Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)(THREAD) BREAKING - The NYT has published a bombshell report on George Papadopoulos [View all]
(THREAD) BREAKING: The NYT has published a bombshell report on George Papadopoulosthe biggest Trump-Russia news since Flynn's plea. This thread dissects the new revelationsas well as some major implications for the Trump-Russia collusion narrative. I hope you'll read and share.
1/ First, here's the article. The NYT foregrounds the story's significance as a rebuttal of Trump's claims the Russia investigation began with the Steele Dossier. But in fact, anyone who knows criminal investigations knew long ago Trump's claim was untrue.
Link to tweet
2/ As has been discussed by @AshaRangappa_, the Steele Dossier alone would never have been enough to earn the FBI the July 2016 FISA warrant it was granted to monitor Carter Page. So attorneys and those in intelligence long ago knew the Dossier didn't launch the probe by itself.
3/ The NYT story gives usit appearsan additional piece of the warrant application the FBI filed to get a FISA warrant in July '16. But again, this is merely a pieceas was the Dossier. We know multiple intelligence agencies, not just Australia's, provided the FBI with evidence.
4/ So Trump's claim that the FBI grabbed a dossier of raw intelligence it hadn't yet confirmed and ran to the FISA court to secure a warrant to wiretap Americans connected to the Trump campaign has been laughably false from Day 1. And media has not done enough to underscore that.
5/ What we learn from the NYT (though again it's notcontrary to what the NYT seems to believe from its headlinewhat makes today's breaking news significant) is that the Australians informed U.S. law enforcement in July 2016 that Papadopoulos had made covert contact with Russia.
6/ In fact, while today's NYT story is indeed this month's second-biggest Trump-Russia revelationafter the December 1 guilty plea by Mike Flynnwhat makes it significant isn't that it rebuts Trump's false claims but that it may have *sealed the Trump-Russia collusion narrative*.
7/ If the NYT understood this, it would've led with it. But one must know the *prior* reporting on Papadopoulos to understand why today's news constitutes one of the biggest revelations in the 18-monthy history of the Trump-Russia probe. So I'll *briefly* summarize what we know.
8/ On September 2240 days before we learned Papadopoulos was cooperating with the Mueller probeI said that he had directly identified himself to Trump as a Kremlin agent in March 2016. This led to major-media coverage of the now-infamous "TIHDC meeting."
Link to tweet
9/ It hadn't previously been discussed that Papadopoulos was at the first meeting of Trump's national security (NatSec) team at the Trump International Hotel in DC (TIHDC) on March 31, 2016. But he was therea *week* after revealing himself as a Kremlin agent to the NatSec team.
10/ So when (per the NYT) Papadopoulos revealed in May '16 to an Australian diplomat that he knew Russia had committed major federal crimes against the U.S.via computer theft and fraudit was two months after he told Trump's NatSec team *and Trump* he was in contact with Russia.
11/ The nature of the contact that Papadopoulos revealed in March 2016 to Trump and his team was that he was a *legal* agentin the law we'd say "special agent"of the Kremlin. He was authorized to represent the Kremlin's interests in setting up a clandestine Trump-Putin meeting.
12/ That authority came to Papadopoulosfrom Kremlin officialsthrough another Kremlin agent, Joseph Mifsud. This is why Papadopoulos, per public reporting by WP, identified himself to Trump on March 31, 2017 as a Kremlin "intermediary" designated not by Trump but by the Kremlin.
13/ As has been exhaustively detailed by WaPo (WP), Trump's NatSec team spent *two months*from March to May of 2016discussing how to handle Papadopoulos' "offer" of acting as an intermediary between Trump and Putin. They did *not* dismiss the offer in March, whatever some say.
14/ It was in the *middle* of this deliberation by the NatSec team that Papadopoulos, in April 2016, was told the Kremlin had committed federal computer crimes by stealing emails from a presidential candidate. Papadopoulos *knew* his team was then deliberating a Trump-Putin meet.
15/ During this period, Papadopoulos was *personally* hounding top Trump officialsper the WPto give him more authority and allow him to travel abroad to arrange a Trump-Putin meeting. His April intelligence on the Clinton emails was *without a doubt* a card he would've played.
16/ So while Australian law enforcement knew of the stolen Clinton emails in May 2016, and the FBI knew by July 2016 (via Australia), it's a *lock* that Papadopoulos gave this intel to Trump and his campaignfrom whom he wanted present authority *and* a future jobin April 2016.
17/ So when Trump said, in July 2016, "Russia, if you're listening..." let's be clearhe a) knew they were listening, b) knew they'd stolen the emails he was urging them to release, and c)this is keyhad already promised, *via Papadopoulos*, to reward them for being good to him.
18/ This is the first real bombshell from the NYT: we now know Papadopoulos helped write the April 27, 2016 speech in which Trump promised Russia a "good deal" if they'd be his "friend," and that Trump *knew* Papadopoulos would transmit to Russia that that speech was a *message*.
19/ In March 2017, I was the first to argue that Trump's Mayflower Speech was the orchestrated beginning of a negotiation with the Russiansa negotiation about unilaterally dropping Russian sanctions. That thread essentially launched this feed (see link).
Link to tweet
20/ The NYT has just confirmed the crux of that March 2017 thread: that Trump hadby April 27, 2016established sufficient means to send a message to Russia that the careful placement of Kislyak at the event (violating diplomatic protocol) signaled the beginning of a negotiation.
21/ Per the NYT, Papadopoulos was that means. Papadopoulos told Trump he was a Kremlin agent; Trump put Papadopoulos on his campaign's Russia beat (not Papadopoulos' specialization); he let him help with the Mayflower Speech; he knew Papadopoulos would communicate that to Russia
22/ Per the NYT, Papadopoulos working on the Mayflower Speech was a signal to Russia negotiations had begun. So: Papadopoulos tells Russia he's helping with Trump's foreign policy; Russia tells him of the emails; Papadopoulos tells the campaign; Trump offers Russia a "good deal."
More
23/ All of this happens in April 2016, which is why Papadopoulos was feeling pretty damn good about himself in May 2016 when he let slip about the emails to an Australian diplomat.
It also explains why Trump was so frustrated when the Kremlin didn't give Don the emails in June.
24/ Don was excited to meet Kremlin agents in June 2016 to get Clinton "dirt" because Papadopoulos told the campaign in April Russia had that dirt. When Veselnitskaya left only a slim file with Don, the campaign was dissatisfied. They thought Russia would then release the emails.
25/ That didn't happenother hacked info was released insteadwhich is why Trump made the appeal himself, on TV, in July 2016.
He'd already promised Russia a "good deal" on sanctions if they'd be a "friend"he said he'd "reward" friendsbut he felt they hadn't delivered enough.
26/ I've been arguing on this feed for over six months now that Trump-Russia collusion is *already known*: Trump negotiated sanctions relief for Russia in exchange for continued assistance with leakswhich constitutes *Aiding and Abetting Computer Crimes*.
Link to tweet
27/ In October, I made this case in even greater detail.
Link to tweet
28/ There is much, much more to say here about the NYT story and everything we know about Papadopoulos that makes this NYT story *much* bigger than the NYT thinks. But I have to take a break for a couple hours for an important event.
I will return *immediately* after with more.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
107 replies, 26633 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (175)
ReplyReply to this post
107 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
(THREAD) BREAKING - The NYT has published a bombshell report on George Papadopoulos [View all]
bathroommonkey76
Dec 2017
OP
I also believe the high-ranking republican elected pols were in on this, too!
TheDebbieDee
Dec 2017
#2
#TrumpRussia 50 tweet MEGA-THREAD by Seth -- history's most explosive intel dossier .....
L. Coyote
Dec 2017
#81
Wow, thanks for sharing this excellent synopsis, really pulls the whole picture together.
lark
Jan 2018
#103
Hearings will happen, meanwhile there is a deference to Mueller's investigation and its integrity.
L. Coyote
Jan 2018
#104
Trump is a principal in the conspiracy of Aiding & Abetting Computer Crimes; can be charged with it.
NBachers
Dec 2017
#3
I looked it up and a member of the Supreme Court can be impeached. If it can be proved
Maraya1969
Dec 2017
#33
The end of the GOP would be another alternative / add-on. But I'm with you.
Bernardo de La Paz
Dec 2017
#44
why not link to the NYT article instead of giving this guy so much free self promotion?
msongs
Dec 2017
#12
Sorry to disappoint, but this has been all over DU and the internet since at least this morning.
George II
Dec 2017
#29
Starting to detect a pattern ... when Two Scoops goes too far off the rails with his bullshit ...
mr_lebowski
Dec 2017
#32
Yes, NYT always checks it stories with principals, so Gang get alerted & go ape (in tRump's case) nt
Bernardo de La Paz
Dec 2017
#36
Thank you for posting it all; it's a gadawful thing to have to do (hard enough to read). . . nt
Bernardo de La Paz
Dec 2017
#34
RW line today was that Sen Lindsey Graham had "confirmed" that the Steele
Bernardo de La Paz
Dec 2017
#37
abramson is trying to inform the public so no one can cover all this up
questionseverything
Dec 2017
#88
They need significantly more than just tax records to prove a money laundering case.
Calista241
Dec 2017
#87
"improved Russia relations" is only one of tons of quid pro quo's that could be established no? tia
uponit7771
Dec 2017
#100
Yes, must be. But his NYT leaker got confused / upstaged by the tRump interview.
Bernardo de La Paz
Dec 2017
#41