manafort immunity in the probe.

Special counsel Robert Mueller has subpoenaed public relations firms that worked on a campaign run by Manafort.

FBI agents also raided Manafort’s home in July in connection with the Russia probe. Blumenthal said at the time that he believed there was “no question of clear evidence” of Manafort committing wrongdoing during the election.

"Apparently there is now no question of clear evidence connecting Paul Manafort to some criminal wrong doing," Blumenthal said in August.

Manafort was one of the members of the Trump team to attend a meeting with a Russian lawyer during the election that was also attended by Trump Jr. and Trump's son-in-law, White House senior adviser Jared Kushner.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administrat ... al-charges



DECADES AGO, PAUL MANAFORT PLAYED A LEADING ROLE IN A PIONEERING OPERATION TO SECRETLY FUNNEL FOREIGN MONEY INTO U.S. POLITICS
Maryam Saleh
September 5 2017, 11:36 a.m.
FORMER DONALD TRUMP campaign manager Paul Manafort was a major player in a transnational operation that was both pioneering and innovative during its time, according to court documents and interviews with key figures. This decades-old scheme may fit the same pattern investigators are probing in regard to Russian government’s influence on the 2016 campaign.

When Manafort joined Trump’s campaign, a flurry of stories was written about the shady clients the lobbyist had represented over his long career. But by shifting the focus from who he represented to how, a more interesting picture begins to emerge.

Trump accepted Manafort’s resignation in August 2016 — just three months after he joined the campaign — after reports of Manafort’s ties to a pro-Russian Ukrainian became too much to stomach. He is known to have worked for a series of controversial clients, including an international arms dealer. A closer look into one of Manafort’s former clients, as well as details from a past top official of that organization, provide insight into a scheme to funnel foreign government money into the United States through a nonprofit partner, evading the notice of authorities.

In the early 1990s, Manafort’s lobbying firm, Black, Manafort, Stone, and Kelly, worked for the Kashmiri American Council, a group that tried to influence U.S. policy toward the disputed territory of Kashmir. Later, the group, led by Kashmiri native Syed Ghulam Nabi Fai, was proven to be a front for Pakistan’s intelligence agency in Washington. The KAC hired Manafort in October 1990, just months after its founding.

Two decades later, the Department of Justice charged and convicted Fai of conspiring to secretly act as an agent of the Pakistani government in the U.S., the result of a long-running investigation. The reason: Inter-Services Intelligence, Pakistan’s intelligence agency, had been secretly funding and directing the KAC’s work in violation of federal law since its inception.

Over the course of five years, Manafort’s lobbying firm took in $700,000 from the KAC to set up the operation. It was just a fraction of the $3.5 million Fai admitted the KAC received from the Pakistani government between 1990 and 2011, but it came at a crucial time for the organization.

THE FBI LAUNCHED an investigation into Fai in 2005, following years of allegations from the Indian press that the KAC, which advocated for Kashmiris’ right to self-determination, was a front for the Pakistani government. The investigation started with a tip from a confidential informant that Fai and an associate in Pakistan, Zaheer Ahmad, were ISI agents, according to an FBI affidavit. In July 2011, the Justice Department charged Fai and Ahmad with conspiracy to act as agents of the Pakistani government in the U.S. without disclosing their affiliation as required by U.S. law. In December of that year, Fai pleaded guilty to conspiracy and related tax violations. (Ahmad was not arrested when the charges were brought because he was in Pakistan, where he died in October 2011.)

The investigation unveiled an elaborate scheme on the part of the Pakistani government to influence Washington policymakers while hiding behind a seemingly innocuous nonprofit organization. Under U.S. law, an organization doing the bidding of a foreign government must register as a foreign agent. But, as the KAC learned, it was possible to circumvent the rules by hiding behind donors seemingly sympathetic to the organization’s mission. The money could be used to make campaign contributions to lawmakers who, in return, would make public statements about Pakistan’s rightful claim to Kashmir. And who better to help the KAC make inroads with members of Congress than Manafort, a longtime lobbyist and darling of the Republican Party. (Rep. Dan Burton, a Republican who represented Indiana’s 5th District from 1983 to 2013, was the KAC’s chief supporter in Congress and received at least $10,000 in contributions from Fai, according to Politico.)

As KAC director, Fai submitted annual budget requests to the government of Pakistan, which partially funded Fai’s work through money delivered to Ahmad, who arranged for the funds to be delivered to Fai through a network of straw donors in the U.S., according to court documents. The KAC provided the straw donors with letters documenting that the transfers were tax deductible. At no point did Fai register his group as a foreign agent of Pakistan, as required under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, nor did he disclose to the IRS that the money the KAC received from the donors actually came from Pakistani officials.

The reporting on Manafort’s work on Kashmir has focused on the identity of the client. But setting that aside and foregrounding the operation itself reveals something simpler: The use of a nonprofit to funnel foreign money into Washington.

In 1994, Manafort and his coworker, K. Riva Levinson traveled to Kashmir, arriving in India on tourist visas with no indication that they worked for the KAC. The Indian government accused them of posing as CNN journalists while gathering footage in the Himalayan region and notified CNN’s Atlanta headquarters. Manafort and Levinson denied the accusations, and a colleague said their footage was never used, according to the Associated Press. Levinson, who declined to be interviewed for this story, described Manafort as “arrogant, narcissistic, egotistical, brilliant” in her 2016 memoir, “Choosing the Hero: My Improbable Journey and the Rise of Africa’s First Woman President.”

“But it is Paul’s mercenary attitude that puts us at odds,” she wrote in her book.

Gordon D. Kromberg, the assistant U.S. attorney who prosecuted Fai’s case, told Yahoo News last year that Manafort’s knowledge, if any, of the source of Fai’s money was not part of the Justice Department’s investigation. (The DOJ did not respond to a request for comment.) In December 1995, the ISI officer responsible for handling Kashmiri affairs in the mid-1990s, Javeed Aziz Khan, criticized Fai for renewing a contract with a public relations firm without prior authorization from the ISI; at Fai’s sentencing hearing, Kromberg identified the firm as “Black, Manafort, and Stone,” according to court records.

Peter Kelly, a partner at the lobbying firm, confirmed to The Intercept that Manafort brought the KAC in as a client, but he said he does not know much about Manafort’s role with the group. “Frankly I never worked with Paul on it at all,” Kelly said. “We never communicated on it. I don’t think there was anything, frankly, unique about it.” He said he was unaware of the KAC’s connection to the ISI until The Intercept brought it to his attention.

BUT A FORMER KAC employee said he does not think Fai could have come up with the operation to covertly use Pakistani funds to sway U.S. foreign policy without the firm’s help. “Manafort set it up,” speculated David Wolfe, who was the KAC’s chief government relations liaison from 2005 to 2009. “He found those loopholes, because people don’t look at nonprofits.”

Wolfe joined the KAC a decade after Manafort stopped providing services to the organization. He met Manafort a few times during his work at the KAC, he said, but was not aware at the time of what exactly Manafort’s role with the group had been. But when reports emerged in 2016 that Trump’s campaign manager was linked to a group that was acting on behalf of the ISI and that Manafort had also lobbied on behalf of Saudi Arabia in the 1980s, Wolfe said he started to connect the dots. “When you start putting the two together about what was going on with the Saudis with Pakistan and Afghanistan at the time of the ’80s, and what the KAC was taken down doing … it really all started to make a lot of sense,” Wolfe told The Intercept. Fai also has ties to Saudi Arabia dating back to the 1980s, and it was the Saudis who bankrolled his emigration to and education in the U.S., according to a 2011 ProPublica report.

During his tenure at the KAC, Wolfe was suspicious of large payments the group received without doing public fundraising in the U.S., and he said he could tell the scheme had been in place for some time, likely with some outside help. “He’s not that clever, which is I think probably why he got caught,” Wolfe said of Fai. He had questions but was not concerned enough to leave his job. “An organization that had that type of money that was coming in without doing any type of proactive fundraising is also a red flag — which I personally knew was a red flag — but I was in it to try to solve the Kashmir crisis,” Wolfe said. Eventually, the FBI contacted Wolfe and asked him to spy on his boss, which he did for about two years. (Both Fai and the FBI declined to comment for this story.)

FBI Special Agent Sarah Linden, who led the investigation into Fai, wrote in her affidavit in support of his arrest that “the KAC does receive some legitimate donations,” but the majority of its funds came from a small group of individuals closely associated with Ahmad, Fai’s accused co-conspirator. Court documents show that Fai eventually admitted to receiving money in sums ranging from $4,000 to $595,193 from the ISI between 1993 and 2011 through Ahmad and a series of middlemen.

Trump brought on Manafort, a longtime political consultant, at no cost in March 2016 to recruit delegates for the upcoming Republican National Convention. Two months later, the then-candidate named Manafort his campaign adviser, again without an official salary. Manafort never asked for one. He did not last long, though, at least not officially; Trump removed Manafort in August amid internal campaign discord and following reports of Manafort’s business dealings with Russian-aligned individuals in Ukraine, including Viktor Yanukovych, the former Ukrainian president and ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin. On June 9, 2016, 11 days before he was named campaign chair, Manafort, along with Donald Trump Jr. and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, met with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya at Trump Tower.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller III has focused on Manafort. When Mueller was appointed to lead the Trump-Russia probe in May, he began to draw from ongoing investigations into Manafort’s business dealings, including one by federal prosecutors in Manhattan and a review of Manafort’s late filings to comply with FARA. The FBI raided the political consultant’s Virginia home in July to secure documents related to the Russia probe and in August, Mueller subpoenaed Manafort’s bank records.
https://theintercept.com/2017/09/05/dec ... -politics/


Could this Russian-born Trump donor be the key to a cryptic Manafort note?
by Robert Maguire on September 1, 2017

Yesterday, NBC News reported that notes written by Trump’s then-campaign manager Paul Manafort during a June 2016 meeting with Russians at Trump Tower included cryptic references to political contributions and the Republican National Committee.
According to the report, the notes were turned over to both House and Senate intelligence committees, as well as to Special Counsel Robert Mueller, for their respective investigations into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia in 2016.
Who or what the note might be a reference to is still a mystery. But as far as any Russian money might be concerned, it would be illegal for foreign nationals to contribute to candidates in U.S. elections.
A Russian-born American citizen, on the other hand, could certainly make a donation, which is why one major Republican donor’s 2016 contributions merit a fresh look.
Meet Mr. Kukes
Born in the Soviet Union, Simon Grigorievich Kukes emigrated to the U.S. in the 1970s. He spent time in academia in the Houston area and also worked for some oil and gas companies. By the 1990s, he was back in Russia where, in 2003, he became the head of Yukos Corp., a now-defunct oil company once owned by the Russian government. In ascending to the position, Kukes replaced the wealthiest man in Russia, a Putin foe named Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who was charged with fraud and sentenced to 10 years in prison in what Forbes described as “Vladimir Putin’s most notorious power grab.”

Vladimir Putin shakes hands with Simon Kukes in 2000. (Photo: Kremlin.ru)
Kukes only lasted a year at Yukos. Afterward, he bounced from oil company to oil company. Eventually, he landed back in Houston for a job at Nafta Consulting, which focuses on “creating cross border opportunities between companies in the U.S. and Russia,” according to the company’s website.
And Kukes, it seems, is no stranger to greasing a few palms to influence officials. CIA documents released in 2003 claim that “Kukes said that he bribed local officials,” an accusation which he has denied. Despite his possible willingness to use money to sway officials and being a U.S. citizen since the 1970s, Kukes had no history of political contributions before 2016. That changed, in a big way, when Donald Trump ran for president.
Timing is everything
In early March 2016, Kukes gave $2,700 – the maximum amount possible – to Donald Trump’s primary campaign. Then in late June, Kukes began a veritable flood of contributions, largely to a joint fundraising committee called Trump Victory, whose primary beneficiaries included not only Trump’s campaign but the Republican National Committee and a handful of other state-level GOP committees.
All told, Kukes contributed $283,283 during the 2016 cycle. More than 99 percent came after the Trump Tower meeting in June.
The timing is important because between Kukes’ initial donation in March and the deluge of contributions from June to September, two critical things had happened. First, in early May, Trump won the Indiana Republican primary and became his party’s presumptive nominee. Second, on June 9, the fateful meeting between Paul Manafort, Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and a group of Russians took place in Trump Tower.
The meeting had been set up by an entertainment publicist named Rob Goldstone as a part of the Russian government’s “support for Mr. Trump,” according to an email to Donald Trump Jr.
In the email, Goldstone told Trump Jr. that the Russian attendees at the meeting would provide information that “would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.” While Trump Jr. has maintained that nothing came of the meeting, this is where Manafort apparently jotted the note about a political contribution and the RNC. Two weeks later, Simon Kukes – who happens to be the former owner of a $1.7 million condo in Trump Parc – began contributing tens of thousands of dollars to Trump and the Republican Party.
Whether or not Kukes’ decision to give more than a quarter of a million dollars to Trump and the Republican Party is related to the notes Manafort jotted down that day is unclear. The OpenSecrets Blog has reached out to Kukes but had not received a response by the time of publication.
What is clear, however, is Kukes isn’t bashful about his financial support for President Trump or his connections to the Russian oil and gas industry. The “In the News” section of Nafta’s website includes a link to the OpenSecrets Blog’s previous reporting about Kukes’ contributions, which seemingly welcomes the publicity.
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2017/0 ... fort-note/


Manafort Spox Mostly Tight-Lipped After Testifying To Mueller Grand Jury

By TIERNEY SNEED Published SEPTEMBER 15, 2017 12:00 PM
0Views
WASHINGTON – More than two hours after Jason Maloni, Paul Manafort’s spokesperson, was spotted heading into the federal courthouse to testify in front of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s grand jury, he emerged from the room where grand jury was convened around 11:30 a.m. ET and spoke briefly to the press.

“My name is Jason Maloni. I’m the president of JadeRoq. I was order to appear today before the grand jury. I answered questions and I’ve been dismissed,” Maloni, who was accompanied by his attorney Erik Bolog, said.

He declined to answer any questions, but was generally upbeat when he encountered the handful of reporters huddled outside the grand jury room. He made his brief remark outside of the courthouse where photographers and TV crew also waited.

Maloni had been subpoenaed by the Mueller probe late last month, in a sign of increasing scrutiny on Manafort, who served as President Trump’s campaign chairman in the summer of 2016. In July, Manafort’s home was raided in the early morning hours by FBI agents, who reportedly obtained documents related to Manafort’s business dealings around the world.

Manafort’s former attorney, Melissa Laurenza, has also reportedly been subpoenaed by the probe, but it is unclear if and when she will appear in front of the grand jury.

Beyond the Mueller probe, Manafort has also become a subject of focus for the other bodies investigating Russia’s influence in the 2016 election. He appeared in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee behind closed doors in July, and the Senate Judiciary Committe is also seeking to interview him, though its chair, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has said he is having trouble getting cooperation from Manafort’s legal team.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/ ... grand-jury


Robert Mueller is about to indict Paul Manafort. Here’s how it’ll impact Donald Trump.
By Bill Palmer
Updated: 8:22 pm EDT Thu Sep 14, 2017
Home » Opinion

Special Counsel Robert Mueller has a federal grand jury going against Paul Manafort, and he’s reached the point where he’s hauling in Manafort’s direct underlings to testify (link). That’s essentially the last step. Ask any prosecutor, and they’ll tell you they can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. In other words, Paul Manafort is about to be indicted. Here’s what comes next, and how it will relate to the investigation of Donald Trump.


In the immediate term, the felony indictment of Paul Manafort will mean that he’ll have to stand before a judge, plead guilty or not guilty, get a trial date, and be given the opportunity to post bail (unless the judge sees him as a flight risk to one of the countries that was funding him all along). In other words, we’ll be entering the second half-hour of the proverbial Law & Order episode. But in the big picture, what matters is how this development will relate to Trump.

Manafort will be forced to make a relatively quick decision as to whether he wants to flip on Trump in exchange for a deal, or go ahead with a trial. If it’s the former, it means Mueller will have a coveted first-hand witness willing to rat out Trump for his various political and financial crimes. Not only was Manafort the Trump campaign chair, he also appears to have had financial entanglements with Trump going back years. If it’s the latter, Trump will have to decide whether to try pardon Manafort.


Practically speaking, pardoning Manafort would be political suicide for Trump. It was one thing for him to pardon racist Sheriff Joe Arpaio, whose crimes had no connection to Trump. If Trump begins pardoning his own co-conspirators in the Russia scandal, most of the public will take that as an admission of guilt. There are also two wildcards to watch out for when it comes to Mueller’s pursuit of Manafort and pardons.

The first is that there has been some confirmation Mueller is working with the New York Attorney General to bring state level charges against Manafort, which cannot be pardoned by the president. If New York brings a parallel indictment against Manafort, he’ll have to decide whether to flip or go to prison. The second is that some legal experts expect Mueller will have a grand jury name Trump as an unindicted co-conspirator at some point, to limit Trump’s ability to even pardon federal crimes. Will this be the grand jury that drags Trump directly into it?
http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/mue ... next/4938/



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: Paul Manafort

Postby seemslikeadream » Sat Sep 16, 2017 2:22 pm

The curious rise of Natalia Veselnitskaya, the Russian lawyer who met Team Trump
By Michael Weiss
Updated 10:38 AM EDT, Sat September 16, 2017

Story highlights
Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya was a key participant at the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting with Donald Trump Jr. and campaign aides
Michael Weiss: How a young provincial attorney with a modest income was able to afford seven figures worth of property is a very Russian mystery -- as is her journey to the Trump Tower meeting
Editor's Note: (Michael Weiss is a national security analyst for CNN and author of "ISIS: Inside the Army of Terror." The views expressed are his own.)
(CNN) She's been called a "Russian government attorney," a "trusted insider" of the Kremlin, the "go-to lawyer for the Moscow regional government" and an acquaintance of Russia's powerful prosecutor general.

Natalia Veselnitskaya, 42, rose from obscurity to international notoriety following the disclosure of her June 9, 2016, meeting with Donald Trump, Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort. She also appears to have amassed considerable wealth in a very short period of time, 14 years ago, when her legal career in the Moscow region (not to be confused with the city of Moscow) was in its infancy and she was just transitioning from being a government employee to a private practitioner.

According to two different privately run databases, which draw on personal financial and employment information from Russian state records, Veselnitskaya went from a lowly state salary of $1,559 a year to a much more comfortable $53,645, between 1999 and 2003.

But here's the curious thing: In August 2003, before the lion's share of that $53,645 was earned, the Russian land registry shows that Veselnitskaya was somehow able to buy two large plots of land in an elite residential community in the Moscow suburbs -- properties that cannot have been sold for less than $500,000 apiece at the time, according to two Russian brokers with extensive experience selling in that area.

Veselnitskaya would not respond to multiple interview requests for this story to confirm her employment details and her income.

How a 28-year-old provincial attorney raking in, at most, five figures was able to afford seven figures worth of property is a very Russian mystery, no less intriguing than her extraordinary and unlikely journey to the meeting at the center of the far-reaching investigation into how Moscow might have had a hand in influencing the American presidential election.

If special counsel Robert Mueller is interested in determining just how well-connected Veselnitskaya is in Russia and on whose behalf she may have been acting when she entered Trump Tower a year ago, he should start by asking a simple question: Where did she get all her money?

The Prevezon case

Veselnitskaya was best known in the US for defending Prevezon Holdings Ltd., a Cypriot company accused by the US Justice Department, in a civil forfeiture action, of being a front for washing ill-gotten cash in the Manhattan property market. The case was settled out of court in May, with the offshore company agreeing to pay $5.9 million while not admitting to any wrongdoing.

Concurrent with her legal work, she also lobbied in Washington against the very foundation upon which the US government's case against Prevezon was constructed.

In February 2016, a few months before her meeting with Team Trump, this Moscow resident co-founded a Delaware-registered NGO called the Human Rights Global Accountability Initiative Foundation, purporting to seek the revocation of a controversial ban on American adoption of Russian children. In actuality, the ban itself and the dangled prospect of its repeal was cleverly conceived of by the Russian government as leverage with Washington to negotiate away a piece of American legislation acutely painful to the Kremlin.

The Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act is a US sanctions law targeting Russian government officials and mobsters said to have defrauded Russian taxpayers a decade ago to the tune of $230 million, some of which, the US government alleges, wound up in Prevezon's coffers and from there in pricey apartments in Manhattan.

The law was named for Sergei Magnitsky, the whistleblowing Russian attorney who a decade ago uncovered what the US Justice Department, State Department and Congress all allege was a vast criminal conspiracy aided and abetted by a corrupt Russian government. Magnitsky, they contend, was framed on tax charges by the same government and arrested; he died under suspicious circumstances in pretrial detention.

The $230 million tax heist that allegedly enriched Prevezon and others was perpetrated by what Sen. John McCain has called a "dangerous transnational crime organization" known as the Klyuev Group and consisting of Russian government officials in the Interior Ministry and tax agencies, according to US authorities.

They maintain that the Klyuev Group used corporate documents stolen from Hermitage Capital Management, once the largest Moscow-based foreign investment fund, to reregister the ownership of three companies, which they then initiated dummy civil litigation against, seeking enormous damages. On the basis of those damages, they applied for and received -- courtesy of their accomplices in the tax agencies -- the $230 million as a "refund." The whole sum was processed in a single day, Christmas Eve 2007.

Veselnitskaya has frequently argued in the Russian media that the entire story of what Magnitsky uncovered and the plight he endured is a fabrication accepted by a gullible US government from Magnitsky's former client, William Browder, the CEO of Hermitage and Magnitsky's posthumous flame tender.

In 2014, she told RBK-TV, "Sergei Magnitsky did not uncover any theft referred in the Magnitsky Act," and, "Many events and data stated in the Magnitsky Act did not exist."

Prevezon is owned by Denis Katsyv, the son of Pyotr Katsyv, now vice president of Russian Railways, the state-owned rail monopoly and before that the transport minister for the Moscow region. That put him in the same regional government where Veselnitskaya was then working as a prosecutor.

As with most other jurisdictions in Russia in the late 1990s, the Moscow region was run as a Tammany-style racket, as Russian expat journalist Leonid Bershidsky has observed, drawing from his own experience publishing an investigative book on that place and era. The regional government, Bershidsky wrote, was "a mess of corrupt schemes that ultimately led it to de facto bankruptcy."

Bankruptcy for some is opportunity for others. Veselnitskaya's tenure in that local administration led to lasting personal and professional relationships, upon which she continues to capitalize to this day. One of Pyotr Katsyv's employees at the time was Alexander Mitusov, who had been deputy prosecutor in the Moscow region and therefore Veselnitskaya's superior.

Mitusov and Veselnitskaya later married, then divorced. But they developed a close friendship with the Katsyvs, whom Veselnitskaya has represented in several legal cases in Russia before counseling them in the Prevezon one.

"Natalia Veselnitskaya has been well-known as a 'family fixer' for the Katsyvs for years but had never been mentioned in any connection with Magnitsky case before the claim to Katsyv's family was filed in New York," Vladimir Pastoukhov, a lawyer for Hermitage, told me.

A thriving practice

Veselnitskaya said in a declaration filed in US federal court, that she has "argued and won more than 300 cases [in Russia] on corporate tax and property law." Today, she runs Kamerton Consulting, a Moscow-based law firm, which she says employs 30 people, including five attorneys, with "large state-owned and private corporations" as clients.

One of these, Reuters has reported, was Russia's Federal Security Service, or FSB, successor of the Soviet KGB. While working as counsel for a government agency, even an intelligence-gathering one, is not dispositive of one's level of influence, Veselnitskaya does have one close associate whose ties to the Russian security services have been better established.

Her partner in counter-Magnitsky agitating is Rinat Akhmetshin, a Washington, D.C.-based lobbyist who, The New York Times has reported, maintains an "association" with Viktor Ivanov, the former deputy head of Russia's domestic spy agency, the FSB. Akhmetshin was an officer in a Soviet military intelligence unit, according to the Times. He, too, attended the meeting with the Trump camp in New York in June 2016.

The windfall

It's not clear why, according to Russian financial databases, Veselnitskaya's income increased at around the same time as she purchased the two land parcels in 2003.

While there is no way of determining whether these financial disclosures are entirely accurate or comprehensive, the two databases from which I requested them are frequently used by Russian journalists researching Moscow government officials.

One of them, Larix, is run by the Moscow Center for Economic Security, a private intelligence firm, which has previously come under scrutiny for selling the passport information of millions of current and former residents of the Russian capital. The other database, Cronos, says it draws financial information from the Russian Pension Fund, the country's version of Social Security, which applies to all tax-paying citizens.

Both sets of financial records for Veselnitskaya's income between the years 1999 and 2003 match exactly. The employers listed in either are indeed those for which she is known to have worked, according to international press reports and her own declarations in US court.

These records show that in 2003, she made around $54,000, the vast majority of it after she purchased the aforementioned property, considered to be worth more than $1 million. At that price, she clearly wouldn't have had enough collateral for a mortgage, so where did the money come from?

Anya Levitov, a Russian broker formerly with Evans Property Services, laughed when I asked if such modest incomes were typical for the average landowner in DSK Riita, the tony forested community where Veselnitskaya invested in 2003.

The area is a "closed club village in the old-fashioned style," as its website advertises, constructed in the middle of a pine forest along the Rublevo-Uspensky highway, with fenced-in lots and bespoke building options. "The cost of developing completed houses in that community in 2006 were in the ballpark of $10 to $12 million," says Levitov.

Now based in New York, where she is the managing partner of Versus Real Estate, Levitov has facilitated property transactions in DSK Riita in the past decade and she says that two lots in that community of comparable square footage, sold at around the time Veselnitskaya bought hers, would have gone for anywhere between $500,000 and $800,000 per lot.

Each "cottage" in the gated enclave features "rooms for staff," the DSK Riita website informs us, suggesting the type of homeowner the community seeks to attract. The area is just a short car ride away from Vladimir Putin's presidential residence at Novo-Ogaryovo and Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev's own dacha.

The cottage

Veselnitskaya has built a comfortable 8,000 square-foot "cottage" in DSK Riita. A photograph of one wall of the house became famous for a hot minute in July when it was exhibited in a tranche of hacked emails belonging to a senior State Department official who works in the department's secretive intelligence wing.

The official's personal gmail account was compromised and published on the Internet by a hacker known only as "Johnnie Walker."

Among the correspondence published online was a shot of the property sent by Kyle Parker, a congressional aide in the House of Representatives, a major Magnitsky Act proponent who has made a close study of Veselnitskaya's activities in Washington. Parker snapped a picture of her sitting behind former US Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul at a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing in June 2016, just days after her confab with the Trump campaign in New York.)

Parker had received the image of the house, the hacked correspondence shows, from William Browder, the man responsible for convincing Congress to pass the Magnitsky Act and someone whom Veselnitskaya has characterized in the Russian press as a fraud and someone who she maintains has a personal vendetta to discredit her.

"I am already tired of talking about it, but apparently nobody wants to hear. This was the story that I brought to Donald Trump Jr. I wanted him to know that Browder, a person who gave up his US citizenship, is trying to manipulate people in Congress," she told RT, the Russian government's English-language propaganda channel.

Veselnitskaya's home isn't exactly a well-hidden secret.

I was able to find aerial footage of it, filmed in a real estate broker's 2015 promotional video for an adjoining house in DSK Riita. The grounds of her estate, as seen in the video, boast what appears to be a combination tennis-basketball court, a children's playground as well as an annex to the house that, at least as of two years ago, was still under construction just as Veselnitskaya mounted her anti-sanctions lobby campaign in Washington.

Property records show that Veselnitskaya started building her home in 2006. That year, a contact of hers, another onetime provincial prosecutor, was made Russia's equivalent of attorney general.

The prosecutor general

In a July 14 interview with the Wall Street Journal, Veselnitskaya admitted to having a connection to Russian Prosecutor General Yury Chaika, with whom she said she has shared information related to the Magnitsky Act, or rather to the supposed con artistry of Browder, the CEO of Hermitage Capital Management.

Browder is convinced that he has been targeted by both Chaika and Veselnitskaya in a coordinated campaign of vilification and disinformation.

"She's obviously working with Chaika on counter-Magnitsky lobbying in Washington," he said. Browder's lawyer, Vladimir Pastoukhov, added that after Veselnitskaya took on the Katsyv's legal defense in the Prevezon case, "the prosecutor's office and Yuri Chaika personally started to play an unbelievably active role in the Magnitsky story."

Veselnitskaya has denied working in any capacity on behalf of the Kremlin, even though her adoption ban campaign dovetails perfectly with what other Russian government officials have floated as a possible quid pro quo for ending the Magnitsky Act.

Following the fallout from the exposure of her meeting at Trump Tower, she told the Financial Times that any insinuation that she is Chaika's emissary in New York and Washington comes from the "gutter press." Which still doesn't explain why in emails released by Donald Trump Jr. accounting for Veselnitskaya's meeting with him in June 2016, she is referred to as a representative of the "crown prosecutor of Russia." That was the term used by Robert Goldstone, the British publicist who pitched the meeting. There is no such thing as a "crown prosecutor" in a non-monarchy such as Russia; the closest equivalent would be prosecutor general.

Nor is Chaika hiding his part in trying to scuttle the Magnitsky Act by discrediting Browder as an alleged fugitive crook now residing in London. His office placed Browder on trial in absentia in 2013 for alleged tax evasion, along with the deceased Sergei Magnitsky -- the first time in Russian history that the state has tried a corpse. They were both found guilty.

Then, in December 2015, Russian anti-corruption crusader Alexey Navalny and his Anti-corruption Foundation published an intricate video expose alleging that Chaika has used his political stature to enrich himself and his family by means of an elaborate and recondite business empire.

Chaika responded in the Russian daily Kommersant by dismissing the entire investigation as false and slanderous and accusing Browder of bankrolling the film. Russian state media previously portrayed Navalny and Browder as working in tandem, if not as Western spies. Browder denies financing Navalny's work, which always generates significant interest: the Chaika YouTube video, for instance, was viewed by more than 3 million people in the first week or so of its uploading.

The opposition leader is now waging a long-shot candidacy for the Russian presidency next year, with allegations of widespread corruption as a major theme. Russia's economy routinely ranks as one of the least transparent in the world and the Moscow-based InDem Foundation once concluded that Russians pay $318 billion in bribes annually, which would amount to as much as one third of the country's gross domestic product.

As for Browder's assertion that Veselnitskaya is fixated on him and the Magnitsky Act, this appears to be borne out by notes taken at her meeting with the Trump camp by embattled former campaign chief Paul Manafort. Politico reported recently that US officials who have reviewed Manafort's contemporaneous account of the encounter say they are mostly about Browder and the need for nixing the Magnitsky Act.

Follow the money

It's almost a cliche of Putinomics that well-connected Russians who "officially" can't afford to buy a car are later found sporting 40-grand Breguet watches or controlling billions in corporate assets. Ledgers are written not just in black and red but invisible ink, as deputy prime ministers, Interior Ministry investigators and concert cellists have all been shown to have net worths vastly in excess of their putative taxable take homes. Many have what's colloquially known as a krysha, or "roof" (as in protection) for whom they do favors in return for gifts.

"Veselnitskaya is not close to the Kremlin," said Mark Galeotti, a Prague-based specialist on Russia's security services and organized crime. "But in today's Russia, even a second- or third-hand connection to the big beasts of the system can be parlayed into all kinds of extracurricular economic activities."

Ben Macintyre, the celebrated British historian of espionage, recently sat for a three-way interview with his friend John le Carré, the even more celebrated ex-spook and Cold War novelist, and The New York Times.

When the topic of Russia's interference in the US political system inevitably came up, Macintyre immediately alighted upon Veselnitskaya as the most intriguing figure in the story, an obscure woman of inscrutable significance and influence by which so much political skullduggery is done in contemporary Russia.

She is, Macintyre said, "straight out of one of our books, a character that is possibly connected to the Russian state. Who knows? They exist somewhere in that foggy, deniable hinterland. It's called maskirovka -- little masquerade -- where you create so much confusion and uncertainty and mystery that no one knows what the truth is."
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/09/16/opin ... index.html
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: Paul Manafort

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Sep 18, 2017 7:12 pm

NYT: Prosecutors told Manafort they plan to indict him


Exclusive: US government wiretapped former Trump campaign chairman
By Evan Perez, Shimon Prokupecz and Pamela Brown, CNN
Updated 6:55 PM ET, Mon September 18, 2017

Washington (CNN)US investigators wiretapped former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort under secret court orders before and after the election, sources tell CNN, an extraordinary step involving a high-ranking campaign official now at the center of the Russia meddling probe.

The government snooping continued into early this year, including a period when Manafort was known to talk to President Donald Trump.
Some of the intelligence collected includes communications that sparked concerns among investigators that Manafort had encouraged the Russians to help with the campaign, according to three sources familiar with the investigation. Two of these sources, however, cautioned that the evidence is not conclusive.

Special counsel Robert Mueller's team, which is leading the investigation into Russia's involvement in the election, has been provided details of these communications.
A secret order authorized by the court that handles the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) began after Manafort became the subject of an FBI investigation that began in 2014. It centered on work done by a group of Washington consulting firms for Ukraine's former ruling party, the sources told CNN.
The surveillance was discontinued at some point last year for lack of evidence, according to one of the sources.
The FBI then restarted the surveillance after obtaining a new FISA warrant that extended at least into early this year.
Sources say the second warrant was part of the FBI's efforts to investigate ties between Trump campaign associates and suspected Russian operatives. Such warrants require the approval of top Justice Department and FBI officials, and the FBI must provide the court with information showing suspicion that the subject of the warrant may be acting as an agent of a foreign power.

It is unclear when the new warrant started. The FBI interest deepened last fall because of intercepted communications between Manafort and suspected Russian operatives, and among the Russians themselves, that reignited their interest in Manafort, the sources told CNN. As part of the FISA warrant, CNN has learned that earlier this year, the FBI conducted a search of a storage facility belonging to Manafort. It's not known what they found.
The conversations between Manafort and Trump continued after the President took office, long after the FBI investigation into Manafort was publicly known, the sources told CNN. They went on until lawyers for the President and Manafort insisted that they stop, according to the sources.
It's unclear whether Trump himself was picked up on the surveillance.
The White House declined to comment for this story. A spokesperson for Manafort didn't comment for this story.

Manafort previously has denied that he ever "knowingly" communicated with Russian intelligence operatives during the election and also has denied participating in any Russian efforts to "undermine the interests of the United States."
The FBI wasn't listening in June 2016, the sources said, when Donald Trump Jr. led a meeting that included Manafort, then campaign chairman, and Jared Kushner, the President's son-in-law, with a Russian lawyer who had promised negative information on Hillary Clinton.
That gap could prove crucial as prosecutors and investigators under Mueller work to determine whether there's evidence of a crime in myriad connections that have come to light between suspected Russian government operatives and associates of Trump.
Origins of the FBI's interest in Manafort
The FBI interest in Manafort dates back at least to 2014, partly as an outgrowth of a US investigation of Viktor Yanukovych, the former Ukrainian president whose pro-Russian regime was ousted amid street protests. Yanukovych's Party of Regions was accused of corruption, and Ukrainian authorities claimed he squirreled millions of dollars out of the country.
Investigators have spent years probing any possible role played by Manafort's firm and other US consultants, including the Podesta Group and Mercury LLC, that worked with the former Ukraine regime. The basis for the case hinged on the failure by the US firms to register under the US Foreign Agents Registration Act, a law that the Justice Department only rarely uses to bring charges.
All three firms earlier this year filed retroactive registrations with the Justice Department.

It hasn't proved easy to make a case.
Last year, Justice Department prosecutors concluded that there wasn't enough evidence to bring charges against Manafort or anyone of the other US subjects in the probe, according to sources briefed on the investigation.
The FBI and Justice Department have to periodically seek renewed FISA authorization to continue their surveillance.
As Manafort took the reins as Trump campaign chairman in May, the FBI surveillance technicians were no longer listening. The fact he was part of the campaign didn't play a role in the discontinued monitoring, sources told CNN. It was the lack of evidence relating to the Ukraine investigation that prompted the FBI to pull back.
Renewed surveillance
Manafort was ousted from the campaign in August. By then the FBI had noticed what counterintelligence agents thought was a series of odd connections between Trump associates and Russia. The CIA also had developed information, including from human intelligence sources, that they believed showed Russian President Vladimir Putin had ordered his intelligence services to conduct a broad operation to meddle with the US election, according to current and former US officials.
The FBI surveillance teams, under a new FISA warrant, began monitoring Manafort again, sources tell CNN.
The court that oversees government snooping under FISA operates in secret, the surveillance so intrusive that the existence of the warrants only rarely become public.

For that reason, speculation has run rampant about whether Manafort or others associated with Trump were under surveillance. The President himself fueled the speculation when in March he used his Twitter account to accuse former President Barack Obama of having his "wires tapped" in Trump Tower.
The Justice Department and the FBI have denied that Trump's own "wires" were tapped.
While Manafort has a residence in Trump Tower, it's unclear whether FBI surveillance of him took place there.
Manafort has a home as well in Alexandria, Virginia. FBI agents raided the Alexandria residence in July.
The FBI also eavesdropped on Carter Page, a campaign associate that then candidate Trump once identified as a national security adviser. Page's ties to Russia, including an attempt by Russian spies to cultivate him, prompted the FBI to obtain a FISA court warrant in 2014.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/18/politics/ ... index.html


With a Picked Lock and a Threatened Indictment, Mueller’s Inquiry Sets a Tone
By SHARON LaFRANIERE, MATT APUZZO and ADAM GOLDMANSEPT. 18, 2017


Paul D. Manafort, President Trump’s former campaign chairman, in June 2016. Prosecutors in the Russia investigation told Mr. Manafort they planned to indict him, two people close to the investigation said. Credit Brendan McDermid/Reuters
WASHINGTON — Paul J. Manafort was in bed early one morning in July when federal agents bearing a search warrant picked the lock on his front door and raided his Virginia home. They took binders stuffed with documents and copied his computer files, looking for evidence that Mr. Manafort, President Trump’s former campaign chairman, set up secret offshore bank accounts. They even photographed the expensive suits in his closet.

The special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, then followed the house search with a warning: His prosecutors told Mr. Manafort they planned to indict him, said two people close to the investigation.

The moves against Mr. Manafort are just a glimpse of the aggressive tactics used by Mr. Mueller and his team of prosecutors in the four months since taking over the Justice Department’s investigation into Russia’s attempts to disrupt last year’s election, according to lawyers, witnesses and American officials who have described the approach. Dispensing with the plodding pace typical of many white-collar investigations, Mr. Mueller’s team has used what some describe as shock-and-awe tactics to intimidate witnesses and potential targets of the inquiry.

Mr. Mueller has obtained a flurry of subpoenas to compel witnesses to testify before a grand jury, lawyers and witnesses say, sometimes before his prosecutors have taken the customary first step of interviewing them. One witness was called before the grand jury less than a month after his name surfaced in news accounts. The special counsel even took the unusual step of obtaining a subpoena for one of Mr. Manafort’s former lawyers, claiming an exception to the rule that shields attorney-client discussions from scrutiny.

“They are setting a tone. It’s important early on to strike terror in the hearts of people in Washington, or else you will be rolled,” said Solomon L. Wisenberg, who was deputy independent counsel in the investigation that led to the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton in 1999. “You want people saying to themselves, ‘Man, I had better tell these guys the truth.’”

A spokesman for Mr. Mueller declined to comment. Lawyers and a spokesman for Mr. Manafort also declined to comment.

Few people can upend Washington like a federal prosecutor rooting around a presidential administration, and Mr. Mueller, a former F.B.I. director, is known to dislike meandering investigations that languish for years. At the same time, he appears to be taking a broad view of his mandate: examining not just the Russian disruption campaign and whether any of Mr. Trump’s associates assisted in the effort, but also any financial entanglements with Russians going back several years. He is also investigating whether Mr. Trump tried to obstruct justice when he fired James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director.

Mr. Manafort is under investigation for possible violations of tax laws, money-laundering prohibitions and requirements to disclose foreign lobbying. Michael T. Flynn, the former national security adviser, is being scrutinized for foreign lobbying work as well as for conversations he had last year with Russia’s ambassador to the United States. On Monday, Mr. Flynn’s siblings announced the creation of a legal-defense fund to help cover their brother’s “enormous” legal fees.

The wide-ranging nature of Mr. Mueller’s investigation could put him on a collision course with Mr. Trump, who has said publicly that Mr. Mueller should keep his investigation narrowly focused on last year’s presidential campaign. In an interview with The New York Times, Mr. Trump said Mr. Mueller would be overstepping his boundaries if he investigated his family’s finances unrelated to Russia.

Photo

Mr. Manafort’s apartment in Alexandria, Va., was searched in July. Credit Win McNamee/Getty Images
For the moment, Mr. Mueller’s team has shown a measure of deference to White House officials, sparing them grand jury subpoenas and allowing them to be appear for voluntary interviews. Those sessions are expected to begin soon. Ty Cobb, a lawyer brought in to manage the White House response to the inquiry, has told administration officials that he wants to avoid any subpoenas from the special prosecutor.

Staff members have been working long hours answering Mr. Mueller’s request for 13 categories of documents, including records related to Mr. Comey’s firing and Mr. Trump’s role in drafting a misleading statement about a June 2016 meeting between campaign officials and Russian-born visitors. Nonetheless, the demand for documents has provoked at least one angry confrontation between Mr. Cobb and Donald F. McGahn II, the White House counsel, over whether certain documents should be withheld to protect the president’s right to confidentiality.

But associates of both Mr. Manafort and Mr. Flynn have received more peremptory treatment. Instead of invitations to the prosecutor’s office, they have been presented with grand jury subpoenas, forcing them to either testify or take the Fifth Amendment and raise suspicions that they had something to hide. At least three witnesses have recently been subpoenaed to testify about Mr. Manafort: Jason Maloni, a spokesman who appeared before the grand jury for more than two hours on Friday, and the heads of two consulting firms — Mercury Public Affairs and the Podesta Group — who worked with Mr. Manafort on behalf of Viktor F. Yanukovych, the pro-Russia former president of Ukraine.

Mr. Mueller’s team also took the unusual step of issuing a subpoena to Melissa Laurenza, a specialist in lobbying law who formerly represented Mr. Manafort, according to people familiar with the subpoena. Conversations between lawyers and their clients are normally considered bound by attorney-client privilege, but there are exceptions when lawyers prepare public documents that are filed on behalf of their client.

Mr. Mueller took over the Russia investigation in May, after the F.B.I. had already spent nearly a year looking into connections between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russians. His team has occasionally been caught by surprise, hearing of possibly important information only when it is revealed in the news media.

This was the case in July, when Mr. Mueller’s prosecutors learned about email exchanges between Donald Trump Jr. and an emissary for a Kremlin-connected Russian oligarch only after they were disclosed in The New York Times, according to a law enforcement official who spoke on condition of anonymity. Donald Trump Jr., the president’s son, set up the Trump Tower meeting to receive what he was told would be damaging information about Hillary Clinton from the Russian government.

Morning Briefing

Soon after his name surfaced, one of the Russian-born participants at the meeting, Rinat Akhmetshin, was ordered to testify before the grand jury, according to one of Mr. Akhmetshin’s associates.

“They seem to be pursuing this more aggressively, taking a much harder line, than you’d expect to see in a typical white collar case,” said Jimmy Gurulé, a Notre Dame law professor and former federal prosecutor. “This is more consistent with how you’d go after an organized crime syndicate.”

The tactics reflect some of the hard-charging — and polarizing — personalities of Mr. Mueller’s team, seasoned prosecutors with experience investigating financial fraud, money laundering and organized crime.

Photo

Robert S. Mueller III, a former F.B.I director, is known to dislike meandering investigations that languish for years. Credit Doug Mills/The New York Times
Admirers of Andrew Weissmann, one of the team’s senior prosecutors, describe him as relentless and uncompromising, while his detractors say his scorched earth tactics have backfired in some previous cases. Greg B. Andres, another one of Mr. Mueller’s prosecutors, once ran an investigation into a Mafia kingpin. Zainab N. Ahmad made her name as a prosecutor pursing high-profile terrorism cases.

Some lawyers defending people who have been caught up in Mr. Mueller’s investigation privately complain that the special counsel’s team is unwilling to engage in the usual back-and-forth that precedes — or substitutes for — grand jury testimony. They argue that the team’s more aggressive tactics might end up being counterproductive, especially if some grand jury witnesses turn out to be more guarded than they would have been in a more informal setting or invoke the Fifth Amendment.

The longer Mr. Mueller’s investigation goes on, the more vulnerable he will be to allegations that he is on a fishing expedition, said Katy Harriger, a professor of politics at Wake Forest University and the author of a book on special prosecutors. Such accusations dogged the investigation of Kenneth W. Starr, the independent counsel whose investigation of Mr. Clinton stretched on for years.

To a degree, Mr. Mueller is in a race against three congressional committees that are interviewing some of same people who are of interest to the special prosecutor’s team. Even if the committees refuse to grant them immunity, congressional testimony that becomes public can give other witnesses a chance to line up their stories.

Rep. Adam Schiff of California, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said committee staff members were going to great lengths not to get in Mr. Mueller’s way. But Senator Charles E. Grassley, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, indicated last week that his committee might subpoena witnesses to testify about the circumstances of Mr. Comey’s firing even over Mr. Mueller’s objections.

Mr. Mueller’s need to navigate this complex landscape could explain the timing of the raid on Mr. Manafort’s house, which took place in the early hours of July 26. The raid came one day after Mr. Manafort was interviewed by staff members of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

On the day of the raid, Mr. Manafort was scheduled to talk to the Senate Judiciary Committee, an interview that was eventually canceled.

It is unusual for a prosecutor to seek a search warrant against someone who, like Mr. Manafort, had already put his lawyer in contact with the Justice Department. No search warrants were executed during the investigations by Mr. Starr or Patrick J. Fitzgerald, a special counsel appointed during the George W. Bush administration to investigate the leak of the name of a C.I.A. officer.

To get the warrant, Mr. Mueller’s team had to show probable cause that Mr. Manafort’s home contained evidence of a crime. To be allowed to pick the lock and enter the home unannounced, prosecutors had to persuade a federal judge that Mr. Manafort was likely to destroy evidence.

Said Mr. Gurulé, the former federal prosecutor, “Clearly they didn’t trust him.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/us/p ... ml?mcubz=0
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: Paul Manafort

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Sep 19, 2017 2:59 pm

Republican insider: Paul Manafort is going to flip on everyone – including Donald Trump
By Bill Palmer
Updated: 1:48 am EDT Tue Sep 19, 2017
Home » Politics

Donald Trump’s former campaign chair Paul Manafort is officially screwed. He’s been under FISA surveillance since before the election, and he’s about to be indicted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller in a manner which will prevent Trump from being able to pardon him. Manafort only has one way out of this that doesn’t involve dying in prison. According to a Republican insider, that’s precisely what Manafort is going to do.


Someone asked Republican political pundit Rick Wilson this question last night: “Who (and how many) does Manafort give up to Mueller in exchange for leniency or sentence recommendation?” Wilson’s answer: “Everyone. He’s going to roll, roll hard, and get out of this without prison tats.” (link) He then added “I told you. The [Intelligence Community] has a royal flush.” In this instance, “everyone” includes quite a long list of people, including Donald Trump himself.


It’s already been reported that Mueller is working with the New York Attorney General to bring parallel state level charges against Manafort so that Trump can’t fully pardon him. This will leave Manafort with only one option: flip on everyone he possibly can. That includes Trump, along with every campaign adviser and associate who conspired with Russia to rig the election. That includes everyone in Trump’s financial orbit in New York whose paths have crossed with Manafort. It also likely includes members of Trump’s family.


So now we wait to see what Paul Manafort does, in light of being dealt a losing hand with only one wildcard. He can drag this out a bit as he’s indicted, tried, convicted, and sentenced to prison, just to make sure he truly has no way out before he flips. But Manafort been around the block enough times to know that by that time, someone else in Donald Trump’s universe may have flipped on him and gotten the only good deal there is to be had. It’s a matter of when, not if, Manafort flips.
http://www.palmerreport.com/politics/in ... flip/5006/





Rick Wilson‏Verified account
@TheRickWilson

Rick Wilson Retweeted David Watson
Everyone. He's going to roll, roll hard, and get out of this without prison tats.



COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE RUSSIA
Image
https://investigaterussia.org
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 56 guests