Proof from the Manafort indictment that Podesta group committed the same crime as manafort

I know there are a lot of threads on these indictments, but its an important issue.


Manafort was charged with a lot, but it basically boils down to financial crimes, hiding evidence or lying, and then the most relevant story as far as russian influence goes; operating on behalf of pro russian sources without properly disclsoing it.

This is the idea of possible interference into the US government by Russia that was the biggest purpose of the investigation.

The indictment doesn't have anything about Manafort or Gates doing this while working on Trumps campaign though.

The indictment says this occured starting in 2012 thru about 2015. It says that Manafort worked for two companies, Company A and B, to spread russian influence to DC.

We now know that Company A and B were Mercury LLC, and the Podesta group. Yes, the gorup founded by Hillarys campaign manager, ran by his brother, that had connections to many democrats and even a few republicans throughout dc.

The lobbying firms the Podesta Group and Mercury Public Affairs are the unnamed companies in the grand jury indictment of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and his deputy, Rick Gates, according to three sources with knowledge of the investigation.

The indictment, unsealed Monday, refers to "Company A" and "Company B" as the firms Manafort and Gates solicited in 2012 to lobby on behalf of the Ukranian government. Company A is Mercury Public Affairs and Company B is the Podesta Group, the sources said.

www.nbcnews.com...

(Yes I know this is anonymous sources, but from the Poidesta groups own admission, we can see that exactly fit this description).

The Podesta group never filed as a foreign lobbyist, the exact same crime Manafort was charged with. However, when they were caught, they said that it was all a mistake, and they thought they were just working for a non profit, not the same Pro Russian president of Ukraine Yanukovytch that Manafort was charged for working for.

Podesta Group filed paperwork with the Justice Department in April stating that it had done work for the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine that also benefited the same Ukrainian political party that Manafort once advised. Podesta Group said at the time it believed its client was a European think tank untethered to a political party.

www.politico.com...

Now enter Muellers indictment of Manafort and gates. In it, he shows that they have an email that shows that Gates specifically told the podesta group and Mercury that there evidence was going straight to President Yanukovytch.

November 2012, GATES wrote to Company A and Company that the terms needed to prepare
an assessment of their past and prospective lobbying efforts so the President could be briefed by
Paul on what Ukraine has done well and what it can do better as we move into 2013

www.cnn.com...

This is proof positive that the Podesta group not only failed to register properly as a lobbyist for a pro russian Ukrainian government, but then they lied about it to officials when caught.

Surely even the most staunch Trump haters will admit that this is a crime that needs to be charged.

(Note, I changed the tile because I thought that it should represent the fact that this is proof that the Podesta group commtted a crime, in fact the same one manafort committed)

a reply to: Grambler

Been reading up on this issue, and one things sticks out to me.

In the indictment, the term "president" is in quotes.

I'd have to see a lot more context to know what was being relayed in that message and how the recipients interpreted that.

Bet those yokels meddled in the Crimea election.

All in favor of RUSSIANS !!

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

Been reading up on this issue, and one things sticks out to me.

In the indictment, the term "president" is in quotes.

I'd have to see a lot more context to know what was being relayed in that message and how the recipients interpreted that.

The whole indictment previous to that in that section is talking about yanukovych and the party of regions, and the government of the Ukraine.

yanukovych was the president of the Ukraine.

Viktor Fedorovych Yanukovych (born 9 July 1950) is a Ukrainian politician who was elected as the fourth President of Ukraine on February 7, 2010

en.wikipedia.org...

Here is the sections before mentioning Manafort working with him.

22. At the direction of MANAFORT and GATES, Company A and Company B engaged in
extensive lobbying. Among other things, they lobbied multiple Members of Congress and their
staffs about Ukraine sanctions, the validity of Ukraine elections, and the propriety of
Yanukovych?s imprisoning his presidential rival, Yulia Tymoshenko (who had served as Ukraine
President prior to Yanukovych). MANAFORT and GATES also lobbied in connection with the
roll out of a report concerning the Tymoshenko trial commissioned by the Government of Ukraine.
MANAFORT and GATES used one of their offshore accounts to funnel $4 million to pay secretly
for the report.

www.cnn.com...

It is clear that the President that Gates is referring to is Yanukovych.

It is absolute proof the Podesta group committed the same crime as Manafort.

a reply to: Grambler

The whole indictment previous to that in that section is talking about yanukovych and the party of regions, and the government of the Ukraine.

True, but that is not indicative of what was being told to the "companies". It appears only Company A was specifically told they were going to work for the Ukrainian government. The section of talking points given to Company B was also interesting. The only red flag they thought to mention was that their email communications would indicate much more involvement by Manafort and Gates.

They were not concerned that the point of working for a NGO would be an issue... if it was a lie.

Perhaps they truly thought they were working for a non-profit NGO.

That is why I would like to see the entire communication to get better context.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

The whole indictment previous to that in that section is talking about yanukovych and the party of regions, and the government of the Ukraine.

True, but that is not indicative of what was being told to the "companies". It appears only Company A was specifically told they were going to work for the Ukrainian government. The section of talking points given to Company B was also interesting. The only red flag they thought to mention was that their email communications would indicate much more involvement by Manafort and Gates.

They were not concerned that the point of working for a NGO would be an issue... if it was a lie.

Perhaps they truly thought they were working for a non-profit NGO.

That is why I would like to see the entire communication to get better context.

They were told by Gates that there info was going straight to the president (Yanukovych).

This proves they knew there working for more than just an NGO.

Come on now be honest, if this was a trump group working for a russian source, you would say that this is damning.

This morning I saw one where Tony resigned his post over this.

The story is fuzzy for me and I have made mention before that Russians does not always mean Russian Russians . When I follow the questionable issues back on the trail that looks like it goes to Russia my mind gets bogged down in the mix of Ukraine ... I am glad that that has been the case because its the only thing that makes sense of my confusion ...

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
This morning I saw one where Tony resigned his post over this.

The big "T" was directly involved in the Uranium 1 lobbying too.

He needs a geiger counter.

a reply to: Grambler


You have been digging into this deep, so something I remembered came up!


Remember this? If so, how do you figure it might fit in?




Let's not forget these two Rino's either!

a reply to: Grambler

Your defense is always the same... Your justifiable logic always trickles to the same arguments; its never who's right or wrong with those threads, rather who's more wrong...
Stay smappe.

a reply to: Grambler

They were told by Gates that there info was going straight to the president (Yanukovych).

The term president was in quotes. I'd like to see what that memo specifically said before i say it is clear proof of anything.

If they were told they were working for a non-profit NGO, it is possible they thought they were referring to the president of that NGO.

I don't know. Need a lot more context and info.

Come on now be honest, if this was a trump group working for a russian source, you would say that this is damning.

Hardly. I don't like to jump to conclusions and make absolute statements of guilt without all the context I can get.

I'll leave that to you.

a reply to: the2ofusr1

I will try to make this as clear as possible.

In 2012 and for a while after, Manafort and Gates were working for pro russian government forces in the Ukraine, including the president, yanukovych. There job was to peddle the russians agenda to politicians in the US.

They were working with the Podesta group to do this.

Manafort and gates were charged by gates today for working as mouthpieces for russian agents and not properly disclosing that to authorities.

Last year, The podesta group was called out for this same thing, but the said they didnt know they were working for pro russian government people in the Ukraine, the thought they were working for a private organization so they didnt have to register.

Muellers indictment of gates and manafort today shows that the Podesta group lied. Mueller has an email showing that Gates told the Podesta group that there work was going straight to the pro russian president of the Ukraine.

So the podesta group was working with the exact same group that manafort and gates were working for, and failed to register, which is the exact same crime gates and manafort were charged with.

a reply to: Grambler

Muellers indictment of gates and manafort today shows that the Podesta group lied. Mueller has an email showing that Gates told the Podesta group that there work was going straight to the pro russian president of the Ukraine.

That is not what it says.

It only mentions the term president in quotations.

The indictment does not show any more context than that.

What you should be saying is that you are taking what the indictment says and extrapolating what you believe it means, without the entire context or communication at hand.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

Muellers indictment of gates and manafort today shows that the Podesta group lied. Mueller has an email showing that Gates told the Podesta group that there work was going straight to the pro russian president of the Ukraine.

That is not what it says.

It only mentions the term president in quotations.

The indictment does not show any more context than that.

What you should be saying is that you are taking what the indictment says and extrapolating what you believe it means, without the entire context or communication at hand.

Unbelievable.

This has to be the most desperate attempt at dismissal that I have ever seen.

The word "Paul" is also in quotes. Does that mean we dont know what "Paul" that is referring to?

Are you at least willing to admit that there is a better than not chance that the president being referred to is yanukovych?

a reply to: introvert

In the context of the indictment, who are all the people that could possibly be referred to by the term, "president?"

a reply to: Grambler

Unbelievable.

This has to be the most desperate attempt at dismissal that I have ever seen.

What have I dismissed?

I did not say the Podesta Group is not in trouble here.

What I said is that you are jumping to a conclusion that we cannot make at this point, given the lack of context.

If they truly thought they were working for an NGO, and were not directly told they were working for a government entity, as Company A was, the term "president" could have meant someone other than just the president of the Ukraine.

Correct?

The word "Paul" is also in quotes. Does that mean we dont know what "Paul" that is reffering to?

Paul is much more specific than the general term "president".

Fact is, you do not know for 100% certainty whom they were referring to in that email, given the lack of info and context in the indictment.

Are you at least willing to admit that there is a better than not chance that the president being referred to is yanukovych?

It very well could be. But we do not know for certain.

Surely you can admit that.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: introvert

In the context of the indictment, who are all the people that could possibly be referred to by the term, "president?"

The president of the NGO non-profit.

That may not be the case, but since it is still a possibility, we cannot come to the absolute conclusion Grambler has.

a reply to: Grambler

Can you also admit that you misrepresented what the email said in the indictment?

a reply to: Grambler

I kind of understood that part and thanks for laying it out ... Where my mind is having the problem is the Podesta/Clinton Uranium 1 deal with Russia . Do we know for sure it was with Russia or was it a Ukrainian Russian made to look like Russia proper ? ... Mullers trip to Moscow was said to be a stolen Uranium sample from Georgia so maybe that part is actually true and was getting added to the mix of the Uranium 1 deal to conflate the story .