The Russian Connection 2

[fraurosena]

For everyone who is interested, here's a great WaPo article about the inner workings of the special counsel investigation.

Inside the secretive nerve center of the Mueller investigation

Quote

A white sedan whisked a man into the loading dock of a glass and concrete building in a drab office district in Southwest Washington. Security guards quickly waved the vehicle inside, then pushed a button that closed the garage door and shielded the guest’s arrival from public view.

With his stealth morning arrival Thursday, White House Counsel Donald F. McGahn II became the latest in a string of high-level witnesses to enter the secretive nerve center of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Twenty-hours later, Mueller and his team emerged into public view to rattle Washington with the dramatic announcement that former national security adviser Michael Flynn would plead guilty to lying to the FBI.

The ensnaring of Flynn, the second former aide to President Trump to cooperate with the inquiry, serves as the latest indication that Mueller’s operation is rapidly pursuing an expansive mission, drilling deeper into Trump’s inner circle.

In the past two months, Mueller and his deputies have received private debriefs from two dozen current and former Trump advisers, each of whom has made the trek to the special counsel’s secure office suite.

Once inside, most witnesses are seated in a windowless conference room where two- and three-person teams of FBI agents and prosecutors rotate in and out, pressing them for answers.

Among the topics that have been of keen interest to investigators: how foreign government officials and their emissaries contacted Trump officials, as well as the actions and interplay of Flynn and Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law.

Often listening in is the special counsel himself, a sphinx-like presence who sits quietly along the wall for portions of key interviews.

This picture of Mueller’s operation — drawn from descriptions of witnesses, lawyers and others briefed on the interviews — provides a rare look inside the high-stakes investigation that could implicate Trump’s circle and determine the future of his presidency.

The locked-down nature of the probe has left both the witnesses and the public scrutinizing every move of the special counsel for meaning, without any certainty about the full scope of his investigation.

Trump and his lawyers have expressed confidence that Mueller will swiftly conclude his examination of the White House, perhaps even by the year’s end. Trump’s Democratic opponents hope the investigation will uncover more crimes and ultimately force the president’s removal from office.

Meanwhile, some witnesses who have been interviewed came away with the impression that the probe is unfolding and far from over.

“When they were questioning me, it seemed like they were still trying to get a feel of the basic landscape of the place,” said one witness who was questioned in late October for several hours and, like others, requested anonymity to describe the confidential sessions. “I didn’t get the sense they had anything incriminating on the president. Nor were they anywhere close to done.”

A spokesman for Mueller declined to comment, citing the sensitivity of the ongoing investigation.

White House lawyer Ty Cobb said he believes the probe’s focus on Trump’s White House is wrapping up, noting that all White House staffer interviews will be completed by the end of next week.

“At the end of the interviews, it would be reasonable to expect that it would not take long to bring this to conclusion,” Cobb said. “I commend the Office of Special Counsel for their acknowledged hard work on behalf of the country, to undertake this serious responsibility, and to perform it in an expedited but deliberate, thorough way.”

At least two dozen people who traveled in Trump’s orbit in 2016 and 2017 — on the campaign trail, in his transition operation and then in the White House — have been questioned in the past 10 weeks, according to people familiar with the interviews.

The most high profile is Kushner, who met with Mueller’s team in November, as well as former chief of staff Reince Priebus and former press secretary Sean Spicer. Former foreign policy adviser J.D. Gordon has also been interviewed.

White House communications director Hope Hicks was scheduled to sit down with Mueller’s team a few days before Thanksgiving. Mueller’s team has also indicated plans to interview senior associate White House counsel James Burnham and policy adviser Stephen Miller.

McGahn, who was interviewed by Mueller’s prosecutors for a full day Thursday, was scheduled to return Friday to complete his interview. However, the special counsel postponed the session as a courtesy to allow McGahn to help the White House manage the response to Flynn’s plea, a person familiar with the interview said.

Cobb declined to say which White House aides remain to be interviewed.

Several people who worked shoulder to shoulder with Flynn have also been interviewed by Mueller’s operation. That includes retired Gen. Keith Kellogg, the chief of staff to the National Security Council, as well as several people who worked with Flynn Intel Group, a now-shuttered private consulting firm.

Mueller’s group has also inquired whether Flynn recommended specific foreign meetings to senior aides, including Kushner. Investigators were particularly interested in how certain foreign officials got on Kushner’s calendar and the discussions that Flynn and Kushner had about those encounters, according to people familiar with the questions.

During the transition, Kushner and Flynn met with the Russian ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak. At the early December meeting, Kushner suggested establishing a secure communications line between Trump officials and the Kremlin at a Russian diplomatic facility, according to U.S. officials who reviewed intelligence reports describing Kislyak’s account.

Kushner has said that Kislyak sought the secure line as a way for Russian generals to communicate to the incoming administration about U.S. policy on Syria.

Trump’s son-in-law has also been identified by people familiar with his role as the “very senior member” of the transition team who directed Flynn in December to reach out to Kislyak and lobby him about a U.N. resolution on Israeli settlements, according to new court filings.

The volume of questions about Kushner in their interviews surprised some witnesses.

“I remember specifically being asked about Jared a number of times,” said one witness.

Another witness said agents and prosecutors repeatedly asked him about Trump’s decision-making during the May weekend he decided to fire FBI Director James B. Comey. Prosecutors inquired whether Kushner had pushed the president to jettison Comey, according to two people familiar with the interview.

Kushner attorney Abbe Lowell declined to comment on what the president’s son-in-law discussed at his November session with Mueller. “Mr. Kushner has voluntarily cooperated with all relevant inquiries and will continue to do so,” he said.

Two administration officials said that it would be natural for investigators to ask a lot of questions about Kushner, whom Trump put in charge of communicating with foreign officials, adding that such inquiries do not indicate he is a target.

The special counsel has continued to make ongoing requests for records from associates of the Trump campaign, according to two people familiar with the requests. The campaign associates aren’t expected to finish producing these documents by the end of the year. Mueller’s team is also newly scrutinizing an Alexandria-based office and advisers who worked there on foreign policy for the campaign.

In the past several weeks, Mueller’s operation has reached out to new witnesses in Trump’s circle, telling them they may be asked to come in for an interview. One person who was recently contacted said it is hard to find a lawyer available for advice on how to interact with the special counsel because so many Trump aides have already hired attorneys.

“It was kind of a pain,” the person said. “It’s hard to find a lawyer who wasn’t already conflicted out.”

People who have gone before Mueller’s team describe polite but detailed and intense grillings that at times have lasted all day and involved more than a dozen investigators. Spicer, for example, was in the office from about 10 a.m. until 6 p.m. for his fall session. Mueller’s team has recommended nearby lunch spots, but many witnesses have food brought in for fear of being spotted if they go outside.

Mueller has attended some interviews, introducing himself to witnesses when he enters and then sitting along the wall. Sometimes he is joined by his deputy, longtime friend and law partner James Quarles, a former Watergate prosecutor who is the main point of contact for the White House.

Investigators bring large binders filled with emails and documents into the interview room. One witness described the ricochet of questions that followed each time an agent passed them a copy of an email they had been copied on: “Do you remember this email? How does the White House work? How does the transition work? Who was taking the lead on foreign contacts? How did that work? Who was involved in this decision? Who was there that weekend?”

Some witnesses were introduced to so many federal agents and lawyers that they later lamented that they had largely forgotten many of their names by the time one team left the room and a new team entered.

“They say, ‘Hey, we’re not trying to be rude, but people are going to come in and out a lot,’ ” one witness explained about the teams. “They kind of cycle in and out of the room.”

One contingent of investigators is focused on whether Trump tried to obstruct justice and head off the investigation into Russian meddling by firing Comey in May. Prosecutors Brandon Van Grack and Jeannie Rhee have been involved in matters related to Flynn.

Yet another team is led by the former head of the Justice Department’s fraud prosecutions, Andrew Weissman, and foreign bribery expert Greg Andres. Those investigators queried lobbyists from some of the most powerful lobby shops in town about their interactions with former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and campaign adviser Rick Gates.

Mueller’s team charged Manafort and Gates last month with engaging in a conspiracy to hide millions of dollars in hidden foreign accounts and secretly creating an elaborate cover story to conceal their lobbying work for a former Ukrainian president and his pro-Russia political party. Both have pled not guilty.

Lawyers familiar with prosecutors’ questions about Manafort said they expect several more charges to come from this portion of the case.

People familiar with the Mueller team said they convey a sense of calm that is unsettling.

“These guys are confident, impressive, pretty friendly — joking a little, even,” one lawyer said. When prosecutors strike that kind of tone, he said, defense lawyers tend to think: “Uh oh, my guy is in a heap of trouble.”

3

 

[onekidanddone]

Oh, he's crawling down the corridor
On his hands and knees
Old Charlie stole the handle and
The train—it won't stop going
No way to slow down

He hears the silence howling
Catches angels as they fall
And the all-time winner
Has got him by the balls

 

[fraurosena]

Seth Abramson’s latest thread. Don’t worry, it’s not a long one this time.

I read this in a reply to some other tweet that I can’t find right now, but I want to share anyway as it made me laugh, and because it’s so true.

MAGA = Mueller Ain’t Going Away

 

[fraurosena]

As we've suspected all along, the NRA is deep into the darkest crevices of the Russian connection.

Operative Offered Trump Campaign ‘Kremlin Connection’ Using N.R.A. Ties

Quote

A conservative operative trumpeting his close ties to the National Rifle Association and Russia told a Trump campaign adviser last year that he could arrange a back-channel meeting between Donald J. Trump and Vladimir V. Putin, the Russian president, according to an email sent to the Trump campaign.

A May 2016 email to the campaign adviser, Rick Dearborn, bore the subject line “Kremlin Connection.” In it, the N.R.A. member said he wanted the advice of Mr. Dearborn and Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, then a foreign policy adviser to Mr. Trump and Mr. Dearborn’s longtime boss, about how to proceed in connecting the two leaders.

Russia, he wrote, was “quietly but actively seeking a dialogue with the U.S.” and would attempt to use the N.R.A.’s annual convention in Louisville, Ky., to make “‘first contact.’” The email, which was among a trove of campaign-related documents turned over to investigators on Capitol Hill, was described in detail to The New York Times.

Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel investigating Russian interference in the election and possible collusion with the Trump campaign, secured a guilty plea on Friday from President Trump’s first national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, for lying to the F.B.I. about contacts with Moscow’s former ambassador to the United States. But those contacts came after Mr. Trump’s improbable election victory.

The emailed outreach from the conservative operative to Mr. Dearborn came far earlier, around the same time that Russians were trying to make other connections to the Trump campaign. Another contact came through an American advocate for Christian and veterans causes, and together, the outreach shows how, as Mr. Trump closed in on the nomination, Russians were using three foundational pillars of the Republican Party — guns, veterans and Christian conservatives — to try to make contact with his unorthodox campaign.

Both efforts, made within days of each other, centered on the N.R.A.’s annual meeting and appear to involve Alexander Torshin, a deputy governor of the Russian central bank and key figure in Mr. Putin’s United Russia party, who was instructed to make contact with the campaign.

“Putin is deadly serious about building a good relationship with Mr. Trump,” the N.R.A. member and conservative activist, Paul Erickson, wrote. “He wants to extend an invitation to Mr. Trump to visit him in the Kremlin before the election. Let’s talk through what has transpired and Senator Sessions’s advice on how to proceed.”

It is not clear how Mr. Dearborn handled the outreach. He forwarded a similar proposal, made through Rick Clay, an advocate for conservative Christian causes, to Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law and a top campaign aide. Mr. Kushner rebuffed the proposal at the time, according to two people who have seen Mr. Kushner’s email.

Mr. Sessions told investigators from the House Intelligence Committee that he did not recall the outreach, according to three people with knowledge of the exchange. Mr. Dearborn did not return requests for comment, and Ty Cobb, the White House lawyer dealing with matters related to the investigations, declined to comment. Repeated attempts to reach Mr. Erickson were not successful.

Intelligence agencies have concluded that Russia, on orders from the highest levels of its government, undertook a sophisticated campaign to hack Democratic computers, spread propaganda and undermine the candidacy of Hillary Clinton. The repeated outreach around the N.R.A. convention, where Mr. Trump accepted the group’s endorsement, came just weeks after a self-described intermediary for the Russian government told George Papadopoulos, a campaign aide, that the Russians had “dirt” on Mrs. Clinton. And just weeks later, the president’s eldest son arranged a meeting at Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer who promised damaging information about the would-be Democratic nominee.

“The Kremlin believes that the only possibility of a true reset in this relationship would be with a new Republican White House,” Mr. Erickson wrote to Mr. Dearborn, adding, “Ever since Hillary compared Putin to Hitler, all senior Russian leaders consider her beyond redemption.”

Congressional investigators obtained the email as part of their inquiry into Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election and whether Mr. Trump’s campaign aided the efforts. It appears to have caught the attention of senators as well. Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, penned letters to several Trump campaign foreign policy advisers last week asking for all documents related to the N.R.A., Mr. Erickson, Mr. Torshin, Mr. Clay, Mr. Dearborn and others.

Mr. Erickson, a longtime conservative operative who has been involved in several presidential campaigns, presented himself in the email as a well-connected intermediary to the upper reaches of the Russian government. By “happenstance” and the reach of the N.R.A., Mr. Erickson wrote, he had been put in position to “slowly begin cultivating a back-channel to President Putin’s Kremlin” in recent years.

“Russia is quietly but actively seeking a dialogue with the U.S. that isn’t forthcoming under the current administration,” he wrote.

Indeed, evidence does appear to show deep ties between Mr. Erickson, the N.R.A. and the Russian gun rights community that were formed in the years when many American conservatives, put off by the Obama administration’s policies, were increasingly looking to Mr. Putin as an example of a strong leader opposing immigration, terrorism and gay rights.

The N.R.A. was one of Mr. Trump’s biggest backers during the campaign, spending tens of millions of dollars to help elect him.

Mr. Erickson has known Maria Butina, a former assistant to Mr. Torshin and the founder of the Right to Bear Arms, a Russian gun-rights group, for several years. Ms. Butina, who helped Mr. Torshin make the request through Mr. Clay, hosted Mr. Erickson at a September 2014 meeting of the group at its Moscow office. And in February 2016, the two incorporated a company, Bridges LLC, together in South Dakota. What the company does is unclear.

In December 2015, Mr. Erickson returned to Russia as part of an N.R.A. delegation that included David Keene, the group’s onetime president, top donors and David A. Clarke Jr., the former sheriff of Milwaukee County who became a popular Trump campaign surrogate. At one stop, the group met with Dmitry Rogozin, the deputy prime minister in charge of defense. A photograph from the meeting shows Mr. Torshin was also present.

In the United States, the hospitality was returned. Mr. Torshin and Ms. Butina attended the N.R.A.’s annual convention in 2014 and 2015. Ms. Butina told the conservative news site Townhall that she attended the N.R.A. Women’s Leadership Luncheon as a guest of Sandra S. Froman, a former president of the group. And in 2015, she was given a tour of the N.R.A.’s Virginia headquarters.

Attempts to contact Ms. Butina were unsuccessful.

Mr. Erickson does not explicitly name Mr. Torshin in the email to Mr. Dearborn, but the message appears to refer to him, the people familiar with the communication said. Instead, he describes “President Putin’s emissary on this front,” whose plans match those of Mr. Torshin.

Mr. Torshin, he wrote, was planning to attend a reception being planned by Mr. Clay honoring wounded veterans that he expected Mr. Trump would also attend. Mr. Torshin expected to use the reception to “make ‘first contact’” with the candidate and present Mr. Trump’s wife, Melania, with a gift from the Russian Orthodox Church.

According to Mr. Clay, neither Mr. Trump nor his campaign officials attended the veterans’ dinner. The president’s son, Donald Trump Jr., and Mr. Torshin did attend a separate N.R.A. dinner that night.

Mr. Torshin served in the upper house of the Russian Parliament and was a member of the country’s National Anti-Terrorism Committee, a government body that includes the ministers of defense, interior and foreign affairs and the director of the Federal Security Service, known as F.S.B., the K.G.B.’s successor. He has been a leading advocate of gun rights in Russia and of more closely linking the government and the Russian Orthodox Church.

Spanish investigators say that while he was in Parliament, Mr. Torshin laundered money for the Russian mafia through Spanish banks and properties. Mr. Torshin has denied those accusations.

8

 

[GrumpyGran]

Even if none of this ends up being illegal, there are just too many different arrows in this quiver. Too many people whispering about Russia, Russia, Russia. We don't hear about people wanting to set up meetings with China. Or Germany. Or any other foreign country.

Why would so many people be talking about setting up meetings between Putin and Trump? Why would Putin or anyone in Russia be so very eager to set up meetings with Trump? Why would all of these "random" people think that Trump wanted to meet Putin?

To think that this very specific focus is just business as usual is ludicrous.

[fraurosena]

Asha Rangappa, a former FBI special agent with the counterintelligence division, has an important thread (nowhere near Seth-size!) that I think you should read. Without stating it overtly, she's making the case for treason. Which according to the Constitution (as one commenter adroitly points out) carries the death penalty.

  

[fraurosena]

A tiny Seth-thread about what was actually going on with those negotiations with the Russians.

So, no collusion, but rather a shit-ton of other crimes. 

[AmazonGrace]

Have we heard anything from Reince for a while?

 

[Howl]

Remember our old B-List friend, all around feckless eejit, and massively incompetent  House Intelligence Committee chairman Congessman Devin Nunes?  He's having a melt down and threatening contempt charges against the FBI unless they give him EVERYTHING (petulantly stamps his little foot), particularly about Peter Strzok, by the end of the day, today (Monday), and maybe other stuff about Fusion GPS and whatever. 

Peter Strzok, if you'll recall, is the FBI agent who Mueller, back in July, demoted to HR after Strzok was found to be texting anti-Trump messages to his extra-marital mistress, a top-level FBI lawyer. 

This is a major, major, major oh shit oh dear hot potato issue.  According to WaPo's article Top FBI official assigned to Mueller’s Russia probe said to have been removed after sending anti-Trump texts

Quote

Peter Strzok, as deputy head of counterintelligence at the FBI, was a key player in the investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server to do government work as secretary of state, as well as the probe into possible coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia in the 2016 election.

During the Clinton investigation, Strzok was involved in a romantic relationship with FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who worked for Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, according to the people familiar with the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

The extramarital affair was problematic, these people said, but of greater concern among senior law enforcement officials were text messages the two exchanged during the Clinton investigation and campaign season in which they expressed anti-Trump sentiments and other comments that appeared to favor Clinton.

Shit, shit, shit, because, as the Washington Examiner noted today (Dec. 4)

Quote

Among federal law enforcement officials, there is great concern that exposure of the texts they exchanged may be used by the president and his defenders to attack the credibility of the Mueller probe and the FBI more broadly, according to the people familiar with the matter.

I'm not familiar with the Washington Examiner, but is it distributed in the DC area; in terms of slant, the Washington Examiner tries to be the conservative version of WaPo. 

Hannity:  Siri, order three large boxes of Depends from Amazon Prime.

Hannity wants to be ready because he knows he'll be wetting himself with excitement over this. 

[GrumpyGran]

4 hours ago, Howl said:

Peter Strzok, if you'll recall, is the FBI agent who Mueller, back in July, demoted to HR after Strzok was found to be texting anti-Trump messages to his extra-marital mistress, a top-level FBI lawyer. 

There's one in every crowd. The fool who can't keep his mouth shut and stay off the phone. This could be bad because you know they'll act like this is a YUGE deal. You're right, Hannity will dine on this for months.

[Cartmann99]

OT: Is anybody else getting ads for Russian dating services on FJ after reading this thread? I keep getting this Russian lady smiling at me and showing me her cleavage. 

[onekidanddone]

Not an endorsement of Howard Dean, but this could be a nice Hanukkah gift

 

[fraurosena]

47 minutes ago, onekidanddone said:

Not an endorsement of Howard Dean, but this could be a nice Hanukkah gift

 

Oh, it could get even better!

 

[onekidanddone]

30 minutes ago, fraurosena said:

Oh, it could get even better!

 

I wonder if Trump thinks his tweets are privileged. Maybe he will say they are fake news.  Yea that would be fun to watch Fox spin it. 

[AmazonGrace]

 

[GreyhoundFan]

The WaPo's daily roundup kicks off with this: "The Daily 202: Botched damage control efforts keep making the Russia scandal worse for Trump"

Spoiler

THE BIG IDEA: President Trump’s aides spent the weekend applying tourniquets to stop the bleeding from more self-inflicted wounds. Continuing a pattern, the White House took a bad story and made it worse. With his legal exposure increased, the president then sought to change the subject.

On Saturday, Trump tweeted this about his former national security adviser: “I had to fire General (Michael) Flynn because he lied to the Vice President and the FBI.”

Legal experts said this could be used as evidence that the president was trying to obstruct justice when he allegedly asked James Comey to take it easy on Flynn and then, when he didn’t, fired him as FBI director.

On Sunday, Trump’s personal lawyer claimed responsibility for writing the tweet — which he called sloppy. John Dowd clarified that the president knew in late January that Flynn had probably given FBI agents the same inaccurate account he provided to Vice President Pence about a call with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

“Dowd said the information was passed to Trump by White House counsel Donald McGahn, who had been warned about Flynn’s statement to the vice president by a senior Justice Department official,” Carol D. Leonnig, John Wagner and Ellen Nakashima reported last night. “A person close to the White House involved in the case termed the Saturday tweet ‘a screw-up of historic proportions’ that has ‘caused enormous consternation in the White House.’”

-- Washington is now consumed by speculation about what shoe drops next. Here are seven questions that will determine what course special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation takes from here:

1. What did Flynn give up in exchange for leniency?

Flynn was part of Trump’s inner circle and even considered as a potential running mate. Mueller reportedly agreed to spare the disgraced ex-general’s son and does not plan to pursue several potential charges that carried much stronger potential penalties than making a false statement to the FBI.

If there was nothing inappropriate about reaching out to the Russians, as the president and his lawyers say, why didn’t Flynn tell the truth when FBI agents asked about it? What exactly was Flynn instructed to tell the Russians?

Trump insists he’s not worried about anything Flynn might say. “No, I'm not,” he said as he left the White House Saturday for fundraisers. “And what has been shown is (there was) no collusion.”

In fact, this has not been shown. 

2. Has anyone else lied to the FBI?

“At least two dozen people who traveled in Trump’s orbit in 2016 and 2017 — on the campaign trail, in his transition operation and then in the White House — have been questioned in the past 10 weeks,” per Robert Costa, Carol D. Leonnig and Josh Dawsey. “The most high profile is (Jared) Kushner, who met with Mueller’s team in November, as well as former chief of staff Reince Priebus and former press secretary Sean Spicer. Former foreign policy adviser J.D. Gordon has also been interviewed. White House communications director Hope Hicks was scheduled to sit down with Mueller’s team a few days before Thanksgiving. Mueller’s team has also indicated plans to interview senior associate White House counsel James Burnham and policy adviser Stephen Miller.”

• “McGahn, who was interviewed by Mueller’s prosecutors for a full day Thursday, was scheduled to return Friday to complete his interview. However, the special counsel postponed the session as a courtesy to allow McGahn to help the White House manage the response to Flynn’s plea …”
• White House lawyer Ty Cobb declined to say which White House aides remain to be interviewed.
• “In the past several weeks, Mueller’s operation has reached out to new witnesses in Trump’s circle, telling them they may be asked to come in for an interview.”

Many of these interviews lasted several hours. If he can show that anyone made false statements, Mueller can now circle back and has leverage over them. 

3. What did Kushner tell Mueller’s team about Flynn and the Russia contacts?

Trump’s son-in-law has been identified by sources as the “very senior member” of the transition team who Flynn says directed him in December to reach out to Kislyak and lobby him about a U.N. resolution on Israeli settlements. Flynn admits that he was not truthful when asked by the FBI on Jan. 24 about those interactions, but we don’t know what Kushner told investigators last month. Kushner’s lawyer has declined to comment.

... < good tweet from Glenn Kessler >

Bob, Carol and Josh interviewed several witnesses who have been interviewed by Mueller’s team, and some of them said they were surprised by the volume of questions about Kushner. “I remember specifically being asked about Jared a number of times,” said one witness. “Another witness said agents and prosecutors repeatedly asked him about Trump’s decision-making during the May weekend he decided to fire (Comey). Prosecutors inquired whether Kushner had pushed the president to jettison Comey, according to two people familiar with the interview.” Conservative blogger Jen Rubin, who practiced law for two decades, raises several additional questions about Kushner: “What was the Trump team going to get in exchange for lifting sanctions against Russia? If Kushner directed Flynn to contact Russian officials, was he then looking to cover that up when he urged the president to fire (Comey)? … If Flynn’s contacts were authorized and legal, why did Trump allow him to lie to the vice president about them? … Did Kushner derive any financial benefit from contacts with Russians? Why did he meet with a Russian bank during the transition? … Did Kushner intentionally omit Russia contacts on his disclosure forms? … What connection, if any, exists between Russian officials and the Trump campaign data operation conducted by Cambridge Analytica and overseen by Kushner? … Will Trump attempt to pardon Kushner if he is indicted?”

Newsweek reports that, among other significant omissions, Kushner did not disclose in paperwork for the Office of Government Ethics that he led the Charles and Seryl Kushner Foundation from 2006 to 2015, during a time when the group funded an Israeli settlement then considered illegal under international law. “The failure to disclose his role in the foundation — at a time when he was being tasked with serving as the president’s Middle East peace envoy — follows a pattern of egregious omissions that would bar any other official from continuing to serve in the West Wing,” Chris Riotta reports. 

4. How many other people on the Trump team knew about and/or approved of Flynn’s interactions with the Russians?

Flynn admitted in his plea deal that he spoke with another member of the transition team before he talked to Kislyak on Dec. 29 about why the Kremlin should not retaliate against the United States for sanctions that had just been announced by the Obama administration. People familiar with the matter say that this person was K.T. McFarland, who was pushed out as deputy national security adviser after Flynn’s departure and is now awaiting confirmation as Trump’s nominee for ambassador to Singapore.

That day, McFarland reportedly emailed Tom Bossert, who was another transition official and is now the president’s homeland security adviser, to say that the sanctions were aimed at discrediting Trump’s victory. According to the New York Times, McFarland passed along word that Flynn would be speaking with Kislyak hours after the sanctions were announced: “If there is a tit-for-tat escalation Trump will have difficulty improving relations with Russia, which has just thrown U.S.A. election to him,” she wrote.

Bossert then forwarded her email to six other people — including Priebus, Spicer and chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon — and urged them to “defend election legitimacy now,” according to the Times, which said McFarland couldn’t be reached. 

5. What did Trump himself know and when did he know it?

The day after he pushed Flynn to resign, Trump met with Comey. The former FBI director has testified under oath (and presented contemporaneous notes to back up his account) that Trump said, “I hope you can let this go.”

The president tweeted Sunday morning, “I never asked Comey to stop investigating Flynn.”

6. Who else and what else is Mueller looking at that we don’t know about yet?

Another lower-level Trump campaign aide, foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, previously pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. Agents arrested him in July. He pleaded guilty at a secret hearing in October. Mueller kept the information private until he indicted former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his associate, Rick Gates, on Oct. 30.

“Precisely what Papadopoulos did in recent months to aid the government remains unclear and the subject of speculation among Trump aides and former campaign officials,” Politico’s Josh Gerstein reports. “Prosecutors seemed pleased with the cooperation because they dropped the obstruction charge … Spokespeople for Mueller's office and the FBI declined to comment for this article, but in court papers they cited a need to keep the charges against Papadopoulos secret because of planned interviews with other Trump campaign officials and others relevant to the investigation.”

7. How far will Trump and congressional Republicans go to thwart the ongoing Russia investigations?

Trying to go on the offensive, Trump spent Sunday attacking the integrity of the FBI. He noted that Peter Strzok — the former top FBI official assigned to Mueller’s probe — was taken off that job this summer after his bosses discovered that he and another member of Mueller’s team had exchanged politically charged texts disparaging Trump and supporting Hillary Clinton.

“Strzok, as deputy head of counterintelligence at the FBI, was a key player in the investigation into Clinton’s use of a private email server to do government work as secretary of state,” Karoun Demirjian and Devlin Barrett reported Saturday. “During the Clinton investigation, Strzok was involved in a romantic relationship with FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who worked for Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.”

In a tweetstorm, Trump said the FBI’s “reputation is in tatters.” He retweeted a conservative pundit saying that Chris Wray, who Trump appointed to replace Comey, needs to “clean house”: 

... < tweet from twitler >

It was reported last week that Trump has pushed key GOP leaders on Capitol Hill to “move on” from their investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Some Republican lawmakers are responding to damaging revelations about Trump by ramping up their calls for new inquiries … into Clinton.

Many people who are close to Trump have been warning him that Mueller means nothing but trouble, and that he’s making a mistake by being as cooperative as his lawyers want him to be. “I don’t know what they’re smoking,” Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy, a friend of the president’s, said on ABC’s “This Week.” “Robert Mueller poses an existential threat to the Trump presidency.” Now the question is what will Trump do about it.

Meanwhile, FBI agents and alumni are defending the bureau: 

The president of the FBI Agents Association issued this statement after Trump trashed the bureau's professionals:

... < tweets from the FBI Agents Association and Comey >

...

 

[onekidanddone]

31 minutes ago, AmazonGrace said:

 

Snoopy dance.

[GreyhoundFan]

Good grief: "The White House’s latest fallback: Who cares if Trump colluded with Russia?"

Spoiler

At first, it was all so simple. The Trump White House said there were “no contacts” — zero, zilch — between Trump’s campaign and Russia. But in time this elegant defense encountered a formidable opponent: reality.

And so for a year now, Trump and his advisers, facing mounting evidence of their campaign’s entanglement with Russia, have redrawn lines of defense and revised talking points with such daring that it has amounted to a veritable Marshall Plan for the moving of goal posts.

As details of campaign contacts with Russia piled up, Trump and his officials instead said there had been “no collusion.” As more evidence came in showing attempts at high-level collusion, the White House retreated to another line of defense: Trump himself didn’t collude. “Nothing about the actual facts published to date suggests that the president . . . colluded with anybody,” was White House lawyer Ty Cobb’s careful phrasing.

Now, with four Trump campaign officials indicted and two of them, including Trump’s former national security adviser, pleading guilty, even that distinction no longer seems safe.

One of Trump’s attorneys, Jay Sekulow, just told the New Yorker that it doesn’t matter whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia, because “there is no crime of collusion.” Another Trump attorney, John Dowd, told Axios that technically the president “cannot obstruct justice, because he is the chief law enforcement officer.”

A year after the Trump team debuted its “no contacts” defense, the attenuated new White House position amounts to this: Who cares whether Trump colluded with Russia and obstructed justice?

It has been quite a journey. Let’s recall some scenic vistas.

Original position: “There was no communication between the campaign and any foreign entity during the campaign.”

Revised position: Carter Page traveled to Russia when he was a Trump campaign adviser, but he was only “a low-level volunteer.” Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with Russians, but he was only in a “voluntary position.” Former campaign manager Paul Manafort was indicted in the Russia probe, but this doesn’t count because “he was replaced long before the election.”

Original position: Attorney General Jeff Sessions “did not have communications with the Russians.”

Revised position: Sessions “did meet one Russian official a couple of times.” But Sessions conducted no “improper discussions with Russians.”

Revised position 2: Sessions does “not recall any discussions” with Russians “regarding the political campaign.” But he does recall that he had no conversations with Russians “concerning any type of interference with any campaign.”

Original position: Donald Trump Jr. did not set up meetings with Russians, or if he did he wasn’t “representing the campaign in any way, shape or form.”

Revised position: The campaign meeting he set up with Russians was about “adoption of Russian children.”

Revised position 2: The “adoption” meeting was with a Russian attorney promising Russian government dirt on Clinton. But Trump Jr. received “no meaningful information.”

Original position: President Trump was “not involved” in the false Trump Jr. statement alleging the meeting was about adoption.

Revised position: Trump “weighed in, as any father would.”

Original position: When Michael Flynn, incoming national security adviser, called the Russian ambassador during the transition, they “did not discuss anything having to do with” Russia sanctions.

Revised position: Flynn “couldn’t be certain that the topic never came up.”

Revised position 2: Flynn “inadvertently briefed the vice president elect and others with incomplete information.”

Revised position 3: Flynn “lied to the vice president and the FBI.”

Original position: A report that Jared Kushner suggested a secret, secure “communications channel” with Russia was based on “a lot of facts that are not substantiated.”

Revised position: Kushner asked the Russian ambassador whether he had a “communications channel” that could be used to relay information from the Kremlin.

Original position: FBI Director James Comey’s firing “had zero to do” with Russia investigation.

Revised position: Trump cited “this Russia thing” in firing Comey.

Original position: “I have nothing to do with Russia. To the best of my knowledge, no person that I deal with does.”

Revised position: The Trump campaign did not have “constant contacts with Russian spies.”

Revised position 2: “There were no Russians in our campaign.”

But there is one position on the scandal Trump hasn’t changed — his reluctance to accept what the entire intelligence community and his own CIA director do: That Russia meddled in the election.

Position: Election hackers could have been “somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds.”

Position: U.S. intelligence agencies were led by “political hacks” and employ “the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.”

Position: Vladimir Putin “said he absolutely did not meddle in our election” and “I really believe that when he tells me that he means it.”

That’s the exception that proves the rule.

The BTs don't care, but most of the rest of us do.

[Howl]

And now it gets worse, much worse with the Peter Strzok thing, because it appears that, although the editing concerning how Clinton handled classified information was a team effort, it was Strzok (who CNN describes as  the "former top counterintelligence expert at the FBI") who implemented the edit changing Comey's language from "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless".   

Quote

The shift from "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless," which may appear pedestrian at first glance, reflected a decision by the FBI that could have had potentially significant legal implications, as the federal law governing the mishandling of classified material establishes criminal penalties for "gross negligence."   CNN FBI agent dismissed from Mueller probe changed Comey's description of Clinton to 'extremely careless'.   CNN  FBI agent dismissed from Mueller probe changed Comey's description of Clinton to 'extremely careless'.

CNN FBI agent dismissed from Mueller probe changed Comey's description of Clinton to 'extremely careless'

Here's the deal.  As I understand it from reading this article, Comey's May 2016 draft with the original "grossly negligent" language and who changed it was no secret back in November 2016, when metadata concerning who edited what and when was provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee and Chuck Grassley*, but this information can now be weaponized to discredit the Mueller investigation ( Look! Over there! Shiny!) and reinforce Lock her up! 

Hannity is probably all the way through his first box of Depends by now. 

 

*Chuck Grassley was brought to our attention yesterday when he said “I think not having the estate tax recognizes the people that are investing, as opposed to those that are just spending every darn penny they have, whether it’s on booze or women or movies”, i.e., he thinks we all spend our $$$$$$$$$ on hookers and blow, instead of mortgage, child care, food, health in$urance, car payment and gas. 

[GrumpyGran]

9 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Good grief: "The White House’s latest fallback: Who cares if Trump colluded with Russia?"

  Reveal hidden contents

At first, it was all so simple. The Trump White House said there were “no contacts” — zero, zilch — between Trump’s campaign and Russia. But in time this elegant defense encountered a formidable opponent: reality.

And so for a year now, Trump and his advisers, facing mounting evidence of their campaign’s entanglement with Russia, have redrawn lines of defense and revised talking points with such daring that it has amounted to a veritable Marshall Plan for the moving of goal posts.

As details of campaign contacts with Russia piled up, Trump and his officials instead said there had been “no collusion.” As more evidence came in showing attempts at high-level collusion, the White House retreated to another line of defense: Trump himself didn’t collude. “Nothing about the actual facts published to date suggests that the president . . . colluded with anybody,” was White House lawyer Ty Cobb’s careful phrasing.

Now, with four Trump campaign officials indicted and two of them, including Trump’s former national security adviser, pleading guilty, even that distinction no longer seems safe.

One of Trump’s attorneys, Jay Sekulow, just told the New Yorker that it doesn’t matter whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia, because “there is no crime of collusion.” Another Trump attorney, John Dowd, told Axios that technically the president “cannot obstruct justice, because he is the chief law enforcement officer.”

A year after the Trump team debuted its “no contacts” defense, the attenuated new White House position amounts to this: Who cares whether Trump colluded with Russia and obstructed justice?

It has been quite a journey. Let’s recall some scenic vistas.

Original position: “There was no communication between the campaign and any foreign entity during the campaign.”

Revised position: Carter Page traveled to Russia when he was a Trump campaign adviser, but he was only “a low-level volunteer.” Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with Russians, but he was only in a “voluntary position.” Former campaign manager Paul Manafort was indicted in the Russia probe, but this doesn’t count because “he was replaced long before the election.”

Original position: Attorney General Jeff Sessions “did not have communications with the Russians.”

Revised position: Sessions “did meet one Russian official a couple of times.” But Sessions conducted no “improper discussions with Russians.”

Revised position 2: Sessions does “not recall any discussions” with Russians “regarding the political campaign.” But he does recall that he had no conversations with Russians “concerning any type of interference with any campaign.”

Original position: Donald Trump Jr. did not set up meetings with Russians, or if he did he wasn’t “representing the campaign in any way, shape or form.”

Revised position: The campaign meeting he set up with Russians was about “adoption of Russian children.”

Revised position 2: The “adoption” meeting was with a Russian attorney promising Russian government dirt on Clinton. But Trump Jr. received “no meaningful information.”

Original position: President Trump was “not involved” in the false Trump Jr. statement alleging the meeting was about adoption.

Revised position: Trump “weighed in, as any father would.”

Original position: When Michael Flynn, incoming national security adviser, called the Russian ambassador during the transition, they “did not discuss anything having to do with” Russia sanctions.

Revised position: Flynn “couldn’t be certain that the topic never came up.”

Revised position 2: Flynn “inadvertently briefed the vice president elect and others with incomplete information.”

Revised position 3: Flynn “lied to the vice president and the FBI.”

Original position: A report that Jared Kushner suggested a secret, secure “communications channel” with Russia was based on “a lot of facts that are not substantiated.”

Revised position: Kushner asked the Russian ambassador whether he had a “communications channel” that could be used to relay information from the Kremlin.

Original position: FBI Director James Comey’s firing “had zero to do” with Russia investigation.

Revised position: Trump cited “this Russia thing” in firing Comey.

Original position: “I have nothing to do with Russia. To the best of my knowledge, no person that I deal with does.”

Revised position: The Trump campaign did not have “constant contacts with Russian spies.”

Revised position 2: “There were no Russians in our campaign.”

But there is one position on the scandal Trump hasn’t changed — his reluctance to accept what the entire intelligence community and his own CIA director do: That Russia meddled in the election.

Position: Election hackers could have been “somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds.”

Position: U.S. intelligence agencies were led by “political hacks” and employ “the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.”

Position: Vladimir Putin “said he absolutely did not meddle in our election” and “I really believe that when he tells me that he means it.”

That’s the exception that proves the rule.

The BTs don't care, but most of the rest of us do.

Sadly, we are moving in that direction. Some of these BTs won't care even when Russian troops are marching in the Macy's Christmas parade. I'm just worried that will happen before 2020.

[GrumpyGran]

13 minutes ago, Howl said:

implemented the edit changing Comey's language from "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless". 

In a world where our president's administration is shuffling information about possible collusion like a magician doing a card trick, this is nothing.

First, at the end of the day, there was nothing to charge Clinton with, and second, Comey himself made the statement so if he wasn't okay with the change, why say it? He was the boss.

But they will attempt to use it to distract and deflect. I don't think it helps them that Grassley, if I read this right, knew about this change a year ago and has said nothing, and he's not exactly looking like a friend of the average American right now anyway. No matter how hard the BTs rage about trying to lock up Hillary, the majority of Repubs in high positions don't seem interested.

I think the majority of Americans are done with Hillary hysteria and the continual whining by the far right is just making them look more mindless.

[Howl]

31 minutes ago, GrumpyGran said:

But they will attempt to use it to distract and deflect.

This.  It's also any ultra right-wing conspiracy theorist's wet dream and I'm sure Hannity and Alex Jones won't leave it alone.  It keeps the deplorables busy with a chew toy so they don't notice the real issues at hand: tax deform, Russia,  dismantling the government and starting WWIII with No. Korea. 

And since this is the Russia thread, Manafort, what the WTAF?  I suspect they have Kompromat out the kazoo on Comrade Pavel, so when they say Hey, ghost write an op-ed, broski, he hops right to it. 

[GreyhoundFan]

"Prosecutors say longtime Manafort colleague has ‘ties’ to Russian intelligence"

Spoiler

Federal prosecutors asserted Monday that a longtime associate of Paul Manafort, the former chairman of President Trump’s campaign, has been “assessed to have ties” to Russian intelligence — the first time the special counsel has alleged a Trump official had such contacts.

The statement came as prosecutors working for special counsel Robert S. Mueller III withdrew their support for a joint bail deal filed last week that would have released Manafort from home detention and GPS monitoring while he awaits trial on charges including money laundering and fraud.

Manafort, 68, and his longtime deputy, Rick Gates, 45, have both pleaded not guilty to charges filed Oct. 30.

In the four-page filing Monday, prosecutor Andrew Weissmann urged the judge to reject the bail deal, arguing that Manafort and a Russian colleague have been secretly ghostwriting an English-language editorial that appeared to defend Manafort’s work advising a ­Russia-friendly political party in Ukraine.

They said Manafort worked on the draft as recently as last week with “a long-time Russian colleague . . . who is currently based in Russia and assessed to have ties to a Russian intelligence service.” They indicated they would file further supporting evidence under seal.

The Russian colleague was not identified in court papers. However, Manafort has had a long-standing Russian employee named Konstantin Kilimnik who ran Manafort’s office in Kiev during the 10 years he did consulting work there.

Prosecutors said the editorial Manafort was writing violated a court order prohibiting the parties in the case from making public statements outside of court that could influence jurors.

The piece “clearly was undertaken to influence the public’s opinion of defendant Manafort,” prosecutors wrote, noting there would be no other reason for Manafort and the colleague to have it published under someone else’s name.

The allegation is the first time that prosecutors have claimed any former Trump campaign official has had contacts with a Russian tied to that country’s intelligence services.

A spokesman for Manafort declined to comment.

Kilimnik has previously denied intelligence ties, telling The Washington Post in a statement in June that he has “no relation to the Russian or any other intelligence service.”

He did not respond to an email Monday about the prosecutors’ allegation.

Kilimnik attended a Russian military foreign language university in the late 1980s that experts have said was a training ground for Russian intelligence services. He served as an officer in the Russian military for several years.

Manafort and Kilimnik were in contact during the months that Manafort ran Trump’s campaign. They met twice in person, in May 2016 and then again in August 2016, when their dinner conversation at New York’s Grand Havana Room included discussion of the presidential campaign, Kilimnik told The Post this June.

For a decade, Manafort and Kilimnik worked with then-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who was initially considered pro-Western but eventually became allied with Russian interests.

Kilimnik also served as Manafort’s liaison to Oleg Deripaska, an aluminum magnate and ally to Russian President Vladi­mir Putin who employed Manafort as an investment consultant.

According to emails described to The Post, Manafort directed Kilimnik to offer Deripaska “private briefings” about Trump’s campaign. A Deripaska spokeswoman has said he was never offered such briefings.

Manafort has previously denied knowingly communicating with Russian intelligence during the campaign. But he told the New York Times in February, “It’s not like these people wear badges that say, ‘I’m a Russian intelligence officer.’ ”

Along with being under home detention and GPS monitoring, Manafort has pledged to pay $10 million if he fails to appear in court.

Prosecutors had agreed to a bail deal in which Manafort would have secured his release with four properties worth $11.6 million and a prohibition on foreign travel, as well as a limitation on his travels within the United States.

On Monday, the special counsel asked U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson either to reject the deal, keeping Manafort under home confinement pending further negotiations, or impose additional restrictions, including making the $10 million forfeitable for other breaches of the terms and requiring Manafort to remain under GPS monitoring.

Okay, how freaking stupid is Manafort? Did he think he wasn't being monitored?

[onekidanddone]

32 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

"Prosecutors say longtime Manafort colleague has ‘ties’ to Russian intelligence"

  Reveal hidden contents

Federal prosecutors asserted Monday that a longtime associate of Paul Manafort, the former chairman of President Trump’s campaign, has been “assessed to have ties” to Russian intelligence — the first time the special counsel has alleged a Trump official had such contacts.

The statement came as prosecutors working for special counsel Robert S. Mueller III withdrew their support for a joint bail deal filed last week that would have released Manafort from home detention and GPS monitoring while he awaits trial on charges including money laundering and fraud.

Manafort, 68, and his longtime deputy, Rick Gates, 45, have both pleaded not guilty to charges filed Oct. 30.

In the four-page filing Monday, prosecutor Andrew Weissmann urged the judge to reject the bail deal, arguing that Manafort and a Russian colleague have been secretly ghostwriting an English-language editorial that appeared to defend Manafort’s work advising a ­Russia-friendly political party in Ukraine.

They said Manafort worked on the draft as recently as last week with “a long-time Russian colleague . . . who is currently based in Russia and assessed to have ties to a Russian intelligence service.” They indicated they would file further supporting evidence under seal.

The Russian colleague was not identified in court papers. However, Manafort has had a long-standing Russian employee named Konstantin Kilimnik who ran Manafort’s office in Kiev during the 10 years he did consulting work there.

Prosecutors said the editorial Manafort was writing violated a court order prohibiting the parties in the case from making public statements outside of court that could influence jurors.

The piece “clearly was undertaken to influence the public’s opinion of defendant Manafort,” prosecutors wrote, noting there would be no other reason for Manafort and the colleague to have it published under someone else’s name.

The allegation is the first time that prosecutors have claimed any former Trump campaign official has had contacts with a Russian tied to that country’s intelligence services.

A spokesman for Manafort declined to comment.

Kilimnik has previously denied intelligence ties, telling The Washington Post in a statement in June that he has “no relation to the Russian or any other intelligence service.”

He did not respond to an email Monday about the prosecutors’ allegation.

Kilimnik attended a Russian military foreign language university in the late 1980s that experts have said was a training ground for Russian intelligence services. He served as an officer in the Russian military for several years.

Manafort and Kilimnik were in contact during the months that Manafort ran Trump’s campaign. They met twice in person, in May 2016 and then again in August 2016, when their dinner conversation at New York’s Grand Havana Room included discussion of the presidential campaign, Kilimnik told The Post this June.

For a decade, Manafort and Kilimnik worked with then-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who was initially considered pro-Western but eventually became allied with Russian interests.

Kilimnik also served as Manafort’s liaison to Oleg Deripaska, an aluminum magnate and ally to Russian President Vladi­mir Putin who employed Manafort as an investment consultant.

According to emails described to The Post, Manafort directed Kilimnik to offer Deripaska “private briefings” about Trump’s campaign. A Deripaska spokeswoman has said he was never offered such briefings.

Manafort has previously denied knowingly communicating with Russian intelligence during the campaign. But he told the New York Times in February, “It’s not like these people wear badges that say, ‘I’m a Russian intelligence officer.’ ”

Along with being under home detention and GPS monitoring, Manafort has pledged to pay $10 million if he fails to appear in court.

Prosecutors had agreed to a bail deal in which Manafort would have secured his release with four properties worth $11.6 million and a prohibition on foreign travel, as well as a limitation on his travels within the United States.

On Monday, the special counsel asked U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson either to reject the deal, keeping Manafort under home confinement pending further negotiations, or impose additional restrictions, including making the $10 million forfeitable for other breaches of the terms and requiring Manafort to remain under GPS monitoring.

Okay, how freaking stupid is Manafort? Did he think he wasn't being monitored?

Not sure if stupid is the right word on this guy. Hubris, greed, total lack of morals works for me. I think he might have known he could have been caught, but he just didn't care.

Trump and many of his people are that stupid (along with the greed, total lack of morals and hubris)

[AmazonGrace]

This makes me so happy:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/05/donald-trump-bank-records-handed-over-robert-mueller

Trump's personal banking information handed over to Robert Mueller

Deutsche Bank, Donald Trump’s biggest lender, is forced to submit documents after special prosecutor issues subpoena

Spoiler

 

Stephanie Kirchgaessner

Tuesday 5 December 2017 11.23 GMTFirst published on Tuesday 5 December 2017 11.16 GMT

Donald Trump’s banking information has formally been turned over to Robert Mueller, the special prosecutor who is investigating whether the president’s campaign conspired with the Kremlin during the 2016 presidential election.

Deutsche Bank, the German bank that serves as Trump’s biggest lender, was forced to submit documents about its client relationship with the president and some of his family members, who are also Deutsche clients, after Mueller issued the bank with a subpoena for information, according to multiple media reports. The news was first reported by Handelsblatt, the German newspaper.

The revelation makes it clear that Mueller and his team are investigating the president’s finances. Trump’s son-in-law and White House adviser, Jared Kushner, is also a client.

Deutsche Bank examined Donald Trump's account for Russia links

 

Deutsche Bank declined to comment. The bank told Bloomberg in a statement that it always cooperated with investigating authorities.

Legal experts who are following the investigation said it showed Mueller was “following the money” in his search for possible links between the presidential campaign and the Kremlin.

It also indicated that any investigation into Trump personally may not be limited to the question of whether or not the president sought to obstruct justice when he fired the former FBI chief James Comey.

Instead, said Ryan Goodman, a New York law professor and former Pentagon counsel, it showed that Mueller was possibly examining whether the president could be compromised by Russian interests.

“Deutsche Bank relates to the Russia collusion investigation,” Goodman said.

He pointed to the bank’s known relationships with Russian oligarchs and its previous dealings in Moscow among reasons why Mueller would be interested in having access to Trump’s bank accounts. The president was in the past loaned about $300m by the bank. His indebtedness, Goodman said, means that Mueller will want to examine if there are any connections between Russia and the president’s financial vulnerabilities.

 

Trump has consistently denied any collusion between his campaign and Russia and has stated that he did not have any business dealings in Russia. Since then, news has emerged that the Trump Organization sold a significant number of its properties to Russian clients and explored opening a hotel in Moscow, though the plan never came to fruition.

The president has repeatedly criticised the Mueller investigation and this weekend alleged that the FBI’s reputation was “in tatters”. The attack followed the guilty plea of Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael Flynn, who is cooperating with federal investigators.

Mueller’s investigators have, according to previous media reports, examined Russian purchases of Trump-owned apartments, the president’s involvement with Russian associates in a development in SoHo, New York, and the president’s 2008 sale of his Florida mansion to a Russian oligarch, Dmitry Rybolovlev.

 

News of the subpoena was not unexpected. The Guardian reported in July that executives at the bank were anticipating they would receive a formal demand for the president’s banking records and had already established informal contacts with Mueller’s investigators.

The development nevertheless represents a significant blow to the president.

Deutsche Bank has for months been the subject of intense scrutiny – especially by Democrats on Capitol Hill – because of its dealings with the president and its history of banking violations, including its dealings in Russia.

The $300m in loans, some of which may have been restructured, were extended to Trump before he became president.

He has four large mortgages, all issued by Deutsche’s private bank. The loans are guaranteed against the president’s properties: a deluxe hotel in Washington DC’s Old Post Office building, just around the corner from the White House; his Chicago tower hotel; and the Trump National Doral Miami resort.

 

The Guardian reported in February that the bank had launched a review of Trump’s account earlier this year to gauge whether there were any connections to Russia and had not discovered anything suspicious.

Ivanka Trump, the president’s daughter and adviser in the White House and Kushner’s mother, Seryl Stadtmauer, are also clients of Deutsche Bank.

Deutsche Bank has been the only financial institution willing to lend Trump significant sums since the 1990s, a period in which other Wall Street banks turned off the tap after Trump’s companies declared bankruptcy.

The German bank sued Trump in November 2008 after he failed to repay a $40m debt on a $640m real estate loan. Trump countersued and the matter was eventually settled in 2010. Trump then began doing business with Deutsche’s private banking business, which extended new loans despite the bank’s history of litigation with the onetime real estate tycoon.

The special counsel’s office declined to comment.

 

 

 

 

On the fifth day of Christmas Bob Mueller gave to  me 

Trump's bank records, 

Paul Manafort, 

And Rick Gates, 

And two people 

Made a guilty plea