What can a reader of even average intelligence glean by reading
the Mueller Report—which is apparently too much for most Trump fans?
Was there collusion? Mueller says that a case for “collusion” could
not be made; but that doesn’t mean Trump campaign workers didn’t have multiple contacts
with Russian agents during the run up to the election. And it doesn’t mean that
they didn’t lie repeatedly and say they didn’t.
The case for obstruction of justice, however is strong—and obstruction
itself may have saved President Trump’s fat posterior in the end.
Starting on Page 129, the Mueller Report turns a focus on Paul
Manafort. That Manafort was dirty is made manifest. The only question
investigators had to answer was whether Manafort played Trump for a fool—which
he did—or if it might be Trump was in on the game. The fact Trump never took a pardon off the table may
hint at the answer to that second part.
“It was never discussed, but I wouldn’t take it off
the table. Why would I take it off the table?” President Donald J. Trump
What we learn beyond all doubt is that there are a lot of Russians
in this story and everyone involved is motivated by money.
Love of country is nowhere to be found.
First, to refresh your memory: Paul Manafort joined the Trump
Campaign in March 2016, oddly enough as an unpaid consultant. (He had a plan to
“monetize” his work later, so don’t be surprised.) On May 16 he was promoted to
campaign chairman and Rick Gates, his long-time business partner, became deputy
chairman. Manafort served as chair until the free press began to dredge up
evidence of numerous pre-campaign ties to Russians and pro-Russian individuals.
Manafort left the campaign in August. Gates worked there till the very end.
Then he shifted to the Trump Inaugural Committee.
Both Manafort and Gates are now convicted felons.
 |
| Mugshot of Paul Manafort. |
…to Russia through
his prior work for Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska and later through his work
for a pro-Russian regime in Ukraine. Manafort stayed in touch with these
contacts during the campaign period through Konstantin Kilimnik, a longtime
Manafort employee who previously ran Manafort’s office in Kiev and who
the FBI assesses to have ties to Russian intelligence [emphasis
added, unless otherwise noted].
According to investigators, throughout the 2016 campaign and long
after, Manafort and Gates were in regular contact with Russian individuals and
individuals representing Russian interests:
Manafort instructed
Rick Gates, his deputy on the Campaign and a longtime employee, to provide
Kilimnik with updates on the Trump Campaign—including internal polling data,
although Manafort claims not to recall that specific
instruction. Manafort expected Kilimnik to share that information
with others in Ukraine and with Deripaska. Gates periodically sent such polling
data to Kilimnik during the campaign.
Manafort was working on policies which would benefit Russia.
Of course, Candidate Trump and later President Trump, as well as
numerous aides and family members, insisted that they had never had any contacts with Russians during the campaign.
Investigators proved, however, that Manafort met with Kilimnik
twice during the campaign. The second meeting took place in New York City, on
August 2, 2016.
Kilimnik requested
the meeting to deliver in person a message from former Ukrainian President
Viktor Yanukovych, who was then living in Russia. The message was about a peace
plan for Ukraine that Manafort has since acknowledged was a ‘backdoor’ means for Russia to control eastern Ukraine.
To be blunt: Manafort was working on policies which would benefit
Russia not the United States.
Why?
He hoped to monetize his position.
Nor was this some one-off proposition. According to investigators,
Manafort and Kilimnik communicated about the peace plan on at least four
occasions after their first discussion on August 2.
Mueller’s investigators “reviewed numerous Manafort email and text
communications, and asked President Trump about the plan in written questions.”
But they could find no proof that Manafort passed along information about the
“Ukrainian peace plans to the candidate or anyone else in the Campaign or the
Administration.” That would seem to absolve Mr. Trump.
See! No collusion!
Sadly, for Trump fans, the report continues:
The [Special
Counsel’s] Office was not, however, able to gain access to all of Manafort’s
electronic communications in some instances, messages were sent using
encryption applications. And while Manafort denied that he
spoke to members of the Trump Campaign or the new Administration about the
peace plan, he lied to the Office and the grand jury about
the peace plan and his meetings with Kilimnik[.]
So: Trump might not have known what Manafort was about. And that
would make Trump a dupe.
Or: Trump knew what Manafort had been up to all along and dangled
a pardon to make sure Manafort kept his mouth shut once
investigators closed in. That would make him unfit to lead the nation.
A footnote on Page 130 makes this much clear: Trump claimed total
ignorance in regard to several key points: “According to the
President’s written answers [which he submitted to Mueller’s investigators], he
does not remember Manafort communicating to him any particular
positions that Ukraine or Russia would want the United States to support.”
(Again, even if we accept that Mr. Trump is innocent of all
crimes, he’s still a tool and a fool.)
Used to install friendly political officials.
The Mueller Report outlines Manafort’s efforts to advance Russian
interests in years before he joined the campaign:
A memorandum
describing work he performed for Deripaska in 2005, “referenced the need to brief
the Kremlin and the benefits that the work could confer on ‘the
Putin Government.’” Gates described this work as “political risk
insurance” and said that Deripaska used Manafort “to install friendly political
officials in countries where Deripaska had business interests.”
Meanwhile, thousands died in Ukrainian/Russian border clashes, but
neither Manafort nor Gates cared.
Cash vs. corpses.
Eventually, failure of a multi-million-dollar investment fund Manafort
created for the Russian oligarch led to a breach. “Gates stated that, by 2009,
Manafort’s business relationship with Deripaska had ‘dried up.’”
Manafort also did work as a political consultant for Ukrainian
President Viktor Yanukovych, till Yanukovych was forced to flee…to Russia…in
the face of widespread popular dissent in 2014.
*
As for Kilimnik, the Mueller Report leaves no room for doubt about
whose interests he was serving. “Kilimnik is a Russian national who has lived
in both Russia and Ukraine and was a longtime Manafort employee.” He had
“direct and close access to Yanukovych and his senior entourage.” He
“maintained a relationship with Deripaska’s deputy, Viktor Boyarkin, a Russian
national who previously served in the defense attaché office of the Russian Embassy
to the United States.”
When Mueller’s investigators began looking into his contacts with
Russians later, Manafort did his best to play dumb. He told questioners he did
not believe Kilimnik was working as a Russian spy.
The Mueller Report paints a different picture:
Kilimnik…attended
the [Soviet] Military Institute of the Ministry of Defense from 1987 until
1992. Sam Patten, a business partner to Kilimnik, stated that Kilimnik
told him that he was a translator in the Russian army for
seven years and that he later worked in the Russian armament industry selling
arms and military equipment.
U.S. government visa
records reveal that Kilimnik obtained a visa to travel to the United States
with a Russian diplomatic passport in 1997.
Jonathan Hawker is a
British national who specialized in public relations work. He told
investigators he had been contacted by Kilimnik about working “on a
public-relations project that would promote, in Western and Ukrainian media, Russia’s
position on its 2014 invasion of Crimea.”
Gates himself suspected Kilimnik was a spy. He shared that view
with Manafort, Hawker and Alexander van der Zwaan, an attorney who had worked
with Hawker previously.
Both van der Zwaan and W. Samuel Patten were later indicted for lying
about interactions with Manafort and Kilimnik and both men pled guilty. In a
footnote on Page 133 of the Mueller Report, we learn that Patten “admitted in
his Statement of Offense that he also misled and withheld documents from the Senate
Select Committee on Intelligence in the course of its
investigation of Russian election interference.”
Men with cash register souls.
One might ask how a man like Manafort landed a job on the Trump
Campaign in the first place. The Mueller report notes that, “Thomas Barrack and
Roger Stone both recommended Manafort to candidate Trump.” Stone and Manafort
had been partners in a consulting firm for many years and made their name by
doing lobbying work for what Newsweek magazine
describes as “unsavory foreign leaders.” In
fact, their firm became known as “the torturers’ lobby.”
As for Barrack, he was later subject of an Italian
government investigation into a massive tax-cheating
scheme.
These are the type of people you meet at every turn when you dig
into the Mueller Report: men with cash register souls.
Once hired, Manafort wasted no time contacting old business
partners—which might seem odd for a man focused on electing the next President
of the United States. “Immediately upon joining the Campaign,” investigators
note, “Manafort directed Gates to prepare for his review separate memoranda
addressed to Deripaska, [Rinat] Akhmetov, Serhiy Lyovochkin, and Boris
Kolesnikov, the last three being Ukrainian oligarchs” and leaders of a
pro-Russian political party. “The memoranda described Manafort’s appointment to
the Trump Campaign and indicated his willingness to consult on Ukrainian
politics in the future.” That is: Manafort was prepared to consult on
“Ukrainian politics” and policies favorable to pro-Russian interests.
On March 30, 2016, he sent a press release announcing his position
on the campaign to Kilimnik for translation and dissemination.
On April 11, Manafort emailed to ask if Kilimnik had shown “our
friends” the media coverage of his new role.
“Absolutely. Every article,” Kilimnik replied.
“How do we use to get whole. Has Ovd [Oleg Vladimirovich
Deripaska] operation seen?” Manafort wanted to know.
“Yes,” Kilimnik replied. “I have been sending everything to Victor
[Boyarkin, Deripaska’s deputy], who has been forwarding the coverage directly
to OVD.”
According to Mueller’s team, “Gates reported that Manafort said
that being hired on the Campaign would be ‘good for business’ and increase the
likelihood that Manafort would be paid the approximately $2 million he was owed
for previous political consulting work in Ukraine.” This payment had been held
up after the investment fund Manafort set up for Deripaska went bust.
Gates then deleted the communications on a daily basis.
Gates further stated
that Deripaska wanted a visa to the United States, that Deripaska could believe
that having Manafort in a position inside the Campaign or Administration might be helpful to Deripaska, and that
Manafort’s relationship with Trump could help Deripaska in other ways as well….Gates
also reported that Manafort instructed him in April 2016 or early May 2016 to
send Kilimnik Campaign internal polling data and other updates so that
Kilimnik, in turn, could share it with Ukrainian oligarchs. Gates understood
that the information would also be shared with Deripaska, ■■■ REDACTED ■■■
…Gates said that
Manafort’s instruction included sending internal polling data prepared
for the Trump Campaign by pollster Tony Fabrizio.
Fabrizio had worked with Manafort for years and was brought into the Campaign
by Manafort. Gates stated that, in accordance with Manafort’s instruction, he
periodically sent Kilimnik polling data via WhatsApp [an encrypted phone
application]; Gates then deleted the communications on a daily basis.
Cashing in was never far from Manafort’s mind. On July 7, 2016, a
Ukrainian reporter asked if he was concerned about the failed Deripaska-backed
investment. This prompted Manafort to ask Kilimnik whether there had been any
movement on this issue with “our friend.”
Kilimnik replied: “I am carefully optimistic on the question of
our biggest interest.”
Our friend [Boyarkin]
said there is lately significantly more attention to the campaign in his boss’
[Deripaska’s] mind, and he will be most likely looking for ways to reach out to
you pretty soon, understanding all the time sensitivity. I am more than sure
that it will be resolved and we will get
back to the original relationship with V.’s boss [Deripaska].
Eight minutes later, the Mueller Report explains, Manafort replied
that Kilimnik should tell Boyarkin’s boss,
“that if
he needs private briefings we can accommodate.” Manafort has alleged
to the [Special Counsel’s] Office that he was willing to brief Deripaska only
on public campaign matters and gave an example: why Trump selected Mike Pence
as the Vice-Presidential running mate. Manafort said he never gave Deripaska a
briefing. Manafort noted that if Trump won, Deripaska would want to
use Manafort to advance whatever interests Deripaska had in the
United States and elsewhere.
Plainly stated, then, Manafort was more interested in padding his
bank account at some future date than representing the true interests of the
United States. No one should be terribly surprised he lied about all of
this—got indicted—and got convicted by a jury on eight felony counts.
This, however, is surprising: Manafort never fell from grace with
Candidate and later President Trump.
Nor should we forget that during the same period when Manafort and
Kilimnik and Gates were plotting to make money, the Trump Campaign had already
had multiple contacts with Russians offering to help Trump win in November. All
these contacts are confirmed in the Mueller Report. In March and April 2016,
George Papadopoulos, a Trump adviser, had secret meetings with Russian assets
offering dirt on Hillary Clinton. In May, Roger Stone met with a different
Russian offering dirt on Clinton. In June, of course, Manafort, Jared Kushner
and Donald Trump Jr. met with agents of the Russian Federation, at Trump Tower.
The agenda for the meeting?
The Russians would bring dirt on Hillary.
Papadopoulos, Stone, Don Jr., Kushner and Manafort all promptly “forgot”
they ever had any of these meetings.
“A large jar of black caviar.”
You don’t have to be a genius to figure this out. Investigators
make it clear that Manafort and Kilimnik were in frequent contact during this
period—contacts which Manafort initially denied
under oath. According to Mueller, the two met for breakfast in New York
City on May 7, 2016. “According to Manafort [who later began to “cooperate”
with investigators], during the meeting, he and Kilimnik talked about events in
Ukraine, and Manafort briefed Kilimnik on the Trump Campaign, expecting
Kilimnik to pass the information back to individuals in Ukraine and elsewhere.”
Kilimnik spoke about a plan to boost election participation in the
eastern zone of Ukraine,” an area Putin
and the Russians hoped to annex.
The report continues:
Manafort met with
Kilimnik a second time at the Grand Havana Club in New York City on the evening
of August 2, 2016. The events leading to the meeting are as follows. On July
28, 2016, Kilimnik flew from Kiev to Moscow. The next day, Kilimnik wrote
to Manafort requesting that they meet, using coded language about a
conversation he had that day.
In an email with a subject line “Black Caviar,” Kilimnik wrote:
I met today with the
guy who gave you your biggest black caviar jar several years ago. We spent
about 5 hours talking about his story, and I have several important
messages from him to you. He asked me to go and brief you on
our conversation. I said I have to run it by you first, but in principle I am
prepared to do it.... It has to do about the future of his country, and is
quite interesting.
Eventually, Manafort admitted to investigators that “the guy who
gave you your biggest black caviar jar” was Yanukovych. In 2010, Manafort
admitted, he and Yanukovych had lunch to celebrate the Ukrainian presidential
election, which Yanukovych had won with Manafort’s help. Manafort was given “a
large jar of black caviar” worth $30,000 to $40,000.
At any rate, on July 31, 2016, Kilimnik flew back to Kiev from
Moscow. That same day he emailed Manafort that he needed “about 2 hours” for
their meeting “because it is a long caviar story to tell.”
Kilimnik would fly to New York City on August 2 “and he and
Manafort agreed to a late dinner that night.”
A “backdoor” means for Russia to control eastern Ukraine.
On the night of August 2,
Manafort and
Kilimnik discussed a plan to resolve the ongoing political problems in Ukraine
by creating an autonomous republic in its more industrialized eastern region of
Donbas, and having Yanukovych, the Ukrainian President ousted in 2014, elected
to head that republic. That plan, Manafort later acknowledged, constituted
a “backdoor” means for Russia to control eastern Ukraine. Manafort
initially said that, if he had not cut off the discussion, Kilimnik would have
asked Manafort in the August 2 meeting to convince Trump to come out in favor
of the peace plan, and Yanukovych would have expected Manafort to use his
connections in Europe and Ukraine to support the plan. Manafort also initially
told the Office that he had said to Kilimnik that the plan was crazy, that the
discussion ended, and that he did not recall Kilimnik asking Manafort to
reconsider the plan after their August 2 meeting….When confronted with an email
written by Kilimnik on or about December 8, 2016, however, Manafort
acknowledged Kilimnik raised the peace plan again in that email. Manafort
ultimately acknowledged Kilimnik also raised the peace plan in January and
February 2017 meetings with Manafort.
Second, Manafort
briefed Kilimnik on the state of the Trump Campaign and Manafort’s plan to win
the election. That briefing encompassed the Campaign’s messaging and its
internal polling data. According to Gates [who attended], it also included
discussion of “battleground” states, which Manafort identified as Michigan,
Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota.
After the meeting, Gates and Manafort both stated that they left
separately from Kilimnik. They knew the media was tracking Manafort and wanted
to avoid further reporting on his connections to Kilimnik.
A footnote on Page 139 of the Mueller Report makes it perfectly
clear why the Russians were so happy to be working behind the scenes with
Trump’s campaign manager and so willing to help the campaign out:
The Luhansk and
Donetsk People’s Republics, which are located in the Donbas region of Ukraine,
declared themselves independent in response to the popular unrest in 2014 that
removed President Yanukovych from power. Pro-Russian Ukrainian militia forces,
with backing from the Russian military, have occupied the region since 2014.
Under the Yanukovych-backed plan, Russia would assist in withdrawing the
military, and Donbas would become an autonomous region within Ukraine with its
own prime minister. The plan emphasized that Yanukovych would be an ideal
candidate to bring peace to the region as prime minister of the republic, and
facilitate the reintegration of the region into Ukraine with the support of the
U.S. and Russian presidents.
What exactly was Manafort hoping to gain? He told investigators
“that, in the wake of Trump’s victory, he was not interested in an
Administration job.” He said he preferred to “stay on the ‘outside’ and monetize his campaign position to generate
business given his familiarity and relationship with Trump and the incoming
Administration.” For Manafort, money—and heaping piles of it—was what it
was all about. After Trump defeated Clinton, he traveled to the Middle East,
Cuba, Japan, China and South Korea, where he was “paid to explain what a Trump
presidency would entail.”
Intent on hiding his Russian connections.
Even then, Manafort was intent on hiding his Russian connections. These
efforts eventually led to additional
charges of witness tampering.
The Mueller Report explains:
Manafort’s
activities in early 2017 included meetings relating to Ukraine and Russia. The
first meeting, which took place in Madrid, Spain in January 2017, was with
Georgiy Oganov. Oganov, who had previously worked at the Russian Embassy in the
United States, was a senior executive at a Deripaska company and was believed
to report directly to Deripaska. Manafort initially denied attending the
meeting. When he later acknowledged it, he claimed that the meeting
had been arranged by his lawyers and concerned only the [failed investment fund
mentioned earlier]. Other evidence, however, provides reason to doubt
Manafort’s statement… Kilimnik’s message states that the meeting was supposed
to be “not about money or Pericles [the failed investment]” but instead “about
recreating [the] old friendship”—ostensibly between Manafort and Deripaska—“and
talking about global politics.” Manafort also replied by text that he “need[s]
this finished before Jan. 20,” which appears to be a reference to resolving
Pericles before the inauguration.
On February 26,
2017, Manafort traveled to Madrid once more, this time to meet with Kilimnik.
“In his first two interviews with the Office, Manafort denied meeting with
Kilimnik on his Madrid trip and then—after being confronted with documentary
evidence that Kilimnik was in Madrid at the same time as him—recognized that he
met him in Madrid.”
Manafort remained in contact with Kilimnik throughout 2017 and
into the spring of 2018. “Those contacts included matters pertaining to the
criminal charges brought by the Office, and the Ukraine peace plan.”
Thus, the witness tampering charge (and subsequent conviction).
From start to finish, then, Mueller’s investigators make it clear
that the Russians were intent on using Manafort to convince the new
Administration to bend to their interests. And we know Manafort wouldn’t care
if U.S. or Ukrainian interests were harmed, so long as he cashed in bigtime.
We also know that a peaceful “resolution” of the situation in the
Ukraine would have given Trump cover to end the crippling financial sanctions
imposed by the Obama Administration after Putin invaded Crimea. We know an end
to sanctions would have allowed Russian oligarchs, including Putin, to get
their mitts on tens of billions of dollars in assets frozen overseas.
Again: You don’t have to be a genius to understand why Putin was
anxious for Trump to win in 2016.
“A very minor ‘wink’ (or slight push) from DT.”
Even after he left the campaign, Manafort continued to work with
Russian friends and pro-Russian leaders in Ukraine.
Manafort told the
Office that around the time of the Presidential Inauguration in January, he met
with Kilimnik and Ukrainian oligarch Serhiy Lyovochkin at the Westin Hotel in
Alexandria, Virginia. During this meeting, Kilimnik again discussed the
Yanukovych peace plan that he had broached at the August 2 meeting and in a
detailed December 8, 2016 message found in Kilimnik’s DMP email account. In
that December 8 email, which Manafort acknowledged having read, Kilimnik
wrote, “[a]ll that is required to start the process is a very minor ‘wink’ (or
slight push) from DT”—an apparent reference to President-elect Trump—“and a
decision to authorize you to be a special representative and manage this
process.”
According to Kilimnik, with that authority, Manafort “could start
the process and within ten days visit Russia.” Yanukovych would guarantee his reception at the very top
levels of the Russian government and “DT could have peace in Ukraine
basically within a few months after inauguration.”
That would be a coup for Trump and a huge return on all the hard
work Russians did to help his campaign.
Kilimnik, of course, soon fled the U.S. for Russia and it is
unlikely he’ll ever come back. Gates cut a deal to cooperate with investigators
and awaits sentencing. Manafort has been sentenced to seven years in jail.
Still, President Trump has never
turned his back on this felon. At 6:21 a.m. on August 22, 2018, he tweeted:
“I feel very badly for Paul Manafort and his wonderful
family. ‘Justice’ took a 12 year old tax case, among other things, applied
tremendous pressure on him and, unlike Michael Cohen, he refused to ‘break’ -
make up stories in order to get a ‘deal.’ Such respect for a brave man!”
Yes, “such respect for a brave man” who might have been able to
tie the president directly to contacts with Russians during the campaign.
Sure.
Why take a pardon off the table?
No comments:
Post a Comment