Last time. There is no collusion.

[BULLDOG]

Thanks for the info, but I'll wait for the investigation to be over if you don't mind

The investigation is over for Trump/Russia collusion in the election. Mueller is onto something much bigger....The Podesta group and the Clinton foundation are the new target...Manafort hired the Podesta group...they worked for him.

Link?

Watch the Tucker Carlson show...he has the proof. The Podesta group threatened to sue Fox news to try and shut them up...won't work. The deep state is real and it is now dead.....

I've watched Carlson before. He's a lying idiot. If it's so clear, make your case.

 

[BULLDOG]

Thanks for the info, but I'll wait for the investigation to be over if you don't mind

The investigation is over for Trump/Russia collusion in the election. Mueller is onto something much bigger....The Podesta group and the Clinton foundation are the new target...Manafort hired the Podesta group...they worked for him.

Link?

why? if he provides a link do you fold your tent and drop the liberal non-sense?...todays events were nothing but good news for trump and the russia collusion lie...NEXT

I've changed my mind before, and I'm sure I'll do it again. I never saw any use in arguing something I know not to be true. It takes credible proof though.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

Thanks for the info, but I'll wait for the investigation to be over if you don't mind

The investigation is over for Trump/Russia collusion in the election. Mueller is onto something much bigger....The Podesta group and the Clinton foundation are the new target...Manafort hired the Podesta group...they worked for him.

Link?

why? if he provides a link do you fold your tent and drop the liberal non-sense?...todays events were nothing but good news for trump and the russia collusion lie...NEXT

I've changed my mind before, and I'm sure I'll do it again. I never saw any use in arguing something I know not to be true. It takes credible proof though.

Fair enough, but my money says providing a link would not change anything...todays indictments/news showed a link to the clintons but not the russians

 

[BULLDOG]

Thanks for the info, but I'll wait for the investigation to be over if you don't mind

The investigation is over for Trump/Russia collusion in the election. Mueller is onto something much bigger....The Podesta group and the Clinton foundation are the new target...Manafort hired the Podesta group...they worked for him.

Link?

why? if he provides a link do you fold your tent and drop the liberal non-sense?...todays events were nothing but good news for trump and the russia collusion lie...NEXT

I've changed my mind before, and I'm sure I'll do it again. I never saw any use in arguing something I know not to be true. It takes credible proof though.

Fair enough, but my money says providing a link would not change anything...todays indictments/news showed a link to the clintons but not the russians

Your call. If you can't back up your claim, then it's not my fault.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

The investigation is over for Trump/Russia collusion in the election. Mueller is onto something much bigger....The Podesta group and the Clinton foundation are the new target...Manafort hired the Podesta group...they worked for him.

Link?

why? if he provides a link do you fold your tent and drop the liberal non-sense?...todays events were nothing but good news for trump and the russia collusion lie...NEXT

I've changed my mind before, and I'm sure I'll do it again. I never saw any use in arguing something I know not to be true. It takes credible proof though.

Fair enough, but my money says providing a link would not change anything...todays indictments/news showed a link to the clintons but not the russians

Your call. If you can't back up your claim, then it's not my fault.

no one blamed you, in fact you are the only one suggesting it may be your fault....and backing up any claim no matter how legit would defeat the purpose of responding in kind to those making bogus russian collusion claims

 

[Valerie]

The Hilary supporters are starting to run for the hills now.

The brother of Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman is stepping down as head of his lobbying group as Mueller's probe intensifies

But if you want to see real collusion look at this:

Opinion | NGO connected to Obama’s 2008 campaign used U.S. tax dollars trying to oust Netanyahu

oh noze. how confusing this all must be for you...


does this mean the FBI won't be manually installing Hillary in place of Trump??

 

[Valerie]

"Now, as far as the news 'release' of the indictments, which conveniently were reported AFTER 6 pm Eastern, were actually leaked illegally. Trey Gowdey is heading up an investigation as to how who and by whose orders the information was leaked to CNN. it is highly likely higher level people at CNN will also be subpoenaed to testify as to why their people elected to report illegally leaked information."



aaaha! FINALLY our phony Captain America shows his weaselly little face. NOW investigating news leaks! lmao

2008 - 2013
Nothing to do with Trump. Dip shit

if watching you assholes meltdown DAILY for 8 years of generating fake news on obama wasn't enough, now we get to watch you melt over the forthcoming domino effect of reality about to rain drip drip drip on your delusional heads...

piss on all of you stupid motherfuckers. tell it to the grand jury!



"So if you want to talk Russia on social media, I’d suggest focusing on the date each actor had knowledge of Russia’s illegal acts.

It’s more bad news for Trump and company. Trump’s knowledge about the whole situation is going to implicate him deeply in the crimes committed here."

Lawyer Exposes “Single Most Important Fact” in Mueller’s Investigation That No One is Talking About

Seth Abramson, a journalist, lawyer and prolific Twitter user, has a recent thread discussing what he says is the most important aspect of the Trump/Russia collusion investigation, that no one is discussing.

After you take time to read through the thread, you will not only see that Abramson is right, but you will also see why it’s taking Robert Mueller longer than most people would like to get through his investigation. He has to put hundreds of pieces of the puzzle together and only has one shot to get it right.

1/ Investigators are now trying to determine *exactly* when every member of the Trump campaign found out Russia was working to elect Trump.

2/ These dates are of legal importance because they establish a “mens rea” (mental state) for possible crimes committed by Trump and others.

3/ Once Trump, his family, and/or his campaign aides knew Russia was committing crimes to assist Trump, certain actions became *prohibited*.

4/ For instance, once Trump had this knowledge, he could not publicly deny it without running afoul of federal Aiding and Abetting statutes.

5/ For instance, once Don Jr. had this knowledge he couldn’t take any action in furtherance of a plan to benefit from Russia’s illegal acts.

6/ Knowledge of Russian illegalities—even broadly—is a necessary precursor to what we colloquially call “collusion” (not a legal term here).

7/ This is why *all* of Trump’s most audacious lies—and his family’s, and his aides’—center on their *knowledge* of what Russia was doing.

8/ Paul Manafort’s excuse for not knowing Russia was working to elect Trump? (a) he didn’t check his email; (b) he was looking at his phone.

9/ Jared Kushner’s excuse for not knowing Russia was working to elect Trump? (a) he left a big meeting early; (b) he didn’t check his email.

10/ What do the Trump aides who changed the GOP platform last July say in response to charges they were executing a quid pro quo for Russia?

11/ They say (a) they were executing orders Trump gave March 31, 2016; (b) but don’t blame Trump, because he didn’t know what we were doing.

12/ What’s *Trump’s* excuse as to Russia working to elect him—after *admitting* he knew and then *getting briefed on it* on August 17, 2016?

13/ Why, he just didn’t *believe* what U.S. intel agencies said, of course! He just didn’t *believe* the mountains of evidence we all saw!

14/ Now ask yourself: does Bob Mueller believe any of these lies? Does the FBI? Does the DOJ? Do American voters? Would a duly-seated jury?

15/ FACT: Don was directly told by a trusted friend that Putin was working to elect his dad. He knew this as of the first week of June 2016.

16/ Now consider: despite the way the Russia issue blew up after June 2016, Don says he *never told his dad* Putin was working to elect him.

17/ Don, Jared, and Manafort say they *never* discussed the issue again—with *anyone*—and deliberately plotted to keep this info from Trump.

18/ Do *you* believe that? Do you think Mueller does? Or the FBI? The DOJ? Most American voters? Most American Congressmen? Future jurors?

19/ You think Don sat there watching Russia news every single day for *months*, yet never told daddy Putin was confirmed as “in his corner”?

20/ Do you believe that—once the Russia news broke shortly after June 2016— Kushner and Manafort *never went back to look at their emails*?

21/ Do you think Kushner and Manafort were—start to finish—in the dark about who Veselnitskaya was, who she worked for, and what she wanted?

22/ Do you believe *none* of the Russia news between June 2016 and this summer caused Kushner *or* Manafort to reflect back on that meeting?

23/ Why did Trump witness-tamper with his son—exposing himself/Don to *prison*—with false statements on the meeting? Why? Knowledge matters.

24/ This explains fantastical tales of phone-checking/email-ignoring at the *exact* moments knowledge—legally speaking—could be established.

25/ This explains Trump’s increasingly grotesque and deranged denials of reality on Russian interference: if he says otherwise, *knowledge*.

26/ This is why the news that Don and Ivanka were about to be charged with felony fraud matters. It goes to their honesty—which is now key.

27/ Don/Ivanka *repeatedly lied to consumers* about how many Trump SoHo units had sold. So do you think they’d lie to save dad’s presidency?

28/ And this is why every single lie Trump tells is legally relevant on the question of his reputation/propensity for honesty versus deceit.

29/ Trump admitted Russia was helping—then was briefed on it—then reversed course and said otherwise when he saw the danger of an admission.

30/ But his reputation for deceit—it’s legendary—would prompt an investigator or juror to presume his initial briefing sealed his knowledge.

31/ The danger *now* is non-attorney journalists confusing evidence of Aiding and Abetting with “evidence of a cover-up.” They’re different.

32/ There’s evidence of a cover-up—Mueller could get Trump on Obstruction with a jury right now—but also Aiding and Abetting a Russian plot.

33/ The evidence of a cover-up overlaps in many particulars with the evidence Trump and his team knew Russia was interfering, then aided it.

34/ For instance, it *isn’t* legal for Trump to learn on August 17th, 2016 that Russia was committing crimes against the U.S., and *then*…

35/ …send his chief foreign policy aide—Sessions—to negotiate *unilateral sanctions-lifting* with Russia’s ambassador three weeks later.

36/ So let’s stop talking collusion—a vague and meaningless term in this legal scenario—and instead discuss “knowledge of illegal activity.”

37/ Don, Jared, and Manafort were on *legal notice* that Russia was illegally stealing information from June 9, 2016 onward—at the *latest*.

38/ So no, Don wasn’t entitled to take that meeting—given what he’d been told. And Manafort couldn’t push a GOP platform change weeks later.

39/ Indeed, arguably, the *entire campaign* was on notice Russia aimed to secretly negotiate with and aid Trump from March 24, 2016 onward.

40/ On that date, Papadopoulos told seven senior Trump staffers that Putin wanted to meet with Trump—and felt Trump could improve relations.

41/ On that basis, *any* subsequent revelation that Russia was committing crimes should’ve been read by the campaign as a pro-Trump proffer.

42/ Note that, in this analysis, I’m approaching this as a former criminal attorney and former criminal investigator—we *do* think this way.

43/ The media can’t—it feels—call Trump a liar when he lies to (dis)establish his legal knowledge. But as an attorney, I see it differently.

44/ But as we enter the intermediate stages of the Mueller probe, we *all* must be thinking in legal terms—as we’re in the legal sphere now.

45/ So if you want to talk Russia on social media, I’d suggest focusing on the date each actor had knowledge of Russia’s illegal acts. {end}

 

[WEATHER53]

There are no Russians
Never have been

 

[Frankeneinstein]

1/ Investigators are now trying to determine *exactly* when every member of the Trump campaign found out Russia was working to elect Trump.

2/ These dates are of legal importance because they establish a “mens rea” (mental state) for possible crimes committed by Trump and others.

3/ Once Trump, his family, and/or his campaign aides knew Russia was committing crimes to assist Trump, certain actions became *prohibited*.

4/ For instance, once Trump had this knowledge, he could not publicly deny it without running afoul of federal Aiding and Abetting statutes.

5/ For instance, once Don Jr. had this knowledge he couldn’t take any action in furtherance of a plan to benefit from Russia’s illegal acts.

6/ Knowledge of Russian illegalities—even broadly—is a necessary precursor to what we colloquially call “collusion” (not a legal term here).

7/ This is why *all* of Trump’s most audacious lies—and his family’s, and his aides’—center on their *knowledge* of what Russia was doing.

8/ Paul Manafort’s excuse for not knowing Russia was working to elect Trump? (a) he didn’t check his email; (b) he was looking at his phone.

9/ Jared Kushner’s excuse for not knowing Russia was working to elect Trump? (a) he left a big meeting early; (b) he didn’t check his email.

10/ What do the Trump aides who changed the GOP platform last July say in response to charges they were executing a quid pro quo for Russia?

11/ They say (a) they were executing orders Trump gave March 31, 2016; (b) but don’t blame Trump, because he didn’t know what we were doing.

12/ What’s *Trump’s* excuse as to Russia working to elect him—after *admitting* he knew and then *getting briefed on it* on August 17, 2016?

13/ Why, he just didn’t *believe* what U.S. intel agencies said, of course! He just didn’t *believe* the mountains of evidence we all saw!

14/ Now ask yourself: does Bob Mueller believe any of these lies? Does the FBI? Does the DOJ? Do American voters? Would a duly-seated jury?

15/ FACT: Don was directly told by a trusted friend that Putin was working to elect his dad. He knew this as of the first week of June 2016.

16/ Now consider: despite the way the Russia issue blew up after June 2016, Don says he *never told his dad* Putin was working to elect him.

17/ Don, Jared, and Manafort say they *never* discussed the issue again—with *anyone*—and deliberately plotted to keep this info from Trump.

18/ Do *you* believe that? Do you think Mueller does? Or the FBI? The DOJ? Most American voters? Most American Congressmen? Future jurors?

19/ You think Don sat there watching Russia news every single day for *months*, yet never told daddy Putin was confirmed as “in his corner”?

20/ Do you believe that—once the Russia news broke shortly after June 2016— Kushner and Manafort *never went back to look at their emails*?

21/ Do you think Kushner and Manafort were—start to finish—in the dark about who Veselnitskaya was, who she worked for, and what she wanted?

22/ Do you believe *none* of the Russia news between June 2016 and this summer caused Kushner *or* Manafort to reflect back on that meeting?

23/ Why did Trump witness-tamper with his son—exposing himself/Don to *prison*—with false statements on the meeting? Why? Knowledge matters.

24/ This explains fantastical tales of phone-checking/email-ignoring at the *exact* moments knowledge—legally speaking—could be established.

25/ This explains Trump’s increasingly grotesque and deranged denials of reality on Russian interference: if he says otherwise, *knowledge*.

26/ This is why the news that Don and Ivanka were about to be charged with felony fraud matters. It goes to their honesty—which is now key.

27/ Don/Ivanka *repeatedly lied to consumers* about how many Trump SoHo units had sold. So do you think they’d lie to save dad’s presidency?

28/ And this is why every single lie Trump tells is legally relevant on the question of his reputation/propensity for honesty versus deceit.

29/ Trump admitted Russia was helping—then was briefed on it—then reversed course and said otherwise when he saw the danger of an admission.

30/ But his reputation for deceit—it’s legendary—would prompt an investigator or juror to presume his initial briefing sealed his knowledge.

31/ The danger *now* is non-attorney journalists confusing evidence of Aiding and Abetting with “evidence of a cover-up.” They’re different.

32/ There’s evidence of a cover-up—Mueller could get Trump on Obstruction with a jury right now—but also Aiding and Abetting a Russian plot.

33/ The evidence of a cover-up overlaps in many particulars with the evidence Trump and his team knew Russia was interfering, then aided it.

34/ For instance, it *isn’t* legal for Trump to learn on August 17th, 2016 that Russia was committing crimes against the U.S., and *then*…

35/ …send his chief foreign policy aide—Sessions—to negotiate *unilateral sanctions-lifting* with Russia’s ambassador three weeks later.

36/ So let’s stop talking collusion—a vague and meaningless term in this legal scenario—and instead discuss “knowledge of illegal activity.”

37/ Don, Jared, and Manafort were on *legal notice* that Russia was illegally stealing information from June 9, 2016 onward—at the *latest*.

38/ So no, Don wasn’t entitled to take that meeting—given what he’d been told. And Manafort couldn’t push a GOP platform change weeks later.

39/ Indeed, arguably, the *entire campaign* was on notice Russia aimed to secretly negotiate with and aid Trump from March 24, 2016 onward.

40/ On that date, Papadopoulos told seven senior Trump staffers that Putin wanted to meet with Trump—and felt Trump could improve relations.

41/ On that basis, *any* subsequent revelation that Russia was committing crimes should’ve been read by the campaign as a pro-Trump proffer.

42/ Note that, in this analysis, I’m approaching this as a former criminal attorney and former criminal investigator—we *do* think this way.

43/ The media can’t—it feels—call Trump a liar when he lies to (dis)establish his legal knowledge. But as an attorney, I see it differently.

44/ But as we enter the intermediate stages of the Mueller probe, we *all* must be thinking in legal terms—as we’re in the legal sphere now.

45/ So if you want to talk Russia on social media, I’d suggest focusing on the date each actor had knowledge of Russia’s illegal acts. {end}

Funny cuz I didn't get it at first Val, but then I realized that this was one of those super intelligent thingys where I am to dumb to understand that "the 'SINGLE' most important fact" was code for 45 seperate/different opinions...see, I am getting schmat

 

[Valerie]

oh my, you read that entire piece and still don't know what the single common factor is yet.

 

[Valerie]

There are no Russians
Never have been

yeah yeah, tell it to the grand jury!

 

[Frankeneinstein]

oh my, you read that entire piece and still don't know what the single common factor is yet.

• I wouldn't go so far as to claim I read it, perhaps I would have found the word "common" and/or "factor" instead of just "fact" like you did if I had...but lets not pretend meaning has meaning so that meaningless banter not be discriminated against, e.g. 'can you post the united state of America' for me?...I will be hanging on every second awaiting

 

[Lastamender]

George Papadopoulos has already proven collusion. More to come...

His own collusion with Meuller.

 

[Lastamender]

There are no Russians
Never have been

yeah yeah, tell it to the grand jury!

The Grand jury only gets one side of the story.

 

[Valerie]

THE BIG IDEA: The ghost of Paul Manafort haunts the White House this Halloween.

Since President Trump likes alliterative nicknames, maybe the special counsel’s should be Methodical Mueller.

Unveiling the first batch of criminal allegations to come from probes into possible Russian influence in the American political system, Robert S. Mueller III proved Monday that he is not messing around. The former FBI director has played his cards carefully since his appointment in May. He’s clearly turning over every rock to see what crawls out from underneath. Unafraid to play hardball, he’s being strategic in showing his hand.

You surely know the news by now: Manafort, the former Trump campaign chairman, and his longtime business partner, Rick Gates, were charged in a 12-count indictment with conspiracy to launder money, making false statements and other charges in connection with their work advising a Russia-friendly political party in Ukraine.

But the biggest bombshell of Monday — the real October Surprise — is that former Trump foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos agreed to a plea deal and admitted to making a false statement to FBI investigators about his contacts with foreigners claiming to have high-level Russian connections.

“The charges are striking for their breadth, touching all levels of the Trump campaign and exploring the possible personal, financial wrongdoing of those involved, as well as what appeared to be a concerted effort by one campaign official to arrange a meeting with Russian officials,” Matt Zapotosky, Rosalind S. Helderman, Carol D. Leonnig and Spencer S. Hsu write in our lead story.

“[Mueller’s] opening bid is a remarkable show of strength,” Susan Hennessey and Benjamin Wittes explain on their Lawfare blog. “He has a cooperating witness from inside the campaign’s interactions with the Russians. And he is alleging not mere technical infractions of law but astonishing criminality on the part of Trump’s campaign manager, a man who also attended the Trump Tower meeting. Any hope the White House may have had that the Mueller investigation might be fading away vanished . . . Things are only going to get worse from here.”

Analysis | The Daily 202: 10 takeaways from Mueller’s shock-and-awe gambit

 

[Valerie]

-- Here are 10 takeaways from Mueller’s opening gambit:


1. We now know that multiple members of the Trump campaign at least entertained the idea of getting help from the Russians.


The DNC email system was hacked in March 2016. In April, Papadopoulos began communicating with someone he believed to be linked to the Russian government. By July, Trump was publicly encouraging the Kremlin to release Hillary Clinton’s emails. “The White House can no longer claim honestly (if it ever could) that the investigation into Russian collusion is nonexistent,” Jennifer Rubin notes.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

The real questions that needs to be answered are
1) Why would Loretta Lynch threaten to suppress an FBI informant?
2) If the Russians are so bad, and we are talking “collusion”, why would the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton even remotely want to be associated with striking a uranium deal with them that so happens to also include financial contributions to the Clinton Foundation?

Loretta Lynch didn't.

'Silenced' FBI Informant Called To Testify On Corrupt Russian Bribery Scheme Involving Hillary

 

[Valerie]

col·lu·sion
kəˈlo͞oZHən/
noun
noun: collusion
secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.




Dread hangs over Washington as Mueller probe moves ahead

It took barely an hour for President Donald Trump's first, and best, defense to crumble after special counsel Robert Mueller's charging spree.

And in a cascade of developments, it quickly became clear that the Russia cloud engulfing the White House is only thickening -- and may not be disbursed until deep into the President's term, if ever.

 

[Valerie]

The real questions that needs to be answered are
1) Why would Loretta Lynch threaten to suppress an FBI informant?
2) If the Russians are so bad, and we are talking “collusion”, why would the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton even remotely want to be associated with striking a uranium deal with them that so happens to also include financial contributions to the Clinton Foundation?

Loretta Lynch didn't.

'Silenced' FBI Informant Called To Testify On Corrupt Russian Bribery Scheme Involving Hillary

SO is Trump's official legal defense going to be "bbbbut Hillary!" ?





FACT CHECK: Hillary Clinton Gave 20 Percent of United States' Uranium to Russia in Exchange for Clinton Foundation Donations?


FALSE

The Uranium One deal was not Clinton’s to veto or approve

Among the ways these accusations stray from the facts is in attributing a power of veto or approval to Secretary Clinton that she simply did not have. Clinton was one of nine cabinet members and department heads that sit on the CFIUS, and the secretary of the treasury is its chairperson. CFIUS members are collectively charged with evaluating the transaction for potential national security issues, then turning their findings over to the president. By law, the committee can’t veto a transaction; only the president can. According to The New York Times, Clinton may not have even directly participated in the Uranium One decision. Then-Assistant Secretary of State Jose Fernandez, whose job it was to represent the State Dept. on CFIUS, said Clinton herself “never intervened” in committee matters.

Despite transfer of ownership, the uranium remained in the U.S.

A key fact ignored in criticisms of Clinton’s supposed involvement in the deal is that the uranium was not — nor could it be — exported, and remained under the control of U.S.-based subsidiaries of Uranium One, according to a statement by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission:

 

[Valerie]

2. Sam Clovis is about to be in the hot seat.

3. Papadopoulos is helping the government, but we still don’t know how much.

4. The updated timeline raises a host of new questions about what Trump knew and when he knew it.


Analysis | The Daily 202: 10 takeaways from Mueller’s shock-and-awe gambit

oh my, you read that entire piece and still don't know what the single common factor is yet.

• I wouldn't go so far as to claim I read it, perhaps I would have found the word "common" and/or "factor" instead of just "fact" like you did if I had...but lets not pretend meaning has meaning so that meaningless banter not be discriminated against, e.g. 'can you post the united state of America' for me?...I will be hanging on every second awaiting

Frankeneinstein PAY ATTENTION TO NUMBER 4 above then let's see if you and Will HalfWit can figure it out


"the most important aspect of the Trump/Russia collusion investigation, that no one is discussing."


1/ Investigators are now trying to determine *exactly* when every member of the Trump campaign found out Russia was working to elect Trump.

2/ These dates are of legal importance because they establish a “mens rea” (mental state) for possible crimes committed by Trump and others.

3/ Once Trump, his family, and/or his campaign aides knew Russia was committing crimes to assist Trump, certain actions became *prohibited*.

4/ For instance, once Trump had this knowledge, he could not publicly deny it without running afoul of federal Aiding and Abetting statutes.

5/ For instance, once Don Jr. had this knowledge he couldn’t take any action in furtherance of a plan to benefit from Russia’s illegal acts.

6/ Knowledge of Russian illegalities—even broadly—is a necessary precursor to what we colloquially call “collusion” (not a legal term here).

7/ This is why *all* of Trump’s most audacious lies—and his family’s, and his aides’—center on their *knowledge* of what Russia was doing.

8/ Paul Manafort’s excuse for not knowing Russia was working to elect Trump? (a) he didn’t check his email; (b) he was looking at his phone.

9/ Jared Kushner’s excuse for not knowing Russia was working to elect Trump? (a) he left a big meeting early; (b) he didn’t check his email.

10/ What do the Trump aides who changed the GOP platform last July say in response to charges they were executing a quid pro quo for Russia?

11/ They say (a) they were executing orders Trump gave March 31, 2016; (b) but don’t blame Trump, because he didn’t know what we were doing.

12/ What’s *Trump’s* excuse as to Russia working to elect him—after *admitting* he knew and then *getting briefed on it* on August 17, 2016?

13/ Why, he just didn’t *believe* what U.S. intel agencies said, of course! He just didn’t *believe* the mountains of evidence we all saw!

14/ Now ask yourself: does Bob Mueller believe any of these lies? Does the FBI? Does the DOJ? Do American voters? Would a duly-seated jury?

15/ FACT: Don was directly told by a trusted friend that Putin was working to elect his dad. He knew this as of the first week of June 2016.

16/ Now consider: despite the way the Russia issue blew up after June 2016, Don says he *never told his dad* Putin was working to elect him.

17/ Don, Jared, and Manafort say they *never* discussed the issue again—with *anyone*—and deliberately plotted to keep this info from Trump.

18/ Do *you* believe that? Do you think Mueller does? Or the FBI? The DOJ? Most American voters? Most American Congressmen? Future jurors?

19/ You think Don sat there watching Russia news every single day for *months*, yet never told daddy Putin was confirmed as “in his corner”?

20/ Do you believe that—once the Russia news broke shortly after June 2016— Kushner and Manafort *never went back to look at their emails*?

21/ Do you think Kushner and Manafort were—start to finish—in the dark about who Veselnitskaya was, who she worked for, and what she wanted?

22/ Do you believe *none* of the Russia news between June 2016 and this summer caused Kushner *or* Manafort to reflect back on that meeting?

23/ Why did Trump witness-tamper with his son—exposing himself/Don to *prison*—with false statements on the meeting? Why? Knowledge matters.

24/ This explains fantastical tales of phone-checking/email-ignoring at the *exact* moments knowledge—legally speaking—could be established.

25/ This explains Trump’s increasingly grotesque and deranged denials of reality on Russian interference: if he says otherwise, *knowledge*.

26/ This is why the news that Don and Ivanka were about to be charged with felony fraud matters. It goes to their honesty—which is now key.

27/ Don/Ivanka *repeatedly lied to consumers* about how many Trump SoHo units had sold. So do you think they’d lie to save dad’s presidency?

28/ And this is why every single lie Trump tells is legally relevant on the question of his reputation/propensity for honesty versus deceit.

29/ Trump admitted Russia was helping—then was briefed on it—then reversed course and said otherwise when he saw the danger of an admission.

30/ But his reputation for deceit—it’s legendary—would prompt an investigator or juror to presume his initial briefing sealed his knowledge.

31/ The danger *now* is non-attorney journalists confusing evidence of Aiding and Abetting with “evidence of a cover-up.” They’re different.

32/ There’s evidence of a cover-up—Mueller could get Trump on Obstruction with a jury right now—but also Aiding and Abetting a Russian plot.

33/ The evidence of a cover-up overlaps in many particulars with the evidence Trump and his team knew Russia was interfering, then aided it.

34/ For instance, it *isn’t* legal for Trump to learn on August 17th, 2016 that Russia was committing crimes against the U.S., and *then*…

35/ …send his chief foreign policy aide—Sessions—to negotiate *unilateral sanctions-lifting* with Russia’s ambassador three weeks later.

36/ So let’s stop talking collusion—a vague and meaningless term in this legal scenario—and instead discuss “knowledge of illegal activity.”

37/ Don, Jared, and Manafort were on *legal notice* that Russia was illegally stealing information from June 9, 2016 onward—at the *latest*.

38/ So no, Don wasn’t entitled to take that meeting—given what he’d been told. And Manafort couldn’t push a GOP platform change weeks later.

39/ Indeed, arguably, the *entire campaign* was on notice Russia aimed to secretly negotiate with and aid Trump from March 24, 2016 onward.

40/ On that date, Papadopoulos told seven senior Trump staffers that Putin wanted to meet with Trump—and felt Trump could improve relations.

41/ On that basis, *any* subsequent revelation that Russia was committing crimes should’ve been read by the campaign as a pro-Trump proffer.

42/ Note that, in this analysis, I’m approaching this as a former criminal attorney and former criminal investigator—we *do* think this way.

43/ The media can’t—it feels—call Trump a liar when he lies to (dis)establish his legal knowledge. But as an attorney, I see it differently.

44/ But as we enter the intermediate stages of the Mueller probe, we *all* must be thinking in legal terms—as we’re in the legal sphere now.

45/ So if you want to talk Russia on social media, I’d suggest focusing on the date each actor had knowledge of Russia’s illegal acts. {end}