First Charges Filed in U.S. Special Counsel Mueller's Russia

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: First Charges Filed in U.S. Special Counsel Mueller's Ru

Postby mentalgongfu2 » Tue Oct 31, 2017 3:01 pm

As to 8bit's question about when Mueller is going to charge former US presidents with war crimes - let's get real. Never gonna happen, no matter who is in charge. Not Trump, not Bush, not Clinton, not Obama. None will face charges of that sort. An arm of the US gov't won't be acknowledging war crimes committed by our highest officials and calling them war crimes anywhere near a courthouse. No matter how well deserved, that is the kind of things nations just don't do. Better to petition the ICC to make charges.

Besides, the issue of US war crimes is wholly separate from Trump's alleged crimes related to collusion. To ask the question in that context is just more whataboutism.
"When I'm done ranting about elite power that rules the planet under a totalitarian government that uses the media in order to keep people stupid, my throat gets parched. That's why I drink Orange Drink!"
User avatar
mentalgongfu2
 
Posts: 1966
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 6:02 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: First Charges Filed in U.S. Special Counsel Mueller's Ru

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Oct 31, 2017 3:12 pm

White House Stands By USDA Nom Clovis Despite His Emails With Papadopolous


Carolyn Kaster/AP
By CAITLIN MACNEAL Published OCTOBER 31, 2017 3:13 PM
White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders on Tuesday afternoon indicated that the administration will stand by Sam Clovis as the nominee to be the top scientist at the Agriculture Department, even though court documents and subsequent news reports revealed that Clovis encouraged a Trump campaign staffer to travel to Russia to meet with government officials.

“I’m not aware that any change would be necessary at this time,” Sanders told reporters at the daily press briefing when asked about the status of Clovis’ nomination.

Earlier on Tuesday, Senate Agriculture Committee Chair Pat Roberts (R-KS), who oversees USDA nominations, told Politico that his plans to hold Clovis’ confirmation hearing on Nov. 9 has not changed.

“I don’t think he’s a target of any investigation,” Roberts said.

Court documents from the guilty plea of George Papadopolous, a foreign policy adviser to Trump’s campaign, revealed that a “campaign supervisor” encouraged Papadopolous to travel to Russia. The Washington Post identified the “campaign supervisor” as Clovis, and his attorney, Victoria Toensing, confirmed it. Toensing told the Post that Clovis “always vigorously opposed any Russian trip for Donald Trump and/or the campaign” and that his emails to Papadopoulos were the result of him being “a polite gentleman from Iowa.”

Since the release of court documents on Monday, the White House has downplayed Papadopolous’ role in the campaign. On Tuesday, Sanders told reporters that Papadopolous lied to federal investigators, which should reflect on him, not on the campaign. She added that the Trump campaign cooperated with the federal probe and handed over Papadopolous’ emails to investigators
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/s ... cks-clovis


'I want to quit': Fox News employees say their network's Russia coverage was 'an embarrassment'
by Oliver Darcy @oliverdarcy
October 31, 2017: 2:24 PM ET

Some employees at Fox News were left embarrassed and humiliated by their network's coverage of the latest revelations in special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian election meddling, according to conversations CNN had with several individuals placed throughout the network.
"I'm watching now and screaming," one Fox News personality said in a text message to CNN as the person watched their network's coverage. "I want to quit."
"It is another blow to journalists at Fox who come in every day wanting to cover the news in a fair and objective way," one senior Fox News employee told CNN of their outlet's coverage, adding that there were "many eye rolls" in the newsroom over how the news was covered.
The person said, "Fox feels like an extension of the Trump White House."
The employees spoke to CNN on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly on the matter. A Fox News spokesperson told CNN the network covered the breaking news accurately and fairly across both news and opinion programming.
On Monday, it was revealed that President Trump's former campaign manager Paul Manafort and another associate Rick Gates had been indicted by a grand jury on 12 counts, including conspiracy against the United States. Unsealed court records also revealed that another Trump associate, George Papadopoulos, had pleaded guilty to making a false statement to the FBI weeks ago.
The revelations jolted through the news media, and Fox News -- the highest rated network in the country -- did cover it as its top story. But in contrast with CNN and MSNBC, which aired non-stop rolling coverage throughout the day, Fox News found plenty of time to cover other topics, like the NFL protests, North Korea, and tax reform.
Related: How Fox News is covering the toughest day of the Trump presidency
Additionally, Fox News aired segments that questioned Mueller's credibility and many were framed around how Trump and his allies were responding to the news. On Fox News' homepage, the lead story at one point was focused on Trump slamming the indictment. Another lead story cited Manafort's lawyer, and asked, "Mueller's 'ridiculous' claims?"
"This kind of coverage does the viewer a huge disservice and further divides the country," one Fox News personality told CNN.
Fox News journalists took significant issue with their network's opinion hosts, who deflected from the news and, in Sean Hannity's case, characterized Mueller's investigation as a "witch hunt," a term Trump used on Sunday in a angry tweet to describe the probe.
"That segment on Outnumbered [questioning Mueller's integrity] was absurd and deserves all the scorn it can get," a Fox News employee told CNN, referring to the network's noontime talk show.
The person added that it was "laughable seeing Hannity and [Laura] Ingraham," two Fox News opinion hosts who are openly supportive of Trump, "tripping over themselves saying [Mueller's team has] found nothing thus far."
"It's an embarrassment," another Fox News employee echoed to CNN. "Frankly, there are shows on our network that are backing the President at all costs, and it's that short term strategy that undermines the good work being done by others."
This story has been updated to include comment from a Fox News spokesperson.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/31/media/f ... 135PMStory




The not-so-hidden message in Mueller's court filings
The special prosecutor's indictments of Paul Manafort and Rick Gates — and the plea deal struck with low-level adviser George Papadopoulos — suggest a road map for additional charges still to come.
By DARREN SAMUELSOHN 10/30/2017 07:42 PM EDT Updated 10/30/2017 08:55 PM EDT


Special counsel Robert Mueller's filings in the Paul Manafort and Rick Gates cases showed that he leaned hard on the work of investigators from the Treasury Department, IRS and the FBI. | J. Scott Applewhite/AP

Robert Mueller delivered a punch in the rapidly expanding Russia investigation by simultaneously indicting Paul Manafort and Rick Gates, two of the most prominent figures in Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign.

But the special counsel sent a more powerful signal to others around the president with the public release of a plea deal struck with low-level loyalist George Papadopoulos, which was full of details about the former foreign policy adviser’s email traffic to still-unnamed high-ranking campaign officials about a “request from Russia to meet Mr. Trump.”

“In unsealing it, he knows he’s sending messages to at least three or four other operatives and their lawyers that he’s got somebody in his corner who could be damaging to their interests,” said Randall Samborn, a former senior aide on the George W. Bush-era special counsel investigation into who leaked the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame.

Top White House officials including press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said Monday that despite the latest developments the Mueller probe is still moving toward a quick conclusion. But that brand of optimism ran counter to the analysis provided by several veterans from previous special counsel investigations who said they expect more targets to wind up in court.

“I’d be very surprised if it’s the last indictment we see,” said Julie Myers Wood, a former lead prosecutor during Kenneth Starr’s independent counsel investigation into President Bill Clinton.


Solomon Wisenberg, also a former Starr prosecutor, said Mueller’s opening moves demonstrated the probe has been “moving quickly” thanks in part to the work the FBI had done before his mid-May appointment.

He said Manafort and Gates are now on track for a criminal trial that begins anywhere from nine to 16 months from now. And in the meantime, with his Monday disclosures, Mueller has helped insulate himself against presidential attacks by filing the criminal charges against two of Trump’s highest-ranking campaign aides.

“Nobody can say this is a chicken-shit prosecution,” Wisenberg said. “It makes it that much harder, I think, for somebody to try to either pardon someone like Manafort or get Mueller fired.”

Trump himself reacted to the indictments via his favorite platform: Twitter. There, he riled up his supporters by noting Mueller’s charges involve actions predating the 2016 campaign, all the while turning the focus back on his erstwhile Democratic nemesis.

“Sorry, but this is years ago, before Paul Manafort was part of the Trump campaign. But why aren’t Crooked Hillary & the Dems the focus????” Trump posted Monday, adding a few moments later, “… Also, there is NO COLLUSION!”

Meantime, some of Trump’s top allies, including former top White House strategist Steve Bannon, are urging Trump to undermine Mueller’s investigation by going after its budget, according to multiple people familiar with his thinking. Republicans over the weekend also complained that Mueller’s office was behind the initial leak to the media that the indictments were coming — a criminal offense if proved true.

Yet the special counsel demonstrated that his prosecution team can avoid leaking big news. Papadopoulos’ July arrest at Dulles International Airport, his subsequent meetings with the government “on numerous occasions to provide information and answer questions,” and his plea deal all remained secret until they were released by Mueller on Monday.

Mueller’s office over the past five months has avoided much in the way of public comment on anything beyond its staffing hires and other basic logistical moves. On Monday, his office launched a new website under the Justice Department’s banner with his unsealed court filings, contact information and a link to his underlying mandate.

prosecutors said Mueller made a smart strategic decision by waiting until Monday to release the Papadopoulos plea, which signals legal exposure to anyone who was in contact with the foreign policy aide during the campaign as well as people who were in touch with him in more recent months without knowing he was cooperating with investigators.

“I’m sure there are a lot of phones ringing off the hook to folks’ lawyers,” Myers Wood said. “They’re rethinking any interaction with him in the last few months.”

The plea document revealed the FBI, for example, first interviewed Papadopoulos on Jan. 27, 2017 — just a week after Trump's inauguration and the same day then-acting Attorney General Sally Yates met with White House counsel Don McGahn to raise red flags about then-national security adviser Michael Flynn.

Mueller’s filings in the Manafort and Gates cases leaned hard on the work of investigators from the Treasury Department, IRS and the FBI — a sign that those teams are seamlessly supporting Mueller’s core team of prosecutors.

“It’s obvious they’ve got good ones,” Wisenberg said of the FBI agents and other staffers detailed to Mueller’s investigation far. “That’s important. You don’t always get good people.”

David Sklansky, a Stanford Law School professor, said the criminal charges against the former campaign chairman and his deputy would “put considerable pressure” on both men to start cooperating with the special counsel.

Even if neither man flips, Sklansky added, the indictments showed Mueller’s team had managed to untangle complex transactions. “They can follow money trails designed not to be followed, they can unravel complicated webs of deceit and collusion crossing international borders, and they can do this relatively rapidly,” he said.


Mueller’s first indictments came at a much faster pace than the 17-month average seen in the nine previous independent counsel and special counsel cases, dating to the Carter administration, in which criminal charges were filed, according to a Politico analysis of the historic legal record. The only case that moved at a faster pace than Mueller’s — Whitewater — had certain similar circumstances.

In that probe, the first independent counsel, Robert Fiske, inherited a number of earlier investigative efforts involving the Clintons’ land deal in Arkansas that sped along his first major action just two months after his January 1994 appointment. Fiske notched a guilty plea on federal fraud charges against David Hale, an Arkansas political insider and former municipal judge who alleged that Bill Clinton as governor had pressured him to approve an illegal government-subsidized loan.

Hale, in turn, agreed to cooperate with Fiske as part of a wider Whitewater investigation that would last more than seven years and end up covering the suicide of White House attorney Vincent Foster, irregularities in the White House travel office, allegations of misuse of confidential FBI files, false statements by a top White House attorney and, finally, the president’s sexual affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.

“The game has just begun,” said Paul Rosenzweig, a senior counsel from the Starr investigation. “Don’t expect a resolution anytime soon — this is just the bottom of the second inning in a long game.”
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/ ... ump-244344




Papadopoulos’ Bumbling Effort To Conceal Russia Contacts Did Him In


By ALLEGRA KIRKLAND Published OCTOBER 31, 2017 1:04 PM

Given the lack of savviness with which George Papadopoulos tried to disappear a months-long effort to get Trump campaign officials in a room with Russian government officials who had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton, he may as well have been just a campaign “coffee boy.”

According to Papadopoulos’ guilty plea unsealed Monday, the former Trump campaign advisor attempted to conceal that work from the FBI, destroying records and lying to agents. So instead of landing what he billed to other campaign staff as a “history making” meeting between Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, Papadopoulos’ back-channel dealings landed him federal charges.

His first missteps came during his initial interview with FBI agents in Chicago on Jan. 27. Papadopoulos’ statement of offense makes no mention of any counsel accompanying him to that sit-down, where agents informed him that the interview was “completely voluntary,” that lying to the FBI was a “federal offense” and that he could get “in trouble” for doing so.

Papadopoulos proceeded to tell all manner of falsehoods about the “extent, timing, and nature of his communications” with multiple individuals with close ties to the Russian government, according to the statement. One was that a professor with links to Russian officials who supposedly had “dirt” on Clinton approached him about said dirt before he joined the campaign, when in fact he did so over a month after Papadopoulos joined the Trump campaign.

Nick Oberheiden, a federal criminal defense attorney, told TPM that Papadopoulos’ false statements likely served as the “little mosaic pieces” that provided the FBI with the “slam dunk required to make it over the probable cause hurdle” to obtain a search warrant to dig through his online communications.

Once the FBI did, they found copious emails detailing Papadopoulos’ efforts to coordinate an in-person meeting between senior Russian officials and high-level Trump campaign staffers that directly contradicted what he’d told them.

As those communications made clear, growing scrutiny of Trump’s fondness for Putin, which escalated after the GOP candidate urged the Russian government to hack Clinton’s emails in a July 2016 press conference, didn’t dissuade Papadopoulos from continuing to try to organize such a meeting.

Papadopoulos went on to express eagerness to cooperate in a second interview with the FBI on Feb. 16, this time with his counsel present. According to the statement of offense detailing the case, the very next day Papadopoulos deactivated a Facebook account he’d maintained since 2005 that contained records of his communications regarding Russia; several days later, on Feb. 23, he stopped using his cell phone and acquired a new number.

Papadopoulos’ attorneys did not respond to TPM’s request for comment on whether he notified them that he would be taking those steps, which were later cited as evidence he was trying to “impede the FBI’s ongoing investigation.”

As Oberheiden, the criminal defense attorney noted, “I would not advise a client to delete Facebook or anything that may contain information regarding this investigation because then you really get into the obstruction of justice area and that’s a tricky offense.”

Trump and his allies have dismissed the notion that Papadopoulos could possess any information damaging to the campaign, arguing that the 30-year-old, who until recently listed Model U.N. as experience on his LinkedIn profile, was a “volunteer” and “coffee boy” with no real influence. But he was one of just five people Trump named as members of his foreign policy advisory team in March 2016, and emails show he was in frequent touch with senior campaign staffers, forwarding them lengthy chains detailing his efforts to set up a meeting with Russian officials.

And Oberheiden and other attorneys point out that the special counsel likely targeted Papadopoulos precisely because he was a low-level aide who would be easy to “flip,” convincing him to provide any information he may possess about other campaign staffers in exchange for a reduced sentence. The statement of offense notes that in the three months since Papadopoulos was arrested at Dulles International Airport, he has “met with the Government on numerous occasions to provide information and answer questions.”

Until the content of those conversations comes out, Trump’s team is reduced to arguing that the people the campaign named to advisory roles had no idea what they were doing.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/ ... y-mistakes


Nigel Farage is 'person of interest' in FBI investigation into Trump and Russia

Exclusive: FBI interested in former Ukip leader’s ties with people connected to US president and WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange

Stephanie Kirchgaessner, Nick Hopkins and Luke Harding
Friday 2 June 2017 05.31 EDT First published on Thursday 1 June 2017 07.30 EDT
Nigel Farage is a “person of interest” in the US counter-intelligence investigation that is looking into possible collusion between the Kremlin and Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, the Guardian has been told.

Sources with knowledge of the investigation said the former Ukip leader had raised the interest of FBI investigators because of his relationships with individuals connected to both the Trump campaign and Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder whom Farage visited in March.

He’s right in the middle of these relationships. He turns up over and over again
WikiLeaks published troves of hacked emails last year that damaged Hillary Clinton’s campaign and is suspected of having cooperated with Russia through third parties, according to recent congressional testimony by the former CIA director John Brennan, who also said the adamant denials of collusion by Assange and Russia were disingenuous.

Farage has not been accused of wrongdoing and is not a suspect or a target of the US investigation. But being a person of interest means investigators believe he may have information about the acts that are under investigation and he may therefore be subject to their scrutiny.

Sources who spoke to the Guardian said it was Farage’s proximity to people at the heart of the investigation that was being examined as an element in their broader inquiry into how Russia may have worked with Trump campaign officials to influence the US election.

“One of the things the intelligence investigators have been looking at is points of contact and persons involved,” one source said. “If you triangulate Russia, WikiLeaks, Assange and Trump associates the person who comes up with the most hits is Nigel Farage.

“He’s right in the middle of these relationships. He turns up over and over again. There’s a lot of attention being paid to him.”

The source mentioned Farage’s links with Roger Stone, Trump’s long-time political adviser who has admitted being in contact with Guccifer 2.0, a hacker whom US intelligence agencies believe to be a Kremlin agent.

Roger Stone in his office in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Photograph: Miami Herald/MCT via Getty Images
Farage’s spokesman said he had never worked with Russian officials, and described the Guardian’s questions about Farage’s activities as “verging on the hysterical”.


“Nigel has never been to Russia, let alone worked with their authorities,” the spokesman said. But he did not respond to questions about whether Farage was aware of the FBI inquiry; had hired a lawyer in connection to the matter; or when Farage first met Trump.

The spokesman also declined to comment on whether Farage had received compensation from the Russian state-backed media group RT for his media appearances. RT, which has featured Farage about three times over the last 18 months, also declined to comment, citing confidentiality.

On Thursday Farage dismissed the story as “fake news”. He said he visited Assange at the Ecuadorian embassy in March at the behest of LBC Radio “with a view to conducting an interview”.

He added: “I consider it extremely doubtful that I could be a person of interest to the FBI as I have no connections to Russia.”

Farage has said he only met Assange once has but declined to say how long the two have known each other.

The FBI’s national press office said it had no comment on Farage.

The former Ukip leader has voiced his support for the Russian president, calling Vladimir Putin the leader he most admired, in a 2014 interview. Ukip also has history with Assange: Gerard Batten, a Ukip member of the European parliament (MEP), defended the Wikileaks founder in a speech in the European parliament in 2011.


One source familiar with the US investigation told the Guardian that the examination of Farage’s activities was considered especially delicate given his role as an MEP.

Neither Farage nor Trump have made a secret of their admiration for one another. They emerged as unlikely winners last year in contests that have reshaped the world order: Britain’s vote to leave the EU and Trump’s surprise ascendency to the White House.

Both men credited their ability to tap into the worries of struggling and neglected citizens for their victories. But at the heart of the US investigation lies a deeper question: whether Trump campaign officials and people close to the former reality TV star sought to work with state players in Russia to try to influence the US election result.

Last July, Farage attended the Republican national convention in Cleveland, Ohio, when Trump became the party’s nominee.

According to an account by the Ukip donor Arron Banks, Farage first met Trump at a campaign stop in Mississippi in August, where he spoke at a Trump campaign event.

But Farage’s relationships with people close to the US president began years earlier. Farage first met Steve Bannon, Trump’s strategist and former campaign chief executive, in the summer of 2012, when Bannon, who was interested in rightwing movements in Europe, invited the then Ukip leader to spend a few days in New York and Washington, according to an account in the New Yorker magazine.

There Farage was introduced to, among others, the staff of the then senator Jeff Sessions, who is now the US attorney general. Speaking of his longtime admiration for Bannon, Farage told the New Yorker last year: “I have got a very, very high regard for that man’s brain.”

Nigel Farage dismisses Russia link as ‘hysterical nonsense’
Two years later, in 2014, Breitbart News, of which Bannon was executive chair, opened an office in London. A top editor, Raheem Kassam, later went on to work as Farage’s chief of staff.

In 2015, Breitbart News arranged a dinner in Farage’s honour at “the embassy”, the nickname for the house the news group rented in Washington. According to a report in Bloomberg, attendees were “blown away” by Farage’s speech at the event, which was also attended by Sessions.

Then, on 24 June last year, the day after the UK voted to leave the EU, Farage thanked Bannon during an interview for Breitbart News’s coverage of the leave campaign. Bannon, in turn, congratulated Farage on his victory, saying he had led an extraordinary “David v Goliath” campaign.

Farage’s ties to Stone are also under scrutiny, it is understood. Stone has frequently publicised his relationship with Assange and described him on Twitter as “my hero”.

Stone publicly predicted the 2016 release of hacked emails from the Clinton campaign that now lie at the heart of the federal inquiry. Democrats on the House intelligence committee have named Stone in their hearings and, according to the New York Times, he is now under investigation.

Last summer, just a few weeks before Farage met Trump in Mississippi, Stone bragged about having a “mutual friend” who served as an intermediary between himself and Assange. He also mentioned in a separate tweet that he had dinner with Farage, though the date of the encounter is unclear.

After Trump’s victory, Farage was one of the first foreign politicians to meet and celebrate with the Republican president-elect, and had his picture taken with Trump in front of a golden elevator in Trump Tower just days after the US election.

View image on Twitter
Nigel Farage ✔@Nigel_Farage
It was a great honour to spend time with @realDonaldTrump. He was relaxed and full of good ideas. I'm confident he will be a good President.
6:38 PM - Nov 12, 2016
2,309 2,309 Replies 14,221 14,221 Retweets 25,106 25,106 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy
In November, Trump suggested in a tweet Farage should become the UK’s ambassador to the US.

Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrump
Many people would like to see @Nigel_Farage represent Great Britain as their Ambassador to the United States. He would do a great job!
9:22 PM - Nov 21, 2016
14,479 14,479 Replies 21,532 21,532 Retweets 63,903 63,903 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy
The tweet prompted a curt response from Downing Street, which pointed out that there was “no vacancy”. A spokesman said: “We already have an excellent ambassador.”

The pair met again in February, when they had dinner together with Trump’s daughter and adviser, Ivanka, and her husband and White House adviser, Jared Kushner.

Farage was asked about his relationship with Assange in a recent interview with Die Zeit, the German newspaper, after he was seen on 9 March leaving the Ecuadorian embassy where Assange has lived for years. Farage, who declared he had “never received a penny from Russia”, said he met Assange for “journalistic reasons”.

Pressed on his meetings with Russian officials in the past, Farage initially denied having had any, but then acknowledged that he had met Alexander Yakovenko, the Russian ambassador to the UK, in 2013.

Asked by Die Zeit what he was doing now, and whether he saw himself as a politician or a journalist, Farage concluded: “Changing public opinion. That’s what I have been doing for 20 years. Using television, media. Shifting public opinion. That’s what I am good at.”

A spokesman for Farage told the Guardian he had only met Assange on that one occasion. “The meeting was organised by a broadcaster, they could have easily sent another presenter instead.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... and-russia


You bet there's collusion: And other reasons Donald Trump should be nervous after Robert Mueller's indictments

President Trump and his defenders are anxious to portray Monday’s indictments from Special Counsel Robert Mueller as a “nothing burger.” The quasi-official state broadcaster, Fox “News,” in fact, was trying to distract viewers’ attention with an actual story about cheeseburgers — or, to be, exact, cheeseburger emojis--as the big news was breaking. That may work for those who have already drunk the Kool-Aid along with their cheeseburgers. It won’t wash for anyone who retains even a speck of objectivity.

It is not every day that a president’s former campaign manager and another campaign worker are indicted on felony charges. In fact the last time it happened was 1974, when Nixon’s campaign manager John Mitchell was indicted. Trump’s claims that “this is years ago, before Paul Manafort was part of the Trump campaign,” aren’t true. The indictment says that the money laundering and conspiracy for which Manafort and his associate Rick Gates are being charged continued “through at least 2016” — i.e., through the period, from March 29 to August 19, 2016, when Manafort was working for Trump. Gates remained at the campaign even after Manafort was ousted.

Trump’s other claim — “Also, there is NO COLLUSION!” — is marginally more compelling, insofar as it’s true that the indictment of Manafort and Gates does not accuse the Trump campaign of colluding with the Kremlin. But that’s like Al Capone bragging that his indictment didn’t say anything about racketeering. Money laundering and tax evasion are offenses that prosecutors charge in order to nail a suspect for a whole range of other egregious behavior.

In this case, the likelihood is that Mueller is going to use the pressure of major jail time to force Manafort and Gates to come clean about what they know regarding the Trump campaign’s dealings with the Russians. Odds are that Manafort knows a lot, given his close connections to the Russians. The money he was charged with hiding from U.S. authorities came, after all, from his pro-Russian clients in Ukraine.

Trump advisor Papadopoulos deactivated Facebook after FBI probe

Not Released (NR)
The indictment of President Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort (above) and another campaign worker on charges of laundering $18 million may seem to involve little evidence of collusion between Trump's campaign and Russia, but Monday's indictments are likely to foreshadow more damning revelations.
(Win McNamee/Getty Images)
The contention that there is “NO COLLUSION” became even less compelling a few minutes after the Manafort and Gates indictments when Mueller unveiled another blockbuster indictment: Former campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos pled guilty to lying to FBI agents about his efforts to solicit “dirt” on Hillary Clinton from an unnamed “professor” in London who was closely connected to the Kremlin. According to the indictment, “The Professor” told Papadopoulos in April 2016 that the Russians “ ‘have dirt on her’; ‘the Russians had emails of Clinton’; ‘they have thousands of emails.’”

Note that the Russian hacking had only occurred in March and did not become public until June. So Papadopoulos clearly was in touch with someone who had access to top-secret details of the Russian plot to influence the U.S. election—and Papadopoulos let his superiors at the campaign know what he was up to. In other words, he was as eager for Vladimir Putin’s help as Donald Trump Jr. was when he wrote “I love it” on June 3, 2016, in response to another offer of incriminating information on Hillary from another Russian emissary. If this isn’t collusion, then the word has lost any meaning.

It is important to keep in mind, moreover, that we have seen only a small portion of the evidence that Mueller is accumulating. What has been reported in the media is damning enough. Just last week, for example, we learned that the head of Cambridge Analytica, the data firm paid $5.9 million by the Trump campaign, contacted Julian Assange of Wikileaks to ask for help in finding Hillary Clinton’s emails. Just imagine how much Mueller knows that isn’t public knowledge. No one in the media, for example, was talking about Papadopoulos until Monday. Mueller will learn even more if he can “flip” more of his “targets” and turn them into cooperating witnesses against the president — something that has already happened with Papadopoulos.

Not Released (NR)
President Donald Trump speaks to the media Wednesday.
(SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images)
This is how a prosecutor builds his case — and Mueller has assembled a team of the best prosecutors in the Department of Justice. There’s a good reason why, the day before the indictments were unsealed, Trump was having a meltdown on Twitter. Among his Sunday morning tweets was this desperate plea to his supporters: “DO SOMETHING!” This sounds like something that Al Pacino, as Tony Montana, might have said near the end of “Scarface” as he saw an army of gunmen invading his mansion.

Here’s what we know about Donald Trump’s ties to Russia

The only salvation for Trump now may be to try to fire Mueller and to issue blanket pardons to his campaign associates. That would be the legal equivalent of Tony Montana going down guns blazing. Or would it?

If Trump were to use his authority as president to try to shut down the special counsel investigation, he would be guilty of obstruction of justice and should be impeached. But as a practical matter impeachment would only be possible if Democrats win a majority of the House next year and a number of Senate Republicans are willing to convict the president. Republicans, in other words, could soon be forced to choose whether they are loyal to the rule of law or the rule of Trump. I fear that by this point the “rule of law” caucus will constitute only a small minority of a once-proud party.
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/bet- ... ?cid=bitly
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: First Charges Filed in U.S. Special Counsel Mueller's Ru

Postby stillrobertpaulsen » Tue Oct 31, 2017 5:12 pm

Oct 31 2017, 4:03 pm ET
Top Trump Campaign Aide Clovis Spoke to Mueller Team, Grand Jury

by Ken Dilanian and Mike Memoli

WASHINGTON — Sam Clovis, the former top Trump campaign official who supervised a man now cooperating with the FBI's Russia investigation, was questioned last week by special counsel Robert Mueller's team and testified before the investigating grand jury, a person with first-hand knowledge of the matter told NBC News.

Clovis, who is President Donald Trump's pick to be the Department of Agriculture's chief scientist, could not be reached for comment. His lawyer, Victoria Toensing, would neither confirm nor deny his interactions with the Mueller team.

"I'm not going to get into that," she said in an interview.

George Papadopoulos was arrested in July and began cooperating with agents, records show — disclosing his interactions with a professor and other Russians whom the FBI suggested in court documents may have been working for Russian intelligence agencies. He pleaded guilty to making false statements on Oct. 5.

The court documents unsealed Monday describe emails between Papadopoulos and an unnamed "campaign supervisor." The supervisor responded "Great work" after Papadopoulos discussed his interactions with Russians who wanted to arrange a meeting with Trump and Russian leaders.

Toensing confirmed that Clovis was the campaign supervisor in the emails. Clovis, a former Air Force officer and Pentagon official who unsuccessfully ran for Iowa State Treasurer in 2014, was the Trump campaign's chief policy adviser and national co-chairman.

He is currently serving as an unpaid White House adviser to the Agriculture Department, awaiting Senate confirmation before the Agriculture Committee for the scientist job. He is not a scientist.

In a statement, Toensing's office said Clovis set up a national security committee in the Trump campaign that included Papadopoulos, "who attended one meeting and was never otherwise approached by the campaign for consultation."

She disputed a suggestion in the Papadopoulos documents that he was told by Clovis that a top campaign priority was improving relations with Russia.

In August 2016, according to court documents, Papadopoulos told Clovis about his efforts to organize an "off the record" meeting with Russian officials.

"I would encourage you" and another foreign policy adviser to the campaign to "make the trip, if it is feasible," Clovis responded.

In the statement, Toensing said the Trump campaign had a strict rule prohibiting travel abroad on behalf of the campaign, but said that Clovis would have had no authority to stop Papadopoulos from traveling in his personal capacity.

"Dr. Clovis has not communicated with Mr. Papadopoulos since prior to the 2016 election," the statement says.

Democrats have already targeted Clovis' nomination to what is often referred to as the department's chief scientist because he has previously stated doubts about climate change.

In a 2014 interview when he was a candidate for U.S. Senate in Iowa, Clovis described himself as "extremely skeptical" of the overwhelming assessment of climate scientists that human behavior is responsible for warming trends. "A lot of the science is junk science," he said then.

In his role in the Trump campaign Clovis, a 25-year Air Force veteran, helped assemble Trump's National Security Advisory Committee, chaired by then-Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), which was publicly announced in March 2016.

A public Senate confirmation hearing would give Democrats on the committee an opportunity to question Clovis about his interactions with Papadopoulos and the campaign's deliberation about meetings with Russian officials.

"I’m not aware that any change would be necessary at this time," White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters at the daily press briefing when asked about the status of Clovis’ nomination.

The Agriculture Committee is chaired by Republican Sen. Pat Roberts of Kansas, a former chairman of the Intelligence Committee. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, which is conducting its own Russia-related probe, is also a member of the Agriculture Committee, as are Democrats Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota.

"A hearing later this week is to be determined," said Roberts. "We'll make that determination after we check with all members of the ag committee. I know the Democrats have marching orders to oppose him and so we usually operate in a bipartisan manner. We'll see."

Clovis was also interviewed recently by the Senate Intelligence Committee, according to a source with direct knowledge. Roberts told Politico Tuesday that Clovis was "a fully cooperative witness."

Clovis has continued to work at the Agriculture Department even as his nomination is pending. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue has referred to Clovis as a "trusted adviser and steady hand" in his work for USDA in his current role, noting when his nomination was announced that he "was one of the first people through the door."


Toensing. :puke: One of the few lawyers that might be slimier than Sekulow.
"Huey Long once said, “Fascism will come to America in the name of anti-fascism.” I'm afraid, based on my own experience, that fascism will come to America in the name of national security."
-Jim Garrison 1967
User avatar
stillrobertpaulsen
 
Posts: 2414
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:43 pm
Location: California
Blog: View Blog (37)

Re: First Charges Filed in U.S. Special Counsel Mueller's Ru

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Oct 31, 2017 5:34 pm

thanks rp...who was Toensing representing before...didn't she quit on someone?

here's Palmer's take on it

Trump adviser Sam Clovis appears before grand jury: he’s either flipped or he’s about to be arrested
Bill Palmer
Updated: 5:25 pm EDT Tue Oct 31, 2017
Home » Opinion

Yesterday, court documents revealed that Donald Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos pleaded guilty and confessed to campaign collusion with the Russian government. The media then subsequently confirmed that the two redacted Trump campaign officials fingered by Papadopoulos were Paul Manafort and Sam Clovis. Now comes word of Clovis appearing before a Robert Mueller grand jury. There are only two possible explanations of what’s going on here – and they’re both terrible for Trump himself.



Sam Clovis testified before a Trump-Russia grand jury last week, according to a new NBC News report (link). Details are very scarce, but the most crucial detail is the timeframe. Clovis testified well after the Papadopoulos indictment and plea were signed off on. Moreover, Clovis was the campaign supervisor of Papadopoulos, and these kinds of charges flow upward, not downward. That means Clovis testifying in a different Trump-Russia criminal case, and higher stakes one.



The first possibility is that Sam Clovis was testifying in Trump-Russia criminal case against himself. In this scenario, the Papadopoulos confession would serve as evidence against Clovis, and Clovis would have been testifying in his own defense. If this is the case, it means Mueller is looking to indict Clovis so he can arrest him, and then force him to cut a deal. Clovis would have been the last witness in a case against himself, meaning that – assuming Mueller continues to succeed in getting the indictments he wants – Clovis could be arrested at any minute.



The second possibility is that Sam Clovis was testifying in a Trump-Russia case against someone further up the chain. If this is the case, it means Clovis has either formally cut a deal, or he’s informally been informed he won’t be charged if he cooperates with his testimony. Either way, it would mean Clovis has flipped. His testimony would most likely have been against his campaign supervisor, Jeff Sessions, or the other adviser involved in the Papadopoulos conspiracy, Paul Manafort. The bottom line is that the collusion-related charges are working their way closer to Donald Trump himself.


Clovis said to be 'cooperative witness' in Senate Russia probe
By CATHERINE BOUDREAU and JOSH DAWSEY 10/31/2017 12:44 PM EDT Updated 10/31/2017 05:07 PM EDT
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Sam Clovis, President Donald Trump’s controversial nominee to be the Agriculture Department’s chief scientist, has been “a fully cooperative witness” in the Senate Intelligence Committee’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election, Senate Agriculture Chairman Pat Roberts told POLITICO.

Clovis, a former co-chair and policy adviser to Trump’s campaign, knew that another campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, was talking to Russians, according to documents released Monday as part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe and campaign and administration officials.


Papadopoulos was arrested in late July and pleaded guilty to a charge that he made false statements to the FBI about his contact with a professor who has ties to the Kremlin and promised thousands of pages of emails related to Hillary Clinton.

Meanwhile, NBC News reported Tuesday that Clovis has been questioned by Mueller's team and has testified before Mueller's grand jury.

Clovis’ nomination to the top scientific job at the Agriculture Department has already drawn significant opposition from Democrats and scientists who have raised concerns about his climate-change skepticism, his credentials and his history of making disparaging statements about blacks, women, LGBT individuals and others. But there's been no public opposition from Republicans.

Roberts said Monday that he planned to continue with a scheduled Nov. 9 confirmation hearing. But on Tuesday, when asked whether he'd consider delaying the hearing amid the Russia developments, he said that was "to be determined."

“I don’t think he’s a target of any investigation,” Roberts said of Clovis on Monday, describing him as someone likely on the fringes of the inquiry.

Clovis brought Papadopoulos into the campaign in March 2016, when he was asked to put together a foreign-policy advisory committee, according to the administration and campaign officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. Trump felt pressure to hastily assemble a team because he was getting criticism for a lack of foreign policy manpower, these people said.

But Clovis, an Air Force veteran and radio host who taught management and public policy at Morningside College in Iowa until 2015, didn’t have foreign-policy connections and scrambled to find people willing to align themselves with Trump. He brought in a group of people with little vetting, the officials said.

Papadopoulos had little contact with most campaign insiders, but he was in touch with Clovis, the people said.

Victoria Toensing, a lawyer representing Clovis, said in an e-mailed statement that after an initial meeting of the advisory panel, all of Papadopoulos' communications with the campaign were "self-generated," and that Clovis did not believe an improved relationship with Russia should be a foreign policy focus of the campaign.

"Dr. Clovis always vigorously opposed any Russian trip for Donald Trump or staff," Toensing said. "However, if a volunteer made any suggestions on any foreign policy matter, Dr. Clovis, a polite gentleman from Iowa, would have expressed courtesy and appreciation."

Neither Senate Intelligence Committee officials nor the USDA press office responded to a request for comment.

Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Agriculture ranking member Debbie Stabenow, along with a handful of other Democrats, have publicly announced their opposition to Clovis. They argue that Clovis does not have the academic and research background required for the post, and also point to the disparaging comments, including some about former President Barack Obama and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.


https://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/ ... ion-244370




All roads lead to Jeff Sessions. He chaired the campaign’s NATSEC committee that Clovis & Papadopoulos were on...



What do the indictments mean for Trump? Former White House ethics chief explains
CTVNews.ca Staff
Published Monday, October 30, 2017 10:20PM EDT


On Monday, Donald Trump’s campaign chair Paul Manafort and his associate Rick Gates were indicted on a dozen charges in the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
Meanwhile, a little-known Trump adviser named George Papadopoulos has pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with Russians.
CTV’s Chief Anchor Lisa LaFlamme spoke with Richard Painter, the former chief White House ethics counsel to George W. Bush, about what the charges could mean for Trump.
Of the three named today, who is Donald Trump most concerned about?
Well he ought to be most concerned about George Papadopolous, his former campaign aide who has (pleaded) guilty, who is co-operating with the government and is talking presumably about collaboration with the Russians. So that's the person I'd be most concerned about.
Interesting, since Papadopolous is a 30-year-old volunteer who has nowhere near the profile of Manafort or Gates. Does any of this touch on Trump’s own actions?
I don't know what he knows, but this is a 30-year-old volunteer who was apparently sitting in a room with candidate Trump and they have a picture that they've been broadcasting on television down here of him sitting in a room with then-candidate Donald Trump with very high-ranking people in the room. So we'll find out what this man knows. But he was collaborating with the Russians, with a Russian agent called the professor, and we're going to have to find out what that was all about. And I think Bob Mueller is going to find out because this man is co-operating with the government.

So the big question: Did Trump’s presidential campaign collude at any level with Russian operatives to sway the 2016 U.S. presidential election?


It's obvious they colluded with the Russians. We know that from the Trump Tower meeting. We know that from today's guilty plea. They clearly colluded with the Russians. The legal question is whether the collusion with the Russians was illegal, whether they violated campaign finance laws or whether they were trafficking in stolen emails in violation of hacking laws, and that has yet to be determined.
So Trump’s reaction today, a series of tweets, (was) not surprising. But was it smart? And does his reaction even matter today?
Well, when I was chief ethics lawyer at the Bush White House, we made it very clear that our policy was not to comment on pending investigations. The President of the United States also did not comment on pending investigations. Every one of President Trump's tweets on this Russia investigation has hurt him a lot, either legally in helping build a case against him for obstruction of justice or politically with the American people who don't want to hear any more about Hillary Clinton. They want to hear what Donald Trump is going to do as President to rejuvenate our economy and to conduct foreign policy and protect us from threats from abroad, which is North Korea. They don't want to hear more nonsense about Hillary Clinton's uranium deal that Congress has had years to look at from a long time ago.
So if you were working in this administration, what signal did all the insiders, did all the staff receiving today?
I don't think they got the right message. They should not be commenting on this investigation at all. They shouldn't be talking about the Russia investigation. They shouldn't be talking about Hillary Clinton. That election was a year ago. They need to focus on doing their jobs and they are making it that much easier to prosecute the White House staff and perhaps even the President for obstruction of justice every time they turn around make a comment about this investigation.
So what then is the next phase of this investigation?
That's for Robert Mueller to determine, who is he going to indict next, who is he going to persuade to co-operate. Michael Flynn is somebody I would keep an eye on. We don't know what's going on with him, whether he is cooperating, whether he's worked a plea deal or whether he’s going to … be prosecuted. But he is somebody I would keep an eye on for sure.
How nervous is Trump now that these first charges have been laid?
Well, I think he'd be quite nervous about it. But he would have been so much better off if he had just let it alone, not talked about the Russia investigation, not fired James Comey from the FBI and just did his job as president. Because then in order to remove him from office it would have had to have been established that he had known about and condoned criminal conduct by his campaign and that might have been very, very hard to show. But the number of people that lied about dealings with the Russians and then also the obstruction of justice scenario where the president himself fired the FBI director in order to derail this investigation, those are the developments that are really going to hurt President Trump, probably much more so than the underlying collaboration with the Russians.
http://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/world/what ... -1.3656277



Low level staff committed crimes during Watergate that brought down the President of the United States. Just sayin'.



Special counsel's office: Papadopoulos 'small part' of 'large scale investigation'

Former Trump adviser cooperates with Mueller

Washington (CNN)Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos' guilty plea Monday appears to hint toward even more threads of the ongoing Russia collusion investigation than what the court revealed.

Lawyers from the Justice Department's special counsel office have repeatedly hinted at how Papadopoulos would contribute to a larger, sensitive investigation.

Why George Papadopoulos' guilty plea is a much bigger problem for Trump than the Manafort indictment
"The criminal justice interest being vindicated here is there's a large-scale ongoing investigation of which this case is a small part," Aaron Zelinsky of the special counsel's office said during Papadopoulos' October 5 plea agreement hearing, records of which were unsealed Monday.
The special counsel's office sought to keep Papadopoulos' plea agreement confidential because it didn't want to dissuade witnesses and persons of interest from sharing information with investigators.

"Although the government is moving expeditiously to interview individuals of immediate interest to the investigation, news that the defendant has been charged with and pleaded guilty to lying to federal agents may make those individuals reluctant to speak with investigators," the special counsel's office wrote on October 3.

"Revealing the defendant's plea would likely chill individuals to be interviewed in the coming weeks," the filing added.

In a transcript of his plea hearing, Zelinsky also referred to a "road map" it feared revealing about the larger investigation.

Neither Hill intel committee has interviewed Papadopoulos
Papadopoulos' court proceedings were unsealed Monday. He pleaded guilty to a charge of making false statements to the FBI, about his contact with three people who enticed him with the idea of a meeting between Trump and Russian government officials, after cooperating with the special counsel investigation.

It's possible that Papadopoulos' interviews with federal investigators contributed to the charges brought against former campaign advisers Paul Manafort and Rick Gates, though those counts had little to do with contact with Russian officials.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/30/politics/ ... 07PMVODtop



Papadopoulos claims Jeff Sessions was in the room when he sought approval for his Russian collusion meeting. Even if Sessions claims he didn’t hear it or didn’t understand it, Clovis may have testified otherwise last week. Proving that Sessions lied about his own Russian meetings would require proving that those meetings were nefarious in intent. But Sessions said “I have no knowledge of any such conversations by anyone connected to the Trump campaign.” He knew about the Papadopoulos meeting, which Papadopoulos admits was an attempt at collusion with Russia. This means Mueller can arrest Sessions for perjury and pressure him to flip on Trump.
http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/arr ... ller/5827/

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: First Charges Filed in U.S. Special Counsel Mueller's Ru

Postby stillrobertpaulsen » Tue Oct 31, 2017 7:11 pm

seemslikeadream » Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:34 pm wrote:thanks rp...who was Toensing representing before...didn't she quit on someone?


I can't remember. I just remember what a lying troll she was regarding Valerie Plame.

Oh - you're gonna love this:

Mueller set to interview Hope Hicks after Trump returns from Asia

Elizabeth Preza

31 Oct 2017 at 17:17 ET

Image
White House communications director Hope Hicks deplanes Air Force One (Twitter)

Special counsel Robert Mueller is set to speak with longtime Donald Trump aide and White House Communications Director Hope Hicks, marking a new phase in his department’s investigation into the 2016 presidential election and possible collusion with the Trump campaign.

As Politico reports, Mueller’s team has interviewed firmer Trump aides, including Reince Priebus and Sean Spicer, but Hicks is the first current administration official to be grilled by the special counsel. The interview will take place after Trump returns from his scheduled trip to Asia.

“Nothing about recent events alters the White House’s commitment to fully cooperate with the office of the special counsel,” White House lawyer Ty Cobb told Politico.



seemslikeadream » Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:34 pm wrote:Low level staff committed crimes during Watergate that brought down the President of the United States. Just sayin'.


Liddy. Segretti. Papadapoulos.

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

Re: First Charges Filed in U.S. Special Counsel Mueller's Ru

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Oct 31, 2017 7:15 pm

YES! Hope!

Hoping for Hope......can't wait for that..no lying now Hope :naughty:

on second thought lie your butt off :evilgrin

it was Jamie Gorelick I was thinking of :)

can you imagine Nixon blaming McGovern for Watergate :P

times they are a changing


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: First Charges Filed in U.S. Special Counsel Mueller's Ru

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:26 pm

Image


Team Trump Indictments Suggest AG Jeff Sessions Could Be Facing Trouble:
'BradCast' 10/31/2017
Guest: Journalist Marcy Wheeler of Emptywheel; Also: Reporter Mike Stark violently arrested covering VA's GOP Gubernatorial candidate...

By BRAD FRIEDMAN on 10/31/2017, 6:05pm PT
To paraphrase an infamous tweet from the now-suspended Twitter account of long-time dirty trickster and Trump ally Roger Stone, it could soon be Attorney General Jeff Sessions' "time in the barrel", according to my guest on today's BradCast. [Audio link to show follows below.]

The Trump Administration and his supporters have been very busy today, working hard to downplay the Monday indictments unsealed by Special Counsel Robert Mueller against three campaign officials. Two of them, Paul Manafort and Rick Gates, pleaded not guilty. The other, George Papadopoulos, who pleaded guilty, has been quietly cooperating with prosecutors for several months. The Campaign's former foreign policy advisor, has since been dismissed by Team Trump as little more than a "low-level volunteer" and a "coffee boy" over the 24 hours since the indictments were unsealed, revealing that Papadopoulos was charged with lying to federal prosecutors about conversations he had had with an unnamed "professor" said to be tied to Russia and claiming that Moscow had "thousands of emails" revealing "dirt" on Hillary Clinton.

I'm joined today by investigative journalist MARCY WHEELER of Emptywheel to help separate partisan hope from partisan hype regarding Mueller's investigation. We focus on the Papadopoulos case specifically, discuss whether it reveals "collusion" with Russia (which both the Trump Administration and Russian officials strongly deny), and why she believes, as reported at The Intercept, that, more than anything, the specific charges in that case may signal very bad news for Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

We also discuss what we now know (and don't) about the email hacks, what Mueller may have gained by waiting until Monday to reveal the indictments (Hello, unqualified USDA nominee Sam Clovis! Sam who?), and whether it's possible --- or even likely --- that Papadopoulos may have been wearing a wire during conversations with Trump officials in the months since he agreed to cooperate with federal investigators.

"Papadopoulos plead guilty for lying. We don't know why he lied, and why everyone keeps lying," Wheeler observes, adding a note of caution for the many anti-Trumpers who have been giddy since "Mueller Monday". "There's some smoke there. There may well be fire. I just think that everyone who opposes Trump has to be very careful about screaming 'fire' before we have evidence of fire. We have a legal system to sort that out. And until Trump does something to fire Mueller, or in another way thwart the investigation, we should let the investigation do what our legal system is supposed to do."

Also covered on today's show...

Reporter Mike Stark of ShareBlue, who has been dogging Virginia's Republican Gubernatorial candidate Ed Gillsepsie with questions about his lobbying past in advance of the state's November 7 election next Tuesday, was violently arrested over the weekend. Stark appeared on The BradCast as our guest just last week. We've got details on what happened, including comment from Stark;
A new poll finds Americans very pessimistic about the current state of American democracy and politics (including the vast majority of those who lived through the Vietnam era.);
Desi Doyen joins us for the latest Green News Report with what suffices for some 'good news' updates out of Puerto Rico and much more;
And, we end with the breaking news late today of what New York officials are describing as a "terror" attack in lower Manhattan, after a pickup truck plowed into bicyclists, leaving 8 dead and 11 seriously injured as of the end of today's show...
Download MP3 or listen to complete show online below...


http://bradblog.com/audio/BradCast_Brad ... 103117.mp3



Grand Jury Docs Have Been Unsealed, and It’s Looking Even Worse for Manafort
by Elura Nanos | 4:22 pm, October 31st, 2017

The trial hasn’t even started yet, and already, things are going badly for Paul Manafort and Rick Gates. An October 2 Memorandum Opinion was unsealed yesterday, in which D.C. District Court Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell decided to compel grand jury testimony from a lawyer representing Manafort and Gates under the crime-fraud exception to attorney-client privilege. The Special Counsel’s Office (referred to as “SCO” throughout the document) sought to compel the testimony of Manafort and Gates’ lawyer (referred to as “the Witness”). Now we know that the grand jury proceedings culminated in indictments, and Judge Howell’s ruling on the this motion to compel testimony is more than a little foreshadowing. The Court’s opinion on this issue allows us to peek into the generally secret grand jury proceedings, and that peek isn’t looking so good for the defendants.

When the Special Counsel tried to get Manafort’s lawyer on the stand, it was met with a very predictable obstacle: attorney-client privilege. Usually, lawyers are not compelled (or even permitted) to testify against their own clients, and revealing attorney-client communications is usually a major ethical breach. Courts are very hesitant to pierce privileges, whether the privilege at hand is attorney-client, spousal, doctor-patient, or priest-penitent. And on the spectrum of privileges, attorney-client is perhaps the second-most sacrosanct (it’s tough to get even the most liberal judge to invade the confessional). Judges know that the practice of law in our adversarial system would be seriously disadvantaged if lawyers could be called upon to give testimony against their own clients.

However, privileges are not absolute; among other exceptions is the “crime-fraud” exception to attorney-client privilege. Under this exception when a privileged relationship is used to further a crime, fraud, or other misconduct, the lawyer doesn’t get to use that relationship as a shield. The concept is easy, but getting a court to agree to use the exception is pretty challenging. In this case, Mueller’s office would have had to prove that the lawyer in question made the communication with the intent to further an unlawful or fraudulent act, and that Manafort and Gates actually carried out the crime or fraud. In other words, the judge at the grand jury proceeding found that there was plenty of evidence that Manafort and Gates had committed crime or fraud. Sure, for purposes of compelling a witness to testify at the grand jury phase, there’s no requirement that the crime or fraud is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and the evidentiary rules are different than they’ll be at trial. But bottom line, a federal judge looked at the evidence available to her and found that the SCO had made a good case for guilt against Manafort and Gates. Not a good start for the former Trump advisers.

At this point, we don’t know exactly upon which evidence the court relied; however, we do know that at least some of that evidence hasn’t yet been seen by the defendants. The court’s Memorandum explained that the court had “approved the use of ‘in camera, ex parte proceedings to determine the propriety of a grand jury subpoena or the existence of a crime-fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege.’”After those in camera (privately, with the judge), ex parte proceedings (outside the presence of Manafort, Gates, and their counsel), Judge Howell specifically found:

“…witness testimony and documentary evidence to show that these statements are false, contain half-truths, or are misleading by omission…”

The court’s memorandum was heavily redacted, so at this point, it’s unclear which statements the judge meant, but this portion of the document sure sounds bad for the defendants:

“… the above statement is false, a half-truth, or at least misleading because evidence shows that Target 1 and Target 2 were intimately involved in significant outreach in the United States on behalf of the ECFMU, the Party of Regions and/or the Ukrainian government.”

Yeah, things can change at trial, but even at a preliminary phase, it’s not good for a judge to make a finding that you’re “intimately involved” in sinister foreign misdealings. Oh, and there was also this:

“Through its ex parte production of evidence, the SCO has clearly met its burden of making a prima facie showing that the crime-fraud exception applies by showing that the Targets were “engaged in or planning a criminal or fraudulent scheme when [they] sought the advice of counsel to further the scheme.”

Those seven little letters should strike fear in the hearts of Manafort, Gates, and their lawyers. The SCO hasn’t just met its burden – it’s done so clearly. Allow me to translate from judge-to-English: “You guys are screwed. Take a plea or watch everyone around you– even your own lawyers — go down.”

https://lawnewz.com/uncategorized/grand ... -manafort/



Allow me to translate from judge-to-English: “You guys are screwed. Take a plea or watch everyone around you– even your own lawyers — go down.”


Jeff Sessions may be in big trouble after George Papadopoulos’ guilty plea
According to the Department of Justice, Sessions was there when an aide said he had a path to Russia

20K1.6K301
CHARLIE MAY
10.31.2017•12:37 PM
The credibility of Attorney General Jeff Sessions has been called into serious question after the Justice Department unsealed a plea deal taken by a former foreign policy adviser to President Donald Trump's campaign.
The documents revealed that former adviser George Papadopoulos attended a "national security meeting in Washington D.C.," on March 31, 2016, along with Trump, Sessions and others. In that meeting, Papadopoulos "introduced himself," and explicitly stated "in sum and substance, that he had connections that could help arrange a meeting between then-candidate Trump and [Russian] President Putin."
Trump tweeted a picture of the meeting the day it occurred, and he, as well as Sessions, sat at opposite heads of the table. Papadopoulos is pictured to the left of Sessions in the middle of the table.


While both Trump and Sessions have repeatedly insisted there has been no collusion with the Russian government, Sessions has pledged this argument under oath. Sessions also led the foreign policy team of which Papadopoulos was part.
"I have never met with or had any conversation with any Russians or any foreign officials concerning any type of interference with any campaign or election in the United States," Sessions told the Senate Intelligence Committee in the opening statement of his second testimony on June 13. "Further, I have no knowledge of any such conversations by anyone connected to the Trump campaign."
If the Justice Department affidavit is true, and Sessions was in the room at the time Papadopoulos explained he wanted to arrange a meeting between Trump and Putin, there could potentially be a perjury case.
https://www.salon.com/2017/10/31/jeff-s ... ilty-plea/


Scott Dworkin‏Verified account
@funder
Follow Follow @funder
More
Fmr RNC staffer told me Trump’s asked about the resignation process—it’s the 4th person who’s told me this & WH hasn’t denied #TrumpResign
6:19 PM - 30 Oct 2017



The Papadopoulos plea has blindsided Republicans
By Jennifer Rubin October 31 at 5:47 PM

Opinion | Lessons from the Mueller charges? President Trump should be worried.

President Trump's troubles have only just begun with Special Counsel Robert Mueller's charges against former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort, his associate Rick Gates and former foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, says Washington Post editorial writer Quinta Jurecic. (Adriana Usero, Kate Woodsome/The Washington Post)
The Post reports that George Papadopoulos, who pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI, acted with the encouragement of the top policy person, Sam Clovis, on the campaign in the search for dirt on Hillary Clinton from Russians:

At one point, Papadopoulos emailed Clovis and other campaign officials about a March 24, 2016, meeting he had in London with a professor, who had introduced him to the Russian ambassador and a Russian woman he described as “Putin’s niece.” The group had talked about arranging a meeting “between us and the Russian leadership to discuss U.S.-Russia ties under President Trump,” Papadopoulos wrote. (Papadopoulos later learned that the woman was not Putin’s niece, and while he expected to meet the ambassador, he never did, according to filings.)

Clovis responded that he would “work it through the campaign,” adding, “great work,” according to court documents.

In August 2016, Clovis responded to efforts by Papadopoulos to organize an “off the record” meeting with Russian officials. “I would encourage you” and another foreign policy adviser to the campaign to “make the trip, if it is feasible,” Clovis wrote.

Clovis is now reportedly cooperating with special counsel Robert S. Mueller III. As my colleague Aaron Blake points out, Clovis’s excuse, provided by his lawyer, that he was being “polite,” makes no sense:

So basically, Clovis told someone to do something he opposed and was against campaign rules because he was only being a polite Midwesterner and he couldn’t technically prevent him from doing it. (As a Minnesotan, I’ll gladly try to use this excuse going forward.)

The strained explanation speaks to just how problematic this could be for Clovis. The campaign and the Trump transition team claimed over and over again that it had no contact with Russians during the campaign. Here we have a former Trump foreign policy aide actively setting up a potential meeting with the Russians, and Clovis giving him the thumbs-up. At one point, Papadopoulos specified that the meeting was requested by the Russian MFA (Ministry of Foreign Affairs), so there was no mistaking who was requesting the meeting.

Plainly, Papadopoulos doesn’t fit the Trump talking point that Mueller is somehow “proving” no connection between the campaign and the Russians, and Clovis’s involvement makes the entire talking point irrelevant. No matter how many times Sarah Huckabee Sanders insists there is no connection between the campaign and the Russians and that there is some unbridgeable gap between the actions of Papadopoulos, Paul Manafort and Rick Gates, the facts say otherwise. Trump insists Papadopoulos is “low level” and a “liar,” but he was on the campaign, as was Clovis, who was very high level.

In addition to Clovis, now-Attorney General Jeff Sessions, we noted, appears in the photo of the March 2016 meeting with Papadopoulos and Trump. “A picture is worth a thousand words, and it may take the attorney general that many to explain this one,” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) tells me. “Not only can’t Sessions get his story straight about contacts with Russia, but it is becoming harder for him to claim these contacts were inconsequential.”

Sessions not only was involved in the firing of FBI Director James B. Comey (when Trump said he had the Russia investigation in mind), but he also has at various times, when asked about his contact with or knowledge of Russian contacts, not brought up Papadopoulos. Sessions, in his confirmation hearing, denied having any contacts with Russians. When that proved not to be true, he revised his testimony. In June, he told the Judiciary Committee: “The suggestion that I participated in any collusion, that I was aware of any collusion with the Russian government, or hurt this country which I have served with honor for 35 years, or to undermine the integrity of our democratic process, is an appalling and detestable lie.”

However, the New York Times reports:

On March 31, back in Washington, Mr. Papadopoulos met Mr. Trump for the first time at a gathering of his new foreign policy team at the candidate’s Washington hotel. According to the former Trump adviser who was there, and who spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid offending former colleagues, Mr. Papadopoulos spoke for a few minutes about his Russian contacts and the prospects for a meeting with the Russian president.

But several people in the room began to raise questions about the wisdom of a meeting with Mr. Putin, noting that Russia was under sanctions from the United States. Jeff Sessions, now attorney general and then a senator from Alabama who was counseling Mr. Trump on national security, “shut George down,” the adviser said. “He said, ‘We’re not going to do it’ and he added, ‘I’d prefer that nobody speak about this again.’”

And yet Sessions recalled none of that in testimony under oath — in any of his explanations.

A final point on Russian contacts: Jared Kushner changed his clearance form no less than three times, which might also be viewed as an attempt to distance himself from Russia contacts. The Post in July reported:

Kushner, one of President Trump’s closest advisers, has filed three updates to his national security questionnaire since submitting it in mid-January, according to people familiar with the matter. That is significant because the document — known as an SF-86 — warns that those who submit false information could be charged with a federal crime and face up to five years in prison.

Prosecutions for filing erroneous SF-86 forms are rare — though the Justice Department has brought cases against those with intentional omissions, and people have been denied security clearance for incorrect forms, legal analysts said.

Under the microscope of Mueller’s investigation, the analysts said, Kushner’s mistakes might be viewed as evidence that Kushner met with Russian officials, then tried to keep anyone from finding out. His representatives contend that the omissions were honest errors that were corrected quickly.

So, you see, it wasn’t one low-level person having contact with Russians. It was also more senior advisers who either personally did have contact or had knowledge of others’ contacts. And yet they we all so reluctant to come clean. There’s plenty for Mueller to ponder.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ri ... f1d468f44f



Mueller's Team Worried That Paul Manafort And Rick Gates Would Flee Or Destroy Evidence

Prosecutors want a judge to impose "substantial" bail conditions on Manafort and Gates, arguing that they pose "serious" flight risks.

Posted on October 31, 2017, at 5:40 p.m.
Zoe Tillman

BuzzFeed News Reporter

Court documents unsealed on Tuesday show that special counsel Robert Mueller's team was worried that former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his deputy Rick Gates would flee or destroy evidence once they learned criminal charges were filed against them.

On Oct. 27, according to one of the newly unsealed documents, prosecutors asked a federal magistrate judge to keep the indictment returned against Manafort and Gates and other court records sealed until at least one of the men was in custody. A judge granted the request.

"Law enforcement believes that publicity resulting from disclosure of the Indictment and related materials on the public record will increase the defendants' incentive to flee and destroy (or tamper with) evidence," attorneys from Mueller's team wrote in a motion. "It is therefore essential that any information concerning the defendants' facing a pending indictment in this district be kept sealed for the time being."

Manafort and Gates self-surrendered on Monday. They face a 12-count indictment that includes charges of money laundering, failing to report overseas bank accounts, failing to register as lobbyists for foreign entities, and making false statements to the Justice Department.

On Monday, a redacted version of the indictment was unsealed and Manafort and Gates appeared in court at a public hearing, but the rest of the docket and court documents remained sealed. On Tuesday, the government asked that all records in the case be made public except for the unredacted indictment. The judge agreed.

In new court papers filed on Tuesday, the special counsel's office further explained why it believed that Manafort and Gates were, and continue to be, flight risks. The government will not ask that the two men be placed in jail while the criminal case goes forward, but instead want the judge to impose "substantial" bail conditions.

"The defendants pose a risk of flight based on the serious nature of the charges, their history of deceptive and misleading conduct, the potentially significant sentences the defendants face, the strong evidence of guilt, their significant financial resources, and their foreign connections," prosecutors wrote.

Manafort and Gates are under home confinement until their next court appearance, scheduled for Nov. 2. They were allowed to self-surrender on Monday on the condition that they surrender their passports once they learned about the warrants for their arrest and notify the FBI about their movements.

The special counsel's office wrote in Tuesday's filing that Manafort's financial assets were "substantial" but also difficult to precisely tally because he had listed varying information in financial documents. In August 2016, for instance, Manafort represented the value of his assets as being $63 million and $28 million in different documents, according to the government.

In arguing for steep bail conditions, the special counsel's office noted that Manafort and Gates have significant ties abroad, and connections to Ukrainian and Russian oligarchs who previously paid them millions of dollars.

"Foreign connections of this kind indicate that the defendants would have access to funds and an ability 'to live comfortably' abroad," prosecutors wrote.

In footnotes, prosecutors said Manafort earlier this year registered a phone and an email account under an alias, and had traveled overseas with the phone, and that he has three US passports with different numbers.

Lawyers for Manafort and Gates did not immediately return requests for comment.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/zoetillman/mue ... .drwQBlJBb
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: First Charges Filed in U.S. Special Counsel Mueller's Ru

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Nov 01, 2017 1:28 pm

Why Did Clovis Say Russia Was a Principal Focus of the Campaign?

By JOSH MARSHALL Published NOVEMBER 1, 2017 11:08 AM

Often when we are trying to understand a complex story it is the facts that we are most acclimated to that are most significant. Since they are familiar, they can hide in plain sight. With this in mind, I was particularly struck by a passage on page three of George Papadopoulos’s plea document.

The plea agreement narrative states that in early March 2016 Papadapoulos learned he would be a foreign policy advisor for Trump’s campaign. At the time he was living in London. “Based on a conversation that took place on or about March 6, 2016, with [Sam Clovis] Papadopolous understood that a principal foreign policy focus of the Campaign was an improved U.S. relationship with Russia.”

I’ve looked back over news accounts from late 2015 and the beginning of 2016. Russia had definitely come up as an issue with Trump. But it was primarily about Trump’s then-odd-sounding praise of Vladimir Putin and some positive comments Putin had made about Trump in return. At a conference in mid-December Putin had said: Trump “is a very flamboyant man, very talented, no doubt about that …. he is an absolute leader of the presidential race, as we see it today … He’s saying he wants to go to another level of relations – closer, deeper relations with Russia. How can we not welcome that? Of course we welcome that.”

But Trump didn’t seem to have much foreign policy at all, other than a focus on retrenchment and not fighting more wars in the Middle East. He talked a lot about bad trade deals. But bilateral trade isn’t a big issue with Russia. Again, Trump had little clearly expressed foreign policy at all. Indeed, that was the immediate trigger of putting together this list of policy advisors: to provide some explanation of who was advising him or that he had a foreign policy at all.

But at least according to this plea document, Clovis made clear that a rapprochement with Russia was “a principal foreign policy focus.” (True, President Obama came into office wanting a “reset” with Russia. But it was a secondary or even tertiary focus of his campaign and subsequent presidency.) This exchange happens a few weeks before Trump hires Paul Manafort. But he’d been pitching himself for a job with Trump in February. It’s around the time Mike Flynn is going from being a sometimes informal advisor to a clear member of the campaign team. Flynn was clearly interested in closer ties with Russia. He’d visited Moscow for that 10th Anniversary conference for RT, where he sat as a guest of honor of Vladimir Putin. Of course, as I and many others have noted, Trump himself had deep financial ties to investors and purchasers in the countries of the former Soviet Union as well.

We have a list of possibilities but no clear explanation. Sam Clovis, who’d signed on with Trump in late 2015, puts together this group and in his introductory chat with Papadopoulous tells him that a rapprochement with Russia is a top focus of the campaign. I suspect most people in early March, even reporters following the campaign closely, would have been highly surprised to hear this, notwithstanding Trump’s and Putin’s mix of chummy statements about each other. It wasn’t clear Trump really had any foreign policy at all. Again, that was part of the need to whip up this group. By early March he was clearly in a good position to become the nominee. People needed to know what his views were and who was advising him. So was this Clovis? Was it Clovis acting on Trump’s instructions? Was it Clovis trying to infer a policy agenda from Trump’s various public statements?

I don’t have a clear answer to this. But I’m sure anyone else does either, even though it’s so central.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/why ... e-campaign


The Message Mueller Sent With The Manafort-Papadopoulos Double Punch

By TIERNEY SNEED Published NOVEMBER 1, 2017 6:00 AM
7502Views
To those who were anticipating the indictment against former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort that became public Monday, the unexpected unsealing of a guilty plea from another Trump campaign aide a little more than an hour later was a major shock.

But Special Counsel Robert Mueller wasn’t just giving close observers of the case a bonus surprise on a day being touted on Twitter as #MuellerMonday. Mueller was sending a message — multiple messages in fact — former federal prosecutors tell TPM and the unsealed court filings themselves suggest.


“It was a really strong, powerful one-two punch, that shows that they’re serious about going after people who are critical to this whole investigation and that the Russian collusion is a real issue — you’ve got somebody who has already admitted to it,” Nick Akerman, a former federal prosecutor who worked on the Watergate investigation, told TPM.

It had long been reported that Mueller was interested in Manafort’s financial history not explicitly related to the 2016 campaign and that Manafort himself was expecting an indictment. So in that sense, the indictment released Monday lived up to expectations that it would zero in on shady financial activities not directly related to the campaign.

But it was not known until later in the day Monday that back in July another Trump campaign aide, George Papadopoulos, was arrested for lying to the FBI in January about his Russia contacts during the campaign. Papadopoulos admitted as part of his guilty plea earlier this month that he had communications that other Trump officials were aware of with Russia-tied figures. Papadopoulos has been cooperating with Mueller’s investigation since his arrest and has reached a plea agreement with prosecutors.

Together, the two cases – the indictment of Manafort along with his protege Rick Gates and the Papadopoulos plea agreement – operated as a carrot and a stick, according to Patrick Cotter, a former federal prosecutor who investigated organized crime for the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the Eastern District of New York.

The stick was “a very significant, very detailed, and, therefore, in many ways, more credible than the usual bare bones federal indictment on Manafort and Gates,” Cotter said — an indictment that could bring major jail time and huge fines.

The Papadopoulos plea deal was the “very yummy, yummy carrot,” Cotter said, “where you confess to obstruction of justice and perjury, and you will not do any jail time.”

Mueller’s message to the people he is approaching now, according to Cotter: “You can have the big nasty stick or this yummy carrot. But you don’t have a third choice.”

Key lines in the Manafort indictment suggested Mueller had additional evidence that was going to undercut Manafort’s defense. The Papadopoulos revelations signaled that Mueller had long been aware that Manafort was allegedly looped in on Papadopoulos’ communications with figures said to have been connected to the Kremlin.

The documents referenced an email Papadopoulos allegedly sent a “high ranking Campaign official” — identified by the Washington Post as Manafort — that flagged that Russia through Papadopoulos has been seeking to speak to Trump.

According to Randall Samborn, a spokesman for Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald’s Valerie Plame leak investigation, this shows Manafort and Gates that as significant as the government’s charges are against them in the first indictment, they may get even worse without their cooperation.

“If they’re in jeopardy on these charges alone, they have continued ongoing jeopardy for their involvement in the attempted collusion,” Samborn told TPM.

The Papadopoulos case also signals to those who have yet to be contacted by the Mueller probe that it’s in their interest to be honest, given that Mueller has access to some of the emails from the campaign. And if you have already spoken to Mueller’s team, they might already know if you had been dishonest.

“Now they know what they said may or may not have heightened the temperature around them,” Samborn said.

A key phrase in the case filings that jumped out to former federal prosecutors was a line describing Papadopoulos as a “proactive cooperator.”

Such language could refer to anything from Papadopoulos’ willingness to meet with investigators multiple times to go over documents to the possibility that he may have continued to talk to potential witnesses or even worn a wire, Cotter said.

The case file reveals there were two months between Papadopoulos’ arrest and when he pleaded guilty, and that it was another month before Mueller felt that he could unseal the documents without harming his investigation.

“People know who they are if they have talked to Papadopoulos since the end of July,” Akerman said. “They’re wondering, what did I say and how much did I say and did he tape record it.”

Finally, there was a more general message that Mueller, a longtime creature of Washington, was issuing, one that seemed aimed at the White House spin that was expected to come out of the Manafort indictment: that those charges predate the campaign, that they have nothing to do with Russian interference, and that they were beyond the scope of what Mueller was supposed to investigate.

“Mueller and his team were effectively able to blunt that potential criticism that they don’t have any Russian collusion charges to bring and that this is all they got,” Samborn said. By unsealing the Papadopoulos documents, “he clearly intended to send a message that the investigation of Russia collusion, they are not only laser focused on, but they are making laser progress.”
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/ ... ble-whammy


Convicted Trump Campaign Advisor Met Presidents of Cyprus, Greece & UAE

Convicted Trump Campaign advisor George Papadopoulos has been downplayed by the White House as a “liar” and insulted by Trump’s surrogates as a “coffee boy,” but in reality held meetings with three major heads of state, one coming years before the campaign on an island made famous for Russian money laundering.
The stunning news on Monday of his guilty plea and cooperation with Robert Mueller’s Special Counsel investigation has shaken Washington, D.C. after his numerous Russian contacts and attempts to set up a Trump/Putin meeting were revealed.
Greek news reports that Papadopoulos held a meeting with the President of Cyprus Nikos Anastasiadis in 2014, which was a prelude to energy business business in the region. Kathimerini reports: (via Google Translate)
George graduated in 2010 from the UCL in London where he studied Political Economy and began working at the Hudson Institute for Energy. His team was focused on relations between Cyprus, Greece and Israel and aimed to bring together ambassadors and key people from the three countries.
In this capacity, in 2014 he met with Cypriot President Nikos Anastasiadis. Correspondingly, contacts also took place in Israel: in 2015 he presented a study of the Institute in the Ministry of Energy. These contacts are believed to have played a role in opening the Noble Energy Company for the drilling of gas in the area.
Cyprus is one of the major tax havens — known for Russian money laundering — at the heart of the Paul Manafort indictments.
Current Trump Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross was the Vice Chairman of the Bank of Cyprus — before joining the federal government — an institution which hosted some of indicted ex-Trump Campaign manager Paul Manafort’s accounts, which raised a ‘red flag’ as far back as March.
The News in Cyprus also reported about Papadopoulos’ meeting with the island’s President shortly after his elevation to Trump Campaign foreign advisor, as well as his meeting with the Prime Minister of the UAE — the Gulf Arab, oil-exporting stat — which includes Dubai and Abu Dhabi.
“According to his LinkedIn profile, he has had meetings with President of Cyprus Nicos Anastasiades and the prime minister of the United Arab Emirates. ”
His Linkedin profile no longer mentions those meetings.
A longer companion story published to In Cyprus detailed how the Trump advisor’s political position of encouraging more Mediterranean gas exploration and exports might be at odds with the candidate’s “America First” platform, since the USA is a major source of gas and growing exporter.
Kathimerini reported that the President of Greece, Prokopis Pavlopoulos, along with two key leaders from the country’s right-wing political parties held meetings with George Papadopoulous. (via Google Translate)
He first meets with the President of the Republic, Prokopis Pavlopoulos. He even brought up a photo of his meeting on his personal website. He asks for direct contact with the Maximos Mansion but eventually manages to see Mr Kammenos, Mr Kotzias and later Mr Mitsotakis.
The ex-Trump Campaign advisor, who made news in Israel for his contacts with West Bank settlers and comments shortly made after inauguration, continued to say that despite pro-Turkey forces inside the President’s camp — which one could assume might be registered Turkish agent and disgraced former NSA Gen. Flynn — that Donald Trump had given him a ‘blank check’ to choose an administration role. Kathimerini reports: (via Google Translate)
He claimed to be planning a trip to [Trabab] in Greece, and after the elections insisted he had managed to remain in the circle of councilors “despite the war he had received from some who promoted Turkish positions.” Everybody said that [Trump] had given him a “[blank] check” to choose whatever role he wants in the government to be formed. Some of his interlocutors were skeptical of what he was saying, others more enthusiastic (Mr. Gammen after winning [Trump] had given, through Twitter,
Convicted Trump foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos lowered his profile as the campaign went on, only giving a single interview to the Russian news service Interfax — which appeared on September 30th in English and a few days later in Russian —where he opposed US sanctions against the Russian Federation.
The Democratic Coalition’s co-founder Scott Dworkin unearthed the Russian language Interfax story, which contained clues leading to the Greek language and Cypriot reporting on Papadopoulos, and the cover photo for this story.
“It’s clear he was more senior on the Trump Campaign and was there for longer than Trump admits,” says Dworkin, “and with his ties to Cyprus it would make sense he would have Russian ties too.” He continued:
“I think he was more than capable of setting up a meeting between Trump and Putin.”
In May 2016, George Papadopoulos’ statement to the UK’s Prime Minister David Cameron caught the attention of the Trump campaign, because he very publicly demanded an apology to Donald Trump for calling him “stupid, divisive and wrong.”
Trump Campaign official J.D. Gordon then instructed him to lower his public profile.
Papadopoulos’ multiple meetings with heads of state lends an air of reality to his written messages to Trump Campaign Co-Chairman Sam Clovis, of being able to arrange a meeting with Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump.
Rather, they paint the picture of an ambitious young man, whose connections to the Middle East’s political class are far greater than has been reported since his conviction was announced.
Sam Clovis testified about his role as Supervisor to George Papadopoulos the Special Counsel’s Grand Jury in Washington last week.
George Papadopoulos’ high-level meetings with heads of state prove that he was far more than a “coffee boy.”
https://thesternfacts.com/convicted-tru ... a6d405266a


CURIOUSER
The mysterious work of the Maltese professor identified in the FBI’s Russia probe

WRITTEN BY

Max de Haldevang
OBSESSION

"America First"
November 01, 2017
Joseph Mifsud is an enigma. The Maltese academic has admitted to The Daily Telegraph (paywall) that he is the mysterious professor at the center of Trump campaign advisor George Papadopoulos’s attempts to arrange a meeting between Donald Trump and Russian president Vladimir Putin. But he insists he has a “clear conscience” and fervently denies Papdopolous’s claim that he knew the “Russians had obtained ‘dirt’ on then-candidate Clinton.”
Mifsud has told the Washington Post (paywall) that he’d had “absolutely no contact with the Russian government,” and reiterated to the Daily Beast that, “I do not know anybody from the Russian government…I am an academic.”
That’s not quite true. Mifsud has had contact with multiple Russian officials, as Mother Jones has reported. He met the Russian ambassador to the UK, greeted a counsellor from the Russian embassy, invited a former Russian senator to his academy, and was listed (pdf, p.9) at a conference as having advised the Russian government on “international education issues.”
The idea that he could have tried to facilitate contacts with Russian officials is “not at all” far-fetched, says a former employee at the London Centre of International Law Practice (LCILP), where Mifsud held a senior role. “Everyone he’s dealt with is foreign ambassador of this country or that country.”
The London Centre of International Law Practice

LCILP headquarters
The LCILP’s office is an undecorated backroom in a handsome Georgian building in the heart of London’s legal district. (Max de Haldevang/Quartz)
The LCILP is a curious law firm. The same former employee told Quartz that “there was a lot of secrecy going on about what they do.” After several months there, the person said, “I hardly knew what kind of business they do.”
The source described the firm, which was founded in 2014, as constantly in search of, and seemingly never obtaining, big contracts. Mifsud’s role at LCILP was to bring in potential clients—ideally governments whom the company could advise on international law, the former employee said.
George Papadopoulos also spent three months at the company, before joining the Trump campaign. It’s not clear whether he and Mifsud connected through the firm. Papadopoulos and LCILP director Nagi Idris are friends on Facebook. Idris is a British national, originally from Sudan, and has been director of 18 companies at various times since 2001, according to Companies House filings.
Screen Shot 2017-10-31 at 10.32.07
LCILP didn’t respond to multiple phone and email requests for comment on this story. When a Quartz reporter visited LCILP’s headquarters inside a handsome Georgian building, he found that the office amounted to four people working in an undecorated backroom, all of whom declined to comment.
LCILP has paid rent in a series of highly prestigious locations in London’s legal district, despite ending 2016 with debts of £329,000 (pdf, p.4)—a considerable sum for a company with just a handful of employees.
Shortly after rumors about Mifsud’s connection to Russia and the Trump campaign began swirling on Oct. 30, his profile was removed from the website, along with those of all other members of staff. (They are still available in a cached format.) Mifsud’s profile lists an impressive number of geographical areas of expertise as Europe, USA, the Middle East, Africa, and Asia.
The external advisor, who was peripherally involved with the company, described the firm as “a good bunch of people.” Courtney Barklem, a human rights lawyer who had planned to do pro bono work for the firm but never found time, described them as “great.”
The London Academy of Diplomacy

Mifsud’s wide-ranging career (pdf) also includes a stint at Malta’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, presidency of the Euro-Mediterranean University, and directorship of the little-known London Academy of Diplomacy.
His role at the London Academy of Diplomacy is also unclear—as is the Academy itself (paywall). The Academy seems to have, at various points, been associated with the University of East Anglia, Loughborough University, and Stirling University (where, a spokesman confirmed, Mifsud has been a professorial teaching fellow since May).
Mifsud has been listed as both a director and honorary director of the institution. When Quartz phoned Loughborough University London to ask whether Mifsud was employed at its Academy of Diplomacy and International Governance, it was told there was no record of him in the university’s files.
In a 2014 conversation at the Valdai Club, a Russian think tank with close ties to the government at which Putin speaks every year, Mifsud foreshadowed a Trumpian sentiment, suggesting that the US would soon tire of its role as global policeman. “I don’t think that the US has the energy to continue with this. So the global security and economy needs partners and who is better in this than the Russian Federation,” he reportedly said, at a time when the Ukraine war was raging.
The following year, he observed Kazakhstan’s presidential election and said (link in Russian) that the election “actively corresponded to all norms.” President Nursultan Nazarbayev, who has ruled the country since the fall of the Soviet Union, won almost 98% of the vote. In contrast, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe described Kazakhstan’s election (pdf, p.1) as having “limited voter choice,” “stifled public debate” due to a “restricted media environment,” and “serious procedural deficiencies and irregularities.”


From court filing today it says Manafort & Gates had staff in Moscow, Russia—it also says Russian & Ukrainian oligarchs gave them millions.

Image

From court filing today it says Mueller’s team will be producing hundreds of thousands of documents against Manafort from the US & abroad.
Image

It says in this court doc Trump Advisor George Papadopolous “met with the Gov’t on numerous occasions TO PROVIDE INFO & answer questions.”
Image



VICTORIA TOENSING’S STORY ABOUT SAM CLOVIS’ GRAND JURY APPEARANCE

October 31, 2017/13 Comments/in 2016 Presidential Election, Mueller Probe /by emptywheel
In response to Monday’s server hiccups and in anticipation that Mueller is nowhere near done, we expanded our server capacity overnight. If you think you’ll rely on emptywheel reporting on the Mueller probe, please consider a donation to support the site.

Sam Clovis is the person in the George Papadopoulos plea who told Papadopoulos, just as Paul Manafort’s pro-Russian Ukrainian corruption was becoming a scandal, “‘I would encourage you’ and another foreign policy advisor to ‘make the trip[] [to Russia], if it is feasible.'”

Victoria Toensing is a right wing nutjob lawyer whose chief skill is lying to the press to spin partisan scandals.

Clovis has decided that Toensing can best represent him in the Russia investigation, which means in the wake of yesterday’s surprise plea deal announcement, a person with “first-hand” knowledge of Clovis’ actions decided to tell his side of the story to NBC. Significantly, securing Clovis’ testimony is one of the last things Mueller did before springing the Manafort indictment and unsealing Papadopoulos’ plea, meaning that’s one of the things he was building up towards.

Sam Clovis, the former top Trump campaign official who supervised a man now cooperating with the FBI’s Russia investigation, was questioned last week by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team and testified before the investigating grand jury, a person with first-hand knowledge of the matter told NBC News.

Before I go further, let me note that there are few people who can claim first-hand knowledge of “the matter:” the grand jury, which thus far hasn’t leaked, Mueller’s team, which has shown a remarkable ability to keep secrets, or Clovis or Toensing.

Which is to say this story is likely Toensing and Toensing.

Much later in the article, a person with the same kind of knowledge also confirmed Clovis’ very helpful SSCI testimony.

Clovis was also interviewed recently by the Senate Intelligence Committee, according to a source with direct knowledge.

Thus far Clovis looks very cooperative, huh, per this person who knows what he has been doing?

Having placed Clovis at the grand jury last week, Toensing says she won’t comment on the one thing she can’t directly comment on — what went on there.

His lawyer, Victoria Toensing, would neither confirm nor deny his interactions with the Mueller team.

“I’m not going to get into that,” she said in an interview.

But Toensing does confirm that Clovis is the guy who supported Papadopoulos’ trip to Russia, which she would only know from having prepped his testimony or learned what he was asked in the grand jury.

Toensing confirmed that Clovis was the campaign supervisor in the emails.

She then presents what must be the story he told to explain why emails show him endorsing a trip to Russia even as it became clear why that was a bad idea.

In a statement, Toensing’s office said Clovis set up a “national security advisory committee” in the Trump campaign that included Papadopoulos, “who attended one meeting and was never otherwise approached by the campaign for consultation.”

[snip]

In the statement, Toensing said the Trump campaign had a strict rule prohibiting travel abroad on behalf of the campaign, and but that Clovis would have had no authority to stop Papadopoulos from traveling in his personal capacity.

To be fair, this story doesn’t directly conflict with Papadopoulos’ (though Toensing’s earlier story, that as a midwestern “gentleman,” Clovis would have been unable to tell Papadopoulos no, does conflict — this is probably an attempt, perhaps post-consultation with her client, to clean that up).

But it does adopt a line that permits the possibility Papadopolous did (make plans to) travel to Russia, but that it was all freelancing (remarkably like Carter Page’s trip to Russia was).

That is, this is the story (or close to it) that Clovis told the grand jury last week, before he learned that Papadopoulos had beat him to the punch and told a different (but still not fully public) story.

Now, I’m guessing that all the other people named in the Papadopoulos plea have also already had whatever shot they’ll get to tell the truth to the grand jury, but in case they haven’t, they can now coordinate with what Clovis said, which is surely part of the point.

But I’d also suggest that Mueller would be sure to get the testimony of everyone who might try to lie before he unsealed the Papadopoulos plea, so they have to start considering fixing their testimony.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2017/10/31/v ... ppearance/
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: First Charges Filed in U.S. Special Counsel Mueller's Ru

Postby stillrobertpaulsen » Wed Nov 01, 2017 3:28 pm

“You Can’t Go Any Lower”: Inside the West Wing, Trump Is Apoplectic as Allies Fear Impeachment
After Monday’s indictments, the president blamed Jared Kushner in a call to Steve Bannon, while others are urging him to take off the gloves with Robert Mueller.

by Gabriel Sherman
November 1, 2017 1:08 pm

Image
US President Donald Trump speaks alongside his daughter, Ivanka Trump (L) and her husband, Senior White House Adviser Jared Kushner (R) during a Cabinet Meeting in the Cabinet Room of the White House in Washington, DC, October 16, 2017.
By SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images.


Until now, Robert Mueller has haunted Donald Trump’s White House as a hovering, mostly unseen menace. But by securing indictments of Paul Manafort and Rick Gates, and a surprise guilty plea from foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, Mueller announced loudly that the Russia investigation poses an existential threat to the president. “Here’s what Manafort’s indictment tells me: Mueller is going to go over every financial dealing of Jared Kushner and the Trump Organization,” said former Trump campaign aide Sam Nunberg. “Trump is at 33 percent in Gallup. You can’t go any lower. He’s fucked.”

The first charges in the Mueller probe have kindled talk of what the endgame for Trump looks like, according to conversations with a half-dozen advisers and friends of the president. For the first time since the investigation began, the prospect of impeachment is being considered as a realistic outcome and not just a liberal fever dream. According to a source, advisers in the West Wing are on edge and doing whatever they can not to be ensnared. One person close to Dina Powell and Gary Cohn said they’re making sure to leave rooms if the subject of Russia comes up.

The consensus among the advisers I spoke to is that Trump faces few good options to thwart Mueller. For one, firing Mueller would cross a red line, analogous to Nixon’s firing of Archibald Cox during Watergate, pushing establishment Republicans to entertain the possibility of impeachment. “His options are limited, and his instinct is to come out swinging, which won’t help things,” said a prominent Republican close to the White House.

Trump, meanwhile, has reacted to the deteriorating situation by lashing out on Twitter and venting in private to friends. He’s frustrated that the investigation seems to have no end in sight. “Trump wants to be critical of Mueller,” one person who’s been briefed on Trump’s thinking says. “He thinks it’s unfair criticism. Clinton hasn’t gotten anything like this. And what about Tony Podesta? Trump is like, When is that going to end?” According to two sources, Trump has complained to advisers about his legal team for letting the Mueller probe progress this far. Speaking to Steve Bannon on Tuesday, Trump blamed Jared Kushner for his role in decisions, specifically the firings of Mike Flynn and James Comey, that led to Mueller’s appointment, according to a source briefed on the call. When Roger Stone recently told Trump that Kushner was giving him bad political advice, Trump agreed, according to someone familiar with the conversation. “Jared is the worst political adviser in the White House in modern history,” Nunberg said. “I’m only saying publicly what everyone says behind the scenes at Fox News, in conservative media, and the Senate and Congress.” (The White House didn’t respond to a request for comment by deadline.)

As Mueller moves to interview West Wing aides in the coming days, advisers are lobbying for Trump to consider a range of stratagems to neutralize Mueller, from conciliation to a declaration of all-out war. One Republican explained Trump’s best chance for survival is to get his poll numbers up. Trump’s lawyer Ty Cobb has been advocating the view that playing ball will lead to a quick resolution (Cobb did not respond to a request for comment). But these soft-power approaches are being criticized by Trump allies including Steve Bannon and Roger Stone, who both believe establishment Republicans are waiting for a chance to impeach Trump. “The establishment has proven time and time again they will fuck Trump over,” a Bannon ally told me.

In a series of phone calls with Trump on Monday and Tuesday, Bannon told the president to shake up the legal team by installing an aggressive lawyer above Cobb, according to two sources briefed on the call. Bannon has also discussed ways to pressure Congress to defund Mueller’s investigation or limit its scope. “Mueller shouldn’t be allowed to be a clean shot on goal,” a Bannon confidant told me. “He must be contested and checked. Right now he has unchecked power.”

Bannon’s sense of urgency is being fueled by his belief that Trump’s hold on power is slipping. The collapse of Obamacare repeal, and the dimming chances that tax reform will pass soon—many Trump allies are deeply pessimistic about its prospects—have created the political climate for establishment Republicans to turn on Trump. Two weeks ago, according to a source, Bannon did a spitball analysis of the Cabinet to see which members would remain loyal to Trump in the event the 25th Amendment were invoked, thereby triggering a vote to remove the president from office. Bannon recently told people he’s not sure if Trump would survive such a vote. “One thing Steve wants Trump to do is take this more seriously,” the Bannon confidant told me. “Stop joking around. Stop tweeting.”

Roger Stone believes defunding Mueller isn’t enough. Instead, Stone wants Trump to call for a special prosecutor to investigate Hillary Clinton’s role in approving the controversial Uranium One deal that’s been a locus of rightwing hysteria (the transaction involved a Russian state-owned energy firm acquiring a Canadian mining company that controlled 20 percent of the uranium in the United States). It’s a bit of a bank shot, but as Stone described it, a special prosecutor looking into Uranium One would also have to investigate the F.B.I.’s role in approving the deal, thereby making Mueller—who was in charge of the bureau at the time—a target. Stone’s choice for a special prosecutor: Rudy Giuliani law colleague Marc Mukasey or Fox News pundit Andrew Napolitano. “You would immediately have to inform Mueller, Comey, and [Deputy Attorney General] Rod Rosenstein that they are under federal investigation,” Stone said. “Trump can’t afford to fire Mueller politically. But this pushes him aside.”
"Huey Long once said, “Fascism will come to America in the name of anti-fascism.” I'm afraid, based on my own experience, that fascism will come to America in the name of national security."
-Jim Garrison 1967
User avatar
stillrobertpaulsen
 
Posts: 2414
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:43 pm
Location: California
Blog: View Blog (37)

Re: First Charges Filed in U.S. Special Counsel Mueller's Ru

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Nov 01, 2017 3:37 pm

Rudy Giuliani law colleague Marc Mukasey...why not just go for Alex Jones or Sean Hannity!


:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


It's hard work being a traitor...it messes with your mind
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: First Charges Filed in U.S. Special Counsel Mueller's Ru

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Nov 01, 2017 6:43 pm

Hidden bombshell in Papadopoulos’ plea indicates Trump’s role may soon take center stage

JUDD LEGUM
9 hours ago


Since special counsel Robert Mueller unsealed two indictments and a guilty plea against three Trump campaign advisers on Monday, the White House has had one strategic imperative: Keep this burgeoning scandal away from President Trump.

The White House’s basic argument is that the legal action has nothing to do with the president or the campaign. But if the charge involves campaign activity, as is the case with the guilty plea of George Papadopoulos, the argument is that Trump knew nothing about it.

Trump himself made this argument at a press conference on February 16.

“I was hoping we could get a yes or no answer on one of these questions involving Russia,” a reporter asked Trump. “Can you say whether you are aware that anyone who advised your campaign had contacts with Russia during the course of the election?”


Trump first responded that General Michael Flynn, an adviser to the campaign who briefly served as national security adviser, had contacts with Russia — without specifying whether they occurred during the election.

The reporter pressed Trump as to whether he knew of any campaign aides who had contacts “during the election.”

“Nobody that I know of,” Trump replied.



Until Monday, there was no evidence that Trump knew about any campaign contacts with Russians or their intermediaries.


In July, we learned about a June 2016 meeting between Donald Trump Jr., campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Jared Kushner, and several Russians who had promised Trump Jr. damaging information on Hillary Clinton. Trump claimed he knew nothing about the meeting.

“The President was not aware of, and did not attend, the meeting,” a spokesman for Trump’s legal team said at the time.

But tucked away in the guilty plea of George Papadopoulos is a piece of information that undermines Trump’s February statement and draws him more directly into the scandal.

According to Papadopoulos, when he attended a March 31, 2016 campaign national security meeting he told the small group, which included President Trump, that he had ongoing communications with Russians that would allow him to facilitate a meeting between Trump and Vladimir Putin.

9. On or about March 31, 2016, defendant PAPADOPOULOS attended a “national security meeting” in Washington, D.C., with then-candidate Trump and other foreign policy advisors for the Campaign. When defendant PAPADOPOULOS introduced himself to the group, he stated, in sum and substance, that he had connections that could help arrange a meeting between then-candidate Trump and President Putin.

The New York Times reports that “Mr. Trump listened with interest and asked questions of Mr. Papadopoulos” as he laid out his proposal. In the end Trump “didn’t say yes, and he didn’t say no,” and Papadopoulos continued to try to broker a meeting.

The detail that Trump attended the meeting was not essential to include in the guilty plea but Mueller chose to include it. Significantly, it suggests that Trump is not being honest about what he knew about his campaign’s engagement with Russia. This is a string that Mueller will likely continue to pull. It could mean that, as the investigation develops, Trump himself may become a more central figure.
https://thinkprogress.org/the-hidden-bo ... 200ac/amp/



BUSTED: Evidence mounts that Jeff Sessions perjured himself under Al Franken questioning

4 hours ago

Sen. Al Franken and Attorney General Jeff Sessions (C-SPAN)

Attorney General Jeff Sessions is suddenly facing an active dilemma.

A guilty plea signed last month by one of his former Trump campaign underlings revealed this week shows he likely perjured himself during his confirmation hearing — and he doesn’t have a good option to wriggle out of it.

Sessions told Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) at the January hearing that he was “not aware” of evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government during the campaign, according to the New Republic.

He walked back those claims last month during another Senate hearing, telling Franken he “conducted no improper discussions with Russians at any time regarding the campaign or any other item facing this country.”

But court filings, and a new CNN report, show he was aware of evidence that at least one campaign associate was in contact with Russia.

George Papadopoulos, who served on the foreign policy advisory committee that Sessions oversaw, pleaded guilty Oct. 5 to lying to FBI agents in January and February.

The guilty plea Papadopoulos signed shows the campaign adviser communicated with Russians promising stolen campaign information on Hillary Clinton, and he tried repeatedly to set up meetings between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Papadopoulos told other committee members, and Trump himself, about his contacts with Russia during a March 31, 2016, meeting — and proposed arranging for the Republican candidate to meet with Russian president Vladimir Putin.

According to a CNN report Wednesday, Trump “didn’t say yes and he didn’t say no.”

But Sessions, then an Alabama senator and chairman of his national security team, shut down the proposal, according to one person present for the meeting and confirmed by another source.

The guilty plea shows Papadopoulos continued trying to arrange a meeting between campaign officials and Russia until at least August 2016.

J.D. Gordon, a former Pentagon spokesman and Trump campaign national security adviser who attended the meeting, told CNN that Papadopoulos “obviously went to great lengths to go around me and Sen. Sessions.”

There’s no evidence at this point to contradict Gordon’s claim — but the new revelations still leave Sessions in a position where he’s damned if he does, and damned if he doesn’t.

“The good news for Sessions is that he can plausibly claim to have opposed any Russian collusion,” writes the New Republic‘s Jeet Heer. “The bad news is that, in making those claims, he opens himself up to charges of perjury.”

https://www.rawstory.com/2017/11/busted ... oning/amp/
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: First Charges Filed in U.S. Special Counsel Mueller's Ru

Postby SonicG » Wed Nov 01, 2017 8:26 pm

In addition to the Veselnitskaya meeting, I really think it is all about that Mayflower Hotel speech:
April 27, 2016: In a major foreign policy speech at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C., Trump indicates a willingness to work with Russia and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"I believe an easing of tensions, and improved relations with Russia from a position of strength only, is possible, absolutely possible," he said. "Common sense says this cycle, this horrible cycle of hostility must end and ideally will end soon. Good for both countries. Some say the Russians won't be reasonable. I intend to find out."

Sergey Kislyak, then the Russian ambassador to the U.S., was sitting in the front row, according to a report by Radio Free Europe.

On this same day, Papadopoulos separately emails a "senior policy advisor" and a "high-ranking" campaign official, both unnamed in legal filings. He told the adviser he had "some interesting messages coming in from Moscow about a trip when the time is right." He told the campaign official that he had been receiving "a lot of calls" about Putin wanting to host Trump and his team.
"a poiminint tidal wave in a notion of dynamite"
User avatar
SonicG
 
Posts: 1286
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 7:29 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: First Charges Filed in U.S. Special Counsel Mueller's Ru

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Nov 01, 2017 8:44 pm


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQfQ0DP8LQs

President Donald Trump’s former campaign chair Paul Manafort and his former business associate Rick Gates surrendered to the FBI, after being indicted on charges that include money laundering, acting as unregistered agents of Ukraine’s former pro-Russian government and conspiracy against the United States. The White House said the indictments have nothing to do with the president’s 2016 campaign. However, Trump stopped tweeting yesterday after his former campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. We speak with Marcy Wheeler, who in a new piece writes, “George Papadopoulos’s Indictment is Very, Very Bad News for Attorney General Jeff Sessions.”

Transcript
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: President Donald Trump’s former campaign chair, Paul Manafort, and Manafort’s former business associate, Rick Gates, surrendered to authorities Monday morning, after a federal grand jury handed down the first indictments in special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 presidential election. Manafort and Gates pleaded not guilty to all charges filed against them in a 12-count indictment, which included money laundering, acting as unregistered agents of Ukraine’s former pro-Russian government and conspiracy against the United States. Authorities also announced a third former Trump adviser, George Papadopoulos, had pleaded guilty in early October to lying to the FBI. White House spokesperson Sarah Sanders said Monday the indictments have nothing to do with the president’s campaign or campaign activities.

PRESS SECRETARY SARAH HUCKABEE SANDERS: The real collusion scandal, as we’ve said several times before, has everything to do with the Clinton campaign, Fusion GPS and Russia. There’s clear evidence of the Clinton campaign colluding with Russian intelligence to spread disinformation and smear the president to influence the election. We’ve been saying from day one, there’s been no evidence of Trump-Russia collusion. And nothing in the indictment today changes that at all.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: President Trump responded to news of the indictments on Twitter by lashing out against his former campaign rival, Hillary Clinton, and the Democratic Party. He wrote, quote, “Sorry, but this is years ago, before Paul Manafort was part of the Trump campaign. But why aren’t Crooked Hillary & the Dems the focus? ....Also, there is NO COLLUSION!” The president’s tweets came before news broke of George Papadopoulos’s indictment, and Trump has not tweeted since then. Meanwhile, Democratic leaders warned the White House against firing special counsel Mueller. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement, quote, “Congress must respond swiftly and unequivocally in a bipartisan way to assure that the investigation will continues,” end of quote.

AMY GOODMAN: Manafort’s bail was set at $10 million, Gates’ set at $5 million. They’ve both been placed under house arrest.

Meanwhile, observers are closely watching the case against George Papadopoulos, an early foreign policy adviser to Trump’s 2016 campaign, who may provide greater evidence of possible collusion between the Russian government and the Trump campaign. According to his plea deal, Papadopoulos was told that the Russians had dirt on Hillary Clinton, and through a series of communications with foreign agents, he tried to facilitate communication between the Trump campaign and Russian agents. Papadopoulos was arrested in July 2017, has been cooperating with federal authorities since then, striking a plea deal earlier this month. The plea deal was just announced, after the indictments against Manafort and Gates.

For more, we’re joined by Marcy Wheeler in Michigan, an independent journalist who covers national security and civil liberties. She runs the website EmptyWheel.net. And her new piece for The Intercept is headlined “George Papadopoulos’s Indictment is Very, Very Bad News for Attorney General Jeff Sessions.”

Marcy, welcome back to Democracy Now! Well, why don’t you start with the indictments against the chairman of Donald Trump’s campaign, Manafort, and Manafort’s business executive, Gates? Talk about their significance and whether they relate to collusion.

MARCY WHEELER: Well, they’re designed to get them to flip. So, in other words, Mueller has been targeting Manafort for quite some time. I think Gates was actually a bit surprised that he was indicted yesterday. And what he has done is charge them with crimes that are fairly controllable—I mean, they don’t involve colluding with a foreign—you know, with Russia, for example—such that they will be enticed to make a plea deal, just as Papadopoulos did, and provide more information about what Mueller is really investigating, which is whether or not the Trump campaign, for example, was trying to work with Russian agents on June 9th, 2016, when they agreed to take a meeting to find dirt on Hillary Clinton.

So, it’s mostly garden-variety money laundering, although fairly spectacular garden-variety money laundering. Manafort was charged of laundering a million dollars through the local antique rug shop. There’s also a scheme going back to 2012 where Manafort and Gates were both pretending not to be lobbying on whether or not Ukraine was democratic and pro-EU, and getting, incidentally, Tony Podesta, John Podesta—Hillary Clinton’s campaign adviser’s brother—to lobby on his behalf, while hiding that they were actually lobbying. And that’s the big thing that gets Gates. But again, the idea is to get them to make a plea deal so that then Mueller can get them to provide more evidence on the case in chief, on the way in which the Trump administration—the Trump campaign was trying to reach out to the Russians.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Marcy Wheeler, the issue of Gates also being indicted? And as you have pointed out in some of your articles, Manafort was only a chair of the campaign for a short period of time in 2016, but Gates stayed on and actually was involved in the Trump campaign even through the inauguration, his inauguration as president. The significance of Gates being included in this indictment?

MARCY WHEELER: Well, I made a joke this morning. Mueller’s deputy, Andrew Weissmann, is fairly well known for indicting the target and the target’s family member. Manafort has had some marital problems recently, so I joked this morning that rather than indicting Manafort’s wife, who legitimately could have been tied to some of these, because her name is on the business, as well, he instead indicted Manafort’s long-term business partner, Gates, to make him feel like he was dragging somebody else into the dirt.

And so—but you’re right. Gates—in the Papadopoulos plea deal, there is an interchange between Manafort and Gates pertaining to whether or not the campaign was going to try and set up a meeting with Vladimir Putin. And Gates will have been in a lot of these conversations all the way through the inauguration, so he knows some stuff that—Manafort was ousted in August, although he’s stayed close to Trump and has—you know, was speaking to Trump as recently as February. But Gates was there in the White House as part of the transition, and so will have dirt of his own to deal with, with special counsel Mueller.

AMY GOODMAN: So let’s talk about George Papadopoulos and the significance here. He was what? Arrested the day after Manafort’s house was raided. He pled guilty October 5th, but it was only announced yesterday. Trump tweeted, you know, after Manafort, Gates indictments, this shows no collusion, which he was right about, with Manafort and Gates. This was before—right?—they worked for him. But when the Papadopoulos plea deal was announced, Trump stopped tweeting altogether and then went to lunch with Jeff Sessions, his attorney general. So, talk about George Papadopoulos, Jeff Sessions and the significance of what Papadopoulos knows.

MARCY WHEELER: So, Papadopoulos was living in London. He was basically—it’s quite clear from the plea, he was being courted by Russian handlers, by three different Russian handlers, to set up a meeting. They wanted to set up a meeting between Putin and Trump. And as the summer went on, Papadopoulos and Manafort were going to be the ones who went for the meeting. As I said, there is a footnote in the plea that shows Manafort talking to Gates and saying, “We need to avoid kind of making it clear that we’re kind of cozying up to the Russians here.”

So, the other really important thing, which isn’t really in the plea agreement but we know is part of the discussions that Papadopoulos has been having since July with Mueller’s people, and that is that he was accused of lying about whether—about what he took this reference from the Russians to mean, that they had dirt on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails. And it is clear that they have accused him of lying about when he learned about that, but the rest is kind of silent, which is the beauty of this plea agreement, because it’s designed to get everyone panicking because they don’t know what Papadopoulos has said. But the suggestion there is that by April—actually, three days before the DNC realized that they were being hacked by the Russians—Papadopoulos knew that the Russians had thousands of Hillary emails that they were seeking to drop as dirt, as oppo, for this campaign. And it was very clear that he kept in touch with everyone else on the campaign.

So, in addition to Manafort and Gates, who aren’t named but we know from other reporting that they’re included, Corey Lewandowski, who was also a campaign chair and remained on the campaign, a guy by the name of Sam Clovis, who has a confirmation hearing coming up on November 9th for the Ag Department. And then, most importantly, on March 31, Papadopoulos was in a meeting—there’s a picture of this—with both—with a bunch of foreign policy advisers, but it includes Jeff Sessions, now the attorney general, and Trump. And at that meeting, he said, “My job is to set up a meeting with Vladimir Putin.” And as you said, Trump got really silent yesterday after this was released. But Sanders was saying, “Well, you know, Trump doesn’t remember Russia coming up in that meeting.” Sessions hasn’t said anything about it. But the point I made yesterday is that in testimony on the 18th, Sessions said he knew nothing about any campaign surrogates talking to Russians. Now we know he was in a meeting where he heard about a meeting with Vladimir Putin. So, his sworn testimony from two weeks ago seems, as always is the case with Attorney General Sessions, seems to be no longer operative and proven yet again to be untrue.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Marcy Wheeler, I think that—isn’t the Times reporting today that at one of these meetings, that Sessions especially said that this kind of meeting would not happen between—certainly, between the candidate himself and any Russian leaders? So, clearly, he had to have some knowledge of what was the information that Papadopoulos was gathering beforehand.

MARCY WHEELER: Right. At the very beginning of their discussions about foreign policy—and this is, again, quite clear from the plea agreement, the Papadopoulos plea agreement—that a priority for the Trump campaign was to make friends with Russia. And at this meeting—and again, there’s a picture floating out there with like eight different campaign people and the president, the now president. At that meeting, Papadopoulos said, “My job is to go set up a meeting between you, Donald Trump, and Vladimir Putin. And Vladimir Putin is very much looking forward to that.”

And the important point about that is, from March on—right? March, there’s that meeting. April, Papadopoulos learns about the email. That really influences the mindset of everybody who was in that June 9th, 2016, meeting with a Russian lawyer and a bunch of other Russians, where they offered dirt on Hillary Clinton, because we know that at least one person on the campaign, and probably a lot more, knew two months earlier that the dirt was not political donations going back years, but, instead, emails that were stolen from Hillary Clinton. So that really changes the mindset, particularly for Paul Manafort—right?—because he would have been in the loop, and he was in that June 9th meeting. That would change the mindset of what everyone who took that June 9th meeting was doing.

AMY GOODMAN: So, this indictment is called “Indictment (B),” right? So, who is “Indictment (A)”?

MARCY WHEELER: We have no idea. The docket just chronologically before the Manafort-Gates docket is also sealed. So it is possible somebody else got indicted. And given that we don’t know about it, if that is the case, then that person may be cooperating. It could actually be Tony Podesta. As I said, John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign adviser, he stepped down from his own influence-peddling firm, or lobbyist firm, as they’re called, but they’re both—I mean, he’s just as—he’s kind of the Democratic sleazy counterpart of Paul Manafort. So he stepped down because of this corruption. He has been named a subject in the investigation, so it’s not outside the realm of possibility that he was also charged. There’s this funny thing about these indictments yesterday, where Manafort’s lawyer actually said, “How dare the special counsel prosecute somebody for violating the Foreign Agents Registration Act?” because it hasn’t been treated as a law for a very long time in D.C. And I think—on top of everything else, I think a lot of lobbyists in D.C. are going to start admitting the kind of sleazy influence peddling they’ve been doing, because now Robert Mueller is going after it. So, Tony Podesta is an outside possibility for that.

Another possibility is Mike Flynn, because the charges that he would be offered as a first indictment to get him to flip are all the same ones that Manafort would be, that he hadn’t registered as a foreign agent both for Turkey and for Russia, and that he hadn’t disclosed all of his income on his taxes. So, it’s possible. We don’t know. You know, hopefully we’ll find out. But again, what happened yesterday was, by design, intended to get the people who are named in the Papadopoulos plea and everybody else who knows that they’ve been in conversations with these people to start panicking, to start thinking more seriously.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Marcy Wheeler, I wanted to ask you about one other aspect of what happened yesterday, the civil forfeiture attempts by the federal government against Manafort. What’s the significance of that, going after his assets, as well?

MARCY WHEELER: Plus the $10 million bail, right. So, there were millions—I think $18 million—of money-laundered funds brought into the United States. There’s the rugs. There’s the suits. And all of that—because it is the fruits of the crimes alleged in the indictment, all of that is now forfeitable, including a number of homes, not all of them. But what that serves to do is basically bankrupt Manafort, who is already known to be in a significant amount of debt. So, it makes—I mean, he’s already paid millions to his lawyers. It makes it a lot harder for him to mount a defense, because he no longer has any liquid assets to pay lawyers out of. And that’s the kind of—I mean, this is an object lesson for everyone else, that says, “Plea early, or you’re going to be in much worse straits, because you’re not going to have the money, and the charges are going to start getting worse, and it’s going to be—you know, it’s going to get increasingly difficult to get yourself out of the pinch.”

AMY GOODMAN: Marcy Wheeler, 10 seconds, did anything shock you yesterday?

MARCY WHEELER: No. But I think everyone in D.C. was surprised that Mueller was able to get this guy to take a plea agreement on October 5th and keep it silent 'til now. So what shocked me is just how well he's keeping secrets.

AMY GOODMAN: Marcy Wheeler, thanks so much for being with us, independent journalist who covers national security and civil liberties issues, runs the website EmptyWheel.net. Her new piece is for The Intercept; it’s headlined, and we’ll link to it, “George Papadopoulos’s Indictment is Very, Very Bad News for Attorney General Jeff Sessions.”
https://www.democracynow.org/2017/10/31 ... _in_russia
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: First Charges Filed in U.S. Special Counsel Mueller's Ru

Postby seemslikeadream » Wed Nov 01, 2017 9:45 pm

Hackers Compromised the Trump Organization 4 Years Ago—and the Company Never Noticed
The perpetrators have possible ties to Russia.
DAVID CORN AND AJ VICENS

NOV. 1, 2017 9:01 PM


Four years ago, the Trump Organization experienced a major cyber breach that could have allowed the perpetrator (or perpetrators) to mount malware attacks from the company’s web domains and may have enabled the intruders to gain access to the company’s computer network. Up until this week, this penetration had gone undetected by President Donald Trump’s company, according to several internet security researchers.

In 2013, a hacker (or hackers) apparently obtained access to the Trump Organization’s domain registration account and created at least 250 website subdomains that cybersecurity experts refer to as “shadow” subdomains. Each one of these shadow Trump subdomains pointed to a Russian IP address, meaning that they were hosted at these Russian addresses. (Every website domain is associated with one or more IP addresses. These addresses allow the internet to find the server that hosts the website. Authentic Trump Organization domains point to IP addresses that are hosted in the United States or countries where the company operates.) The creation of these shadow subdomains within the Trump Organization network was visible in the publicly available records of the company’s domains.

Here is a list of a shadow Trump Organization subdomains.

The subdomains and their associated Russian IP addresses have repeatedly been linked to possible malware campaigns, having been flagged in well-known research databases as potentially associated with malware. The vast majority of the shadow subdomains remained active until this week, indicating that the Trump Organization had taken no steps to disable them. This suggests that the company for the past four years was unaware of the breach. Had the infiltration been caught by the Trump Organization, the firm should have immediately decommissioned the shadow subdomains, according to cybersecurity experts contacted by Mother Jones.

“Any basic security audit would show the existence of these subdomains, and what servers they’re leading to. This is sloppy at best, and potentially criminally negligent at worst, depending on the traffic that is being run through these servers.”
The existence of these shadow subdomains suggests a possible security compromise within Trump’s business network that created the potential for unknown actors—using these Trump Organization subdomains—to launch attacks that could trick computer users anywhere into handing over sensitive information and unknowingly allow the attackers access to their computers and network. In fact, the IP addresses associated with the fake subdomains are linked to an IP address for at least one domain previously used by hackers to deploy malware known as an “exploit kit,” which can allow an attacker to gain a computer user’s passwords and logins or to take over another computer and gain access to the files within it.

Two weeks ago, a computer security expert, who wishes to remain unidentified, contacted Mother Jones and provided the list of the shadow Trump Organization subdomains. He explained what he believed had happened. Some hacker—or group—had gained access to the Trump Organization’s GoDaddy domain registration account. Like many companies, the Trump Organization has registered a long list of domain names, many of which it has never put to use. Some examples: barrontrump.com, donaldtrump.org, chicagotrumptower.com, celebritypokerdealer.com, and donaldtrumppyramidscheme.com.

For each of over a hundred of these Trump domains, the intruder created two shadow subdomains, with the names of these subdomains generally following a pattern: three to seven seemingly random letters placed before the real domain name. Here are examples from the list: bfdh.barrontrump.com and dhfb.barrontrump.com; bfch.donaldtrump.org and bxdc.donaldtrump.org; cesf.chicagotrumptower.com and vsrv.chicagotrumptower.com; dxgrg.celebritypokerdealer.com and vsrfg.celebritypokerdealer.com; and bdth.donaldtrumppyramidscheme.com and drhg.donaldtrumppyramidscheme.com.

The available historical data for these shadow subdomains indicate most of them were created in August 2013. When they first were set up, the shadow subdomains were aimed at one of 17 IP addresses on a network that was based in St. Petersburg, Russia, and they were hosted on servers owned by a company called the Petersburg Internet Network, a server provider with a reputation for hosting nefarious actors.

In a January 2015 blog post about fraudulent IP routing and malware, Doug Madory, the director of internet analysis at Dyn, called the Petersburg Internet Network “perhaps the leading contender for being named the Mos Eisley of the Internet,” a reference to the wild and seedy spaceport city on the planet Tatooine in the Star Wars movies. Currently, the IP addresses for these shadow Trump subdomains are registered to a different entity in Russia. According to several cybersecurity experts, the fact that the IP addresses point to Russia does not mean the Trump Organization breach originated there.

The shadow Trump Organization subdomains point to IP addresses in the range between 46.161.27.184 and 46.161.27.200—and these addresses are part of a larger network. In October 2013, a security researcher identified a website called bewarecommadelimited.org deploying an exploit kit that was intended to pilfer passwords and other information from targeted computers and noted it was associated with this IP address: 46.161.27.176. That IP address is within the same network as the IP addresses used for the shadow Trump Organization subdomains—an indication that these subdomains might have been part of a network used to deploy malware against other computers.

This week, a researcher named C. Shawn Eib wrote a blog post highlighting the existence of the shadow subdomains, which had been referenced in a Twitter thread several weeks ago. Eib noted that “more than 250 subdomains of domains registered to the Trump Organization redirect traffic to computers in St. Petersburg, Russia.”

Another computer security expert, who also asked not to be named, notes that this network of shadow subdomains may have been established by a criminal enterprise looking to use the Trump Organization’s computer system as the launching pad for various cyberattacks on other individuals or entities. But, he adds, this breach also could be exploited by state or nonstate actors attempting to infiltrate the Trump Organization. “At the least,” he remarks, “it shows the Trump Organization has been badly run.”

In his blog post, Eib notes, “With an organization of this size, and with the added security concerns and scrutiny that a presidential campaign and victory would entail, it would be inexcusable for this to not have been discovered by their IT department. Any basic security audit would show the existence of these subdomains, and what servers they’re leading to. This is sloppy at best, and potentially criminally negligent at worst, depending on the traffic that is being run through these servers.”

All of the legitimate Trump Organization domains and the suspected subdomains were registered through GoDaddy. The creation of the shadow subdomains suggests that the hacker (or hackers) compromised the company’s GoDaddy account and, depending on how the account was penetrated, the intruders could have obtained passwords and access to other computers in the Trump Organization network.

The creation of these Trump Organization subdomains looks like a classic case of domain-shadowing, according to Steve Lord, a British cybersecurity expert at Raw Hex, a startup that trains people on micro-electronics and computer coding. He examined internet records and reviewed the matter for Mother Jones. Lord notes the Trump Organization shadow subdomains fit the pattern of a major case of domain-shadowing that in 2011 struck clients of GoDaddy, one of the largest domain registrars in the world.

In a March 2015 blog post, Nick Biasini, a threat researcher at Cisco’s Talos Security Intelligence and Research Group, described how domain-shadowing works:

These accounts are typically compromised through phishing. The threat actor then logs in with credentials and creates large amounts of subdomains. Since a lot of users have multiple domains this can provide a nearly endless supply of domains…This behavior has shown to be an effective way to avoid typical detection techniques like blacklisting of sites or IP addresses.

In the post, Biasini noted that the practice of domain-shadowing goes back to 2011 and, like everything else in the tech world, has become more sophisticated over time.

When cyber professionals notice suspected malware coming through their networks or in the wild, they often share this information with public malware databases so the broader information security community is aware and can analyze the potential malware. In the case of the Trump-related subdomains, many have been flagged as suspected malware carriers by IT professionals and security researchers who then uploaded references to these subdomains to VirusTotal, a malware research database.

VirusTotal lists the findings of cybersecurity firms that analyze URLs suspected of being associated with malware. For many but not all of the Trump-related subdomains, according to the VirusTotal listings, Kaspersky, the Russian antivirus company, detected a possible association with malware. (Kaspersky is in the news now due to allegations that it has worked with the Russian government to steal data from US government computers, a claim the company denies. Many security researchers, though, agree that the company is highly skilled at identifying Russian malware.)

“It’s telling that Kaspersky detected [this malware], while others didn’t,” Lord tells Mother Jones. That could be a measure of the malware’s sophistication.

The cybersecurity expert who shared the list with Mother Jones says he could find no legitimate use for the subdomains. He notes that the full scope of the attackers’ breach of the Trump Organization domains remains unclear, but he adds that the hackers who have launched attacks from this block of IP addresses have the ability to wage highly sophisticated cyber assaults. “I’d have to imagine that the file and mail servers on the Trump Org network would be the world’s largest repository of information that could be used to gain leverage over our president,” he remarks. He also points out that this breach signals the Trump Organization did not employ secure IT: “The big thing is that they didn’t notice.”

In response to request for comment, the Trump Organization sent this statement:

There has been no “hack” within the Trump Organization and the domain names [in question] do not host active websites and do not have any content. Publishing anything to the contrary would be highly irresponsible. Moreover, we have no association with the “shadow domains” you reference…and are looking into your inquiry with our third party domain registrar. There is no malware detected on any of these domains and our security team takes any and all threats very seriously.

The security expert who first shared the list of subdomains with Mother Jones notes that it is true that shadow subdomains “do not currently host active websites and that there is no reason to believe that there is currently any malware active on these domains.” But, he remarks, the Trump Organization’s registrar account “was likely compromised since someone created these hundreds of records and if it wasn’t an authorized Trump Org person, that only leaves unauthorized persons.”

Shown the Trump Organization’s statement, Lord replied,

There’s two possible situations as I see it. Either they set up their own domain records to point at servers hosted in St. Petersburg, Russia…or someone else did. In either case, the question is why. For an organization on the cusp of a number of investigations about suspicious links to Russia, I’d hoped they would’ve given more public thought to the possibility that their domain ownership was at some point hijacked possibly through no fault of their own before denying everything.

The Trump Organization did not respond to follow-up questions.

The security expert who first alerted Mother Jones to the Trump-related shadow subdomains noted that as soon as the Trump Organization responded for this story, records related to the subdomains began disappearing.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... r-noticed/
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: First Charges Filed in U.S. Special Counsel Mueller's Ru

Postby seemslikeadream » Thu Nov 02, 2017 8:27 am


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUQtaJ-2BQ4


ZEROING IN
Prosecutors Weigh Charges Against 6 Russians in DNC Hacking

Prosecutors at the Department of Justice have reportedly identified at least six members of the Russian government who were involved in hacking computers at the Democratic National Committee. The suspects allegedly grabbed sensitive information and then publicized it during the 2016 U.S. presidential election, The Wall Street Journal reports. Agents and prosecutors could bring charges against those six officials as early as 2018. Such a case would provide the clearest picture to date of the hacking that arguably swayed the election toward President Trump.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/prosecuto ... cking-case



Prosecutors may charge Russian officials in DNC hack


BY
CHRISTOPHER BRENNAN
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Updated: Thursday, November 2, 2017, 7:54 AM
Russian officials believed to be behind the hack of Democratic National Committee emails may have their day in court, even if they don't show up for it.

Prosecutors in the Justice Department are mulling bringing federal charges over the cyberattack against those in Moscow, and have identified six potential targets, the Wall Street Journal reported Thursday.

The case is reportedly still in its early stages, but may be filed next year.

Russian government figures as high as Vladimir Putin have repeatedly denied meddling in the U.S. election.

But a joint report issued by U.S. intelligence agencies in January about a broader alleged Kremlin effort to tilt the election towards President Trump pinpointed the blame for the DNC hack squarely on the Russian military intelligence agency GRU.

The hacked emails were distributed by Wikileaks online in July during the Democrats' convention, with emails from Hillary Clinton campaign chair John Podesta later revealed in October.

Wikileaks has said that its source for the documents was not the Russian government or Fancy Bear, the hacker group believed to be associated with the GRU.

An analysis of data published by the Associated Press on Thursday says that Fancy Bear also tried to hack into the emails of then-Secretary of State John Kerry, Pussy Riot member Maria Alyokhina and a Ukrainian politician.

The report found that the vast majority of malicious links used by the hackers were sent during office hours in Moscow, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.

The Obama administration sanctioned both the GRU as well as Moscow's FSB, a KGB-successor organization similar to the CIA.

Charges by U.S. prosecutors would be a large step towards public disclosure of what intelligence agencies believe happened with the attack and its spread.

However, the hackers or those above them are unlikely to actually end up in an American courtroom, and the move may be mostly based on creating difficulties should they leave Russia.

The Department of Justice investigation with the FBI into election meddling has been underway since last year, then-FBI Director James Comey told Congress.

It is separate from the probe of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who the Journal reports is allowing the FBI to retain control of the technical nature of the case.


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... -1.3606282



U.S. Prosecutors Consider Charging Russian Officials in DNC Hacking Case
At least six Russian government officials are identified as part of ongoing investigation

By Aruna Viswanatha and Del Quentin Wilber
Nov. 2, 2017 6:23 a.m. ET
169 COMMENTS
The Justice Department has identified more than six members of the Russian government involved in hacking the Democratic National Committee’s computers and swiping sensitive information that became public during the 2016 presidential election, according to people familiar with the investigation.

Prosecutors and agents have assembled evidence to charge the Russian officials and could bring a case next year, these people said. Discussions about the case are in the early stages, they said.

If filed, the case would provide the clearest picture yet of the actors behind the DNC intrusion. U.S. intelligence agencies have attributed the attack to Russian intelligence services, but haven't provided detailed information about how they concluded those services were responsible, or any details about the individuals allegedly involved.

The high-profile hack of the DNC’s computers played a central role in the U.S. intelligence community’s assessment in January that “Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S. presidential election.” Mr. Putin and the Russian government have denied meddling in the U.S. election.

Thousands of the DNC’s emails and other data, as well as emails from the personal account of John Podesta, who served as campaign chairman to 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, were made public by WikiLeaks last year.

The pinpointing of particular Russian military and intelligence hackers highlights the exhaustive nature of the government’s probe. It also suggests the eagerness of some federal prosecutors and Federal Bureau of Investigation agents to file charges against those responsible, even if the result is naming the alleged perpetrators publicly and making it difficult for them to travel, rather than incarcerating them. Arresting Russian operatives is highly unlikely, people familiar with the probe said.

People familiar with the investigation drew the parallel to the Justice Department’s decision in March to charge two Russian operatives and two others with hacking into Yahoo’s computers starting in 2014 and pilfering information about 500 million accounts, one of the largest data breaches in U.S. history. One of the defendants in the Yahoo case, a Canadian national, was arrested and has pleaded not guilty; the other defendants are believed to be in Russia.

Last December, the Democratic administration of then-President Barack Obama imposed sanctions on Russia’s military-intelligence agency, which uses the acronym GRU, and Russia’s Federal Security Service, Russia’s equivalent to the Central Intelligence Agency, in response to the DNC and other hacks. It also named several individuals, including one who was later charged in the Yahoo case.

Federal prosecutors and federal agents working in Washington, Pittsburgh, San Francisco and Philadelphia have been collaborating on the DNC investigation. The inquiry is being conducted separately from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election and any possible collusion by President Donald Trump’s associates.

Mr. Trump, a Republican, has denied that he or his campaign colluded with Moscow.

Mr. Mueller’s investigation resulted this week in money-laundering and tax-related charges against Paul Manafort, former chairman of Mr. Trump’s campaign, and Richard Gates, Mr. Manafort’s business associate who also worked on the campaign.

George Papadopoulos, who served as a foreign-policy adviser on Mr. Trump’s campaign, pleaded guilty last month to lying to FBI agents about his dealings with Russian go-betweens during the campaign. Messrs. Manafort and Gates pleaded not guilty earlier this week.

A Justice Department spokesman and an FBI spokeswoman declined to comment on the identification of the Russian government officials allegedly behind the DNC hack. The Russian Embassy didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Mr. Trump has cast doubts on Russia’s role in the hack. In a series of tweets this past June, the president called the idea that Russia hacked the DNC a “big Dem HOAX.” He added that it was “a big Dem scam and excuse for losing the election!”

High-ranking U.S. intelligence and law-enforcement officials have consistently stood by the intelligence community’s January assessment.

In that document, the intelligence community said GRU, “probably began cyber operations aimed at the U.S. election by March 2016.” It said the GRU had exfiltrated “large volumes of data” from the DNC by May.

The Justice Department and FBI investigation into the DNC hack had been under way for nearly a year, by prosecutors and agents with cyber expertise, before Mr. Mueller was appointed in May. Rather than take over the relatively technical cyber investigation, Mr. Mueller and the Justice Department agreed that it would be better for the original prosecutors and agents to retain that aspect of the case, the people familiar with the Justice Department-FBI probe said.

It is unclear if prosecutors will hold back filing charges until Mr. Mueller completes his investigation or wait to identify others who may have played a role in the DNC hack. Investigators believe dozens of others may have played a role in the cyberattack, the people said.

While the alleged hackers are unlikely to be arrested and prosecuted in the U.S., the Justice Department has been bringing more cases against alleged hackers acting on behalf of foreign governments as a means of making the allegations public and potentially forcing a change in behavior, people familiar with the strategy said.

In the first such case, in 2014, the Justice Department indicted five Chinese military officers, alleging they had hacked U.S. companies’ computers to steal trade secrets. Officials said they witnessed a drop in such activity following the indictment. The defendants are believed to be in China; the Chinese government denied the allegations.

In a 2016 case, prosecutors charged hackers allegedly linked to the Iranian government. The defendants are believed to be outside the U.S.


Feds ID six members of Russian government in DNC hacking case — and may bring charges

02 NOV 2017 AT 07:44 ET

Federal prosecutors have identified more than six Russian government officials involved in the hacking of the Democratic National Committee emails that were dumped online during the 2016 presidential election.

The Justice Department has assembled enough evidence to bring charges against the officials, likely next year, according to sources familiar with the investigation, reported the Wall Street Journal.

The case would provide the clearest picture yet of how the DNC computers were hacked, and attack that U.S. intelligence services have blamed on their Russian counterparts.

Another report, also published Thursday, by the Associated Press reveals a digital hit list that provides conclusive evidence that Russia used hackers to target critics and further Kremlin interest around the world.

President Donald Trump has denied any Russian involvement, and his allies have promoted conspiracy theories about the murder of a DNC staffer they claim may have turned over the emails.

The hacked emails played a central role in the election, and Trump promoted claims based on the stolen data that were then amplified by Russian “bots” on social media.

Federal prosecutors and federal agents based in Washington, Pittsburgh, San Francisco and Philadelphia have been collaborating on the DNC investigation, the Journal reported.

That investigation is being conducted separately from special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe of the Trump campaign’s possible collusion with Russia during the election.
https://www.rawstory.com/2017/11/feds-i ... g-charges/



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNbvCKqSgx0
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 49 guests