Trump World is Oblivious as They Keep Ignoring the Growing Body of Evidence Against Trump…The evidence against Trump from this past week involved new revelations about Stone, Manafort & even a couple Trump’s lawyers. So we’ve pulled the most pertinent articles from the newsfeeds & will highlight some of the key points in our commentary. But the more evidence of wrongdoing that keeps being revealed from Trump’s inner circle, the more it points to direct evidence against Trump himself. And it’s astounding as Trumpeters talk among themselves & plug into the far-right echo, they’re completely in the dark on the legitimate legal troubles that are about to land on Trump. Please share this information, since we should be shouting from the mountaintops about the corruption & wrongdoing that define this president.
The news these past few days reports Mueller in court filings reveals Stone did communicate directly with WikiLeaks, & even more significantly communicated directly with Guccifer 2.0, code name for Russian intelligence. Those messages concerned the stolen materials from the DNC & Hillary’s campaign. This whole Russiagate saga is looking increasingly like Watergate times 100! And keep in mind, it was previously revealed Stone was also communicating updates on this info with a senior member of the Trump campaign, possibly Trump himself, which brings full circle the evidence of collusion between the campaign & the Russians. And the judge issued a gag order, really more of a partial gag order, but Stone should more fittingly be fitted with a muzzle. We’ll start off the articles with this posting pulled from huffpost.com/entry/roger-stone-robert-mueller-wikileaks:
Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team revealed in a court filing Friday that it has evidence that Roger Stone, a major operative on President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, had communicated directly with WikiLeaks. Though Stone’s January indictment, one of several to come out of Mueller’s investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian agents, accused him of being in touch with WikiLeaks in the lead-up to the election, Friday’s filing provides the strongest evidence yet against the longtime Trump confidant. While investigating Russia’s 2016 hacking of Democratic Party documents, which were published on WikiLeaks, the special counsel’s office discovered “accounts that contained Stone’s communications with Guccifer 2.0 and with Organization 1,” which are aliases for WikiLeaks.
Prosecutors previously had evidence only that Stone had worked through intermediaries to attempt contact with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, find out what the hackers had stolen from the Democrats and determine how its release could help secure Trump’s victory. Friday’s filing did not provide any additional details about what was included in those communications, which Stone has firmly denied. Last month, he appeared in federal court and pleaded not guilty to five counts of false statements, one count of obstruction of an official proceeding and one count of witness tampering. Last February, The Atlantic reported that Stone exchanged direct messages with the WikiLeaks account on Twitter, in which Stone was asked to stop making “false claims of association” with the site. Friday’s filing, however, is the first time the special counsel’s office has confirmed evidence of direct communication between the two parties.
This next one about Stone is in this article seen below from cnn.com/2019/02/15/politics/roger-stone-wikileaks:
Prosecutors said for the first time that they have evidence of Roger Stone communicating with WikiLeaks, according to a new court filing from special counsel prosecutors. During its investigation of the Russian hack of the Democrats, “the government obtained and executed dozens of search warrants on various accounts used to facilitate the transfer of stolen documents for release, as well as to discuss the timing and promotion of their release,” the prosecutors wrote Friday to a federal judge. “Several of those search warrants were executed on accounts that contained Stone’s communications with Guccifer 2.0 and with Organization 1,” which is WikiLeaks. Previously, the prosecutors had only outlined how Stone attempted to get in touch with WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange through intermediaries. Stone sought to learn about what the hackers had stolen from the Democratic Party and how he hoped for its release so it could help Donald Trump’s campaign, prosecutors have said.
The new filing provided no further details on what was contained in the communications. There is one known exchange of messages between WikiLeaks and Stone. In February 2018, the Atlantic reported Stone exchanged direct messages via Twitter with the WikiLeaks account in which Stone was asked to stop associating himself with the site. Both denied they were in contact about the release of Clinton emails. The prosecutors have not yet explained in full the extent to which Stone actually reached WikiLeaks or Assange, or levied public charges against them for their role in the distribution of the hacked data. Friday’s filing is the strongest detail yet provided by the prosecutors that Stone and WikiLeaks were in touch. Prosecutors stated that in obtaining the accounts, they found communications between Stone and WikiLeaks, which is only described as Organization 1, as well as Guccifer 2.0 which is the alias used by Russian intelligence to disseminate the documents. Stone and his legal team will have access to these search warrants as they review evidence in the case to prepare for his trial. He has pleaded not guilty to charges of witness tampering, obstruction of justice and lying.
Case will not be reassigned: Judge Amy Berman Jackson on Friday denied Stone’s attempt to get a new judge in his case, by alleging that his charges are unrelated to a case about the Russian hack of the Democrats. Prosecutors say they are indeed related, partly because they both hinge on some of the same search warrants. Gag order:Jackson also placed a gag order on Stone and attorneys involved in his criminal case, though Stone’s ability to speak publicly isn’t completely restricted. Lawyers “for the parties and the witnesses must refrain from making statements to the media or in public settings that pose a substantial likelihood of material prejudice to this case,” Jackson wrote. They, their clients and even Stone are also not allowed to speak in and around the courthouse.
Also from the newsfeeds is the story we’ve posted from reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-stone-wikileaks/mueller-says-searches-yielded-evidence-of-stone-wikileaks-communications:
U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller disclosed for the first time on Friday that his office has evidence of communications between Roger Stone, a longtime adviser to President Donald Trump, and WikiLeaks related to the release of hacked Democratic Party emails. In a court filing on Friday, Mueller’s office said it had gathered that evidence in a separate probe into Russian intelligence officers who were charged by Mueller of hacking the emails during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign and staging their release. In an email criticizing media coverage of Mueller’s filing on Friday, Stone said the evidence was “innocuous Twitter direct messages” that have already been disclosed to the House Intelligence Committee and “prove absolutely nothing”. Stone was indicted last month for lying to Congress about his communications with others about the hacked emails. Mueller did not say at the time that he had evidence of communications with WikiLeaks. Stone, an ally of Trump for 40 years, has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
Stone has previously acknowledged brief exchanges with both WikiLeaks and Guccifer 2.0 but maintains he never had advance knowledge about the release of hacked emails. But Friday marked the first time Mueller indicated he had obtained related evidence, although it remained unclear if the evidence is more substantial than what is publicly known. “The government obtained and executed dozens of search warrants on various accounts used to facilitate the transfer of stolen documents for release, as well as to discuss the timing and promotion of their release,” Mueller’s team wrote in a filing to the U.S. District Court in Washington D.C. “Several of those search warrants were executed on accounts that contained Stone’s communications with Guccifer 2.0 and with Organization 1.” Organization 1 is a reference to WikiLeaks, while Guccifer 2.0 is a hacker persona U.S. intelligence agencies say was a cover name used by Russian military intelligence. WikiLeaks and Guccifer 2.0 each published emails and other documents from the Democratic Party in 2016 in an operation that Mueller alleges was part of a Kremlin-backed effort to tip the election in favor of then Republican nominee Trump. WikiLeaks has previously denied any ties to or cooperation with Russia.
For those doting Trumpeters led around by the nose by the echo, their buzz-phrase there’s no evidence of collusion is getting tiresome. Of course there’s plenty of evidence, but Trumpeters just choose not to believe it. These are live links on more Stone stories indicating yes there was collusion with the Russians:
The judge came down hard on Manafort during his most recent court hearing, since Trump’s former campaign manager lied at every turn even after he agreed to cooperate with Special Counsel. With Manafort’s former right-hand man Rick Gates being a cooperating witness, he can attest to many of the lies Manafort has told to prosecutors. As Trump’s campaign manager at that time in the summer of 2016, Manafort was working to strike deals with a Russian intelligence asset, including turning over to him private campaign polling data.
Keep in mind the Russians attacked us with a massive social media disinformation campaign seen by more than 100 million Americans before the 2016 election, which such polling data could help the Russians microtarget the messaging to the right places. That the judge ruled Manafort’s account of his actions was a stream of lies is very significant to the Russian probe, as Mueller’s prosecutor had recently said in court Manafort’s contacts with the person (Kilimnik) who has ties to Russian intelligence goes to the heart of their case. Here are links to articles detailing these important Manafort reports:
And these excerpts posted below come from nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/02/mueller-recommends-manafort-receive-up-to-24-years-in-prison:
On Friday night, the special counsel investigation recommended that the federal judge responsible for sentencing former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort give him 19.5 to 24.5 years in prison for his conviction on eight financial charges dating back well over a decade. Mueller also suggested a fine for Manafort, with an oddly large window of $50,000 to $24.4 million. If the judge complies with Mueller’s request, it will effectively serve as a life sentence for the 69-year-old lobbyist turned political consultant to Ukraine’s oligarch class. Unfortunately for Manafort’s chances of ever getting out of prison, Mueller’s sentencing recommendation only considers his eight financial convictions in Virginia. It does not include his guilty pleas in a federal court in Washington for one count of conspiracy against the U.S. and one count of conspiracy to obstruct justice. It’s been a bad week for the former Trump campaign chairman, who’s already been incarcerated for eight months. On Wednesday, the federal judge who will sentence him in Washington determined that Manafort intentionally lied to the special counsel, the FBI, and a grand jury.
Manafort issued false statements regarding his contacts with Russian intelligence asset Konstantin Kilimnik, to whom Manafort had passed polling data. (According to prosecutors, Manafort lied in the hope of securing a pardon from his former boss.) Because of his intentional false statements, any opportunity for leniency in exchange for his cooperation has been voided; Manafort will be sentenced in Washington on March 13. In the sentencing recommendation on Friday, the special counsel even used Manafort’s recent false statements as evidence that his “age does not eliminate the risk of recidivism he poses.” In one of the harshest and most prominent sentencing recommendations for financial crimes since the conviction of Bernie Madoff, Manafort’s 20-plus year bid will most likely be the longest of any of the eight Americans indicted or charged by the Mueller investigation — because Manafort has been legally exposed for a decade longer. The former Trump campaign manager’s convictions are for behavior dating back to 2005, when he opened an office in Kiev to lobby for the oligarchs of Ukraine, while the rest of Trump’s indicted are being investigated for potential crimes as early as the beginning of the president’s campaign in 2015.
But that shouldn’t encourage the legal teams of Trump surrogates like Roger Stone. On Friday, as the Moscow Project notes, Mueller’s latest filings relating to Stone’s indictment suggest that he could be indicted as part of the conspiracy against the U.S. charge handed to the “12 Russians.” Those dozen Moscow intelligence assets attempted to hack into the Clinton campaign’s email servers the night of Trump’s increasingly suspect “Russia, if you’re listening” press conference. For Manafort, now, as ever, his best shot at avoiding consequence for his actions is to hope for a pardon from Trump. As the surrogate who repeatedly lied to protect the president, Manafort may be the most likely candidate to receive a get-out-of-jail-free card, because the president — despite not showing an inkling of loyalty — demands it from those in his circle.
Did Trump Lawyers Lie to Government Ethics Officials?
There are contradictions in their statements which raises suspicions. This was having to do with the hush money payments to Trump’s mistresses before the election, a case where Trump has already been implicated in court as an unindicted co-conspirator for felony campaign finance violations. So further evidence against Trump might be uncovered here, especially if congressional committees can find out those lawyers lied at the instruction of the president. The article we’ve posted comes fromthehill.com/homenews/house/430301-cummings-new-documents-show-trump-lawyers-may-have-lied-about-cohen-payments:
Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), the chairman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, said Friday the panel believes two attorneys for President Trump may have given false information to government ethics officials. Cummings said the panel has reviewed newly uncovered documents from the Office of Government Ethics (OGE) suggesting Trump’s personal lawyer Sheri Dillon and former White House lawyer Stefan Passantino gave false info about payments to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal. “It now appears that President Trump’s other attorneys — at the White House and in private practice — may have provided false information about these payments to federal officials,” Cummings wrote in a letter to White House counsel Pat Cipollone.
Cummings said Dillon “repeatedly stated to federal officials at OGE that President Trump never owed any money to Mr. Cohen in 2016 and 2017” and Passantino falsely told officials that Trump and his former lawyer Michael Cohen had a “retainer agreement.” The Hill has reached out to the White House for comment. Cohen, who arranged the payments for the women claiming affairs with Trump in 2006, was sentenced in December to three years in prison on a slew of charges, including some related to the payments. A federal judge ruled the payments violated campaign finance laws. Trump has denied the alleged affairs. “President Trump’s former attorney, Michael Cohen, is now going to prison in part for his role in these hush-money payments,” Cummings wrote. “During his guilty plea, Mr. Cohen said that he did this ‘in coordination with, and at the direction of’ the President ‘for the principal purpose of influencing the election.’ ”
“It now appears that President Trump’s other attorneys—at the White House and in private practice—may have provided false information about these payments to federal officials. This raises significant questions about why some of the President’s closest advisers made these false claims and the extent to which they too were acting at the direction of, or in coordination with, the President.” Cummings also sent Alan Futerfas, who represents the Trump Organization and Donald Trump Jr., a second letter saying the Trump Organization had not complied with the committee’s request for several documents. Futerfas had initially declined to forfeit the documents since they were currently in the possession of federal authorities who are probing the business. “Congress takes great care not to impair the outcome of criminal cases while exercising its own constitutional authority to conduct robust oversight,” Cummings said.
The first part to the article from washingtonpost.com/politics/ethics-officials-questioned-shifting-explanations-on-trumps-reimbursement-to-michael-cohen-for-hush-money-payment-house-oversight-chairman-says is seen here:
House Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.) on Friday said President Trump’s lawyers gave shifting explanations to federal ethics officials about Trump’s reimbursement of a payment Michael Cohen made to an adult-film actress before the 2016 election, calling on the White House to turn over documents related to the transaction. In a letter to White House counsel Pat Cipollone, Cummings said documents his committee obtained from the federal Office of Government Ethics show that lawyers for Trump offered “evolving stories” about the president’s payments to Cohen, his longtime personal attorney. OGE officials appeared skeptical of their explanations, Cummings wrote. The White House and the Office of Government Ethics did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Cohen, who pleaded guilty last year to campaign-finance violations and lying to Congress, has admitted he paid $130,000 to actress Stormy Daniels in October 2016. Daniels says she had a sexual encounter with Trump years earlier and Cohen has said the payment was to buy her silence. Later, Cohen asked Trump’s company for reimbursement — and the Trump Organization paid him a total of $420,000, according to court papers. Cohen said in court that he had made the payments “in coordination with and at the direction of a candidate for federal office.” Trump initially said last year that he did not know about Cohen’s payment to Daniels. But his attorney Rudolph W. Giuliani revealed in a television interview that Trump had reimbursed Cohen. The president then acknowledged that he paid Cohen through a monthly retainer to stop what Trump called “false and extortionist accusations.”
In a footnote on his personal financial disclosure filed last May, Trump reported a reimbursement of up to $250,000 to Cohen. He said he was disclosing it “in the interest of transparency,” stressing that it was not required to be reported as a debt. At the time, Giuliani told The Washington Post that he had publicly discussed Trump’s payments to Cohen because he knew the information would come out in the president’s financial disclosure. “I wanted it out there so it wasn’t a big surprise,” he said. In fact, a timeline released by Cummings Friday indicates that Giuliani’s revelation prompted ethics officials days later to press the president’s attorneys about Trump’s payments to Cohen. The president’s lawyers — who had repeatedly told ethics officials in the preceding months that Trump did not owe money to Cohen — then told OGE that the payments were legal fees that were not required to be reported.
Various Other Articles with Evidence Against Trump
We continue to see in amazement the way Trumpeters & the echo keep denying & lying about all the Russiagate evidence that does exist. If we could only get some of them to read these many posts from The VORACS, it won’t be such a shock to them when the leader they exalt goes down. The criminal evidence against Trump adds up more as every week goes by, especially now that we’re getting hard evidence of collusion between his campaign & the Russians, & it would be preposterous to think Trump was unaware of those deals being discussed. And in watching the 60 Minutes interview today with Andrew McCabe, it just further confirms we must find a legal way to ditch this president! It appears Trump is more of a Russian agent instead of an American president. It’s outlandish he would actually trust Putin over our own intelligence officials. And he’s a vindictive narcissist only out for himself, not the American people. Check out these other relevant articles from the newsfeeds:
Here’s an interesting rundown of the way Trump & his cronies keep flipping the script as new information gets discovered along the way: cnn.com/interactive/2019/politics/trump-team-russia-then-now
Some Dems are already itching to impeach, so when solid evidence of multiple crimes becomes known, that drumbeat turns into a tidal wave: huffpost.com/entry/donald-trump-impeachment-house-democrats
Much like the previous two years of the GOP House probes, the Senate’s was also mostly a whitewash: motherjones.com/politics/2019/02/richard-burr-says-theres-no-evidence-of-collusion-how-would-he-know
The evidence against Trump collusion is right there in plain sight: huffpost.com/entry/adam-schiff-trump-russia-collusion
The drama grows as the evidence against Trump mounts: nytimes.com/2019/02/16/opinion/sunday/trump-russia-mueller
The White House Press Secretary has also spoken with Mueller: thedailybeast.com/white-house-press-secretary-sarah-huckabee-sanders-interviewed-by-robert-mueller
Her lies might be catching up with her along with other White House staff members, as the prez continues to corrupt everyone he touches: refinery29.com/en-us/2019/02/224606/sarah-sanders-questioned-by-special-counsel
If you dare, a very hard-hitting op-ed from the far-left: palmerreport.com/analysis/prison-donald-trump-going-to
Here’s an interesting article on the mounting number of coincidences that could soon add up to the charge of conspiracy: slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/02/mueller-investigation-trump-conspiracy-charges
As for more evidence against Trump, a former federal prosecutor says the signs are pointing directly towards a conspiracy case implicating the prez as the circle tightens, seen in this article from salon.com/2019/02/15/its-going-to-get-to-russian-conspiracy-former-prosecutor-lays-out-trumps-inner-circle:
As special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation has dragged on, indicting or convicting over 30 people and businesses, President Donald Trump and his inner circle have fared poorly — and nothing about how they have conducted themselves does much to allay suspicions that members of the campaign worked with Russia to undermine the 2016 presidential election. In conversation with MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace on “Deadline: White House,” former federal prosecutor and legal analyst Glenn Kirschner laid out how the pattern of lies and misdirections by the Trump team in the Russia probe only serves to throw greater legal suspicion onto them. “Watch for the defense to become the thing they’ve denied, because the truth is worse,” said Wallace, noting that originally, the Trump team tried to flat-out deny there was any collusion with Russia. “They’re not even denying, because they’ve pleaded guilty to these contacts with Russians … this is a campaign whose defense to collusion is, ‘we couldn’t collude with our press office.’ That’s what Brad Pascale and Jared Kushner say.”
Kirschner then discussed the legal situation of former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort — who was convicted on several counts of bank fraud and tax evasion last year, — and the claim from Mueller that he violated a plea agreement he made to head off another series of charges. “They could collude, they were colluding, and all of this is so nefarious,” said Kirschner. “It’s not reckless, it’s not happenstance, it’s not careless … what I found remarkable in what [special counsel prosecutor] Andrew Weissman was saying to the court, when they were trying to decide whether Paul Manafort’s plea agreement should basically be torn up because he lied. As a cooperating witness, he kept lying to the special counsel.”
“I had a nickname at the U.S. Attorney’s office in D.C.,” said Kirschner. “I was the King of the Cooperators, and that’s not a compliment! It really isn’t, it’s almost a criticism, because cooperating witnesses are just notoriously difficult people to keep onboard, to keep focused on telling only the truth. What I find remarkable is that Manafort gets charged, right, federally indicted. What does he do after that? He starts tampering with witnesses. And he was charged for tampering with witnesses. After that we have now learned through this litigation, albeit in highly redacted form, that he continued to conspire with [suspected Russian agent Konstantin] Kilimnik.” “What is it that they so desperately want to cover up?” said Kirschner. The answer, he said, was in the fact that Weissman told the judge that the Kilimnik interactions go “right to the heart of what the special counsel is investigating.” “The concentric circles are tightening and tightening,” he said. “And I think it’s going to get to Russian conspiracy with the Trump campaign.”
The Ultimate Threat
I typically include international dangers here at the bottom of Part 1. Inside this link is definitely The Big One: thehill.com/opinion/national-security/430296-10-lessons-you-should-learn-about-nuclear-weapons. Here’s an awkward silence: usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2019/02/17/mike-pence-silence-munich-speech.