• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

WAPO: Manafort offered to give Russians ‘private briefings’ on 2016 campaign

L

Locke562

Member
PhoncipleBone said:
I don't understand the fascination with the pee tape. I know it means that most of the stuff in the Steele Dossier will be confirmed then, but this fascination that the tape is the be all end all is something that eludes me.
Click to expand...

We just hope it's the beginning of the end of evangelical support but it seems like nothing he's done thus far has eroded much of that support. Okay, that really won't happen. We hope it will affect low information voters. People not really paying attention. It's a big, flashy thing.
 
L

Lightning_Roller

Banned
Beer Monkey said:
Yup, the only way Manafort completely avoids prison is if he sings like a bird. Trump can't save him from Schneiderman. States' rights, motherfucker.
Click to expand...

Schneiderman

Schneiderman

Throws indicments like a Schneider can!!!

Can he convict? Complete a case?

Yes he can, he's Schneiderman!

Look out, here comes the Schineiderman!!
 
V

Vegetable Lasagna

Member
CraigerGamer said:
I wonder when the "he was only campaign manager for 2 months and that's why we fired him" narrative starts?
Click to expand...

It already has.

“Obviously there’s been discussion of Paul Manafort who played a very limited role for a very limited amount of time,” Spicer said.

That's a Spicer quote from months ago.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
B-Dubs said:
We're already on our second scoop today, remember the NYTimes story from earlier?



Yea, it reads as if this was leaked from Mueller's camp. He's still applying that pressure from the look of it.
Click to expand...

There was a really good blog post about leaks recently which I can't find right now, but there were three major points to consider: reporters do their best to be as precise and honest as possible in their attributions, they won't attribute thought processes (such as "so and so believes") that they can't verify, and prosecutors face major civil and criminal penalties for leaking their investigations, while defense lawyers (and Congressional investigators) do not.

Note this:

wapo said:
Less than two weeks before Donald Trump accepted the Republican presidential nomination, his campaign chairman offered to provide briefings on the race to a Russian billionaire closely aligned with the Kremlin, according to people familiar with the discussions.

Nonetheless, investigators believe that the exchanges, which reflect Manafort’s willingness to profit from his prominent role alongside Trump, created a potential opening for Russian interests at the highest level of a U.S. presidential campaign, according to people familiar with the probe.

People close to Manafort believe Mueller’s goal is to force the former campaign chairman to flip on his former Trump associates and provide information.

Last month, Mueller’s team told Manafort and his lawyers they believed they could pursue criminal charges against him and urged him to cooperate in the probe, providing information about other members of the campaign.
Click to expand...

"Investigators" could mean Congress or Mueller. They quote what "investigators" believe and what people close to Manafort believe, but they only describe what Mueller's team SAYS.

I read this as having two main sources -- some number of people working on the Congressional investigation, and some number of people on Manafort's defense team.
 
M

Master Yoshi

Member
JE1TRJT.gif
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
pigeon said:
There was a really good blog post about leaks recently which I can't find right now, but there were three major points to consider: reporters do their best to be as precise and honest as possible in their attributions, they won't attribute thought processes (such as "so and so believes") that they can't verify, and prosecutors face major civil and criminal penalties for leaking their investigations, while defense lawyers (and Congressional investigators) do not.

Note this:



"Investigators" could mean Congress or Mueller. They quote what "investigators" believe and what people close to Manafort believe, but they only describe what Mueller's team SAYS.

I read this as having two main sources -- some number of people working on the Congressional investigation, and some number of people on Manafort's defense team.
Click to expand...

This is probably right. I'll be honest and admit I don't have a whole lot of experience with legal reporting like this.

Actually, in that case there could be a third source there. The "people familiar with the discussions." If that were the investigators I assume they'd be sourced as such.
 
N

Nelo Ice

Banned
B-Dubs said:
Schniderman (the NY AG) is working with Mueller on Manafort's (and probably Trump's) money laundering in NY. Trump can't pardon state crimes, only federal.
Click to expand...
Good thing he's working with a blue AG. I can only imagine the shitshow if he had to try and work with a Republican AG on state charges.
 
A

ArkhamFantasy

Member
This is probably a dumb question, but in these types of cases we always hear things like "Thousands of documents", what the heck are these?

If i got raided by the FBI they'd find like 2 pieces of paper in my house. Are they making receipts for their crimes???
 
R

Random Human

They were trying to grab your prize. They work for the mercenary. The masked man.
ArkhamFantasy said:
This is probably a dumb question, but in these types of cases we always hear things like "Thousands of documents", what the heck are these???

If i got raided by the FBI they'd find like 2 pieces of paper in my house.
Click to expand...
Probably mostly emails. Most of it's nothing.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
ArkhamFantasy said:
This is probably a dumb question, but in these types of cases we always hear things like "Thousands of documents", what the heck are these???

If i got raided by the FBI they'd find like 2 pieces of paper in my house.
Click to expand...

How many Word or text documents do you have on your computer?
 
F

Fenderputty

Banned
pigeon said:
There was a really good blog post about leaks recently which I can't find right now, but there were three major points to consider: reporters do their best to be as precise and honest as possible in their attributions, they won't attribute thought processes (such as "so and so believes") that they can't verify, and prosecutors face major civil and criminal penalties for leaking their investigations, while defense lawyers (and Congressional investigators) do not.
Click to expand...

Was it this?

https://www.lawfareblog.com/how-read-news-story-about-investigation-eight-tips-who-saying-what

Great read by the way. Highly recommend everyone in here read it;
 
B

BertramCooper

Banned
It seems like Team Trump's basic defense is, "Yeah, we had all of these secret meetings and conversations with Russian operatives that we didn't disclose until the press forced them out into the open, but none of them actually led to anything whatsoever."

Seems...kinda implausible!
 
N

Nekofrog

Banned
B-Dubs said:
I dunno about that. This feels more like they're turning the screws on Manafort and seeing what he gives them as a result.



The Pee Pee Tape is the ultimate comedy ending for all of this. Imagine this as the plot to a movie, wouldn't you be disappointed if you don't get it at the very end?
Click to expand...

It would be a mid or post credits sequence in the movie. Halfway through the scrolling text a security camera video feed pops up on the screen, with the actor playing Donald Trump exuberantly jumping up and down in his stained tighty whities, yelling at the top of his lungs. "Take THAT, Obummer!" He exclaims as pee trickles down a sheet.
 
A

androvsky

Member
Sephzilla said:
Speaking of scoops/cones/etc, isn't there still the rumor that the WSJ is sitting on some kind of megaton article?
Click to expand...

It was the Wapo that was supposed to have the megaton article about collusion. The rumor started a few days before a WSJ article that showed end-to-end collusion, but was a bit weak in the middle. The main source for that one was the guy working for an oppo firm that killed himself a couple weeks after the story because he had a terminal diagnosis and wanted his family to get the life insurance before it ran out, iirc.

But I think twitter-verse had confused wapo with wsj and so it's persisted and grown every day there's no giant story from the wapo.
 
J

jmood88

Member
Getting involved in Trump's campaign was the worst decision Manafort could have made. He could have just kept on getting money from European dictators and no one would've cared.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Fenderputty said:
Was it this?

https://www.lawfareblog.com/how-read-news-story-about-investigation-eight-tips-who-saying-what

Great read by the way. Highly recommend everyone in here read it;
Click to expand...

It is this, yes. Thanks for finding it!

B-Dubs said:
This is probably right. I'll be honest and admit I don't have a whole lot of experience with legal reporting like this.

Actually, in that case there could be a third source there. The "people familiar with the discussions." If that were the investigators I assume they'd be sourced as such.
Click to expand...

There could be. I get the impression that the vast majority of the story is just coming from Manafort's attorneys. Note, especially:

wapo said:
People close to Manafort told The Post that he and Kilimnik used coded language as a precaution because they were transmitting sensitive information internationally.
Click to expand...

On its face this is literally an admission of guilt. This person close to Manafort must be very close -- maybe even Manafort himself -- or there's no way they'd print this.

The only thing in this story that can't have come from Manafort or his lawyers are the two sections about what "investigators believe." That must come from the investigators -- only they can testify accurately as to what they believe.

My read of this is that "people familiar with the probe" are people working directly on the Congressional investigation and every other sourcing is Manafort's team. But it's weird that there are so many separate sourcing notes if there's just one source, so you might be right. There could be other people involved, most notably people near Kiliminik.
 
S

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
Everyone involved with Trump is so freaking clumsy and dumb. At every step of the way. It’s genuinely difficult to find a clever or competent person in his inner circle and impossible to find even one ethical person. Not a single one.
 
S

SlickShoesRUCrazy

Member
I'm ready for the bombshell that ties trump to all of this.

I don't want to see trump try to play "im ignorant" card.

He and his entire company/name/franchise needs to be permanently dismantled.
 
X

x24hrs2livex

Banned
Stinkles said:
Everyone involved with Trump is so freaking clumsy and dumb. At every step of the way. It’s genuinely difficult to find a clever or competent person in his inner circle and impossible to find even one ethical person. Not a single one.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Trump wasn't a good businessman so of course it's only logical to assume he'd make a lousy criminal.
 
H

Horns

Member
It's looking worse and worse everyday for Trump. This gives me a little joy in our current fucked up political climate.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
jmood88 said:
Getting involved in Trump's campaign was the worst decision Manafort could have made. He could have just kept on getting money from European dictators and no one would've cared.
Click to expand...

When you work for Putin you work for the dictators Putin wants you to work for.

A big part of the topic of these email threads are that the guy he's offering to meet with is suing him for $13 million. Guess what happens if Manafort just waits around for that to come to trial?
 
F

Fenderputty

Banned
pigeon said:
It is this, yes. Thanks for finding it!
Click to expand...

Wasn't too hard. I read the same thing a short while ago. I think the link was posted on Whittes twitter after one of the booms. I specifically remembered the points you brought up and thought "fuck I bet we read the same thing"

I actually wanted to find the link because I agree with you. It's a valuable read and worthwhile to anyone whos trying to keep up with this investigative reporting on the Russia probe.

pigeon said:
There could be. I get the impression that the vast majority of the story is just coming from Manafort's attorneys. Note, especially:



On its face this is literally an admission of guilt. This person close to Manafort must be very close -- maybe even Manafort himself -- or there's no way they'd print this.
Click to expand...

Good find. Not sure what the purpose of that leak would be though ...

EDIT: Maybe he doesn't mind the info leaking if he's flipped?
 
R

RDreamer

Member
SlickShoesRUCrazy said:
Not enough. I'm talking about a tape recording of trump telling manafort to contact putin levels of bombshell.
Click to expand...

I just love how shit that would have murdered anyone else in politics forever is graded on a curve for Trump.

I think it shows that we as Americans really have no idea what to do or how to judge things when they’re so out in the open and completely obvious. We’re looking for a smoking gun and there’s been like 10. Trump told us he shot the gun. But it’s all not quite because it’s seriously bizarre for this stuff to be so out there. It’s so obvious it feels like we need to somehow find more. Go deeper. We’re used to people hiding the gun.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Fenderputty said:
Good find. Not sure what the purpose of that leak would be though ...
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't know either. It's a pretty bad sign for your case when you feel like leaking an admission of guilt is a good idea.

Might indicate that Manafort has already flipped and isn't worried about his legal outcome, I guess?

edit: Looks like your edit went to the same place my mind did.
 
J

jellies_two

Member
B-Dubs said:
Manafort has got to be the single dumbest human being on the face of the Earth. I mean, in what fucking universe do you say something like that in an e-mail? At least do it over the phone so there's potentially no records to be dug up.
Click to expand...

I don't know if it was for this but he was already using unsent email drafts and shared email logins to communicate with "his Russian friends" according to the IMessage dump of his daughters phone.
 
B

BrassDragon

Member
The key thing here is motivation: why would a Russian oligarch close to Putin need ongoing personal updates / briefings on the activities of the presumptive GOP presidential candidate?

The article alludes to this with the passage:

In one April exchange [with Oleg Deripaska] days after Trump named Manafort as a campaign strategist, Manafort referred to his positive press and growing reputation and asked, “How do we use to get whole?”
Click to expand...

They're trying to deflect this to nonsense about collecting Manafort's outstanding debts in Eastern Europe but that's not an operation you need the clout of a US presidential candidate for.

I don't see how this could refer to anything other than a policy platform Deripaska wanted Manafort to push within the GOP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Manafort Had $60M Relationship with Russian Oligarch
1
879
buttery fistful replied
Manafort's emails show he sold confidential Trump campaign info to Russian oligarch
2
95
18K
GaimeGuy replied
Paul Manafort Had $60M Relationship with Russia - Much higher than previous reports
2
64
12K
Strike replied
US Officials Intercepted Talks Between Manafort and Russians about 2016 Election
12
3K
KernelPanic replied
CBS: Officials intercepted Manafort speaking to Russians about the 2016 campaign
2 3
102
16K
IamDodongo replied
Top Bottom