George Papadopoulos Was Trying to Hide Evidence He Thought Might Amount to Treason When He Lied to the FBI

Chuck Ross’ description of a September 2016 conversation between Stefan Halper and George Papadopoulos has evolved over the course of his reporting on it. In March, he described it this way:

According to a source with knowledge of the meeting, Halper asked Papadopoulos: “George, you know about hacking the emails from Russia, right?”

Papadopoulos told Halper he didn’t know anything about emails or Russian hacking, said the source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the investigations into Russian meddling in the 2016 campaign. The professor did not follow up on the line of inquiry.

In his next story on the exchange, Ross described it this way:

Sources familiar with Papadopoulos’s version of their meetings said Halper randomly asked Papadopoulos whether he knew about Democratic National Committee emails that had been hacked and leaked by Russians.

Papadopoulos strongly denied the allegation, sources familiar with his version of the exchange have told TheDCNF. Halper grew agitated and pressed Papadopoulos on the topic. Papadopoulos believes that Halper was recording him during some of their interactions, sources said.

The very next day, here’s how Ross described it:

During one of their dinners, Halper asked Papadopoulos whether he was involved in the Russian theft of Democrats’ emails, sources familiar with Papadopoulos’ account have told TheDCNF. Papadopoulos denied the allegation, saying that stealing emails would be treason.

Halper grew frustrated, according to sources.

This is the first story in this series where Ross describes what Papadopoulos pled guilty to, but he gets it wrong in a key way I’ll describe below.

Finally, Ross offers yet another description in a new story today.

Sources familiar with Papadopoulos’ version of events say that during one conversation, Halper asked Papadopoulos whether he was involved in the release of DNC emails. Papadopoulos denied it, telling Halper that hacking emails would be treason. Halper grew frustrated, according to the sources.

Today’s story claims we don’t know what Alexander Downer told FBI. We do know one detail he omitted: That Downer told the FBI that Papadopoulos told him Mifsud said the Russians were going to release the emails to help Trump.

Now, as I said, in yesterday’s story, Ross described the substance of the lies Papadopoulos told the FBI slightly wrong.

Papadopoulos has pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about the timing of his encounters with Mifsud and two Russian nationals. He did, however, tell the FBI in his initial interviews that Mifsud mentioned Clinton documents.

Ross leans on his misunderstanding of Papadopoulos’ guilty plea to argue today that FBI should have interviewed Papadopoulos back in August, rather than ask a lifelong Republican to ask the same questions while hiding the FBI interest.

Papadopoulos has pleaded guilty to the special counsel’s office for lying to the FBI during that interview. As part of his plea deal, Papadopoulos admitted he lied about the timing of his interactions with two Russian nationals and a Maltese professor named Joseph Mifsud. Papadopoulos initially told FBI agents that the contacts occurred prior to joining the Trump campaign when, in fact, they occurred after he learned that he would be joining the Trump campaign in March 2016.

FBI defenders could point to Papadopoulos’ deception in the January 2017 interview to argue that he would have lied had he been questioned earlier in Crossfire Hurricane. But that argument is undercut by what else Papadopoulos said in his FBI interview.

According to a statement of offense Special Counsel Robert Mueller filed, Papadopoulos told FBI agents that Mifsud mentioned the stolen Clinton emails.

And sources familiar with Papadopoulos’s version of the FBI interview say he claims that he, and not the FBI agents, first mentioned Mifsud during the interview, which was conducted in Chicago without lawyers present.

That is, Ross argues that because Papadopoulos offered up that he met a weird guy named Mifsud who told him the Russians were offering dirt in the form of Hillary emails, he could be trusted to have been honest had the FBI asked him in August.

As I said, though, Ross’ first description of Papadopoulos’ guilty plea is wrong in several ways. Ross hides how important Papadopoulos said Mifsud seemed; the FBI describes Papadopoulos claiming Mifsud was just BSing. The former Trump aide similarly denied having any relationship with the Russian woman Mifsud introduced him to. Both those details make Papadopoulos’ lies about the timing more important: he lied about how important he believed these two were and he lied about the way their outreach to him tied to his role on the campaign.

In Ross’ first description of his plea, however, he suggested that Papadopoulos affirmatively lied “about the timing of his encounters with Mifsud and two Russian nationals,” the second of whom we know to be Ivan Timofeev. That’s wrong. In the first interview, Papadopoulos (successfully) hid the entire existence of Timofeev. That’s key because Papadopoulos was forwarding communications from Timofeev, a Russian official, talking about setting up meetings with campaign officials. He was forwarding these emails to the campaign in the weeks leading up to the June 9 meeting. Indeed, Papadopoulos told Timofeev that Trump’s first campaign speech was a sign that the candidate was willing to meet. By hiding Timofeev, Papadopoulos was hiding high level campaign knowledge of the outreach (including Paul Manafort).

Ross fails to mention another damning thing the purportedly forthcoming Papadopoulos did the day after his second FBI interview: delete his Facebook account, and with it his communications with Timofeev, and get a new cell phone, presumably destroying secure communications.

There is no way Papadopoulos would have been any more honest with FBI in August 2016 than he was in January.

And if the third and fourth version of Ross’ description of the Halper-Papadopoulos exchange is any indication, then it’s very clear why Papadopoulos would have always lied about the communications: because he considered the very same kind of back and forth with Russians tied to the email release treason.

Papadopoulos was trying to cover up evidence he thought might prove treason.

102 replies
  1. Mister Sterling says:

    Which doesn’t make it treason. But point well taken. Whereas Carter Page was and is an idiot, Papadopoulos was aware that he was involved in a very serious crime.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Carter Page seems more experienced and more aware than Papadopoulos.  But Papa seems to have fewer patrons and a greater need to revert and to play by the rules, which looks like he finally made a smart move.

      As for unaware, I nominate Chris Cillizza.

  2. Trip says:

    But was Halper frustrated? LMAO. Because repeating that Halper sounded frustrated makes it all sooooo nefarious.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Given how long Halper has been in the business, what he has done and for whom, it seems unlikely there was anything about his encounters with Papadopoulos, Page or even Flynn that would have made him lose his cool.

      If he really appeared “frustrated” to Papadopoulos, it was role playing, meant to get a reaction from a wannabe who might have had a little too much to drink.

    • orionATL says:

      yeah, the halper getting frustrated description bothers me too. a guy with 30 yrs experience interacting with people he could guess might be suspicious of him suddenly got “frustrsted”? i wasn’t there, but that seems peculiarly un-suave, unless it was a tactic on halper’s part.

      • Bob Conyers says:

        This is an obscure reference, but I’m reminded of the great X-Files episode “Jose Chung’s From Outer Space.”

        In the episode, different extremely unreliable witnesses describe an alien encounter, including one who claims he saw the perpetually monotone, morose Fox Mulder screaming like a frightened child:

  3. SteveB says:

    What is also interesting about all of these shennanigans to underplay Papadopolous significance is the extent to which Papadopolous (all right sources close to his thinking) is playing along with this.

    That kind of behaviour does not sit well with his agreement to cooperate.

    Maybe the “if only the FBI had interviewed me in August” theme is part of a pardon dangle to him: it gives cover to pardon him, and undercuts the investigation into Trump from the outset.

    Is there any chance that all his contacts with Ross have been bugged by Mueller team? His agreement to cooperate explicitly referred to wearing a wire, but presumably some further authority would be required for surveillance of such contacts?

    • pseudonymous in nc says:

      The next Papadopoulos status report per the docket is on Wednesday. It might be punted again, like it was in January and April. But those sources familiar with his thinking and with knowledge of his interactions have been pretty chatty of late.

    • Avattoir says:

      the extent to which Papadopolous (all right sources close to his thinking) is playing along with this

      Why would it even be necessary to Ross’ ‘reporting’ that he, or “sources”, whether or not “close to his thinking”, that any cooperation at all from Papadopoulos be secured?

      Perhaps I’m failing to grasp the notion of “sources close to his thinking”. Would Papadopoulos himself qualify as one such ‘source’? Or could he continue on breathing in and out, eating, sleeping, waking up each day, largely if not completely oblivious to the busy work of Ross’ “sources” (perhaps even to their very existence)?

      As a practical matter, I have difficulty reconciling the vision of a cloud of “sources” hovering in space closely contiguous with Papadopoulos’ head, hoovering up “his thinking”, all while he, his wife, family and friends, and acquaintances which for some time now have included those employed in or associate with the OSC, fail to notice this activity.

      Nonetheless, as a purely theoretical construct – owing its provenance, perhaps, to Schrodinger’s Equation of State – I can certainly appreciate the attraction to, and potential value in, the very notion of “sources familiar with the thinking of [x]”. Possibly Chuck Ross ought to be nominated for some Newsmax, Fox or supermart tabloid award in counterpart to a Pulitzer, for his notable contributions to theoretical constructs in the proliferation of conceptualizations that please Trumpalos and the Trump-curious in the Republican base.

        • Trip says:

          Sometimes it’s the actual person themselves, who want to be off the record, giving the opinion anonymously. Although when you say “someone familiar with his thinking” you could be including the author, who thinks he knows what Papa was thinking, I suppose.

          • orionATL says:


            but you couldn’t say that of carter page, now could you? if his speech is any example of how he thinks, even he could not be close to his thinking. :)

      • SteveB says:

        UK tabloid speak :

        “source close to his thinking” = him;

        “Sources close to his thinking” = him + wife

        Perhaps you have different conventions. Well I know YOU do.

          • earlofhuntingdon says:

            My reasoning is that Papa’s wife has been more articulate in his defense than Papa himself.

        • Avattoir says:

          Fair enough – but, of course, someone has to ‘interpret’ the ‘information’ received from any such ‘source’.

          Perhaps the ‘interpreter’ detected (or thought she or he detected) “frustration”, to such a degree that a helpful (and entirely innocent, I’m sure) prompt, or even suggestion (or several of them) was permitted access to the Cone of Source during source <–> observer interactions, much as a hypothetical boson can convenience its way into the Feynman diagram.

          Or perhaps Ross utilizes an interpretation process that has multiple phases, with all the attendant randomness of phone tag yet with the extra focus of a TDC filing deadline.

          IAE, I remain underwhelmed by the evidence in support of even the mere existence of, let alone the reliability of the interpretative process involved in rationalizing, “sources close to his thinking”.

          • Trip says:

            Ha! Funny. But, yeah, it’s just a trendy expression Du jour. Remember how years ago everything was “delicious”, even if not edible? Or how “amazing” or “awesome” everything is? One writer used it and now they all do. It’s dumb.

  4. earlofhuntingdon says:

    As part of his plea deal, Papadopoulos admitted he lied about the timing of his interactions with two Russian nationals and a [Russian-linked] Maltese professor named Joseph Mifsud.

    Ross needs to clean up his descriptions.  Mifsud now seems more than linked to Russia.  His various “academic” posts seem largely financed by them, even if the Russians wash their funding through a German-born Swiss lawyer.

    Is that the kind of Russian or foreign contact that Hope Hicks, speaking for the administration, claimed never existed?

  5. bmaz says:

    I am not convinced Ross is all that. He seems more dishonest than, occasionally, honest.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Are you the guy asking where the hell Emmet Flood has gone to?  Don McGahn still seems to be in the White House Counsel’s Office.  Flood does seem smart enough not to volunteer to shovel coal in the boiler room of a sinking ship.

        • Peterr says:

          Per Politico on May 2, Flood will be coming on board “at the end of the month.” I suspect his silence now is to let Ty Cobb retire in peace.

          Lots of the press around the announcement Flood would be taking over trumpeted the fact that he worked for Bill Clinton when he faced impeachment. More interesting to me, though, is that he was Dick Cheney’s lawyer when a certain special prosecutor was going after the White House over outing Valerie Plame. The impeachment part of Flood’s background may come into play eventually, but it’s his work for Cheney that makes him very important to Trump right now.

          Or rather, very important on the first of next month.

  6. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to avoid an obstruction charge, it seems.  But what he seems to have done was not “treason”.  He knows as little about the law as he does about foreign affairs.  But he does know how to lie and what it’s important to lie about.

    • Trip says:

      All of a sudden, John Kelly is back in favor. It sounds like Rosenstein did actually cave, versus the consensus that he humor-yes-ed Trump to death, while continuing on.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        Rosenstein and Wray still seem to be humoring the Don, but I would not want to be given as many balls to juggle as Rosenstein’s IG, Horowitz. But I agree that the Don has intent to fire one or both and is trying to set the stage for doing it.

        Sessions may have recused himself, but his department and his top staff are being consumed by what he has promised to stay away from. 

        Any normal top lawyer and Cabinet official would be trying to plug those many holes in his dike – or writing his letter of resignation.  Sessions seems to be sitting alone with a large tumbler of Maker’s Mark, hoping that his phone doesn’t ring.

        • Peterr says:

          Sessions is praying for Kennedy or Thomas to announce his retirement from SCOTUS, so that Ol’ Jefferson Beauregard can convince Trump to nominate him for the post. “Put me on SCOTUS, and then you’ll be able to get a non-recused AG, without anyone accusing you of obstruction of justice.”

      • Avattoir says:

        Comey called Rosenstein “a survivor”. That’s a skill set! I’d be loathe to underestimate his abilities at negotiating these choppy waters.

        And it’s not like he’ll be stuck within the Straits of Magellan forever. It may well be sufficient that he keeps the ship afloat long enough for Mueller to release to him his report on presidential obstruction.

        But I find it difficult to foresee his continued service after that point.

  7. jo blow says:

    i am curious what happens whenfolks find out mifsud is/was an m16 operative? sorta like how folks recently discovered halper was a cia operative? how many holes does it take to sink your exceptional boat?

    • bmaz says:

      I am curious why every time you show up here you have a different base. Care to explain Jo Blow?

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        They’re baaaaaack.

        MI6 will be so pissed that their Mifsud has been outed.  The Russians might want back the money they lavished on him through that Swiss lawyer for so many years.  I suggest that Mifsud start wearing gloves whenever he puts his hand on his front door knob.

        • jo blow says:

          sounds like mifsud has been missing for a while now.. i got a kick out of that story about 2 people closing the door at the same time to make contact with the military grade agent… some people will believe anything it seems.. do i now need to wear gloves when i post on emptywheel?

      • Trip says:

        Yeah, the villainous Obama was so diabolical, that he never informed the public of the ConFraud investigation, nor did the Obama FBI spooks, nor did the CIA, and Clinton lost, while Trump is seated as the president. What an excellent conspiracy! Was Obama in on getting Trump elected or what?

      • jo blow says:

        well, we definitely wouldn’t want to hold obama accountable! obama never held bush, cheney, wall st (in 2008) and etc. etc. accountable.. why would anyone want to hold him accountable for anything now?? i think he said something to the effect – we have to move on, lol…

  8. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Ari Melber, forcibly retired NYT editor Howell Raines’s belief aside, Mr. Trump is not a self-made man. He inherited about $100 million, allegedly with the help of a late rewrite of possibly demented daddy’s will that was remarkably in favor of the Don. He squandered much of it, went bankrupt six times, and seems to have recovered with the help of a lot of what looks like laundered money.

    Mr. Trump is not throwing darts at Jeff Bezos’s Amazon for its many faults, let alone its horrible employment practices. Ordinarily, Trump would applaud Bezos for such things, especially tax avoidance. In TrumpWorld, that conduct is the definition of smart business practices.

    No, Trump is waging a cat fight with Bezos because his WaPo criticizes him, at a time when he’s feeling vulnerable to federal criminal probes that may be getting close. Mr. Raines’s defense of the Post Office in its contracts with Amazon is partly correct, but wholly beside the point. Ari, you can do better.

  9. SteveB says:

    @ trip 6:36
    @EoH 6:38

    Re the Kelly “committee” : DOJ FBI DNI vs Congressional leaders review of the latter’s requests for highly classified and other information

    I’m not quite sure what to make of it.

    The first part of the WH statement about the expansion of the OIG investigation to cover DOJ FBI tactics re Trump Campaign, read to me like a face saving exercise: the WH were making it sound like it was the Prez’s idea when it is clear that in truth the DOJ did it themselves in advance of the meeting which was scheduled way back.
    Trumps tweetstorm was I think intended to create the impression that the meeting was something other than a routine one it was (and reported as such by CNN) so that it appeared to have been summoned at short notice to haul Wray and Rosenstein over the coals, thus making the Prez look tough and decisive.

    The kicker is the Kelly stuff. Is Kelly going to strong arm the DOJ ?
    While Kelly has been less of the adult in the room that many hoped/expected, I do wonder whether he would sign on for a NunesGaetzetc batshit scheme to obstruct justice. Thus this too maybe a face saving exercise – giving the appearance of tough action by the Prez, and a down-the-line scapegoat for slow walking it.

    • Trip says:

      Kelly is not, and will not be the firewall against any horrific Trump machinations. He is completely signed on, and encourages a lot of the worst characteristics of Trump. Being a past general means zero, nada, zilch in terms of integrity and an ethical compass*.  We (in general, a pun!) need to stop with the military fetishism.

      *See also Michael Flynn, Petraeus, et al.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        Any more than Ms. Haspel will be a firewall to protect the CIA or school el Presidente on the badness of the Russians and Mr. Putin.  Mr. Wittes may never admit his aspirations were doomed from the start, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t obvious.

      • SteveB says:

        As of today 3:25 pm

        SHS @ podium states Kelley not going to be @ meeting he has just set it up

        Thursday  DNI Coates, FBI Wray, DOJ  Ed O’Callaghan , then Nunes and Gowdey.


        So how often will Ed O’C say “Let me get back to you on that one”


        • Trip says:

          No Democrats allowed. This way they can write their script without objections and potentially contrary analysis.

          How is any of this due process? How is any of this legit, when only members of one party get eyeballs on it? This is seriously fucked up. Now they’re just gonna steamroll over ELECTED (by the people) officials.

          • SteveB says:

            What eyeballs?

            The meeting is to

            “review highly classified and other information they have requested”


            1 its to review the requests for information

            2 for information not documents

            Is Ed O’C going to play ball with them.  Counter terrorist specialist, who left DOJ to campaign for John McCain, back at DOJ after 9 + 6years private sector last 6 as partner with Clifford Chance.   He will piss on Nunes I would have thought.

  10. SpaceLifeForm says:

    DOJ says ok to Avenatti appearing pro hac vice.

    Rudy, try the three Big Mac solution.

    Maybe if you and potus go to the same location at the same time,  you both can then get a group discount.

    They may even toss in the shakes for free!

    Oh, wait, you both probably already have the shakes.

  11. Bob Conyers says:

    Meanwhile on the Michael Cohen front….

    The Onion printed today a threatening email it received (for real!) from Cohen back in 2013 complaining about an article they ran under Trump’s byline titled “When You’re Feeling Low, Just Remember I’ll be Dead in About 15 or 20 Years.”

    Cohen demanded The Onion pull the story and apologize. They never responded until now.

    More from The Washington Post on this real letter from Cohen. Seriously, despite The Onion’s involvement, it’s not a fake.

    “The Best Indication Yet That Michael Cohen is the World’s Worst Lawyer”

  12. prostratedragon says:

    Well worth a look, including the 2013 article, if only as a reminder of how easy it was to predict (contingently!) our present distress.

  13. Bay State Librul says:

    I was surprised to learn that a koan signifies a “court case” or as one writer notes “a file of legal documents.”

    He goes on to say that these cases are “intractable, insoluble conundrums to which the disciple must find an answer”.

    Koan #1701 –  The Con Koan

    We are searching for the truth here. When asked about truth, the Buddha replied “A good horse runs even at the shadow of a whip.”

    At least for me, I’m definitely zoned out, in the shadows, hoping Emptywheel is the whip






  14. Trip says:

    OT: Marcy, in re your twitter comments: VERIZON.SUCKS. They used to be a good company, but have morphed into a monstrous machine where increased fees, higher rates at every turn, long customer service phone hold times (and they keep you from other methods of contacts since they don’t want anything in writing), excessive up-selling and collection/reminder calls/texts are all they are about. Customer service, for the most part, are handed scripts and can’t deviate from what is written from above. Most of them are not allowed to think on their own. And they will lie to get you to buy, and then later they will tell you, “Soandso shouldn’t have told you/promised you that”, like it absolves them of the original lie. Awful. And BTW, the internet ain’t that fast. (End rant).

  15. Trip says:

    I do not see the Rosenstein acquiescence has some brilliant plan. Not fighting back, we are descending into tyranny, in real time. I agree with Stanley. This is REALLY BAD. I am not comforted by the ‘chess moves’ analysis.

    Stanley Cohen‏ @StanleyCohenLaw

    White House direct intervention in the investigation, demand for documents otherwise denied any other “subject,” putting together a screening committee of select committee members and kelly is a constitutional crises. Welcome to the Philippines.

    One cannot speak on behalf of justice, denied to tends of millions, in this country and remain silent about the public special treatment demanded and now received by “it”

    In just the last three days this regime has moved to pull money from Planned Parenthood, saw the SCOTUS embrace its anti-worker theology and carved out the Romanov exception to criminal prosecution. #russiagate. lololol

    We are in deep shit.
    Apologies if this duplicates, I’m getting 404 messages (like 7-8 times). Or am I being blocked by the site for too many comments? That’s okay, too.

    • pseudonymous in nc says:

      If Rosenstein and Wray’s strategy is to buy time, the question becomes what the time actually buys. As the Pod Save America team said yesterday, there are a couple of assumptions that will only be proven or disproven in retrospect: that the truth is sufficient to drive out the 43rd iteration of lies, and that the obstruction won’t work. (Can’t be convicted of obstructing justice if you successfully obstruct the obstruction of justice investigation.)

      If it prosper, none dare call it treason.

    • bmaz says:

      No, there is no comment limit. But we have been a little flaky lately as to temporary 404’s. I too have seen a couple.

  16. earlofhuntingdon says:

    As EW has said at length, the Mueller investigation is not only about obstruction or even ConFraud US.  Among other possibilities are serious financial crimes that might permeate the Trump empire.  If they exist, their disclosure would end it, along with Trump’s presidency.

    If ConFraud US permeated the Trump campaign, which was comprised of Trump and Pence, is that sufficient to bring down Mr. Pence?  Or must he be found guilty of misdeeds apart from his full participation in the Trump campaign?

    We were never in Marcus Aurelius territory.  As far as Trump’s likely behavior goes, this is Nero and his fiddle.

  17. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Trump’s phone.  He don’t need no stinkin’ security.  Not if having “security” would tell government security forces who he calls and when.

    Note to the Boss: The security state already knows who you call and when.

  18. Rugger9 says:

    There is a new motion by Manafort, where he is trying to argue that the OSC is leaking, based on a meeting that occurred before Mueller was appointed.  Paulie seems to be projecting the palace here, since the OSC has been remarkably leak-free, and any so-called “leaks” like the questions turn out to have come from the palace legal team.  I can’t see the merit, but perhaps the lawyers can take it apart.  The filing is at the link.

    Also, Flynn Jr won’t shut up.  What’s this latest tweet about?

    And, last but not least, how the GOP screwed over the Trump voters with their tax cuts, one wonders what the bikers will do…:

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      I suspect Flynn is chomping on the bit forced into his mouth over that plea deal.  His “full cooperation” is wearing thin.

      At heart, he is a full-blown Trumpeter and he doesn’t think he did anything wrong.  He’s dying to be in there with Bolton and Pompeo, bringing old testament fire and brimstone to infidels and unbelievers.

      Best thing about Trump’s administration is that Flynn was NSA for less than a month.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Who’s gonna ride into Sturgis on a Harley that says, “Made in Patpong”?

      Nose. Face. Cut. Signed, Harley-Davidson, former American motorcycle company.

  19. sonofnewo says:

    Marcy, you still haven’t answered a very simple question:

    Why, in your opinion, did Stefan Halper and Alexander Downer each arrange private meetings with lowly George Papadopoulos in the summer of 2016?

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      You insist on asking others to answer questions you claim are “very simple”.  Were you a legacy admission to Penn?  You don’t seem to want an answer, just attention.  i think you’ll find that if you want to drink water on the hilltop, you’ll have to get there and carry it yourself.

      • sonofnewo says:

        As I’ve told her many times, if she doesn’t answer that simple question, I will assume that she can’t because the facts are inconvenient for her preferred conspiracy theory.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        If all you’ve got is, “I demand, I demand, I demand….” you’ll have to take it to the White House, where they treat such childish attempts at rhetorical arm-twisting with all seriousness.

  20. sonofnewo says:

    I think I know the answer. That’s not the problem.

    I’m asking Marcy this simple question because I think she’s pretending to be an analyst while ignoring the facts that conflict with her preferred conspiracy theory.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      I think I know the answer, too.  But it depends on whether the swallow is laden or unladen.

    • SteveB says:

      Are you the same sonofnewo who claims to prove on a video that the Charlottesville car attack was staged by the deeeeeep state to discredit Trump supporters , and that Richard Spencer and other Neo-Nazis are infact agents of the deep state whose profile was raised for the same nefarious purpose.

      When you refer to “preferred conspiracy theory”  my my how long and deep have you quaffed to reach such levels of discernment?


      • sonofnewo says:

        One and the same, SteveB.  I’m glad you’re familiar with my work.  Don’t mess with me.

        • SteveB says:

          What you earnestly embody

          is like a delicate exotic fruit; touch it and the bloom is gone.

          Who could mess with a being of such importance

  21. Soldalinsky says:

    This is O/T, but Avenatti needs our help people!


    The Alt-right is attacking him and somehow managed to screw up his law firm’s payroll obligations in 2014 and 2015!  Those Nazis are so sneaky!  Recently, he entered into a personal agreement to repay payroll back taxes and I’m almost positive the Republicans screwed it up again!  Why would they do this? I think they’re scared!!  Even worse, Agolf Twittler’s minions and their fake news spread lies about a different settlement agreement and now Avenatti owes principal + damages for stealing $2 million from one of his former partners!  Fake news is a huge problem and we need to do something now.  A $5 million penalty for ripping off $2 million from somebody and refusing to pay after a judge orders payment just isn’t fair.  How is this happening?



    • Trip says:

      Avenatti being or douche, or not, has ZERO impact on whether Cohen, Trump, or Cohen and Trump were involved in Criminal activity. The dirty ain’t gonna change that.


    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Given the felony counts and potential jail time Freidman was facing, and after having just lost his law license, the Taxi King’s plea deal looks like manna from heaven.  He must have a lot to share with Mr. Mueller and/or SDNY.  Mickey Medallions and the Don should get real lawyers now.  And probably a few other people, too.

  22. orionATL says:

    i don’t think i have read anything as repugnant as the articles i spent the last two hours reading about the historical behavior of influence peddlers and political fixers, eliot broidy and george nader.

    did you know these guys were business partners who stood to gain ~$1 billion from s.a./uae contracts?

    that each had prior convictions?

    that each had a long history of influence peddling?

    that the fight between s.a./uae on the one hand and qatar on the other was a set-up with broidy having had conversations with trump?

    that the repub nat’l committee charges a large fee <$200k for a picture with president trump?

    that nader, with an especially unsavory conviction in europe and forbidden by the secret servivice from being in trump's immediate company, nonetheless got his picture taken thru the intercession of his partner who paid the dinero?

    and yes, new york magazine and the "elliot broidy did trump a favor" story is one of the threads you'll pull, but not the only or the most important.

    you'd like to know more? o.k. start with this paul waldman and and pull all the strings:

    washington post,  paul waldman, may 22, 2018,1:21pm "get to know elliot broidy, the next major trump scandal figure"  (@the plum line).

    go to the other articles cited and pull their strings. just keep on pulling strings. i have rarely read anything more repugnant in the way of influence peddling and behind the scenes influencing of american government actions with major consequences.

    any illegality aside, this is astonishing corruption, a story not about draining the swamp as our president panderingly promised, but about increasing its depth and reach in american public policy thru a welcoming arms policy  toward rainmakers

    • Soldalinsky says:

      Yeah, it’s bad.  I’m not entirely sure that the fight between SA/UAE can be blamed solely on Trump.  Putin had a lot to do with it too.

      Unfortunately, Broidy is just a tiny bit of what is going on behind the scenes and most likely a scapegoat or tool to take down Trump.  These guys are amateurs and I’m not going to be convinced anything is changing until corporate officers are indicted or a TBTF entity is split up.  Everything else is just a distraction.  There’s trillions of dollars missing or unaccounted for every year in military books for god sakes!

      From the article below:

      “The report indicates that for fiscal year 2015 the Army failed to provide adequate support for $6.5 trillion in journal voucher adjustments.  According to the GAO’s Comptroller General.”


      • orionATL says:

        soldalinsky –

        do you realize how obvious you are?

        get more training.

        you bring to mind alex ulanovsky.

Comments are closed.