Columns, Criminal law, International, Justice, Lawyering

Is Mueller Uncovering Ukrainian Rather Than Russian Collusion?

Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on status of the Mueller investigation and what we have learned about Russian collusion. On Friday, Mueller filed what could be his last major filing before the submission of his report to Attorney General Bill Barr. It was the Manafort sentencing report and, once again, it was long on Ukrainian and short on Russian collusion. Indeed, Manafort’s lobbying efforts were designed to help Ukrainian figures on issues stemming from their internal political tensions and investigations. For example, the highly detailed filing discusses how Manafort was given millions to further a “furtive activity in connection with the United States’s consideration of a resolution condemning Ukraine for President Yanukovych’s locking up his political opponent Tymoshenko.” Mueller discusses the focus of Mueller’s work as “lobbying for Ukraine.” While Mueller could still present evidence of Russian collusion, this filing continues a notable trend in the omission of such evidence by key players. If Manafort was an agent for Russia, it would likely have been mentioned in his sentencing report and used as the basis of either a FARA or related charge. Instead, the filing shows Manafort was working for Ukrainian not Russian interests in these criminal enterprises.

Here is the column:

The news that special counsel Robert Mueller may complete his work as early as next week has sent Washington into what Victorian women called “vapors.” For Republicans, the fear is that the report will build a case for criminal conduct that could be the basis for an indictment later but an impeachment now. For Democrats, the fear is that the report will fall short of delivering on proof of Russian collusion. The anticipation of the report was heightened by the shocking statement by former FBI Acting Director Andrew McCabe that President Donald Trump could be a “Russian asset.”

In this twilight moment, the mind races in anticipation. However, the most fascinating element may not be the role of Russia but the role of Ukraine. To be sure, Russia occupies part of Ukraine, wants sanctions lifted over its occupation of Crimea, and works through connections there. Russia was open about its desire to address those sanctions imposed by Congress, reaching out to Republicans and Democrats. There is nothing wrong in such an effort. Likewise, there was nothing wrong with former national security adviser Michael Flynn talking sanctions with Russian diplomats as part of the transition. The crime was his lying about those conversations.

Russia may have preferred Trump to Hillary Clinton. Indeed, it may have viewed his election as wickedly destabilizing for the United States and its allies. Yet, that could well be the extent of the purpose of the operation. But what is remarkable is how all investigative roads seem to lead to Kiev, not Moscow, in terms of key figures. It raises the question of whether Russian hacking efforts in the American election in 2016 were little more than what they seem as a clumsy leak and trolling operation.

So far we have seen no direct connection between the Russians and the Trump campaign as part of a conspiracy to hack the computer systems of the Democrats. We do have is a lot of connections to Ukrainians, along with a lot of money. When the FBI pulled back the curtain from the sordid dealings of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, they found Ukrainians aplenty. Manafort was connected to Ukrainian politician Serhiy Lyovochkin and oligarch Rinat Akhmetov, among others, and received at least $60 million for his work. While some of these individuals favored Russia, their main interest was to maintain power and profits in Ukraine. Manafort struggled to satisfy them even as his connections drew attention and, ultimately, resulted in his being dismissed from the Trump campaign.

The special counsel recently persuaded a federal judge to toss out the cooperating witness agreement with Manafort because he allegedly lied about meeting and sharing polling data with Ukrainian oligarch Konstantin Kilimnik, who has reported ties to Russian intelligence. A second incident allegedly involved meeting Kilimnik in 2016 to discuss a possible Ukrainian peace plan. Mueller told a federal court that Manafort continued workingfor such Ukrainian interests even after he was indicted, and documented wire transfers of millions of dollars from both Lyovochkin and Akhmetov.

Manafort worked primarily for the interests of notorious former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, who was responsible for corruption, alleged murders of protesters, and arrests of opponents. Before Yanukovych fled to Russia, he accumulated a reported estimated net worth of $12 billion. His flight was why Manafort became desperate for money and reached out to Trump for the campaign job. Manafort associate Rick Gates, now a cooperating federal witness, told friends that in every Ukrainian ministry, Manafort “has a guy” and referred to his work as a “shadow government.”

One of the most interesting disclosures from the Flynn investigation was a meeting in New York with Ukrainian politician Andrey Artemenko, Trump lawyer Michael Cohen, and Trump business associate Felix Sater. Shortly before Flynn resigned, these figures were working on a deal in which sanctions against Russia would be lifted in exchange for Russia leasing Crimea for 100 years while recognizing Ukrainian sovereignty over that region. Cohen is tied to Ukraine in other ways. He was introduced to Trump by his father in law, Fima Shusterman, a naturalized American citizen from Ukraine. Cohen also ran a taxi medallion business with his business partner, the “taxi king” Simon Garber, who was born in Ukraine.

United States attorneys for the Southern District of New York opposed leniency for Cohen because they believe he withheld evidence of criminal conduct. Notably, the Southern District of New York was not investigating the Russian conspiracy. It was investigating the myriad criminal dealings of Cohen, including the taxi medallion business set up by Shusterman.

Trump and his counsel, Rudy Giuliani, have now suggested that Cohen is protecting his father in law. Giuliani alleged that Shusterman may have ties to “something called organized crime” in the Ukraine. Shusterman was charged over moving at least $20 million into Chicago to help finance his taxi operation and pled guilty to a criminal count in that investigation, which raised issues of possible money laundering and tax evasion. The recipients of the money were two business people born in Ukraine who were both identified in the FBI search warrant leading to the Cohen raid.

Bryan Cohen, brother of Michael Cohen, also has Ukrainian connections. Remember that meeting with Ukrainians to get a deal on Crimea? The motivating force behind it was said to be Alex Oronov, a naturalized American who ran a huge business in his native Ukraine. Bryan Cohen worked for Oronov and married his daughter. In 2016, Bryan Cohen still eviently worked for the Ukrainian company Grain Alliance, which paid at least $7 million into an limited liability company registered at his home. Oronov died not long after the backroom dealings were made public.

Other collateral figures with Ukrainian connections have come up in the documents of the special counsel investigation. At least two major public affairs firms had been allegedly paid by the European Center for a Modern Ukraine to help the government that supported Russia. They were listed as “Company A” and “Company B” in the Manafort and Gates indictments.

These Ukrainian connections continued into the inauguration of Trump. Mueller investigated roughly a dozen Ukrainians who came to Washington to promote a peace deal with Russia, as well as multiple Ukrainians who attended the inaugural festivities. This had also included an investigation into whether “illegal foreign lobbying related to Ukraine” occurred and whether Ukrainian government agents “used straw donors to disguise donations to the inaugural committee.” With all of these figures weaving their ways through the investigation, we could find Mueller discovering more evidence of Ukrainian collusion rather than of Russian collusion.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.

97 thoughts on “Is Mueller Uncovering Ukrainian Rather Than Russian Collusion?”

  1. Jan F, welcome to the “Trump Zone” where facts and truth are not permitted. As you can see, you WILL be attacked and mocked if your, or proven fact views are expressed, their world of alternative facts, and truth is not truth bubble of the flat earth is welcomed. I do wish them well with their on going battle with reality.

    1. It is likely that an “introduction” involving foolish and arrogant statements will draw fire.
      That’s what the phrase “asking for it” is all about.
      And, it is just as likely that a mindless troll groupie like Fishbrain will weigh in with more vacuous words and shows of support for his troll idols.

      1. Groupies don’t have groupies. L4D is a major FishWings groupie. Ergo, FishWings is not a troll groupie.

        1. I’m not interested in how L4D and others in her coven sort out these classifications; Fishwings is in fact a troll groupie to the Troll L4B.
          L4B may in fact be a groupie, possibly even the groupie once mentioned in a Larry David script……but that does not change the troll/ groupie relationship between L4B and her groupie Fishwings.

          1. FishWings was here first. FishWings was here long before L4D showed up. The Beatles were Bob Dylan groupies. Bob Dylan was not a Leadbelly groupie. Leadbelly was not a Stephen Foster groupie. Remain clueless. See what I care.

            2. OK…I will see what L4B cares.
              It is high on my list of “things to do today”.
              Given that it is early in her shift and WikiPedia Diane has other columns to post on her website here, I’ll try to keep my own comments that might distract her to a minimum.
              I won’t have hours on end to call attention to her most notable bull**** in any case, given her lengthy shift, the time-consuming translation from Dianese to English, etc.

              1. Konstantin Kilimnik remains indisputably Russian. Turley is wrong. Jan F is right. And FishWings knows it.

  2. What is wrong with this guy? This is a professor of law? He goes off half cocked on incomplete information and speculates false hoods. It is not a matter of differing opinions by armchair philosophers whether the Russians favored Trump’s election over Hillary. It is the GD official conclusion of the FBI and our intelligence agencies and confirmed by the GOP controlled Senate Intelligence Committees.

    Washington July 3. 2018

    “A Senate panel investigating Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election released Tuesday a written summary of its determination that the U.S. intelligence community correctly concluded Moscow sought to help Donald Trump win.

    The Senate Intelligence Committee’s report affirms conclusions that its members first announced in May. It stands in sharp contrast with a parallel investigation by the House Intelligence Committee, whose Republican members questioned the intelligence community’s tradecraft in concluding the Kremlin aimed to help Trump.

    The Senate panel called the overall assessment a “sound intelligence product,” saying evidence presented by the FBI, CIA and National Security Agency supported their collective conclusion that the Russian government had “developed a clear preference for Trump” over his opponent in the race, Hillary Clinton. Where the agencies disagreed, the Senate panel found those differences were “reasonable.”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/senate-report-affirms-intelligence-communitys-conclusion-that-russia-favored-trump-over-clinton/2018/07/03/4f0f03a2-7ef7-11e8-bb6b-c1cb691f1402_story.html?utm_term=.437d69878c48

    I’m sorry, but Turley’s column is either ignorant or purposeful propaganda. Hanging out here has lowered my respect for him.

    1. What is wrong with this guy? This is a professor of law? He goes off half cocked on incomplete information and speculates false hoods.

      Evidently he’s someone who doesn’t take for granted fictions in which you’re emotionally invested.

      1. So absurd disputes the fact that our intelligence agencies and the FBI have concluded that the Russian’s tried to swing the election to Trump, a fact which the GOP controlled Senate Intelligence Committee confirmed. Here’s your post modernism right here. You wing nuts can believe whatever you want and if you wait long enough the President will tell you the lie that crave.

        Revolting.

        Meanwhile Turley either doesn’t know this fact – why is he writing about it then – or is purposefully pretending it doesn’t exist, which is even worse.

        1. “Meanwhile Turley either doesn’t know this fact – why is he writing about it then ”

          Oh look, Peter H. little sister wandered into an adult area and demands to know why the host cant play with her using her IQ < 70 tools

          Dear Peter….come get your little sister. She has left her playpen yet again

        2. So absurd disputes the fact that our intelligence agencies and the FBI have concluded that the Russian’s tried to swing the election to Trump,

          With 100k worth of Facebook ads.

          1. And still another zombie for Trump.

            Since you guys exhibit no sign of self respect, why would anyone else hold you in that regard?

            1. They have not yet let go of the Seth Rich murder/leak conspiracy theory. And they never will. They’re still trying to rehabilitate the reputation of Tricky Dick Nixon, for crying out loud.

              1. A fine President. Fantastic foreign policy. Dynamic duo with the genius Kissinger.

                And yes it was a leak not a hack. Stop believing the lies. I won’t bother repeating technology 101 to fools.

                1. Bill Binney recanted, retracted and confessed to having been duped by The GRU. The metadata on the zero-day vulnerability was doctored. There was no zero-day vulnerability. If Binney can pull the bandages off his own eyes, then so can you. But you won’t. Because your motto remains, “Blindness is bliss.”

    2. I’m sure that JT will be crushed by an anonymous hack’s declaration that “Hanging out here has lowered my respect for him”.

        1. I didn’t vote for Trump, you moron,
          And I have stated that here a number of times.

            1. Why do you make baseless, crazy accusations?
              You state crap like “in his service” that you pull out of your *** with no basis for saying it.
              Please do not confuse calling out a scumbag like you with supporting Trump.

              1. It is established fact that Trump is a scumbag. You don’t know me, but I assure you that most of things I say everyday are not lies, I do not cause real pain to others, like federal workers, to support those lies – like Mexico will pay for the wall – I do not incessantly brag about things, many of which I have had nothing to do with, hire incompetent and corrupt cronies, buddy up to murderers like Putin and the Saudi sheik, and reward my friends and family members with millions of dollars from the public treasury.

      2. The column is about the alleged “collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russia.
        And it points out that the Ukraine/ Manafort connection, as well as others, are more indicative of a connection with the Ukraine than with Russia.
        If the Jan. F. criticism of the column is that ( in her view) it questions the Russian meddling in the 2016 campaign, or the Russian preference for Trump, she should point out where that was stated in the column.
        The reason it seems likely that this is L4B or one of her sisters from the coven is that she restates what was actually said, then critiques her restated version rather than the column itself.
        This is a common L4B stunt, and if Jan F. is not L4B, sid not waste any time getting in on that game.

        1. Learn how to read or maybe hold your tongue.

          Turley:

          “Russia may have preferred Trump to Hillary Clinton. Indeed, it may have viewed his election as wickedly destabilizing for the United States and its allies. Yet, that could well be the extent of the purpose of the operation.”

          Unless Turley has traveled to Moscow and has his own information, that is false reporting of the known facts.Why would he do that? Either ignorance or a propagandist. Neither is a good look.

          1. I don’t intend to entire weekend replying to comments from the prolific coven.
            Jan F/L4B did not demonstrate that the column questioned Russian meddling and preference in the 2016 election.
            And L4B/ “Jan F” is about the last person who should call others “propagandists”.

            1. Konstantin Kilimnik is not a Ukrainian oligarch. Kilimnik was born in The Ukraine before the Soviet Union collapsed. But that does not make the child of Russian parents a Ukraininian. When The Soviet Union collapsed, Kilimnik chose Russian citizenship.

              Turley is, at best, ill-informed.

              1. Actually, nothing makes anyone Ukraininian. Except for Allaninny and Devininny Nunes.

                1. “Actually, nothing makes anyone Ukrainian”.
                  Even Putin does not go that far, but I’m sure he’d be delighted seeing some fool make a statement like that.
                  The Ukraine is internationally recognized as a seperate, independent country.
                  Most speak Ukrainian, the country’s official language.
                  It has its own culture and history.

                  Anyone claiming that nothing makes anyone Ukrainian is doesn’t know what the hell they’re talking about.

                  1. Times to have your eyes-of-newt examined, Ptommy. The typo was Ukraininian–not Ukrainian. Now you’ll probably claim that the typo was some sort rhetorical witchcraft of the Ten Rapt Men variety rather than an instance of self-deprecating humor. There’s just no joy left in the world for Gnash.

                    BTW, Konstantin Kilimnik has been a citizen of Russia by choice since the collapse of The Soviet Union. Before the collapse of The Soviet Union, Konstantin Kilimnik was a citizen of The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics–as were all of The Ukrainians–without any choice in the matter. Kostya chose Russian citizenship because Kostya is, was and ever will be Russian–as in NOT Ukrainian.

                    Get a clue, Gnash.

                    1. If L4B is going to slip in new words previously unknown in either the English or Dianese language, it would be a good idea to update the Dianese Urban Dictionary,
                      It’s pretty obvious that a games-playing troll like L4B will not give a “troll language alert” when playing that particular stupid game.
                      So from time to time updates for translations from English to Dianese will be required to better determine the nature of which chicken**** game she happens to be playing at the time.

              2. Why am I reading Turley’s posts? His characterization of a someone he admits likely has ties to Russian intelligence as a “Ukrainian Oligarch” representing “Ukrainian interests” is not even internally consistent. This is really sloppy stuff.

                1. ” Why am I reading Turley’s posts?”
                  A good bet would be that she is a chronic nitpicker looking for something to bitch about, and a forum to write her own column.
                  She’s off to a hell of a start as an L4B clone, if she not L4B herself.
                  I wonder if their coven has seminars in sophistry and duplicity.

                  1. There’s no indication of 100-200 word sentences in the comments of Jan F thus far.

                    The Bournemouth Garbler is selectively observant and selectively oblivious, depending upon whichever ploy best allows him to lump his adversaries together into the same mixing bowl.

                    1. I did not state that it was certain that L4B and Jan F. were one and the same.
                      The same kind of duplicity and games-playing is evident in the similar posts of both of these low-life trolls.
                      Therefore, the possibility that L4B and Jan F. are one in the same can not be eliminated; it is, in fact, highly probable that L4B has another sock puppet.

                    2. Nor did you state that Konstantin Kilimnik was both Russian and Ukrainian. You just floated it out there in the manner of a trial balloon the same way Turley did.

                      Meanwhile, Kostantin “Kostya” Kilimnik is, always was, and ever will be, indisputably Russian. The evidence to warrant that assertion is all over this thread. Turley is either wittingly or unwittingly wrong.

              1. SBG,…
                When a piece of trash shows up here (like whover is posting under the alias Jan F.), I will occasionally comment on their posts, and give them the all the recogintion and respect😏 due to them.

                1. I feel your pain.

                  How many posts can this guy do without saying anything (I’m not that interesting). It’s embarrassing.

                  1. They all have Irritable Male Syndrome. Some of them may have uncontrolled, type II diabetes as well.

                    1. I’m sure that the passive-aggressive slimeballs that invite criticicism, ridicule, and contempt by their trolling can come up with all sorts of diagnoses to explain away why they are regarded as the Trash of the Thread.
                      And I’m also sure our Liar-in-Chief with the longest senority can come up with more than Diabetes if she does more research in her coven’s medical library.

              2. SBG says: February 24, 2019 at 7:09 PM

                “Tom – I think Jan F is a Russian or Ukranian bot. Just ignore!”

                Schlomo Bader Ginsburg–There’s no evidence of thinking in your thought. Just ignorance!

                1. SBG may or may not be correct in the expressing “bot thought” re our newest troll.
                  Given her recent? arrival here ( assuming she is not a sock puppet), SBG is being polite in looking for a relatively innocuous explanation for her lunacy and her hyperpartisan over-the-top, moronic comments.

          2. Jan, I think it’s quite possible Trump served as a useful idiot to Russia without totally ‘direct’ collusion. And it appears Professor Turley is allowing for that possibility in his phrasing here.

            But you should know Turley has a habit of waffling on Trump and Russia. About half his columns contain incriminating passages regarding Trump’s 2016 campaign. But then Turley likes to play baffled observer; viewing Christopher Steele and the FBI as possible ‘Deep State’ actors.

            I think Turley likes to keep himself in good standing with the Republican establishment while leaving windows open to genuine scrutiny.

            1. That has nothing to do with the fact that our intelligence agencies, the FBI, and the GOP controlled Senate Intelligence Committee say the Russian’s wanted to elect Trump, and Turley ignores this fact. If Mr Turley can’t either better inform himself or more cleverly cover up propaganda, he should post about something else.

              1. Jan, keep in mind that Turley is, for the most part, addressing a readership that only follows right-wing media. So he tends to omit realities well-covered by fine, mainstream sources.

                But again, Professor Turley leaves many windows open to genuine scrutiny of Trump. And that is, perhaps, to cover his own butt since Trump will more than likely implode at some point.

                1. If he’s going to ignore facts he should not bring up his fantasies. Why is his readership right wing? i thought he was an independent and principled observer of the world and the law.

                  My mistake I guess.

                  1. You say he ignores facts. What facts? Assessements are opinions. If they had facts, they would not need to make assessments. The Russians spent less money “supporting” Trump than did Obama in his opposing Netanyahu.
                    The FBI’s leadership has been proven to be anti-Trump and they have all been fired or resigned; some are living under the threat of prosecution for various crimes. Brenner and Clapper are political hacks. I believe that the Rusdians were messing with our elections to cause chaos. They could not have achieved any level of chaos if they had gone after Trump, as nobody expected him to win. When Trump unexpectedly won, the interference, including Russian agents input into the dossier paid for by Clinton, was used to try to destabilize the US. Democrats were happy to assist Russia in their indeavor.
                    Don’t get your panties in a wad simply because the author does not equate “assessments” to be facts, as you wrongly do.

                    1. I have stated the facts clearly and more than once above. I’m not doing it again, especially for a post modernist like you who thinks he can pick out what he wants to be true, and even worse, base that flimsy standard on what props up one of the best con men but worse liars in history. It is duly noted that you disagree with our intelligence agencies, the FBI, and the GOP controlled Senate Intelligence Committee and your opinion has been given it’s appropriate consideration.

                      Next

                    2. PS Obama did not spend any money opposing Netanyahu, nor did he show up in the Knesset to speak against his policies as Bibi did before the US Congress.

                      “In September 2013, the State Department funded two projects run by OneVoice, a New York nonprofit. The OneVoice mission is clear — to advance a two-state solution in Israel and the Palestinian territories….

                      …while Netanyahu waffled on the notion of a two-state solution in the run-up to the Israeli elections, the prime minister had been on record supporting a two-state strategy in November and the months before it.

                      ..OneVoice, he said, never “spent any U.S. government funds in connection with the recent elections in Israel. Claims to the contrary are simply wrong.”

                      There are two important points to unpack there. If OneVoice says it spent the money by November 2014, that would be before the Israeli elections were even scheduled. That happened in December after Netanyahu called for early elections.

                      The State Department said in a briefing that “no payment was made to OneVoice after November 2014.””

                      https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/mar/25/blog-posting/blog-claims-us-funded-anti-netanyahu-election-effo/

                      A two state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been official US policy for decades.

            1. Maybe SNOT will surprize us some day and actually say something beside the bitchy little comments she makes.

              1. Hey, quit posting dumb s..t and you won’t have to waste your weekend baling water. Here, let’s make it easy. Just copy and paste the appropriate response:

                1. I’m a Trump zombie who will believe any BS that props him up.
                2. Turley is correct to ignore facts because …

                1. When some two-bit hack uses the comments section here to set up their own column, I don’t want to take away from the valuable time that they spend spouting their nonsense.
                  Must be a busy day for the coven, cranking out column after column.
                  Try to pace yourself, L4B/ “Jan F.”

                    1. P.S. I love how they complain about personal slights, lack of discussion, etc. but are oblivious to their own BS. RWNJ attacks are common on this site.

      1. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/b6/The_Cover_film_poster.jpg/220px-The_Cover_film_poster.jpg
        Mr. Kurtz,..,
        – I just looked at the section of “Recent Comments” and noticed an unusually high level if activity from the coven(s).
        I might scan them some day as a rainy day project, but for now I plan on just watching the movie.
        It’s likely to be a better use of time, and may provide even better insight into the workings and tactics of a few prolific writers here in these threads.

        1. Did you know that Sparrows, too, are songbirds? Especially the Common, or House, Sparrow. The only time they’re not fighting amongst themselves is when a hawk, a jay or a crow shows up.

          https://www.britannica.com/science/territorial-behaviour

          Territorial behaviour, in zoology, the methods by which an animal, or group of animals, protects its territory from incursions by others of its species. Territorial …

  3. In days of old when Knights were bold and rubbers weren’t invented– we had a method of political push called Radio Free Europe. The Soviet Union had Radio Moscow. We had The Voice of America as well. These radio outlets blasted news and information across the dividing lines and tried to influence people living on the other side of the wall. The Russians ultimately gave up The Soviet Union and communism. The notion today that someone who obtains polling data and shares it with the other side is somehow treason or “collusion” is a bit goofy. The Trumpster got elected because Hillary was a mess. Voters did not want some itchBay in the White Hoiuse howling “Bill !” all the time.
    Hillary lost because she was too lazy to go campaign in Michigan.

    Those who yak about this “collusion” apCray need to wipe their rear ends with some Hillary portraited toilet paper and shut the uckFay up.

  4. It’s time you acknowledged that the targeted, political, selective prosecutions against conservatives and the Trump administration are absurd. Let’s examine a fact pattern.

    Democrats paid a political hack group called GPS which took money from Russia to create the phony dossier about Pres. Trump.

    The Clintons were paid half $1 million to speak to Russian banks.

    Hillary’s campaign and the DNC colluded with the Ukraine during the election. Ukrainian government officials 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 Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy to discuss the election.

    Clinton allowed 20% of our uranium to be sold to a Clinton friend and foundation donor in Russia.

    Mr. Obama was also a friend of the Russia and said, “This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility.” Mr. Medvedev appreciated Obama and responded “I I will transmit this information to Vladimir.”

    The “flexibility” after Mr. Obama’s election turned out to be Mr. Putin’s as he invaded and annexed Crimea, started a war to occupy t Ukraine, intervened to prop up Bashar Assad in Syria, covered for Assad’s use of chemical weapons, and helped North Korea evade United Nations sanctions.

    Mr. Putin’s attempt to meddle in U.S. elections began in 2014, long before Mr. Trump chose to run for President. That interference went unopposed by Mr. Obama, his CIA Director John Brennan and his Director of National Intelligence James Clapper until nearly the end of Mr. Obama’s second term.

    The Podesta Group, with close ties to the DNC and John Podesta, worked to win support for the agenda of the Russia-aligned former president of Ukraine, wsas cited in an indictment BUT WHERE”S MUELLER!!

    As a constitutional scholar you should be appaleed at the governments overreach via Mueller and its selective prosecutions. We need people like you to stop with the soft balling and yell the truth to those trying to spread lies (like Adam Schiff, Schumer, etc!)

  5. KEY PASSAGE FROM COLUMN ABOVE:

    “Russia may have preferred Trump to Hillary Clinton. Indeed, it may have viewed his election as wickedly destabilizing for the United States and its allies”.
    ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

    I believe that at the very least this was the situation. Russia favored Trump because they saw him as a destabilizing force. Which Trump has been! Trump’s thrusts towards alienating our allies and breaking-up NATO is precisely what Russia hoped for.

    So whether Trump colluded directly with Moscow or served as only a useful idiot, he has been exactly what Putin wanted for America.

    And one should note that Russia played a behind-the-scenes role in Britain’s Brexit referendum. There too the main objective was to break-up and, or, destablize the western alliance. In a span of just 2 years, America and Great Britain have been rocked by polarizing changes that have undermined our historic roles as western leaders.

  6. “With all of these figures weaving their ways through the investigation, we could find Mueller discovering more evidence of Ukrainian collusion rather than of Russian collusion.”

    Nope the nothing burger express rolls on ignoring crime and criminals and fattening the bank accounts of a new kind of criminal. Special Investi-gators. 40 million now down the drain on the trail of Nothing except large chunks of chewy pay checks ergo sum the need for the dash in their very apt title.

    WHEN? Is the investigation going to start? So far all I see is them condemning themselves.

  7. “So far we have seen no direct connection between the Russians and the Trump campaign as part of a conspiracy to hack the computer ….”

    Leaves a lot unsaid and un asked but finally the word collusion can be dropped and up jumps ‘conspiracy.’ Bfd plenty of that going around and ignored by and for the campaign of the DNC…

    So what?

    we should have been supporting the emergence of a new country and the return of an old country kurdistan as well

    Trust the left to one thing for sure. Back up marxist leninism no matter where and in what form.

  8. We’ve seen this modus operandi in microcosm during the Kavanaugh imbroglio. First, the 17-year old Kavanaugh is supposed to have assaulted someone. When that didn’t pan out, they move to a new square on the checkerboard and contend he’s a drunk. That’s none too plausible a thing to say about someone who has had no interruptions in his schooling or work history over 35 years and no peculiar medical problems. So, they move to a different square on the board and contend he’s lied about his history with alcohol and kinky sex (or is it that he lied about his history with talking about kinky sex?). Perhaps sensing that form criticism of his high school yearbook and adducing the opinion of a bad-attitude freshman room-mate from three decades back made them look faintly ridiculous, they then move to a different square on the board and contend that his raw emotions during testimony demonstrate he is unfit to be an appellate judge (a job he’d had for 12 years).

    And so it goes. ‘Emoluments clause’, ‘Russian collusion’, ‘obstruction of justice’, ‘all these convictions’, and now ‘Ukrainian collusion’. The moderator is at pains to acknowledge that it’s. all. rather. contrived.

    2. Tiax2……A spotless assessment! It’s as if those jackanapes kept a diary…… and you made a photocopy.

      1. Remember when we were taught in grade school that witches were found everywhere in Salem, MA and it was a shame it all happened? When they warned us that Puritans needled into everyone’s sexual business and dress attire in the early Colonial Days? When Southern Baptists were bludgeoned for hosting marches to decalre they were the Moral Majority and had the hubris to teach right vs wrong?

        Pfffft. They were total amateurs.

        The Irreligious Left hiding behind the Democrat in every political office, will go through your high school yearbooks to find evidence of Sssssaaaaaatan!, run your Passport to investigate who’s hand you shook overseas, set you on fire for reading any news outlets contrary to their Screed Texts, and now we realize the Moral Majority failed miserbaly because they used Sacred books and Tablets with 10 Rules on them as their tools to move people to repent, when stalking, shooting at Softball Games, tossing patrons out from restaurants, torching their houses and shaming their young children, not to mention sucking the brains out of newly delivered babies, are farrrrrr more effective than any tactic used in the Middle Ages by uptight Catholic Cardinals posing questions at the Spanish Inquisition. Who needs flagellation with a cat o’ 9 tails given Hitler and Hillary Clinton followers taught the world that gassing deplorables is the modernists way of showing progress.

        Bring us Immigrants to save us from ourselves. Holy Water optional

  9. The “Russians the Russians are coming” fizzled out so now it’s the Ukrainians. Let’s see the President promised the Ukrainians get me elected and I promise to serve Borscht with garlic fritters in all my hotels. Just keep looking for a crime, what a joke. McCabe, Comey, Strozk, Paige, Ohr, Clinton all of them just skating on by.

  10. Unusually, I read past the “Russia occupies part of Ukraine” and reference to Russia’s “occupation of Crimea,” since I knew the piece wasn’t even about Russia and that the falsity and fear mongering was merely gratuitous.

    1. Bill H, just because you know what your own position is on the question of Russia vis-à-vis The Ukraine doesn’t mean that anybody else here can tell what your position might be just from reading your cryptic comment on the issue.

  11. Also from the Wikipedia article on Konstantin Kilimnik:

    Through numerous regular email exchanges, Kilimnik conferred with Manafort after Manafort became Donald Trump’s campaign manager in April 2016 and requested that Manafort give “private briefings” about the Trump campaign to Oleg Deripaska, a Russian billionaire and close ally to Vladimir Putin. On August 2, 2016, Kilimnik met with Manafort and Rick Gates at the Grand Havana Room at 666 Fifth Avenue. The encounter which, according to prosecutor Andrew Weissmann goes “very much to the heart of what the special counsel’s office is investigating,” included a handoff by Manafort of internal polling data from Trump’s presidential campaign to Kilimnik. Gates later testified the three left the premises separately, each using different exits.

    Kilimnik was still working for Russian intelligence when, during September and October 2016, he was known to be communicating with the Trump campaign. Both Rick Gates and Paul Manafort were in contact with him at the time. Manafort has said that he and Kilimnik discussed the Democratic National Committee cyber attack and release of emails, now known to be undertaken by Russian hacker groups known as Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear.

    Kilimnik and Manafort had been involved in the Pericles Fund together, an unsuccessful business venture financed by Oleg Deripaska. In July 2016, Manafort told Kilimnik to offer Deripaska private information in exchange for resolving multimillion-dollar disputes about the venture.

  12. Also from the Wikipedia article on Konstantin Kilimnik:

    Recruited by Philip M. Griffin as a translator for pro-Russia Ukrainian Rinat Akhmetov and seeking better pay than at IRI, Kilimnik met Paul Manafort in 2005 and became an employee of Manafort’s consulting firm. After leaving IRI in April 2005, he lived and worked in Kiev and Moscow while his wife and two children remained in Moscow living in a modest house near the Sheremetyevo International Airport. Some reports say Kilimnik ran the Kiev office of Manafort’s firm and was Manafort’s right-hand man in Kiev. They began working for Viktor Yanukovych after the 2004 Orange Revolution cost him the Presidency. With help from Manafort and Kilimnik, the Russian backed Yanukovych became President in 2010. Kilimnik then spent 90% of his time inside the Presidential administration. From 2011 to 2013 with liaison to Viktor Yanukovych’s chief of staff Serhiy Lyovochkin, Kilimnik, Manafort, Alan Friedman, Eckart Sager, who was a one time CNN producer, and Rick Gates devised a strategy to discredit Yulia Tymoshenko along with Hillary Clinton. This effort supported the pro-Russia administration of then President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych. Yanukovvych hired Paul Manafort’s company Global Endeavour, a St. Vincent and Grenadines based consulting and lobbying company, which during the end of Yanukovych’s presidency transferred $750,000 out of Ukraine and also paid Kilimnik $53,000 during November and December 2013. When Yanukovych fled the country, Manafort and Kilimnik gained employment with the pro-Russia Ukrainian party Opposition Bloc which is backed by the same oligarchs who backed Yanukovych. At some point Opposition Bloc stopped paying Manafort’s firm but even though the non-payment forced Manafort’s firm to shut down their Kiev office, Kilimnik continued to advise the party while working to collect unpaid fees for Manafort’s firm.

    Around 2010, Kilimnik collaborated with Rinat Akhmetshin when the Washington-based lobbyist was trying to sell a book disparaging one of Yanukovych’s opponents.

    In 2017 Kilimnik helped Manafort write an op-ed for a Kiev newspaper. A journalist in Ukraine, Oleg Voloshyn, has disputed this, stating that he and Manafort wrote the op-ed and that he e-mailed the rough draft to Kilimnik. The op-ed may have violated a gag order issued against Manafort by a US court and may have been a breach of Manafort’s bail conditions.

    In 2018, media reported Kilimnik to be variously “described as a fixer, translator or office manager to President Donald Trump’s ex-campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

  13. From the Wikipedia article on Konstantin Kilimnik:

    Kilimnik was born in 1970 at Kryvyi Rih, Dnipropetrovsk, Ukraine, Soviet Union. Fluent in Russian and Ukrainian before his service in the Soviet Army, he became fluent in Swedish and English as a linguist at the Military University of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, which trained interpreters for the Soviet Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU). He served in the Soviet Army as a translator and worked closely with the Soviet Army’s GRU. He took Russian citizenship after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. He worked in Sweden as an interpreter for a Russian arms dealer. In Moscow, Kilmnik then worked for the International Republican Institute (IRI) from 1995 to early 2005. According to anonymous sources, when applying for his position with the IRI, he responded to the question about how he learned English by stating that the “Russian military intelligence” taught him and he became known among Moscow political operatives as “Kostya, the guy from the GRU”. He claims he was dismissed in the early 2000s after the Federal Security Service’s chief gave a speech discussing internal private meetings at the Institute.

    1. Excerpted from the article linked above:

      A pardon would not protect Trump, unless Manafort’s testimony to the grand jury clears him, but if this were the case, Manafort would simply tell this story as part of his cooperation agreement with Mueller.

      [end excerpt]

      The argument cited above is now three months out of date as well as based upon the assumptions that a) Manafort would be compelled to testify before a grand jury after accepting a pardon from Trump and b) accepting a pardon from Trump would be an admission of Manafort’s guilt for crimes against the United States. Manafort already has pled guilty to crimes against the United States and Manafort has been declared in breach of his cooperation agreement because Manafort has already lied to the grand jury amongst many other lies that Mueller demonstrated to the satisfaction of Judge Amy Berman Jackson. So it looks like Manafort’s chances for a pardon from Trump are very nearly zero, now.

  15. Trump will announce his resignation and resign on March 4th, 2019. Thereafter I will say: Pence!: Build That Fence!

  17. Turley wrote, “. . . the filing shows Manafort was working for Ukrainian not Russian interests in these criminal enterprises.”

    Oleg Deripaska is a Russian oligarch. Konstantin Kilimnik is a Russian spy in the employ of Oleg Deripaska. Manafort owed Deripaska a very large sum of money. Trump recently waived sanctions on Deripaska’s aluminum company. To suggest that there are no Russian interests connected to Manafort is known to be wrong. Consequently, Turley’s statement cited above is true only in the sense that Mueller’s sentencing memo on Manafort did not publicly reveal very many new details about the Russian interests for whom, and for which, Manafort worked.

    And the reason for that is (once again) redactions, redactions, redactions. Evidently, Mueller still has an ongoing investigation to protect by means of redactions, redactions, redactions. I predict the imminent announcement of yet another postponement of the imminent arrival of Mueller’s report. First it was “soon.” But that was well over a month ago. Then it was by the end of February. Then it was March. Then it was “any day now.” Then it was “sometime next week.” (Meaning this coming week.) Then it was “as early as Friday” of this coming week. Maybe Mueller will finally take the hint. But I doubt it.

    I’ll believe it when I have Mueller’s report up and running on my computer screen. Until then, please feel free to announce the imminent arrival of Mueller’s report as many consecutive times as it takes to slake your blessed hearts’ desire.

  18. This investigation will end on January 20th 2025. Then they will investigate President Pence.

  19. I still don’t understand why sharing publicly available polling data was against the law.

    1. Manafort lied about the polling data being mostly publicly available polling data. Judge Amy Berman Jackson agreed that Mueller had proven that Manafort had lied about sharing mostly public polling data with Kilimnik. The real polling data at issue was detailed sophisticated in-house Trump polling data produced by Tony Fabrizio for $767,000. Manafort and Gates also briefed Kilimnik on Fabrizio’s polling data–showing Kilimnik how to use it and for what to use it. Kilimnik has long ties to Russian military intelligence–specifically The GRU–who hacked and disseminated thousands of emails damaging to Hillary Clinton through Wikileaks.

      1. P. S. The names of the people who received Fabrizio’s polling data from Kilimnik, who got it from Manafort and Gates, were redacted in each of Mueller’s court filings on that issue. Those court filings include more redacted names than can be accounted for by the formatting error that unveiled the names of Akhmetov and Lyovochkin. The names that have not been un-redacted could be Russians.

        Konstantin Kilimnik is absolutely, indisputably Russian. Kostya’s wife and child lived in Moscow the entire time that Kostya worked for Manafort and Yanukovich and Deripaska. Kostya and Manafort travelled to Moscow together to meet with Oleg Deripaska on numerous occasions during the years 2005 through 2009. Kostya is living with his wife and child in Moscow now. And so is Yanukovich.

        To argue, as Turley does, that Mueller has demonstrated a conspiracy between Manafort and Ukrainians rather than a conspiracy between Manafort and Russians is just-plain flat-out wrong. The only real questions, here, are 1) whether or not Turley, himself, knows just how egregiously wrong Turley’s argument is and 2) is Turley making this egregiously wrong argument because of Turley’s ethical duties to represent his client (“?”) as zealously as he possibly can?

Comments are closed.