Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

CBS News: Manafort wiretaps may have picked up conversations with Trump

CBS News: Manafort wiretaps may have picked up conversations with Trump

Manafort was in the wrong place (Trump campaign) at the wrong time (2016 election), so his business dealings are subject to prosecution pressure tactics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZP3seSDY3QA

WiretapGate keeps getting curiouser and curiouser.

A couple of days ago there were reports that Team Mueller told Paul Manafort he likely would be indicted, and that Manafort was wiretapped before and after the 2016 election.

Today brings a report from CBS News that those wiretaps took place during the campaign. The media reaction focuses heavily on Manafort having spoken with Russians, but there is no indication about what. What is lost in translation in the headlines is that, according to CBS, conversations between Manafort and Trump may have been scooped up in the surveillance:

Long before the special counsel began investigating Russian meddling in the U.S. election — and whether anyone in the Trump campaign was involved — Paul Manafort was the target of an FBI investigation. It included electronic surveillance of the one-time Trump campaign chairman.

CBS News has learned that the surveillance on Manafort occurred during the 2016 presidential campaign.

According to a former U.S. official, the intercepts picked up conversations between Manafort and Russian individuals about the campaign. The intercepts potentially include conversations between Manafort and President Trump.

If the Manafort surveillance, including during the campaign and transition, picked up conversations with Trump and other campaign members, that would lend more credence to Trump’s claim that he was wiretapped.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/837989835818287106

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/837996746236182529

The media, of course, focuses on the precise wording of the Trump tweet in which the claim was made, but as I pointed out at the time, “wires tapped” could means many things, Some curious language in both Trump’s “wiretap” accusation and Obama’s defense.

The issue is not the wording of Trump’s tweets, but what the FBI and intelligence community did to surveil Manafort and others involved in the campaign and transition.

In related news, CNN is reporting that Mueller is digging back a decade into Manafort’s past to try to find a crime:

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team is reaching back more than a decade in its investigation of Paul Manafort, a sign of the pressure Mueller is placing on President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman.

The FBI’s warrant for a July search of Manafort’s Alexandria, Virginia, home said the investigation centered on possible crimes committed as far back as January 2006, according to a source briefed on the investigation.

The broad time frame is the latest indication that Mueller’s team is going well beyond Russian meddling during the campaign as part of its investigation of Trump campaign associates. Manafort, who has been the subject of an FBI investigation for three years, has emerged as a focal point for Mueller.

CNN suggests that this all is an attempt to put such pressure on Manafort that he flips against Trump.

All of this reporting needs to be taken with a grain of salt. The media has been wrong many times in its accusations about Trump and Russia.

It wouldn’t surprise me if a prosecutor with unlimited time and resources could find a crime committed by someone like Manafort, with shady international dealings. But if not for the Trump-Russia accusations, Manafort likely would not be subject to such efforts.

Manafort was in the wrong place (Trump campaign) at the wrong time (2016 election), and is not the ultimate target. That target is Trump, as I wrote early on, Mueller found the man (Trump), now he’ll find the crime.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

It amazes me how many times Trump can be right, and the media wrong, and yet the narrative that Trump is the unthinking idiot is not only still pushed but is believed by many.

I Guess people just believe what they want to..

Reminder that the only two reasons that Manafort was even brought onto the campaign were that (1) Ted Cruz was cooperating with nevertrumpers to overthrow the will of the voters at the convention, and (2) nevertrumpers like Ben Shapiro pushed the Michelle Fields assault hoax against Lewandowski.

The nevertrumpers are worse than Democrats.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/451525/paul-manafort-legal-trouble-donald-trump-might-not-be-involved

That’s a pretty detailed and unbiased analysis. IF you want detailed and unbiased….

If Manafort and/or Trump broke the law then they need to face justice. But it sure is sickening to me to see the difference in how this investigation is being pursued compared to what we watched with Clinton and her lackeys.

Pre-dawn warrants and lock-pick entry versus pussy-footing around, months/years to produce subpoenaed evidence and immunity agreements-for-all. What a load of horse-shit.

4th armored div | September 20, 2017 at 12:57 pm

when will comey face the inquisition ?
he is known to have broken laws, not a question of having to find the crime, only if he will do the time.
what does his ‘good friend mueller’ have to say ?

btw – is their a way to embed a pix into a comment ?

4th armored div | September 20, 2017 at 1:06 pm

i have a question –
if someone breaks into your abode and you having suddenly been awoken and in fear for your life, shoot (with a legal weapon or use a knife) and kill or wound the intruders, are you subject to criminal charges ????

    A question similar to yours was discussed here a couple of years ago. As I recall, that question dealt specifically with cases where police made “dynamic entries” into suspects’ homes. That is, where police broke in without knocking, so that the suspects would not have time to arm themselves. The question discussed here was, “If the police entered the wrong home, would the occupants be justified legally in using legal force? Even if the police identified themselves, the occupants shouldn’t have to expose themselves to risk by asking a group of armed, onrushing intruders to stop and show them a police ID.”

    The answer given here — again, to my recollection — was that courts have ruled that the occupants ARE NOT justified in using lethal force. Somehow, even though the purpose of dynamic entry is to deny occupants sufficient time gather their wits and draw weapons, the courts ruled that the occupants do indeed have sufficient time to gather their wits and ask the armed intruders to show ID.

    I hope someone will correct me if my recollection is inaccurate.

    Certainly not if you fail to survive the incident.

I have previously stated that Manafort may have some liability issues with respect to foreign agent registration and reporting of compensation, but so do the Podesta brothers (John and Tony). I would like to see how Mueller splits hairs on this one …

“Show me the man, and I’ll show you the crime.” – Lavrentiy Beria, head of Joseph Stalin’s secret police

I’m much less concerned about whether Trump was right or not when he tweeted about the “wire tapping”. I’m more concerned about the constitutionality of this entire investigation. The 4th amendment protects all American citizens from having the federal government rummaging through all of your personal belongings searching for some evidence that you may have committed a crime sometime in the past.

Manafort was the FBI’s official elint backdoor into the Trump campaign. A FISA warrant was issued to investigate Manafort’s activities on behalf of the Pro-Russian government of the Ukraine in 2014. This was the wedge in the door for the FBI. A second FISA warrant was obtained in 2016, while Manafort was a member of Trump’s campaign, based largely upon the totally discredited Steele dossier.

Much ado has been made concerning the FISA warrant request rejected in July and then approved in October. This warrant, according to public reports, was for the express purpose of monitoring the activities of a server which had a connection to a Russian bank. While that server could have been dedicated solely to financial transactions, and was the limit of the intercepts, this is by no means assured. But, this was apparently not the FISA warrant used to monitor Manafort or the one to monitor Page. We still do not know exactly what constituted the “surveillance” of Roger Stone, at the time he was affiliated with the Trump campaign.

There is an strong inference that Russian influence was NOT taken very seriously during this period. The Clinton Foundation had a long history of receiving monetary contributions from a variety of Russian interests, which continued during the campaign. As this was known to the FBI, which had an open, supposedly active, ongoing investigation into the activities of the Foundation, it is telling that no surveillance warrants, FISA or conventional, were apparently obtain, or attempted to be obtained, for the Foundation, any of its employees or the heads of the organization, Bill and Hillary Clinton. This is, understandably, totally ignored by the media. The closer all of this is examined, the less likely it becomes that the US Government was concerned, in any way, with attempted Russian interference in our Presidential election and all about gaining intelligence on the Presidential campaign of a single candidate, Donald Trump.

I hate to have to remind you all of the first rule of the msm. It is that whatever Demorats do it is of no interest if it involves politics. If the same offense is committed by a Republican then it is headline material. The party is never mentioned if it is a Dem but is the lede if it is a Repub. We all see the injustice and the unfairness of this whole cabal but it will not and cannot change. Not one mea culpa from any msm source that has been proven wrong. Not one major retraction of any story that has been proven to be wrong. It is just the way it is. If there is one person who may just be the perfect foil for this mob it is Trump.

This is OUR country – not a coteries of sleazeballs ready to sell out our nation a la hillary clinton, comey, and mccain and jeff flake – and the rest of the rats of the GOPe.

FIRE mueller, FIRE that lox AG sessions, and indicted clinton, shaprton, soros and the rest of the malignant clowns working so hard to see use enslaved and themselves rich.

FU*C the establishment!

    Lessee…

    WHO could be MORE “Establishment” than Monofart?

    Multi-millionaire lobbyist, foreign government agent, and general corrupt-0-crat…???

    You really are the limit…!!!

Amazing how the timeline is going down.

NYT: Trump worked with the Russians! We have transcripts!
Trump: Obama admin tapped my phones! Felony!
NYT: Transcripts? No, we don’t have any transcripts. Or any evesdropping records. Trump is lying.
FBI: We had a warrant and tapped Trump’s campaign.
NYT: See! Russians! Russians!
FBI: But we didn’t find anything about Russians.
NYT: Money laundering! Jaywalking!
The rest of the country: Sigh.

We know Rice unmasked Trump. There had to be surveillance for there to be an unmasking.

OleDirtyBarrister | September 20, 2017 at 3:55 pm

These reports generate more questions than answers.

It is important to keep in mind that the FBI has distinct functions, one being law enforcement and another being counterintelligence (and others including counterterrorism with is close to counterintel).

Issues relating to Russia meddling in an election are of the nature of counterintel.

FISA and the warrants procured under the lower standards therein and through secret courts all pertain to national security, which would encompass counterintel, counterterror, etc., not straight criminal matters.

There has been a “something special” rationale applied to national security issues to justify less judicial scrutiny and more deference to the executive and legislative branches. That deference and light scrutiny has generated much debate over integrity of the govt and rights of the individual, and the necessary protections and practices, such as the infamous “Wall” between law enforcement and national security apparatuses pre-2001.

There has even been debate about splitting the FBI to formally separate LE from national security. One of the concerns has always been that divisions of LE agencies in the nat’l security business would feed info and evidence to the LE side for criminal prosecution, possibly through the feds’ favorite artifice, the “parallel construction” of a criminal case.

Four questions right off the top of my head:

Who within what agency sought a warrant for wiretapping and for what purpose?

On what grounds?

From what court?

Was the evidence gathered by wiretapping handed off to some other division or agency and used in some manner other than originally contemplated?

So, was Obama involved in the coverup of Water Closet?

And, if he was, why wasn’t he impeached?

They are smart enough not to tap Trump – too obvious. So tap everybody on the planet who speaks to him.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend