Mueller Prosecutors Link Trump Aide Rick Gates to Russian Intel Network

Dafinch · Mar 28, 2018

https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/f83eb795-bcd0-383d-a3f1-b8e952b506a6/mueller-prosecutors-link.html

Still confident there is no collusion/conspiracy/obstruction, Jagoffs?:think2::missingteShush()*

[h=1]Mueller Prosecutors Link Trump Aide Rick Gates to Russian Intel Network[/h]

The Daily Beast•March 28, 2018

In a court filing Tuesday night special counsel Robert Mueller alleges Rick Gates, a close associate of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, knew the two were working with a former Russian intelligence officer during the 2016 election.
The FBI has determined the former officer continued to have ties to Russian intelligence in 2016 and worked with Gates and Manafort in September and October that year. It is not clear whether the two men knew this.
Mueller’s team made the revelation in a sentencing document against lawyer Alex van der Zwaan, who pleaded guilty in February to lying to investigators in the Russia probe. The investigation is examining whether the Trump campaign assisted the Kremlin’s interference in the 2016 election.

Rick Gates, former campaign aide to U.S. President Donald Trump, departs after a bond hearing at U.S. District Court in Washington, U.S., December 11, 2017. Joshua Roberts/Reuters
Gates continued to work on the Trump campaign after Manafort stepped down amid allegations of fraud over his political work in Ukraine in August 2016. Manafort and Trump continued to stay in touch, according to reports.
During an interview with Mueller’s investigators last November, van der Zwaan “deliberately and repeatedly lied” about his communications with Gates the filing said, even when he “was expressly warned by the government that it is a crime to lie to the Special Counsel’s Office.”
One of those lies, the filing alleges, was about the former Russian military intelligence directorate (GRU) agent, identified in the document as “Person A.” This unnamed person worked in Ukraine for Manafort’s company Davis Manafort International on its lobbying work for the government and lived in Kiev and Moscow until mid-August 2016.
Don't miss: Melania Should Leave 'Jerk of a Husband' Trump Like Hillary Failed to Do, Says Conservative Pundit
Read more: Rick Gates is Mueller's “bitch” in Trump-Russia probe, former Ken Starr deputy says
During his first interview with Mueller’s team, van der Zwaan said “Gates told him Person A was a former Russian Intelligence Officer with the GRU,” the filing states.
It accuses van der Zwaan of lying about “his communications with Gates, his communications with a Ukrainian business associate of Manafort and Gates (Person A), and his failure to produce an email between himself and the Ukrainian business associate—all important matters in the investigation.” It also accuses him of deliberately destroying documents.
In February, Gates pleaded guilty to fraud and lying to investigators and agreed to work with the special counsel’s investigation. Mueller then dropped nearly two dozen fraud charges against him. Both Gates and Manafort were first indicted last October on charges they laundered $30 million.
Most popular: Who Stabbed Corey Feldman? ‘Wolfpack’ is Responsible For ‘Attempted Homicide,’ Actor Says
Gates “saw everything” inside the Trump campaign, a Republican consultant who worked with him on the campaign told Politico Monday, calling Gates among the “top five” insiders who could benefit Mueller’s investigation.
Working for the international law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, van der Zwaan assisted Gates on a report about the trial of Ukraine’s former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko for a Ukrainian political group.
A 30-page sentencing memorandum van der Zwaan’s lawyer filed Tuesday asks the judge for leniency and no jail time when he is sentenced on April 3. It states that if he is jailed he may miss the birth of his first child in London and asks that he pay an “appropriate fine.” He could face as many as six months in jail.
The filing by Mueller’s team makes no recommendation on how van der Zwaan should be sentenced, but argues that he is a trained, experienced lawyer who repeatedly sought to deceive investigators.
This article was first written by Newsweek

GasMan · Mar 28, 2018

Lol...

Still too scared to make a wager, Jagoff?

SheriffJoe · Mar 28, 2018

The Mueller probe is as toothless as an Erv the perv lawsuit.

Greenbacks · Mar 28, 2018

Nelson1999 just joined THERX 2 days ago.

Possible ghost.

Users Browsing this Forum

There are currently 103 users browsing this forum. (9 members & 94 guests)

Greenbacks
Sheriff Joe
Nelson1999
Dave007inVegas
duckhunter
RED EYE
Gas Man
Dafinch
festeringZit

festeringZit · Mar 28, 2018

yahoo = fake news

StevieRay · Mar 28, 2018

Again Yahoo. lol

SheriffJoe · Mar 28, 2018

duhhhhhhhhfinch and the libtards want their 16 year plan back!!

Willie99 · Mar 28, 2018

OMG, this is it, no really this time it's really it

a fucking idiot like duuuhfeces has found evidence of collusion that nobody else can

priceless

Greenbacks · Mar 28, 2018

He's on a posting curfew

Dafinch · Mar 28, 2018

Sock cock en masse, head-in-the-sand-bitches. Dowdy John is coming under fire, too, while Twittler skulks in his bedroom terrified of Stormy and the every expanding investigation into his obstruction of justice.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/28/...&gwh=18D3A794A75B57BF989104E7196930CF&gwt=pay

Trump’s Lawyer Raised Prospect of Pardons for Flynn and Manafort

By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT, JO BECKER, MARK MAZZETTI, MAGGIE HABERMAN and ADAM GOLDMAN MARCH 28, 2018

WASHINGTON — A lawyer for President Trump broached the idea of Mr. Trump’s pardoning two of his former top advisers, Michael T. Flynn and Paul Manafort, with their lawyers last year, according to three people with knowledge of the discussions.The discussions came as the special counsel was building cases against both men, and they raise questions about whether the lawyer, John Dowd, who resigned last week, was offering pardons to influence their decisions about whether to plead guilty and cooperate in the investigation.
The talks suggest that Mr. Trump’s lawyers were concerned about what Mr. Flynn and Mr. Manafort might reveal were they to cut a deal with the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, in exchange for leniency. Mr. Mueller’s team could investigate the prospect that Mr. Dowd made pardon offers to thwart the inquiry, although legal experts are divided about whether such offers might constitute obstruction of justice.Mr. Dowd’s conversation with Mr. Flynn’s lawyer, Robert K. Kelner, occurred sometime after Mr. Dowd took over last summer as the president’s personal lawyer, at a time when a grand jury was hearing evidence against Mr. Flynn on a range of potential crimes. Mr. Flynn, who served as Mr. Trump’s first national security adviser, agreed in late November to cooperate with the special counsel’s investigation. He pleaded guilty in December to lying to the F.B.I. about his conversations with the Russian ambassador and received favorable sentencing terms.
Mr. Dowd has said privately that he did not know why Mr. Flynn had accepted a plea, according to one of the people. He said he had told Mr. Kelner that the president had long believed that the case against Mr. Flynn was flimsy and was prepared to pardon him, the person said.
The pardon discussion with Mr. Manafort’s attorney, Reginald J. Brown, came before his client was indicted in October on charges of money laundering and other financial crimes. Mr. Manafort, the former chairman of Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign, has pleaded not guilty and has told others he is not interested in a pardon because he believes he has done nothing wrong and the government overstepped its authority. Mr. Brown is no longer his lawyer.It is unclear whether Mr. Dowd discussed the pardons with Mr. Trump before bringing them up with the other lawyers.Mr. Dowd, who was hired last year to defend the president during the Mueller inquiry, took the lead in dealing directly with Mr. Flynn’s and Mr. Manafort’s lawyers, according to two people familiar with how the legal team operated.He denied on Wednesday that he discussed pardons with lawyers for the president’s former advisers.
“There were no discussions. Period,” Mr. Dowd said. “As far as I know, no discussions.”Contacted repeatedly over several weeks, the president’s lawyers representing him in the special counsel’s investigation maintained that they knew of no discussions of possible pardons.
“Never during the course of my representation of the president have I had any discussions of pardons of any individual involved in this inquiry,” Jay Sekulow, a lawyer for Mr. Trump, said on Wednesday.

Ty Cobb, the White House lawyer dealing with the investigation, added, “I have only been asked about pardons by the press and have routinely responded on the record that no pardons are under discussion or under consideration at the White House.”

Mr. Kelner and Mr. Brown declined to comment.

During interviews with Mr. Mueller’s investigators in recent months, current and former administration officials have recounted conversations they had with the president about potential pardons for former aides under investigation by the special counsel, according to two people briefed on the interviews.

In one meeting with lawyers from the White House Counsel’s Office last year, Mr. Trump asked about the extent of his pardon power, according to a person briefed on the conversation. The lawyers explained that the president’s powers were broad, the person said. And in other meetings with senior advisers, the president raised the prospect of pardoning Mr. Flynn, according to two people present.

Legal experts are divided about whether a pardon offer, even if given in exchange for continued loyalty, can be considered obstruction of justice. Presidents have constitutional authority to pardon people who face or were convicted of federal charges.

But even if a pardon were ultimately aimed at hindering an investigation, it might still pass legal muster, said Jack Goldsmith, a former assistant attorney general in the George W. Bush administration and a professor at Harvard Law School.

“There are few powers in the Constitution as absolute as the pardon power — it is exclusively the president’s and cannot be burdened by the courts or the legislature,” he said. “It would be very difficult to look at the president’s motives in issuing a pardon to make an obstruction case.”

The remedy for such interference would more likely be found in elections or impeachment than in prosecuting the president, Mr. Goldsmith added.

But pardon power is not unlimited, said Samuel W. Buell, a professor of law at Duke University.

“The framers did not create the power to pardon as a way for the president to protect himself and his associates” from being prosecuted for their own criminal behavior, he said.

Under Mr. Buell’s interpretation, Mr. Dowd’s efforts could be used against the president in an obstruction case if prosecutors want to demonstrate that it was part of larger conspiracy to impede the special counsel investigation.

Mr. Dowd is said to believe that the president has nearly unlimited pardon authority, but he and others have repeatedly insisted that no pardon offers have been made.

A lawyer for Paul Manafort was approached about a possible presidential pardon before his client was indicted in October on charges of money laundering and other financial crimes. Credit Al Drago for The New York Times
In July, amid reports that Mr. Trump was considering granting pardons to his associates under investigation, Mr. Dowd told BuzzFeed that “there is nothing going on on pardons, research — nothing.”

And about two weeks after Mr. Flynn’s guilty plea, Mr. Trump said that such talk was premature.

“I don’t want to talk about pardons for Michael Flynn yet,” Mr. Trump told reporters on Dec. 15 on the South Lawn of the White House. “We’ll see what happens. Let’s see. I can say this: When you look at what’s gone on with the F.B.I. and with the Justice Department, people are very, very angry.”

Mr. Trump has been preoccupied with the investigation into Mr. Flynn since at least early last year. In February 2017, alone in the Oval Office with the F.B.I. director at the time, James B. Comey, the president asked him to end the investigation, Mr. Comey told lawmakers. After that episode became public, Mr. Mueller was appointed by the Justice Department to be the special counsel.

On the day after Mr. Flynn pleaded guilty, the president wrote in a Twitter post said to be composed by Mr. Dowd that he fired Mr. Flynn for, among other things, lying to the F.B.I. But Mr. Trump continued to publicly defend his former national security adviser, saying two days later that he felt “very badly” for Mr. Flynn and that the F.B.I. had “destroyed his life.”

It is not clear what Mr. Flynn has told the special counsel as part of his cooperation agreement. During interviews with other witnesses, Mr. Mueller’s investigators have focused on what Mr. Flynn told the president about his calls during the transition with the Russian ambassador to the United States at the time, Sergey I. Kislyak. The calls came soon after the Obama administration announced new sanctions on Russia for its role in disrupting the 2016 presidential campaign.

Mr. Manafort, who ran Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign for several months, has been indicted on dozens of counts of money laundering and other financial crimes connected to his work as a lobbyist and former consultant for Viktor F. Yanukovych, who at the time was president of Ukraine. The charges are not connected to any work that Mr. Manafort did for Mr. Trump.

Rick Gates, who was Mr. Manafort’s business partner for years and also served as deputy chairman of the Trump presidential campaign, pleaded guilty last month as part of a cooperation agreement with Mr. Mueller’s team. On the day the plea agreement was announced, Mr. Manafort vowed to continue to fight the charges against him.

In total, 19 people have been charged with crimes by Mr. Mueller. Five of them, including Mr. Flynn and two other Trump associates, have pleaded guilty and have agreed to cooperate.

In August, Mr. Trump pardoned Joe Arpaio, the former sheriff from Arizona who had been found guilty of federal criminal contempt for refusing to stop targeting Latinos in traffic stops and other law enforcement efforts. The pardon prompted an outcry because Mr. Arpaio, whose crackdown on illegal immigration made him a national symbol for both conservatives and liberals, had supported Mr. Trump’s run for president.
COMMENTS
Mr. Trump’s only other pardon came this month, for a sailor who had pleaded guilty to unlawfully retaining national defense information and obstruction of justice after he took cellphone photos on a nuclear submarine and then destroyed the photos when he learned he was under investigation.

When announcing the pardon, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary, said that Mr. Trump appreciated the sailor’s “service to the country.”

NFLTrends · Mar 29, 2018

Anyone watching CNN or MSNBC notes the anchors’ grim determination to bring down the president. They report that his personality is unstable, his cabinet is in deep disarray, his poll numbers slipping. His demise is surely inevitable. But how might this occur?

Let me count the ways. Or rather, the issues on which the media focuses.

The malignant narcissism in his statements and tweets; the mental health issue; the strange ways he hires and fires.

The adulterous affairs and hush money.

The multiple allegations of sexual assault.

Questionable business dealings of Trump, Don Jr., Jarod and Ivanka

Collusion with Russia during the election.

The last has been the main hope. The mainstream press has been salivating with desire that the Mueller probe will deliver the needed blow. That would probably be proof that Russians turned over illegally intercepted documents to the campaign, to help Trump.

But one has the sense that this will not happen. It’s merely a fantasy of Hillary shills.

Almost immediately after the election, lame duck President Obama, stunned by the Trump victory, declared that Russia had intervened, expelled Russian diplomats and imposed sanctions. His intelligence community expeditiously produced on Jan. 9 a (thoroughly unconvincing) report essentially asserting that Wikileaks had received the damning DNC emails revealing that Bernie had never had a chance and noting that Russia’s RT network had favored Trump over Hillary. It appears news directors instructed anchors to say “the entire U.S.intelligence community has established beyond a reasonable doubt that the Russians intervened in the elections.” But the basis of this allegation—that Russia had revealed to the U.S. electorate the nature of the system by providing authentic, relevant primary sources with very disturbing information—was ignored. They interfered.

Interference became immediate gospel truth. In May the Deputy Attorney General appointed Robert Mueller as special prosecutor to investigate the Russian charges, in particular charges of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Or some Russians. Any Russians. Or even Russian-Americans. Or supposedly pro-Russian Ukrainians.

But, as a recent SNL sketch so amusingly suggested, Mueller has found not collusion but obstruction (as in “obstruction of justice”). Trump campaign officials lied to the FBI about some of their contacts and business activities. But their prosecutions will probably not destroy Trump. Meanwhile the House Intelligence Committee has concluded its investigation and the Republicans determined there is no evidence of collusion.

The main historical function of these investigations and the media treatment of them has been to revive and even intensify Cold War-era Russophobia. One of the worst features of this period has been the spectacle of liberal Democrats (and Bernie Sanders) all embracing the notion that Russia is an “adversary,” Putin a monster, and that Russia did something unconscionable during the U.S. elections (such as never performed elsewhere in the world by the U.S. itself). The point has been to say: “Why won’t Trump ever say anything bad about Putin?” as though the default mode is to damn the Russian leader.

(Note that Trump supporters are not hysterically anti-Russia. This may be the only good thing about them. They are not Goldwater Republicans. That would be Hillary Clinton.)

The point has been to unite people around an anti-Russia, anti-Putin line, and view “Russian ties” as inherently suspicious, the better to isolate and topple a president allegedly in a bromance with the Russian leader. It won’t and shouldn’t work.

Russia is an “adversary” only in that it opposes the expansion of NATO, especially to include Ukraine and Georgia. Most Americans know very little about NATO or the issues involved, so as to conclude why Russia and Washington are so at odds. Assaulted by relentless propaganda rivaling that on either side in the Cold War, people are vulnerable to the notion that a president who refuses to be adequately hostile is somehow in the other camp.

But again: it won’t and shouldn’t work. The worst possible thing would be the toppling of Trump due to alleged Russian ties, followed by a Pence administration committed to confrontation with Russia.

Of course Trump should be driven from power, as all oppressors should be driven from power. My preference would be a popular uprising producing revolutionary change. But that is unlikely near term. So what are the options?

The saner members of the cabinet remove him according to Art. 25 of the Constitution, due to mental instability. Or the Democrats sweep the next elections and have the strength to impeach him for some reason. In either case Pence succeeds him. That total reactionary clod. A bipartisan consensus on foreign policy influenced by Hillary Clinton’s hawkishness and neocon ties emerges. Bad. Very bad.

It is hard to find hope. The good things include the appropriate decline of U.S. prestige as a world power, and the enhancement of multilateralism; the appropriate drop in respect among the masses globally for the U.S.; the mass disillusionment of the people in the corrupt U.S. political process and corporate press; the radicalization of youth who become increasingly supportive of socialism. One role of Trump has been to elevate youth’s level of contempt for the whole system. One feels that whatever happens to him, they will somehow break from this Cold War mentality and endless sequence of imperialist wars.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/03/16/what-if-there-was-no-collusion/

(Using Dafinch tactics in my website of choice)

busterhyman · Mar 29, 2018

let me guess- he's gonna roll on trump- and then dems will be able to impeach- another fail

NFLTrends · Mar 29, 2018

busterhyman said:
let me guess- he's gonna roll on trump- and then dems will be able to impeach- another fail

Hahaha true....

But notice how Dafinch talks all the shit, like he is 100% sure there is "Trump-Russian Collusion/Interference/Meddling" yet wont wager at all on it... just makes lame excuses about not wagering.

He knows there is none, but has to keep posting the false narrative just in case there is a 1% chance it happens

Greenbacks · Mar 29, 2018

NFLTrends said:
Anyone watching CNN or MSNBC notes the anchors’ grim determination to bring down the president. They report that his personality is unstable, his cabinet is in deep disarray, his poll numbers slipping. His demise is surely inevitable. But how might this occur?

Let me count the ways. Or rather, the issues on which the media focuses.

The malignant narcissism in his statements and tweets; the mental health issue; the strange ways he hires and fires.

The adulterous affairs and hush money.

The multiple allegations of sexual assault.

Questionable business dealings of Trump, Don Jr., Jarod and Ivanka

Collusion with Russia during the election.

The last has been the main hope. The mainstream press has been salivating with desire that the Mueller probe will deliver the needed blow. That would probably be proof that Russians turned over illegally intercepted documents to the campaign, to help Trump.

But one has the sense that this will not happen. It’s merely a fantasy of Hillary shills.

Almost immediately after the election, lame duck President Obama, stunned by the Trump victory, declared that Russia had intervened, expelled Russian diplomats and imposed sanctions. His intelligence community expeditiously produced on Jan. 9 a (thoroughly unconvincing) report essentially asserting that Wikileaks had received the damning DNC emails revealing that Bernie had never had a chance and noting that Russia’s RT network had favored Trump over Hillary. It appears news directors instructed anchors to say “the entire U.S.intelligence community has established beyond a reasonable doubt that the Russians intervened in the elections.” But the basis of this allegation—that Russia had revealed to the U.S. electorate the nature of the system by providing authentic, relevant primary sources with very disturbing information—was ignored. They interfered.

Interference became immediate gospel truth. In May the Deputy Attorney General appointed Robert Mueller as special prosecutor to investigate the Russian charges, in particular charges of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Or some Russians. Any Russians. Or even Russian-Americans. Or supposedly pro-Russian Ukrainians.

But, as a recent SNL sketch so amusingly suggested, Mueller has found not collusion but obstruction (as in “obstruction of justice”). Trump campaign officials lied to the FBI about some of their contacts and business activities. But their prosecutions will probably not destroy Trump. Meanwhile the House Intelligence Committee has concluded its investigation and the Republicans determined there is no evidence of collusion.

The main historical function of these investigations and the media treatment of them has been to revive and even intensify Cold War-era Russophobia. One of the worst features of this period has been the spectacle of liberal Democrats (and Bernie Sanders) all embracing the notion that Russia is an “adversary,” Putin a monster, and that Russia did something unconscionable during the U.S. elections (such as never performed elsewhere in the world by the U.S. itself). The point has been to say: “Why won’t Trump ever say anything bad about Putin?” as though the default mode is to damn the Russian leader.

(Note that Trump supporters are not hysterically anti-Russia. This may be the only good thing about them. They are not Goldwater Republicans. That would be Hillary Clinton.)

The point has been to unite people around an anti-Russia, anti-Putin line, and view “Russian ties” as inherently suspicious, the better to isolate and topple a president allegedly in a bromance with the Russian leader. It won’t and shouldn’t work.

Russia is an “adversary” only in that it opposes the expansion of NATO, especially to include Ukraine and Georgia. Most Americans know very little about NATO or the issues involved, so as to conclude why Russia and Washington are so at odds. Assaulted by relentless propaganda rivaling that on either side in the Cold War, people are vulnerable to the notion that a president who refuses to be adequately hostile is somehow in the other camp.

But again: it won’t and shouldn’t work. The worst possible thing would be the toppling of Trump due to alleged Russian ties, followed by a Pence administration committed to confrontation with Russia.

Of course Trump should be driven from power, as all oppressors should be driven from power. My preference would be a popular uprising producing revolutionary change. But that is unlikely near term. So what are the options?

The saner members of the cabinet remove him according to Art. 25 of the Constitution, due to mental instability. Or the Democrats sweep the next elections and have the strength to impeach him for some reason. In either case Pence succeeds him. That total reactionary clod. A bipartisan consensus on foreign policy influenced by Hillary Clinton’s hawkishness and neocon ties emerges. Bad. Very bad.

It is hard to find hope. The good things include the appropriate decline of U.S. prestige as a world power, and the enhancement of multilateralism; the appropriate drop in respect among the masses globally for the U.S.; the mass disillusionment of the people in the corrupt U.S. political process and corporate press; the radicalization of youth who become increasingly supportive of socialism. One role of Trump has been to elevate youth’s level of contempt for the whole system. One feels that whatever happens to him, they will somehow break from this Cold War mentality and endless sequence of imperialist wars.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/03/16/what-if-there-was-no-collusion/

(Using Dafinch tactics in my website of choice)

+1

Greenbacks · Mar 29, 2018

NFLTrends said:
Hahaha true....

But notice how Dafinch talks all the shit, like he is 100% sure there is "Trump-Russian Collusion/Interference/Meddling" yet wont wager at all on it... just makes lame excuses about not wagering.

He knows there is none, but has to keep posting the false narrative just in case there is a 1% chance it happens

+1

NFLTrends · Aug 8, 2018

Dafinch said:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/f83eb795-bcd0-383d-a3f1-b8e952b506a6/mueller-prosecutors-link.html

Still confident there is no collusion/conspiracy/obstruction, Jagoffs?:think2::missingteShush()*

[h=1]Mueller Prosecutors Link Trump Aide Rick Gates to Russian Intel Network[/h]

The Daily Beast•March 28, 2018

In a court filing Tuesday night special counsel Robert Mueller alleges Rick Gates, a close associate of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, knew the two were working with a former Russian intelligence officer during the 2016 election.
The FBI has determined the former officer continued to have ties to Russian intelligence in 2016 and worked with Gates and Manafort in September and October that year. It is not clear whether the two men knew this.
Mueller’s team made the revelation in a sentencing document against lawyer Alex van der Zwaan, who pleaded guilty in February to lying to investigators in the Russia probe. The investigation is examining whether the Trump campaign assisted the Kremlin’s interference in the 2016 election.

Rick Gates, former campaign aide to U.S. President Donald Trump, departs after a bond hearing at U.S. District Court in Washington, U.S., December 11, 2017. Joshua Roberts/Reuters
Gates continued to work on the Trump campaign after Manafort stepped down amid allegations of fraud over his political work in Ukraine in August 2016. Manafort and Trump continued to stay in touch, according to reports.
During an interview with Mueller’s investigators last November, van der Zwaan “deliberately and repeatedly lied” about his communications with Gates the filing said, even when he “was expressly warned by the government that it is a crime to lie to the Special Counsel’s Office.”
One of those lies, the filing alleges, was about the former Russian military intelligence directorate (GRU) agent, identified in the document as “Person A.” This unnamed person worked in Ukraine for Manafort’s company Davis Manafort International on its lobbying work for the government and lived in Kiev and Moscow until mid-August 2016.
Don't miss: Melania Should Leave 'Jerk of a Husband' Trump Like Hillary Failed to Do, Says Conservative Pundit
Read more: Rick Gates is Mueller's “bitch” in Trump-Russia probe, former Ken Starr deputy says
During his first interview with Mueller’s team, van der Zwaan said “Gates told him Person A was a former Russian Intelligence Officer with the GRU,” the filing states.
It accuses van der Zwaan of lying about “his communications with Gates, his communications with a Ukrainian business associate of Manafort and Gates (Person A), and his failure to produce an email between himself and the Ukrainian business associate—all important matters in the investigation.” It also accuses him of deliberately destroying documents.
In February, Gates pleaded guilty to fraud and lying to investigators and agreed to work with the special counsel’s investigation. Mueller then dropped nearly two dozen fraud charges against him. Both Gates and Manafort were first indicted last October on charges they laundered $30 million.
Most popular: Who Stabbed Corey Feldman? ‘Wolfpack’ is Responsible For ‘Attempted Homicide,’ Actor Says
Gates “saw everything” inside the Trump campaign, a Republican consultant who worked with him on the campaign told Politico Monday, calling Gates among the “top five” insiders who could benefit Mueller’s investigation.
Working for the international law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, van der Zwaan assisted Gates on a report about the trial of Ukraine’s former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko for a Ukrainian political group.
A 30-page sentencing memorandum van der Zwaan’s lawyer filed Tuesday asks the judge for leniency and no jail time when he is sentenced on April 3. It states that if he is jailed he may miss the birth of his first child in London and asks that he pay an “appropriate fine.” He could face as many as six months in jail.
The filing by Mueller’s team makes no recommendation on how van der Zwaan should be sentenced, but argues that he is a trained, experienced lawyer who repeatedly sought to deceive investigators.
This article was first written by Newsweek

Now... His comments recently.....

Dafinch said:
...why aren't you talking about the fact you're left with cum on your chin for looking like an idiot, babbling for months about "collusion" when neither Rosenstein nor Mueller ever mentioned it. Pound sand, DD, or pound something or someone else, which I'm sure you're all too familiar with.

Wait..... What??

LMAO!!! Another BUMP

SheriffJoe · Aug 8, 2018

Bloodhound Bob's "star witness" not doing so well...

Mueller’s ‘Star Witness’ Rick Gates Falls Apart During Cross-Examination by Manafort Lawyers – Perjures Himself

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...ination-by-manafort-lawyers-perjures-himself/

StevieRay · Aug 8, 2018

And Dafinch is beeatch slapped again

Willie99 · Aug 8, 2018

what happened here?

Mueller surely has him in jail by now

GasMan · Aug 8, 2018

Still too scared to make a wager pussy?

Mueller Prosecutors Link Trump Aide Rick Gates to Russian Intel Network

Member

Member

Rx Normal

Active member

Member

Active member

Rx Normal

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory

Active member

Member

New member

New member

New member

Active member

Active member

New member

Rx Normal

Active member

Conservatives, Patriots & Huskies return to glory

Member

Forum statistics

Share this page