Showing posts with label Manafort. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Manafort. Show all posts

September 21, 2019

"Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents..."

"... implicating a top Trump aide in corruption and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found. A Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia, according to people with direct knowledge of the situation. The Ukrainian efforts had an impact in the race, helping to force Manafort’s resignation and advancing the narrative that Trump’s campaign was deeply connected to Ukraine’s foe to the east, Russia...."

From a 2-and-a-half-year-old article in Politico — "Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire/Kiev officials are scrambling to make amends with the president-elect after quietly working to boost Clinton" — which was linked to last night by Instapundit.

ADDED: I created a new tag just now — "Trump and Ukraine" — and then I searched the archive to see where it might need to be added. That got me back to some things that I'd lost track of. I'll put these in reverse chronological order. After you read the first 3, you'll see that everything we're getting excited about these past few days was already basically there in the news last April/May. For me, this reinforces the suspicion I aired yesterday, that the real motivation for surfacing this story now is to push Biden out.

From May 11, 2019:
"Facing withering attacks accusing him of seeking foreign assistance for President Trump’s re-election campaign, Rudolph W. Giuliani announced on Friday night that he had canceled a trip to Kiev in which he planned to push the incoming Ukrainian government to press ahead with investigations that he hoped would benefit Mr. Trump. Mr. Giuliani, President Trump’s personal lawyer, explained that he felt like he was being 'set up,' and he blamed Democrats for trying to 'spin' the trip. 'They say I was meddling in the election — ridiculous — but that’s their spin,' he said."

The NYT reports.
From May 10, 2019:
“We’re not meddling in an election, we’re meddling in an investigation, which we have a right to do. There’s nothing illegal about it," said Giuliani. "Somebody could say it’s improper. And this isn’t foreign policy — I’m asking [Ukraine] to do an investigation that they’re doing already and that other people are telling them to stop. And I’m going to give them reasons why they shouldn’t stop it because that information will be very, very helpful to my client, and may turn out to be helpful to my government."

From "Rudy Giuliani Plans Ukraine Trip to Push for Inquiries That Could Help Trump" (NYT).

What is Ukraine currently investigating that Giuliani wants to encourage? According to the NYT, it's "the origin of the special counsel’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election" and "the involvement of former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s son in a gas company owned by a Ukrainian oligarch."
The investigations had been opened by Ukrainian prosecutors serving during the term of the country’s current president, Petro O. Poroshenko. He lost his re-election bid last month to Volodymyr Zelensky, a comedian and political newcomer....

March 8, 2019

"'Menopause lasts longer than that': Manafort’s 'shockingly lenient' sentence ridiculed."

That's a headline at WaPo. Completely unnecessary. No reason to drag a feminine health matter into the subject of Manafort's sentence.

This is another one of these mainstream media articles that just tap social media. What are the tweets about the surprisingly short sentence the federal judge gave Manafort?
On Twitter, users employed a particular shtick: Contrasting the length of the sentence with other common situations. By early Friday, the phrase “47 months” had been tweeted thousands of times.

“I have stuff in my fridge that’s been there 47 months,” one Twitter user wrote....

CNN political commentator Ana Navarro-Cárdenas tweeted that she not only was grounded for “47 months for talking-back to my mom once,” but also had a “chancla,” or flip-flop, thrown at her....

47 months? I’ve seen longer sentences in Raymond Chandler novels.
You get the idea. But one person said, "47 months. Menopause lasts longer than that," and that's the joke WaPo put in the headline.

The author of that tweet is Barbara Davilman, who identifies herself at Twitter as "tv writer/prod & author. I'm passionate about dogs and politics, struggle with my weight and hair and worry that sane people are a minority." So it's a woman, and she's doing "woman" topics. I guess there's still a market for such junk. Menopause jokes. So retrograde.

And don't get me started on Ana Navarro-Cárdenas. Apparently, throwing shoes at children is okay, and you can out your mother as a shoe-thrower... when it's in service to the anti-Trump agenda and it has ethnic zing.

February 24, 2019

"One of the worst things to happen in America in the last two years is, surely, the birth and spread of the phrase 'nothing burger.'"

"It is used by President Trump’s supporters whenever Robert Mueller issues anything, including the many times he’s issued things that are, quite clearly, something burgers, with lots of shocking and damaging information that implicates people close to the President in something that seems like potential collusion with Russia or other possibly related crimes. [The Paul Manafort sentencing memo], Mueller’s longest, can be seen, by avid followers of his investigation, as not only an exquisitely built nothing burger but a commentary on our age and our expectations—at least, as it relates to the question of collusion during the 2016 election. Andy Kaufman could have hardly done so good a job at tweaking our deepest hunger."

Writes Adam Davidson in The New Yorker in "Robert Mueller’s Nothing-Burger Sentencing Memo on Paul Manafort."

Help me understand what Davidson was picturing when he wrote "Andy Kaufman could have hardly done so good a job at tweaking our deepest hunger." Presumably, he thinks Andy Kaufman did a really good job of tweaking our deep hungers, but which hungers? When? Can you dig up any clips of Kaufman that show him excelling at tweaking deep hungers? Outstripping Andy Kaufman — in Davidson's idea is Robert Mueller — right? — not the "avid followers" of the investigation. The "avid followers" are the audience for Mueller, and Mueller, like Kaufman, is seen as putting on a show for aficionados.

We, the audience, sit expectantly, wanting something from the showman, but he  withholds, even as he maintains our rapt attention. We keep watching, because he's captured our attention, but Mueller has captured our attention because we hope/fear he's got something devastating on Trump. The "deepest hunger" Davidson is thinking about is for the destruction of Trump. How is that like what Andy Kaufman did when — to name 2 examples of Kaufman playing with audience expectations — he did a show that consisted of nothing but singing all the verses of "99 Bottles of Beer on the Wall" or he stood on stage and read the entire text of "The Great Gatsby"?

There was no "deep hunger" that Kaufman was tweaking. He was tweaking the shallow hunger — borne of ticket-buying and seat-sitting — that there will be a show. When will this get funny? The joke is that it will never get funny. It will just go on like this. It's the nothing. The joke's on you for expecting something conventional and the only way to squirm out of your predicament is to realize it before the other people sitting around you not understanding that I'm never going to give you what you're dumb enough to want.

Am I approaching the enigma of the Mueller/Kaufman comparison?



ADDED: Davidson is surely wrong that the term "nothingburger" was born in the last 2 years! The OED traces the term all the way back to 1953. The official definition is: "A person or thing of no importance, value, or substance. Now esp.: something which, contrary to expectations, turns out to be insignificant or unremarkable."

Maybe Davidson — a fan of Kaufman's? — really is doing comedy. I must admit I laughed a lot while reading it out loud last night. He can't really mean that the phrase "nothing burger" is "One of the worst things to happen in America," so that's the tip-off, right? I'm overthinking this. I know!

But he could be serious. Aside from the mistake of believing the term got born during the Trump administration, he could genuinely believe it's one of the worst things to happen in America in the last 2 years. All he'd need is a long "worst things" list. You could have a list of "The 1 Million Worst Things to Happen in the Last 2 Years," and then some irritating word could be on it.

November 28, 2018

"Manafort spoke to Julian Assange/Elvis's hair was black but mine's orange."

Jimmy Fallon has some fun with Trump's recent statement, "Other than the blonde hair when I was growing up, they said I looked like Elvis."



I love the discovery of a new rhyme for "orange," but you have to say "orange" like it's French:



And here's "Assange, Manafort Deny Report They Met. The White House Declined To Address It" (NPR)(quoting a Wikileaks tweet, "Remember this day when the Guardian permitted a serial fabricator to totally destroy the paper's reputation. @WikiLeaks is willing to bet the Guardian a million dollars and its editor's head that Manafort never met Assange").

September 15, 2018

Trump vs. Kerry.


August 22, 2018

"In Trump’s right-wing media universe, it was a day like any other."

Writes Isaac Stanley-Becker at WaPo:
Alongside a Daily Caller story about [Michael Cohen's pleading guilty] were laudatory posts about Trump, from the president’s defense of free speech to his status as “the most feminist president.” TheBlaze gave prominence to Trump’s attacks on ESPN for not “defending our anthem,” foregrounding the president’s grievances with NFL players who kneel during the national anthem to protest police violence.
Meanwhile, conservative talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh asserted that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III isn’t interested in what Trump’s former attorney has to say....

If [Trump] went online shortly before 4 p.m., the only “BREAKING NEWS” alert he would have seen was the one from Fox about the 24-year-old undocumented immigrant from Mexico who law enforcement officials say killed Mollie Tibbetts, the 20-year-old college student who disappeared last month.

Alarm over the student’s death dominated the president’s feed... “OUTRAGE!” steamed Laura Ingraham....

Hannity dismissed Tuesday’s news as a bloodthirsty campaign against the president. “The media is once again beside themselves with false reporting, speculation and hysteria,” he said....
The only part of this right-wing media coverage I consumed yesterday was a bit of Fox News, which I did not turn on, but only overheard. As I said yesterday:
On Fox News — "The Five" — there's too much talk about the Iowa murder case, with a suspect who's been in the country illegally, and how this might be what ordinary Americans really care about. I was groaning aloud at this labored effort.
My comments section often seems like part — a very small part — of the right-wing universe, and I got a lot of pushback for criticizing Fox for putting an Iowa murder story at the top of the news on such a big national news day.

Examples of comments: "Well Ann I disagree. I am angry about Mollie Tibbetts murderer, but don’t give a damn about Manafort or Cohen." "I kind of do care about murder more than I care about selectively prosecuted financial crimes. Both are bad -- but dead bodies should perhaps get more of our focus." "Mollie Tibbetts' murder is going to enrage a lot of people. Like me. In 2015, when Kate Steinle was murdered by an illegal alien, no politician said a word until candidate Trump began slamming it, slamming our laws, etc. That started momentum that carried him all the way to the White House. I'm willing to bet that people--like me--would rather have him and his policies in the White House than hear about what dodgy Michael Cohen had to say to buy five years."

IN THE COMMENTS: tim maguire said, "Ms. Althouse herself has highlighted Drudge's front page. Stanley-Becker needs to stick his head outside is protective cocoon once in a while is he doesn't want to look like an idiot while talking about people who aren't him." Yes, Drudge is also "right-wing media" (within the Stanley-Becker world view) and — as I showed you in my above-linked post from yesterday — Drudge looked like this:



AND: A day later, Drudge is still showing Trump in Hell. The red is gone, but "IMPEACHMENT FEARS" have arrived:

August 21, 2018

Trump in Hell.



NYT: "Michael Cohen Says He Paid Off Women Who Claimed Affairs at Trump’s Direction."
Michael D. Cohen, President Trump’s former fixer, pleaded guilty on Tuesday to campaign finance and other charges. He made the extraordinary admission that he paid a pornographic actress “at the direction of the candidate,” referring to Mr. Trump, to secure her silence about an affair she said she had with Mr. Trump.

Mr. Cohen told a judge in United States District Court in Manhattan that the payment was “for the principal purpose of influencing the election” for president in 2016.

Mr. Cohen also pleaded guilty to multiple counts of tax evasion and bank fraud, bringing to a close a monthslong investigation by Manhattan federal prosecutors who examined his personal business dealings and his role in helping to arrange financial deals with women connected to Mr. Trump.
NYT: "Paul Manafort Guilty of 8 Charges in Fraud Trial."

Trump made a short statement as he was getting off the plane in West Virginia (where he'll have a rally soon). Trump repeatedly expressed empathy for Manafort and stressed that it had nothing to do with Russian collusion, and — it was quite noticeable — didn't mention Cohen at all.

On Fox News — "The Five" — there's too much talk about the Iowa murder case, with a suspect who's been in the country illegally, and how this might be what ordinary Americans really care about. I was groaning aloud at this labored effort.

August 15, 2018

"The dueling summations ended in a heated confrontation over whether Mr. Manafort’s lawyers had crossed a line in seeking to sow doubt about the prosecutors’ motivations."

"While the fraud charges against Mr. Manafort are not related to Mr. Mueller’s inquiry into Russian interference in 2016, as Mr. Trump’s former campaign chairman he might know about Moscow’s efforts to influence the campaign. Without saying so directly, the defense lawyers made clear that Mr. Manafort was a Republican, telling jurors that he had worked on the presidential campaigns of Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, Gerald R. Ford and George Bush. Though they did not mention Mr. Trump by name, they said that Mr. Manafort had no income in 2016 because he had volunteered for 'a presidential campaign.' After prosecutors protested, Judge T.S. Ellis III of the United States District Court in Alexandria instructed the jury to 'ignore any argument about the Justice Department’s motive or lack of motive in bringing this prosecution.'"

From "Evidence Against Manafort Is ‘Overwhelming,’ Prosecutors Say" (NYT).

August 10, 2018

"The judge in Paul Manafort's trial has called a recess without explanation."

"U.S. District Judge T. S. Ellis lll huddled with attorneys from Special Counsel Robert Mueller's office and Manafort's defense lawyers, as well as court security officers, for more than 20 minutes before calling the recess. The judge then exited the courtroom toward the jury room...."

Yahoo News.

ADDED: As you can see at the same link, the trial resumed and there was no big deal. Too bad this boring post sat at the top of the blog all day! I hate when that happens. And before I went out for my 4-mile walk, I considered putting up this photograph:

IMG_2198

But I decided it was too boring. How wrong I was! It is fascinating compared to the Manafort trial.

August 9, 2018

"Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team of prosecutors have spent several days building what many legal experts consider a slam-dunk case against President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort."

"But it has been surprisingly hard going at times, and as they prepare to rest their case by the week's end, they bear battle wounds that Manafort’s lawyers are sure to exploit as they mount their defense," Politico reports.
Most notably, Manafort’s attorneys have painted the prosecution’s star witness, Rick Gates, as a serial liar, embezzler and philanderer who — as a defense lawyer asserted in court on Wednesday — engaged in four extramarital affairs.

Several other setbacks have come courtesy of the cantankerous presiding federal judge, T.S. Ellis III...  The judge also seemed to give credence to Manafort’s argument that he did not keep close enough track of his money to commit knowing fraud and tax evasion.

“Mr. Manafort was very good about knowing where the money is and knowing where to spend it,” Gates said.

“Well, he missed the amounts of money you stole from him, though, didn't he?” the judge said.

Gates conceded that was true.

“So, he didn't do it that closely,” the judge quipped, to some laughter in the courtroom....

July 31, 2018

Prosecutor tells the jury that Manafort owned a $15,000 “jacket made from an ostrich" and had a "golden goose in Ukraine."

An oddly avian first day of trial.

(HuffPo's report.)

Why do I find it so funny that he said "jacket made from an ostrich" instead of "jacket made of ostrich leather" (or "ostrich leather jacket")? It creates a sense that it's very weird to appropriate animals for the manufacture of items for human comfort and pleasure. But only a comedian would say, That man is wearing shoes made from a cow!

May 4, 2018

"You don’t really care about Mr. Manafort’s bank fraud. You really care about getting information that Mr. Manafort can give you that would reflect on Mr. Trump and lead to his prosecution or impeachment or whatever."

Said Federal District Judge T. S. Ellis III today, reported in "Judge Questions Whether Mueller Has Overstepped His Authority" (NYT).
The judge’s unfriendly reception was a new turn of events for Mr. Mueller’s team, which has faced little or no confrontation during court hearings. Other Americans charged by the special counsel have pleaded guilty and most have agreed to cooperate with the prosecutors. But Mr. Manafort has mounted a vigorous defense against financial fraud and other charges, contending that Mr. Mueller has gone beyond his mandate.

Judge Ellis, 77, who was appointed to the federal bench in 1987 by President Ronald Reagan, seemed sympathetic to that argument. He said that the criminal activity described in the indictment “manifestly has nothing to do with the campaign” or Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Some of the allegations, he noted, date to 2005 and 2007.

“I don’t see what relation this indictment has with what the special counsel is investigating,” he said during an hourlong hearing on a defense motion to dismiss the charges. “I’m sure you’re sensitive to the fact that the American people feel pretty strongly about no one having unfettered power.”

March 29, 2018

"And Roseanne, if you ever get in trouble, don't worry, I have the pardon power."

Well, what do you think he said?

I'm reading "Trump called Roseanne Barr after successful series premiere" (CNN) and "Trump’s Lawyer Raised Prospect of Pardons for Flynn and Manafort" (NYT).

UPDATE: From Roseanne:
“We just kinda had a private conversation, but we talked about a lot of things,” she said. “He was just happy for me. I’ve known him for a lot of years and he’s done a lot of nice things for me over the years, and it’s a friendly conversation about working, television, and ratings.” 

January 3, 2018

"President Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, took the unusual step on Wednesday of suing the special counsel and asking a federal court to narrow his authority."

The NYT reports.
He sued both Mr. Mueller and Rod J. Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general who appointed him. The lawsuit said Mr. Rosenstein had improperly given Mr. Mueller the authority to investigate “anything he stumbles across while investigating, no matter how remote.”... The charges against Mr. Manafort date back years, well before he began working for Mr. Trump. His lawyers argue those charges exceed Mr. Mueller’s jurisdiction because he was authorized only to investigate separate matters if they arose from the Russia investigation.

October 31, 2017

"Why George Papadopoulos Is More Dangerous Than Paul Manafort."

That's a cagey headline at the NYT. It only makes a comparison, and that depends on how dangerous  Manafort. This is the same construction: Why a kitten is more dangerous that a mouse.

But an argument is made that there's something particularly dangerous about Papadopoulos, who has pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. The argument is made by Harry Litman, "a former United States attorney and deputy assistant attorney general, teaches at the University of California, Los Angeles, Law School and practices law at Constantine Cannon."
A footnote in Mr. Papadopoulos’s plea agreement includes a detail that is particularly damning when combined with previously reported information: Mr. Manafort wanted to be sure that Mr. Trump himself would not accept a Russian invitation to travel to Russia. In March 2016, George Papadopoulos sent an email to seven campaign officials, including Mr. Manafort and the campaign manager at the time, Corey Lewandowski, saying that Russian leadership wanted to meet with the Trump team. Mr. Manafort forwarded that email to Mr. Gates with a note saying: “We need someone to communicate that D.T. is not doing these trips. It should be someone low level in the campaign so as not to send any signal.”...

Third, a paragraph in the plea agreement indicates that Mr. Papadopoulos pleaded guilty on Oct. 5 and the plea was sealed so that he could act as a “proactive cooperator.” The meaning of that phrase is unclear. But one nerve-racking possible implication is that Mr. Papadopoulos has recently worn a wire in conversations with other former campaign officials....

Fourth, the plea agreement makes clear the Trump campaign knew about the hacking of Democratic National Committee emails well before it was publicly revealed....

Fifth, the episode that prompts the guilty plea is a virtual carbon copy of the infamous July 9, 2016, meeting that Mr. Manafort, Jared Kushner and Donald Trump Jr. attended with a Russian lawyer....

October 30, 2017

"The president digested the news of the first indictments in Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s probe with exasperation and disgust..."

"He called his lawyers repeatedly. He listened intently to cable news commentary. And, with rising irritation, he watched live footage of his onetime campaign adviser and confidant, Paul Manafort, turning himself in to the FBI. Initially, Trump felt vindicated. Though frustrated that the media were linking him to the indictment and tarnishing his presidency, he cheered that the charges against Manafort and his deputy, Rick Gates, were focused primarily on activities that began before his campaign. Trump tweeted at 10:28 a.m., 'there is NO COLLUSION!'... 'The walls are closing in,' said one senior Republican in close contact with top staffers who spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak candidly. 'Everyone is freaking out.'"

Somehow The Washington Post knows this. (It claims to have 2 sources "close to" Trump.)

"The Manafort Indictment: Not Much There, and a Boon for Trump."

Says Andrew C. McCarthy at The National Review.
Do not be fooled by the “Conspiracy against the United States” heading on Count One (page 23 of the indictment). This case has nothing to do with what Democrats and the media call “the attack on our democracy” (i.e., the Kremlin’s meddling in the 2016 election, supposedly in “collusion” with the Trump campaign). Essentially, Manafort and his associate, Richard W. Gates, are charged with (a) conspiring to conceal from the U.S. government about $75 million they made as unregistered foreign agents for Ukraine, years before the 2016 election (mainly, from 2006 through 2014), and (b) a money-laundering conspiracy....

The so-called conspiracy against the United States mainly involves Manafort’s and Gates’s alleged failure to file Treasury Department forms required by the Bank Secrecy Act....
ADDED: Meanwhile, at the NYT, you've got headlines like "Will Manafort Sing?" That's in terrible taste. So disrespectful to the prosecutor that we've been instructed to respect.
If Manafort pursues his self-interest, my bet is that he’ll sing. That then can become a cascade: He testifies against others, who in turn are pressured to testify against still others. And all this makes it more difficult to protect the man at the center if indeed he has violated the law.
That's Nicholas Kristof, sounding as though he's drooling over the keyboard... until he hit that big "if."

What "cascade" can there be if it's about Manafort financial dealings long before he had anything to do with Trump? Things need to be connected for there to be a cascade.

Why is the NYT feeding its readers this kind of wild speculation? Why not get back to the newly released JFK papers? People love conspiracy theories.

"The indictment of [Paul] Manafort and [his associate Rick] Gates makes no mention of Mr. Trump or election meddling."

"Instead, it describes in granular detail Mr. Manafort’s lobbying work in Ukraine and what prosecutors said was a scheme to hide that money from tax collectors and the public. The authorities said Mr. Manafort laundered more than $18 million. 'Manafort used his hidden overseas wealth to enjoy a lavish lifestyle in the United States without paying taxes on that income,' the indictment reads.... 'As part of the scheme, Manafort and Gates repeatedly provided false information to financial bookkeepers, tax accountants and legal counsel, among others,' the indictment read.... Mr. Manafort has expected charges since this summer, when F.B.I. agents raided his home and prosecutors warned him that they planned to indict him."

Says the NYT, in "Paul Manafort, Once of Trump Campaign, Indicted as an Adviser Admits to Lying About Ties to Russia."

Trump's reaction:

And that's followed by:
....Also, there is NO COLLUSION!