Wow! 800 pages! Thatâs a Tolstoy length volume of crime exhibitsâ Anna Karenina was 864 pages.
5 Likes
McDonnell and Graham are on the take according to this article from the Dallas Morning Star. 
5 Likes
Letâs not forget that Giuliani has his own ties to oligarchs who have become persons of interest in the Mueller investigation.
A Russian Ukrainian mogul who has drawn scrutiny from special counsel Robert Mueller has a business connection to one of the lead lawyers representing Donald Trump in the Russia investigation: former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani.
Giuliani told Mother Jones that Pavel Fuks, an oil and real estate magnate, hired his security firm, Giuliani Security & Safety, in 2017 to advise Kharkiv, a city of 1.4 million in Ukraine. âHe was [a] sponsor of a preliminary study that my firm did of security and emergency management in Kharkiv and some on advice on a planned Holocaust Memorial,â Giuliani said in a text message. However, a Ukrainian magazine, Novoye Vremya, reported last year that Fuks said he retained Giuliani to âcreate a U.S. office for supporting investment inâ Kharkiv. When asked about Fuksâ claim, Giuliani said, âI have no knowledge of that.â He said he did not do any work in the United States for Fuks or Kharkiv.
In November 2017, Giuliani traveled to Kharkiv, located near the Russian border in eastern Ukraine, in connection with the work. That year, he was also photographed with Fuks in New York. But the former mayor minimized their connection, saying that his personal involvement in the project ended in December 2017 and that his firm has no continuing relationship with Fuks.
Giulianiâs work in Ukraine is notable because Fuks and other prominent Ukrainians have recently emerged as figures in the Trump-Russia scandal. The New York Times reported last week that Fuks is among a dozen Ukrainian businessmen and political officials who attended Trumpâs inauguration. During their time in Washington, DC, some of the Ukrainians arranged meetings with Republicans and Trump allies to promote peace plans regarding the Russia-Ukraine conflict that were aligned with the Kremlinâs interests.
The presence of the Ukrainians, including Fuks, at exclusive inaugural confabs has drawn Muellerâs interest. Tickets to many of these events required donations of tens of thousands of dollars to the inaugural committee, which could not legally accept foreign money. Mueller is reportedly investigating whether Americans helped Ukrainians and other foreign nationals funnel donations to the inaugural committee and to a political action committee run by Trump allies. Peter Carr, a Mueller spokesman, declined to comment.
âŠcritics ⊠say that Giulianiâs access to Trump and other top US officials would make it easy for him to privately push for US policy to reflect his clientsâ interests. âMr. Giuliani communicates in private with the President and his senior staff on a regular basis,â the senators wrote. âWithout further review, it is impossible to know whether Mr. Giuliani is lobbying U.S. government officials on behalf of his foreign clients.â
3 Likes
Thx. @Keaton_James - always good to see where allegiances lie.
Giuliani is playing it from all sidesâŠbut the fact that he goes and gets business with them is evidence enoughâŠthey are a cash cow, and worth protecting.
Weâve got him pegged with these other âinterests.â
4 Likes
Friday Jan 25thâŠis the day Manafort will be in court to discuss his cooperation efforts with the Mueller team. Initially did not want to show up for the hearing, but the Judge insisted that he doesâŠand Manafort asked the court if he could wear a suit and not the orange prison garb.
Manafort has not been seen publicly since October, when he entered a hearing in a wheelchair because he was suffering from gout. He argued the transportation from Alexandria, Virginiaâs jail to Washington, DCâs federal courthouse is too time-consuming.
Jackson said Manafort has skipped too many court hearings in his criminal case and that Fridayâs is a particularly important one for him to attend. At that hearing, Jackson plans to discuss how prosecutors allege Manafort broke his plea agreement by lying during cooperation interviews and while he gave grand jury testimony.
"Given the number of court appearances defendant has been permitted to waive, the significance of the issues at stake, and the fact that his being available to consult with counsel may reduce the likelihood that the defense position with respect to the issues discussed will change after the hearing, defendantâs motion is denied," Jackson wrote in the order Wednesday.
Earlier this month, special counsel Robert Mueller said Manafort had lied about topics including "contact with administration officials."
4 Likes
Hereâs a primer on how Grand Juries work, even with the government shutdown. There are two ongoing Grand Juries, a group of 12 jurors in each, who are paid a $40 stipend. If they decide what the prosecutors present as valid and correct, they can indict someone. The Grand Juries have done all the deciding on who gets indicted for the SOC - Muellerâs group.
Fun Possible Fact - via twitter, someone is mentioning there is a sealed v sealed indictment which posted on January 22nd, which may (!?) mean it is Muellerâs. Court watchers confirmed it⊠new sealed case (Case 1:19-cr-0018) showed up in the D.C. court today and take that with a grain of salt.
Worth a readâŠ
4 Likes
BOOM
Ding, ding, dingâŠROGER STONE arrested this am on 7 charges, false statements, witness tamperingâŠfrom Muellerâs DC Grand Jury.
The Stone indictment marks Muellerâs biggest move yet against a Trump associate on grounds related to the release of stolen emails to sabotage Hillary Clintonâs presidential campaign in 2016. It also reflects a stunning turn for Stone, a GOP operative and prominent Trump cheerleader whose relationship with the president spans nearly 40 years, making him a prime target for investigators to try to turn into a government witness.
Grant Smith, one of Stoneâs attorneys, told POLITICO that he expects his client to be released after his appearance in court Friday with an arraignment likely next week in Washington. There, Stone plans to enter a not guilty plea.
âRoger intends to fight these trumped up baseless charges that have nothing to do with the original intent of the special counselâs investigation,â Smith said in a brief interview.
Stone has said he would not flip on Trump and in an interview with POLITICO earlier this month insisted on his innocence âbecause there is no crime.â
Muellerâs 24-page indictment against Stone is replete with examples of alleged lies he told, some of them rather brazen. It contends that around Stoneâs late September 2017 testimony before the House committee, he âdenied having ever sent or received emails or text messagesâ from Credico when in fact theyâd âexchanged over thirty text messages.â
4 Likes
The indictment also says Stone received an email in early October from âthe high-ranking Trump Campaign official asking about the status of future releases byâ WikiLeaks. That official is Steve Bannon, the former White House chief strategist who was the Trump campaign CEO at the time, a source with direct knowledge of the special counselâs probe and the indictment told NBC News. According to the source, Bannon is referred to at least one other time in the indictment.
âBannon cooperated with Mueller and Mueller considers him only a witness,â the source said.
4 Likes
Analysis by Lawfare
3 Likes
Roger Stoneâs Indictment
2 Likes
Excellent Video profile of Roger Stone 
2 Likes
Thanks for this. It made for a fascinating read. Hereâs a crib identifying the players:
Organization 1: ⊠Wikileaks. âŠ
Person 1: ⊠Jerome Corsi, a conservative writer and conspiracy theoristâŠ
Person 2: ⊠Randy Credico, a former comedian, political hopeful, and radio show host. âŠ
The reporter: Breitbartâs Washington politics editor, Matthew BoyleâŠ
The high-ranking Trump campaign official: ⊠Steve Bannon, Breitbart Newsâ co-founder, who left the organization to join the Trump campaign.
Regarding the identification of Bannon: In addition to the references to a âhigh-ranking Trump Campaign official,â there are also references to âsenior Trump campaign officialsâ (note the use of the plural!) The first of these references appears in point 5 on page 2. I havenât yet come across any solid reporting on who these officials might be â we shall see.
But, to me, the most explosive reference to an unnamed player appears in point 12 on page 5:
After the July 22, 2016 release of stolen DNC emails by Organization 1, a senior Trump Campaign official was directed to contact STONE about any additional releases and what other damaging information Organization 1 had regarding the Clinton Campaign.
Who directed the senior Trump Campaign official to contact Stone? This is classic Mueller âindictment-speakâ â heâs letting us know, in the subtlest of ways, that he is privy to far more than he is revealing in this filing.
4 Likes
The real question is why werenât these transcripts shared with Mueller while the Republicans controlled the committee? I canât think of any reason other than that they were protecting witnesses who lied to Congress. 
4 Likes
Several âtakeaway summariesâ of the Stone indictment have been published. This came across as one of the best, making several interesting points.
Special counsel Robert Mueller on Friday unveiled the indictment of Trump ally Roger Stone, opening a new chapter in the ongoing investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. âŠ
Hereâs what we learned and how it fits into the bigger picture.
Direction from above to get WikiLeaks intel?
The most damning part of the 24-page indictment directly connects the highest echelon of the Trump campaign to Stoneâs alleged effort to glean inside information about future WikiLeaks dumps.
It reads: âAfter the July 22, 2016 release of stolen DNC emails by (WikiLeaks), a senior Trump Campaign official was directed to contact STONE about any additional releases and what other damaging information (WikiLeaks) had regarding the Clinton Campaign. STONE thereafter told the Trump Campaign about potential future releases of damaging material by (WikiLeaks).â
This paragraph makes it clear that Mueller believes Stone was not engaged in a rogue quest to contact WikiLeaks. Rather, Stone is alleged to have coordinated some of his efforts with the Trump campaign. âŠ
Stoneâs role with the Trump campaign
âŠStone is an exaggerator, but during the campaign, he claimed he spoke with Trump on a near-weekly basis and was in regular contact with then-campaign chairman Paul Manafort. Stone said those conversations continued after Manafort resigned, and that Manafort was âkeeping in touch with a lot of friends in the campaign.â
Court filings from Mueller tell a more definitive story. The indictment says Stone âmaintained regular contact with ⊠the Trump Campaign through the 2016 electionâ and described how he communicated with âsenior Trump Campaign officialsâ about upcoming WikiLeaks releases. âŠ
They knew Russia was behind the hacks
The first words of the indictment note that Russiaâs responsibility for the hacks was well-known before Stone or anyone on the Trump campaign allegedly secretly sought information about WikiLeaks. âŠ
Mueller started closing the loop
Mueller has now closed the loop between the Russian government, WikiLeaks and the Trump campaign. âŠ
His 2018 indictment of Russian intelligence officers formally established how the Kremlin hacked Democratic targets and facilitated public releases through WikiLeaks. This was done to influence the US presidential election and help Trump win, per US intelligence agencies.
The Stone indictment completed the other half of the equation. It alleges ties between Trumpâs campaign to WikiLeaks and the email leaks that severely weakened Clintonâs hand down the stretch.
Mueller clearly doesnât trust Stone
Stone is not the first Trump associate to face charges in the Russia investigation (heâs the sixth, actually), but he is the first to be arrested by FBI agents raiding his home with guns drawn. The spectacle unfolded in Florida, but the indictment was handed up one day earlier by the special counselâs grand jury in Washington. Muellerâs team asked a judge to keep it secret until Stoneâs arrest.
They wrote: âLaw enforcement believes that publicity resulting from disclosure of the Indictment and related materials on the public record prior to arrest will increase the risk of the defendant fleeing and destroying (or tampering with) evidence. It is therefore essential that any information concerning the pending indictment in this district be kept sealed prior to the defendantâs arrest.â
The beginning of the end?
There are a few clues suggesting that this might be the beginning of the end for Mueller.
The Stone indictment offered a new clue. This is the first time where special counsel prosecutors are jointly working with prosecutors from another US attorneyâs office to bring a case. That could suggest that Mueller doesnât intend for his team to see the case through the trial, which could be months away, and instead hand it off to Justice Department colleagues.
4 Likes
Iâm posting this because it begins with a great info-graphic laying out the links between Russia, WikiLeaks, Assange, Stone, the Trump Campaign, and potentially Trump himself.
But the main reason Iâm posting this is for the following telling paragraph:
F.B.I. agents were also seen carting hard drives and other evidence from Mr. Stoneâs apartment in Harlem, and his recording studio in South Florida was also raided.
Some investigation junkies have observed that the New York raid may help âpardon-proofâ the charges against Stone. Iâm not a lawyer, but to me, it seems they are making a valid point. If the FBI obtains any evidence against Stone from his Harlem apartment, that could make it easier for the Southern District of New York to bring state charges against Stone which Trump would not be able to pardon. When Letitia James, New Yorkâs new Attorney General, took office last month, she declared she will vigorously investigate any crimes Trump or his associates may have committed in her state. Interesting⊠
3 Likes
Pelosi stays out in front. She comes out swingingâŠ
again and again.
Pelosi Statement on Special Counsel Indictment and Arrest of Trump Campaign Advisor Roger Stone
JANUARY 26, 2019
Washington, D.C. â Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after Special Counsel Mueller released a seven-count indictment of top Trump campaign advisor Roger Stone, for lying to Congress, witness tampering, and obstruction:
âThe indictment of Roger Stone makes clear that there was a deliberate, coordinated attempt by top Trump campaign officials to influence the 2016 election and subvert the will of the American people. It is staggering that the President has chosen to surround himself with people who violated the integrity of our democracy and lied to the FBI and Congress about it.
âIn the face of 37 indictments, the Presidentâs continued actions to undermine the Special Counsel investigation raise the questions: what does Putin have on the President, politically, personally or financially? Why has the Trump Administration continued to discuss pulling the U.S. out of NATO, which would be a massive victory for Putin?
âLying to Congress and witness tampering constitute grave crimes. All who commit these illegal acts should be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law. We cannot allow any effort to intimidate witnesses or prevent them from appearing before Congress.
âThe Special Counsel investigation is working, and the House will continue to exercise our constitutional oversight responsibility and ensure that the Special Counsel investigation can continue free from interference from the White House.â
4 Likes
Follow the moneyâŠsome more information on Kushnerâs finances and what Mueller knows.
A German bank reportedly has evidence of âsuspicious transactionsâ related to Jared Kushnerâs family accounts and is willing to hand the information over to Russia probe special counsel Robert Mueller.
The board chairman of the banking giant Deutsche Bank, Paul Achleitner, called for an internal investigation and found troubling results, German business magazine Manager Magazin reported in its print edition released on Friday.
Deutsche Bankâa major lender to President Donald Trump and his son-in-law and senior White House advisor Kushner, according to Mother Jonesâprovided the results to the Federal Financial Supervisory Authority, which is Germanyâs bank regulatory agency and referred to as BaFin.
âAchleitnerâs internal detectives were embarrassed to deliver their interim report regarding real estate tycoon Kushner to the financial regulator BaFin,â states the Manager Magazin story translated from German to English. âTheir finding: There are indications that Donald Trumpâs son-in-law or persons or companies close to him could have channeled suspicious monies through Deutsche Bank as part of their business dealings.â
No details on the suspicious money transfer were reported. The bank is worried about what the results will mean for its image, according to Manager Magazin.
âWhat BaFin will do about [the bankâs findings] is not the bankâs greatest concern,â the German magazine reported. âRather, itâs the noise that U.S. special counsel Robert Mueller ⊠will make in his pursuit of Trump. For he will likely obtain this informationâa giant risk to [the bankâs] reputation.â
4 Likes
Some forecasting as to where Mueller may be heading. This is an opinion piece but does try to forecast the outcome. Was there criminal activity in terms of future evidence that may be revealed, linking the Russian hacking more directly with campaign individuals?
But we still donât know the criminal implications, if any, for those in the campaign who were involved. Even if Trump himself did direct a senior campaign official to tell Stone to learn more about WikiLeaksâs plans, that alone is not criminal.
âŠ
The indictment does not allege any kind of agreement or coordination between Stone or the campaign and WikiLeaks. It portrays the campaign as primarily seeking information about actions that WikiLeaks was already planning. If thatâs all it was, learning that information and failing to disclose it is deplorable but likely not criminal.
âŠ
There have always been at least two possible end games for the Mueller investigation. He could uncover evidence of a widespread criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russians to influence the election. Or he could conclude that the campaignâs numerous documented interactions with Russians seeking to help Trump win were not criminal, but people close to Trump lied to cover up those interactions because revealing them would have been politically devastating.Stoneâs indictment falls into the coverup category. Mueller may have evidence of the broader conspiracy, and more charges may well be coming. But every case like Stoneâs, or those against former campaign manager Paul Manafort, that is filed without charging a conspiracy with the Russians makes it seem more likely that criminal charges brought by the special counsel will end up being primarily about the coverups.
That doesnât mean the campaignâs behavior wasnât reprehensible. The best case scenario concerning WikiLeaks is that the Trump campaign, having learned that emails stolen from its opponent by a hostile foreign power were about to be released, did not alert the authorities or disavow that act but eagerly and secretly accepted the help. Even if that ends up not amounting to a criminal conspiracy, it should already be an enormous political scandal.
In a text message quoted in the indictment, Stone allegedly told a witness who was being asked to testify before Congress: âStonewall it. Plead the fifth. Anything to save the plan. . . . Richard Nixon.â The reference to the 37th president, who was Stoneâs political idol and who was brought down by a criminal coverup, may prove to be more than a little ironic.
Randall D. Eliason
Author
Randall D. Eliason teaches white-collar criminal law at George Washington University Law School. He blogs at Sidebarsblog.com.
4 Likes
Read a condensed version of 100 plus tweets via Jennifer Taub, law professor. She discusses ALL the big indictments and what we know so far.
Here are the first few tweetsâŠ
1> / 
Thread
1/We Have Seen the Mueller Report ââ And Itâs Spectacular
2/Special Counsel Robert Mueller is nearing the end of his 20-month probe into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. When the investigation closes he must provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining his prosecutorial decisions.
3/In anticipation, some pundits warn us to dial down the enthusiasm. Itâll be anti-climactic, they caution. Donât expect a public report, some say. Ignore them. Pay attention to documents already filed. Through them, we/ve seen much of the Mueller Report. And it is spectacularLast entry/ The special counsel investigation has already delivered the evidence we need to take action to remove from office a corruptly compromised president who, in the word of veteran reporter Carl Bernstein, âhelped Putin destabilize the United States.â
3 Likes
Just announcedâŠMuellerâs report is close to being ready.
The Washington Post: Mueller investigation is âclose to being completed,â acting attorney general says
Mueller investigation is âclose to being completed,â acting attorney general says
Acting attorney general Matthew G. Whitaker said Monday that he has been âfully briefedâ on special counsel Robert S. Mueller IIIâs probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election and that, âright now, the investigation is close to being completed.â
This is a developing story. It will be updated.
4 Likes