Donald Trump

Trump Campaign Foreign Policy Adviser's Guilty Plea Could Be More Important Than Manafort's Indictment

George Papadopoulos lied about contact with people connected to the Russian government, the FBI says. He's been answering questions for the feds since July.

|

Polaris/Newscom

George Papadopoulos, who served as a top foreign policy adviser to President Donald Trump's campaign, pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI, according to documents unsealed by the U.S. Justice Department on Monday.

According to the FBI, Papadopoulos had contact with a professor "understood to have substantial connections to Russian government officials," and with a "female Russian national," whom he sought to use as a conduit between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.

When questioned in January about his meetings and communications with both individuals, Papadopoulos gave false statements and omitted information that impeded the FBI's investigation into possible links between the Trump campaign and the Russian government, the indictment claims.

Papadopoulos was arrested in July at Dulles International Airport. Since then, he has "met with the government on numerous occasions to provide information and answer questions," according to the indictment unsealed Monday.

While the indictment of Paul Manafort, the former chairman of President Donald Trump's campaign (and of Rick Gates, a longtime Manafort associate) dominated headlines on Monday morning, there are several reasons to believe the indictment of Papadopoulos—and his guilty plea—may actually be more important.

First, as Reason's Scott Shackford noted earlier this morning, the Manafort indictment is far from the smoking gun that many in the anti-Trump crowd hoped it to be. Manafort is accused of taking money to lobby for Ukraine and laundering it through other countries and businesses so that they he wouldn't have to publicly account for it and pay taxes on it, but the alleged criminal activity seems to have occurred prior to and independent of Manafort joining the Trump campaign. That Trump hired someone with such questionable dealings certainly reflects poorly on the president's judgment and sense of character, but that's hardly new territory for the current occupant of the White House.

Second, Papadopoulos' indictment has a much more significant nexus with the actual Trump campaign. According to the FBI, Papadopoulos began communicating with the unnamed "professor" in March 2016, shortly before taking the role of foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign. The professor and Papadopoulos met on several occasions in Italy and London, according to the court documents, and during one of those meetings in April 2016, the professor told Papadopoulos that Russia had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton, including thousands of Clinton's emails. Papadopoulos shared that information with higher-ups in the Trump campaign.

Third, Papadopoulos—unlike Manafort and Gates—has already pleaded guilty and has been answering questions for the FBI for months. After his initial interview with the FBI in January, Papadopoulos was called back for a second interview in February. Around the same time, the FBI says, he deleted his Facebook account (which he had used to contact the professor and a woman with ties to the Russian government) and changed his cell phone number. Papadopoulos was arrested on July 27.

We don't know what additional information Papadopoulos has provided to the FBI since July, and we don't know whether Papadopoulos' guilty plea is an indication that the feds convinced him to "flip." Like the Manafort indictment, it's possible that announcing Papadopoulos' charges and plea are merely meant to scare other potential targets of the investigation into cooperating with the FBI as the probe continues.

On the other hand, as Harvard law professor Alex Whiting has suggested, these may be nothing more than easy charges that fell into special prosecutor Robert Mueller's lap.

Without knowing the prosecutorial strategy being employed by Mueller, it's hard to draw any conclusions from what we've seen this morning. Still, the Papadopoulos plea seems the more important development.

NEXT: Trump's Assault on Legal High-Skilled Immigration

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

    1. He’s doing a lot better than Arnold last time I checked.

      1. What’cha talkin’bout, Willis?

        1. My Whole month’s on-line financ-ial gain is $2287. i’m currently ready to fulfill my dreams simply and reside home with my family additionally. I work just for two hours on a daily basis. everybody will use this home profit system by this link………

          ======================
          http://www.webcash20.com
          ======================

  1. If having “contact” with a female Russian national is wrong, i don’t wanna be right.

      1. Spaseba tvarische.

  2. Nothing about this election or this “collusion” is going to be new, unprecented, or unusual at all. This is what angers me. Yes, dozens of people should be in jail for this shit, and I hope people go down. I wouldn’t even be mad about a Trump impeachment. But let’s not pretend that this kind of corruption and foreign influence peddling isn’t standard operation procedure for the scummy people that run both parties. Hillary and Trump should both be in prison, for many reasons.

    My fear in all this is that people are going to think this was entirely about Trump, even though he’s mostly just an idiot who is new to the game and doesn’t know how to do this shit. Once Trump is gone, especially if a Dem is president, the press is going go back to ignoring all this shit and covering up for government lies all the time again. People are going to ignore all of the shady shit that has always been going on.

    The swamp does indeed need to be drained, but Trump was just the worst person to do it. I don’t blame people for believing him, though. I just wish that, if we had to have an outsider absurd CEO as president, it was Herman Cain. How awesome would that be, at this point?

    1. He may indict a Podesta too so it may go beyond Trump.

      1. One would hope. Two peas in a pod. I just really hate that many people will not go beyond Trump and will willfully remain ignorant that this is a huge problem, largely bipartisan, that existed long before Trump’s incompetence and mean words to the press made everybody care.

    2. Herman Cain? You can’t be serious. You want us to get into a war with Becky-Becky-Stan?

      1. I’m just saying, if we had to have an incompetent yet entertaining CEO as president, I would take Cain over Trump.

        1. America isn’t ready for a black president.

          1. Baby steps, BUCS. We already had a mulatto president, so next up is a mulatto-black American. After that, we will be ready for an African-black president.

            1. I just wanna know when we’re getting an tyrant African woman president?

              We cannot heal the American psyche until that happens.

              1. #Condi2020

                Of all the potential war criminals for president, I like Condi the most.

              2. As long as she’s good looking an serves in a dominatrix outfit.

                1. Fuck you! i am absolutely in love with Condi. If she were president, none of this chicken-shit bullshit would be going on. None of it! The sad fact is that she wouldn’t take the job if we got down on our fucking knees and begged her to take it. So, you’re just going to have to find another black woman republican genius to pick on. So fuck off.

    3. Specific instances of nominees for high office colluding with foreign governments or STFU.

      1. Specific instances of nominees for high office colluding with foreign governments or STFU.

        Wow, you really do lack any semblance of self-awareness…

        1. His apology to Trump is coming any day now.

      2. Just off the cuff here; Reagan campaign and Iran, Bill Clinton campaign and China, Hillary Clinton campaign and Ukraine. Not that the press has any interest in doing their jobs by reporting these other speculative connections right now.

        1. Nixon with China and Vietnam.

          Ted Cruz with Israel and Eastern Europe.

          Obama with Russia.

          Hillary and Russia.

          Oh and Georgia Washington with Creek Nation of American Indians, France, Britain, Spain.

        2. Let’s not forget that Clinton’s DOJ refused to appoint a special investigator for the Chinese fundraising scandal despite his own FBI director explicitly stating that it was necessary to find out the truth. So we just had to take their word that the money never reached the presidential level.

  3. On the other hand, as Harvard law professor Alex Whiting has suggested, these may be nothing more than easy charges that fell into special prosecutor Robert Mueller’s lap.
    Lying to government officials is the easiest charges to push and they tend to use those charges if they cannot get you on anything else.

    Its okay for the government to lie to YOU but illegal for YOU to lie to government agents.

    Its the main reason to NEVER speak to police nor the FBI. Ever. Don’t do it. The FBI does not record interviews, so they can accuse you of lying without proof.

    So consider yourself warned.

    1. No, you could be charged for obstructing justice if you’re just a witness and you don’t talk.

  4. What “foreign policy advisor” isn’t going to have numerous contacts with officials and influence-peddlers in foreign countries? Too bad Gary Johnson didn’t have any advisor familiar with events in Syria! Not a Trump supporter by any means, but how does this make sense “That Trump hired someone with such questionable dealings certainly reflects poorly on the president’s judgment.?” This assumes Trump would have known about such “questionable dealings” and that is hardly fair to assume or expect someone hiring others to know about all the complicated dealings that person may have engaged in during their career.

    1. The only thing unprecedented about all of this is how unbelievably incompetent and stupid Trump is.

    2. Hey, he’s the one that said he’d hire “good people, the best people” to advise him on matters of which he is ignorant.

      1. Here’s the crux of the thing: Either superior are responsible for every bit of their subordinate’s behavior or they are not.

        Manafort is being accused for behavior before being on Trump’s campaign, there is not known link between Manafort tax fraud and Trump, and Trump was not aware of Manaforts actions during the Obama administration.

        If you say that presidents are responsible for all subordinate’s behavior then Obama would be responsible for Hillary’s mishandling of classified information and General James Cartwright and General David Petraeus.

        I am not against this per se but it needs to be the standard for all presidents not just Trump.

        1. ” ….there is not known link between Manafort tax fraud and Trump, …”

          YET

          1. Don’t you think Mueller would have led with that evidence?

        2. If you say that presidents are responsible for all subordinate’s behavior then Obama would be responsible for Hillary’s mishandling of classified information

          That HE emailed her at that address should raise some red flags…

          1. Yup. We shall more details in 2018 after Trump lets this Mueller witch hunt end and then the FBI reinvestigates Hillary.

          2. Don’t forget Timothy Geithner.

  5. Woohoo! It’s only a matter of time before Trump is removed from office and Hillary is installed as our first female President!

    1. Is this how Tony’s masturbation fantasies start out?

      1. For Tony, Hillary starts the fantasy AS president.

      2. It would bear out Nick’s assertions about the Rise of Sexual Equality.

        Would it be a part of the Libertarian Moment or would we be a post-Racial, post-Sexual, AND post-Libertarian nation?

        1. It sounds like you are opposed to sexual equality.

          1. Not going to happen until all boobs are admired equally

    2. Nah … Hillary is guilty of having colluded with the Russian government as well. Russia preferred Trump, but hedged their bets by backing Hillary as well what with the “dossier” scandal and all. So she’s also disqualified. Trump and Hillary can share a cell in the Federal Pen so far as I’m concerned. Nothing left to do but give the Presidency to the 3rd top vote getter: Gary Johnson! At least we know he’s an honest man and fiscally responsible.

      1. Russia preferred Trump

        I still have no idea why this argument is so popular. Putin being Putin I have little doubt that he was trying to play both of them, but Russia’s strategic interests are almost certainly better served by prospective a Clinton presidency than a Trump one. Basically the only thing Trump has to offer is letting Russia have his sphere of influence instead of trying to push for western liberalism at every opportunity.

        1. I have no doubt that Putin preferred Trump.

          Putin certainly hated Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton publicly denounced Putin’s election in the media, saying it was illegitimate. That was a stupid thing for a Secretary of State to say about a foreign leader with which we need to have a relationship, but how Putin treated LGBTQI+ in Moscow was more important to Hillary Clinton (and Obama) than working with Russia on anything from Syria to Ukraine.

          1. Before the election:

            “Why Putin hates Hillary”

            —-Politico, July 25, 2016

            https://tinyurl.com/y79c8gn4

            After the election:

            “Hillary Clinton Explains Putin’s ‘Beef’ With Her”

            —-NPR, December 16, 2016

            https://tinyurl.com/y7ukscom

        2. Furthermore, Putin appears to have purged his security services for helping Hillary undermine the U.S. election with the infamous pissgate dossier.

          “According to USA Today, Putin has black bagged and arrested three other high-ranking Russian intelligence officials, as well as the head of the top cybersecurity firm in Russia.

          This weekend The Telegraph reports that ex-KGB Chief Oleg Erovinkin was found dead in his Lexus after previously being the top subordinate of Putin’s Igor Sechin, an oligarch who runs Russia’s state owned Roseneft oil company.

          This story is part of the continued fallout from Buzzfeed’s release of the “Golden Showers” raw intelligence dossier, which has likely sparked the Russian President’s lethal retaliation against one member of his own, inner circle.”

          https://tinyurl.com/ya847uos

          I see nothing but hot air on this investigation so far. My read is that it’s all a bunch of horseshit, but that doesn’t mean we have to pretend that Putin didn’t despise Hillary. He hated her for what she said about him trying to delegitimize his election in Russia, and it was personal.

          1. In fact, this latter story, the one about Putin purging his intelligence services because of the pissgatge dossier, should be even more damning for the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC.

            They reported back then that Putin was purging his intelligence services over the pissgate dossier when all they really knew about it was that John McCain had given it to Comey at the FBI. The media reported on it back when they thought it was showing that Putin supported Trump and was punishing his intelligence services for revealing the truth about Trump.

            Now it looks like these people were sent off to the gulag and/or murdered by Putin because Hillary Clinton paid for dirt against Trump. Legally, if that doesn’t make the Hillary Clinton campaign complicit in those deaths, ethically, it should.

            1. Maybe Putin dislikes Clinton, but she was by far the better choice for oil prices. I tend to think Putin is a little more pragmatic.

              Honestly, I think all the Russian regime was trying to do was sow discord, but how that is different than the past 60 years is beyond me.

              1. I think Putin’s intelligence service have actual dirt on Hillary and Putin thought he could control her. Plus, Hillary was never going to put America first. That all works in Russia’s favor.

              2. Putin cares far more about an American president that rallies protests against his rule than he does about oil prices, but, even that being said, oil prices are about things that go far beyond anything the President does or doesn’t do.

                It looks like the Russian intelligence services were working for Hillary, behind Putin’s back. As corrupt as the Russian government is, that shouldn’t be surprising to anybody. Hell, it was like that in the U.S., at first, too, when Trump took office.

                We have a deep state. They have a deep state, too.

            2. I largely agree with you. I think Putin never actually wanted Trump as president; he didn’t think it was even possible he would win. He hated Hillary Clinton, and wanted to damage her presidency as much as possible. He wanted her to be hated and scandal-ridden from the start (although he didn’t need to do much helping out there). He wanted to destroy her presidency before it even started.

              Trump is an unpredictable, short-tempered, and erratic idiot. No nation wants that in an enemy.

              1. It’s also important to understand how and why Putin does things.

                Remember when Putin had that guy in London killed by having him injected with a radio isotope?

                Why did he kill him like that? Why not just have him shot or thrown off a building with a suicide note?

                The answer is that Putin wanted everyone to know that he was behind the murder. Only the Russian intelligence services have the ability to procure that radio isotope easily and smuggle it into the UK.

                That guy was a dissident from Putin. He was a traitor to Putin. Putin wanted to make an example of him so that anyone else who might betray him would know what happens when you cross Putin. What’s the point of making an example of somebody if nobody knows it’s you who did it?

                If Putin had wanted the world to know that he had thrown the election for Hillary, everyone would know. We can be fairly certain Putin wasn’t behind the pissgate dossier because he punished the people in his own intelligence services who were responsible for it–and we know all about it. Putin doesn’t care about condemnation from the west. Putin wants everyone to know what happens when you cross him.

                Look at those stories I linked above. Everyone knew Putin hated Hillary before the pissgate dossier, and everyone knew why. We also knew that Putin wasn’t behind the dossier before we even knew that the Hillary campaign and the DNC had paid for it.

          2. it was personal

            Well there I go forgetting that these creatures are actually people. My mistake.

            1. That part about Putin murdering his own intelligence agents for helping a British spy is evidence that the info they provided on Trump was at least credible in the sense that Putin considered it a betrayal to reveal it. That Putin murders the Russians who supplied the dossier is evidence the dirt wasn’t in line with the official Russian Kremlin stance. The dossier wasn’t a Putin ploy to undermine Trump and sow discord. It wasn’t Kremlin made.

              1. It doesn’t matter why Putin did what he did anywhere near as much as it matters that the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee did, in fact, do what they did.

                No, Putin didn’t collaborate with Trump to damage Hillary Clinton.

                Yes, the Clinton campaign and the DNC contracted with elements of the Russian intelligence services to create a dossier damaging to the Trump campaign.

                Trump did not collaborate with Putin to destroy Hillary in the election.

                Hillary did collaborate with the Russian intelligence services to dig up dirt on Trump.

        3. I still have no idea why this argument is so popular.

          That’s because you are a moron.

          1. Paint Thinner|10.30.17 @ 6:13PM|#
            ‘I still have no idea why this argument is so popular.’
            “That’s because you are a moron.”

            So you have no idea, either?

      2. There’s worse fates than having a bunch of politicians arrested.

    3. Actually Barack Obama was our first female president.

  6. He has been talking to them for months. Yet, nothing about what he is telling them or about his plea has been leaked to the media. That is a pretty good sign that he isn’t telling them much.

    1. Yep-or he also has dirt on the Clintons and the Russians that the media doesn’t want to talk about. Don’t forget that the two go a lot further back than Trump -to the mid 1990s when Bill made friends with various Russian mob bosses.

    2. With the way Mueller has been running this operation that is most likely accurate. This whole investigation has more leaks than a Polish submarine.

    3. Flynn went down within weeks of making his call to Russia. It’s clear that anything the intelligence community learns, suspects, or just wants to throw out for shits and giggles will be reported on within days

  7. “According to the FBI, Papadopoulos began communicating with the unnamed “professor” in March 2016, shortly before taking the role of foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign. The professor and Papadopoulos met on several occasions in Italy and London, according to the court documents, and during one of those meetings in April 2016, the professor told Papadopoulos that Russia had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton, including thousands of Clinton’s emails. Papadopoulos shared that information with higher-ups in the Trump campaign.”

    The Russians had plenty of company…
    Anyhow, if this is what he lied about, he was lying about doing his job. Collecting crap on your opponent is one reason we need actual opponents.

    1. In the end, this is going to come down to the fact that some people around Trump had ties to Russia, but even Trump wasn’t stupid enough to go all in, and the worst that could be said is that nobody told the FBI about it. I still don’t think any of it is unprecedented or any different from what the Clintons would have done. Throw everybody in jail.

      1. Throw everyone in jail for what? Even granting you extreme incompetence on Trump’s part, which doesn’t seem to be the case, we don’t (typically) jail people for being incompetent.

        1. Nor do we charge people. But what do you know, Manafort, Gates, and Papadopoulos have been charged.

          1. For incompetence?

          2. Paint Thinner|10.30.17 @ 6:15PM|#
            “Nor do we charge people. But what do you know, Manafort, Gates, and Papadopoulos have been charged”

            Yes, and assuming they are guilty, it still leaves the hag no more than 5 votes closer to winning. Loser.

  8. ” Dime con qui?n andas, y te dir? qui?n eres. “

  9. “Trump Campaign Foreign Policy Adviser’s Guilty Plea Could Be More Important Than Manafort’s Indictment”

    The Manafort indictment is about tax evasion in regards to a matter that had absolutely nothing to do with the Trump campaign.

    “More important than the Manafort indictment” is a very low bar. In fact, if this is Mueller showing his hole card in the face of accusations that he’s just leading a witch hunt, then all Mueller has shown is a deuce that doesn’t pair.

    I can think of a lot of things more important than the Manafort indictment. I’m trying to think of something less important–that’s Trump scandal related–and I’m having a hard time coming up with anything. If all Mueller has to show for his investigation is what’s in this indictment, then he’s got bupkis.

    If Manafort subsequently testifies against Trump to make the Mueller pain go away, they better have more than just Manafort’s testimony to offer. And if there were any direct evidence that Manafort could offer against Trump, I suspect Mueller would have uncovered it already.

    1. Rule #1 of a witch hunt is that you will always find a witch, even if there aren’t any witches to find.

      1. Great thing about Grand Juries- they can put a witch hat on almost any ham sandwich.

    2. if this is Mueller showing his hole card … then all Mueller has shown is a deuce that doesn’t pair.

      These euphemisms…

    3. Wasn’t Mueller FBI Director when Tim Geithner got away with not paying taxes until after the fact?

  10. So he pleaded guilty to lying to or withholding information from the FBI. He didn’t, so far, admit to working with the Russians on behalf of the Trump campaign to influence the 2016 election in Trump’s favor.

    Sounds like a big nothing burger to me.

    1. Glad you also caught that lying through omission is now a federal felony according to Mueller.

      It will be useful in the Dept of Justice prosecution of Hillary in 2018.

      On that note: never talk with the police or FBI about anything because they can charge you with lying or lying through omission. You cannot be charged if you never speak to them.

      1. If you never speak to them, isn’t that lying by omission?

        1. Omission as in omitting materials facts when speaking with government agents.

          Normally without the BoR you would be right, but because we have the Constitution the government has no ability to force you to talk and you don’t have to speak with police.

          When you speak to police and the FBI they specifically ask if you are waving your rights to an attorney and to remain silent. Once you do, leaving out material information and lying can be used against you.

          The lying statutes should be struck down but they havn’t yet.

    2. Yup, a big nothing burger that after pleading guilty and cooperating with Mueller, there was no chance that he wore a wire, recorded convos with other suspects who remained nameless in that indictment, no chance Sessions was involved…

      1. Paint Thinner|10.30.17 @ 6:16PM|#
        “Yup, a big nothing burger that after pleading guilty and cooperating with Mueller, there was no chance that he wore a wire, recorded convos with other suspects who remained nameless in that indictment, no chance Sessions was involved…”

        Tin foil hats on Aisle 6, dimwit.

  11. I would find it funny if the Trump team takes a lead from Hillary and answers, “I don’t recall” to every question.

    The anti-Trump people would go nuts.

    1. Or better yet, “What difference does it make now?”

      1. Johnson: No, again, we were misled that there were supposedly protests and that something sprang out of that — an assault sprang out of that — and that was easily ascertained that that was not the fact, and the American people could have known that within days and they didn’t know that.

        Clinton: With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.

        Pretty big difference when you do not include the context

        1. “What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.”

          Thank you for including the hag’s attempt to direct attention away from what did cause it: Her incompetence.

      2. Johnson: No, again, we were misled that there were supposedly protests and that something sprang out of that — an assault sprang out of that — and that was easily ascertained that that was not the fact, and the American people could have known that within days and they didn’t know that.

        Clinton: With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night who decided that they’d they go kill some Americans? What difference at this point does it make? It is our job to figure out what happened and do everything we can to prevent it from ever happening again, Senator.

  12. “That Trump hired someone with such questionable dealings certainly reflects poorly on the president’s judgment and sense of character, but that’s hardly new territory for the current occupant of the White House.”

    Trump had a problem attracting people–even to his administration once he won, never mind his campaign.

    There was a time when Trump was mulling over whom to give various positions in his administration. To choose from, there was Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, John Bolton, Chris Christie, Rudy Giulliani, and Jeff Sessions. Why did those people attach themselves to the Trump campaign? It’s because with the exception of Jeff Sessions, they all had no political future to risk, and very few inside the Republican party or elsewhere wanted to associate themselves with Trump during his campaign. He was painted as a xenophobe, a sexual predator, inciting racism among his brownshirt supporters, an association with Bannon, etc., etc.

    That Trump may have needed to overlook a past misdeed or two to fill out his campaign staff is hardly surprising under those circumstances. The people who were willing to commit career suicide by associating themselves with his anti-PC, obnoxious, sure to lose campaign were the people who had no future political career left to kill.

    1. But Hillary being associated with people like Podesta and Sid Blunmenthal in no way reflect on her character and judgement sufficiently to be worthy of Reason ever mentioning it.

      1. Yeah, and she could have picked anybody.

        She had no problem adding Wasserman-Schultz to her staff after she was forced out of the DNC for her misdeeds over there, either.

      2. To the left, subordinate’s behavior is NEVER to be held against Democrat leaders.

        To the left, subordinate’s behavior is absolutely ammunition to be used against conservatives.

  13. More evidence that you have to “lawyer up” as soon as the friendly FBI approaches you with a few questions. Mis-report what you had for lunch when you met with some target of theirs, and it will be you in the defendant’s seat.

    1. These heavy handed tactics are going to bite them in the ass eventually. It is becoming well known that you do not speak to the FBI.

      1. I think the FBI going after Margret Stewart really alerted people about speaking to police and the FBI is a mistake because they can send you to prison just for “lying”.

  14. Testing 123

  15. Never, ever, talk to law enforcement. Almost anything you say can be called a lie, regardless of how truthful you think you are being.

    One false memory, one misspoken claim, and you’re facing charges.

    1. That ain’t what happened here though. He was just a witness. If you don’t talk and you don’t have a 5th Amendment basis then you’re obstructing the investigation by not answering questions. They didn’t catch this motherfucker in a gray area either.

      1. You’re right. He should have pulled a “hag” and said he didn’t remember.

  16. George Papadopoulos, who served as a top foreign policy adviser to President Donald Trump’s campaign..

    Jesus Christ Boehm, so an unpaid 30 year old is a top foreign policy advisor?

    Also, wasn’t he turned down by Manafort himself? Maybe you could tell us, since you’re supposed to be the journalist here.

    Despicable reporting.

    1. For fucks sake, I do believe the Trump campaign called Papa a top foreign policy advisor.

      1. For fuck’s sake, you believe all sorts of lies:

        “Less than a decade out of college, Papadopoulos appeared to hold little sway within the campaign, and it is unclear whether he was acting as an intermediary for the Russian government, although he told campaign officials he was.”
        https://www.washingtonpost.com/ politics/trump-campaign-emails- show-aides-repeated-efforts- to-set-up-russia- meetings/2017/08/14/54d08da6- 7dc2-11e7-83c7-5bd5460f0d7e_ story.html?utm_term=. a2680ce3597b

        From that hot-bed of Trumpism, WaPo!

  17. Manafort is fu..ck..ed because his charges “have nothing to do with that witch hunt Russian investigation”. Sorry, Manafort but Le Roi Louis the Trump XIV doesn’t know you.

    1. Mueller was sitting on this because of the Podesta connection to Manafort.

      1. And only rolled with it now as a backstop against all the Fusion GPS revelations from last week.

        Trying to give Rosenstein some excuse for not pulling the plug.

  18. Sounds like Reason staff can breathe easy now that they have their “smoking gun” that will drive Trump and others from the White House.

  19. How much spaghetti can we throw at the wall expecting something to stick?

    Dems wasting OPM scoring political points….

  20. Elsewhere I read he was some “energy adviser”.

    He got caught lying about some timeline that isn’t terribly relevant, given that the Trump campaign nixed his requests to meet with the contact. Supposedly someone was open to sending a “low level” person to Russia (to avoid noise), but I don’t know if it ever amounted to anything, given that the Trump campaign never officially met with the professor.

  21. I would like a Nothingburger, fries and a Coke please!

    This WaPo story from mid-August all but proves that this Papadopolous guy was pretty much a junior-level nobody within the campaign, and sr officials would not let him anywhere near Trump. https://tinyurl.com/y7avmp97

  22. Timothy Franz Geithner tax evasion.

    That Obama hired someone with such questionable dealings certainly reflects poorly on the president’s judgment and sense of character, but that’s hardly new territory for the current occupant of the White House

    Did anyone see this line at Reason?

    1. Amazing how silent they were last week when all the Hillary & Obama ties to Russia were being revealed.

    2. Amazing how quiet they were last week when all the Hillary and Obama ties to Russia were being reported.

  23. Who the Hell is George Papadopoulos?
    For many of us who followed the day to day ups & downs of the Trump Campaign, we’ve never heard of him; and I don’t recall ever reading any op-ed with his name attached offering us his expertise on foreign policy.

  24. I wonder how much evidence on Clinton collusion is being destroyed by Mueller’s team.

    1. Using the Comey pkaybook, not hiding, whitewashing.

      “Exoneration” statements to follow.

  25. There was a hint in some of the linked material regarding illegal behavior in contacting some foreign officials. Does anyone have any info on what that might mean?

  26. Those who say this isn’t that big a deal, or that there have always been shady deals like this in elections, have their facts backward. As Manafort’s lawyer said, his indictment as a foreign agent is only the 6th time the law has been used. That’s because situations like this haven’t come up. The law was written for exactly this situation, so that’s why it’s happening now.

    Papadopoulos has been talking to the FBI, as an informant, for 3 months. He’s told them there were three high-ranking Trump campaign people involved in working with Russia to get dirt on Clinton. Those unnamed folks are either going to be arrested or have become witnesses too.

    The White House is doing a bait and switch, trying to say that she sold 20% of US uranium for Clinton foundation support. Trouble is, she had nothing to do with authorizing the sale, which right-wingers can deny, but it is well documented.

    In a way, Trump’s people are like fans who claim their team lost because of the umpires. It’s a kind of displacement, to deny reality. Instead of facing the truth, you lie to yourself a bit longer. But eventually it’s time to admit reality: you lost.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.