It’s Manafort – Podesta Next?

Posted by Tina

Paul Manafort and Richard Gates III face indictment on twelve counts that include laundering money, conspiracy against the United States, being an unregistered agent of a foreign principal, false and misleading FARA statements. See full indictment papers here. These are serious allegations and if guilty these men face long prison terms, as they should. But if Manafort should be indicted then others should be also. Mueller may already have such indictments in mind. It was reported today that Tony Podesta stepped down from his law firm in light of the ongoing investigation:

Tony Podesta, founder of the Podesta Group and brother of former Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, is resigning from his lobbying company. Podesta and his lobbying firm were subjects of a federal investigation led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. The Podesta Group was one of several firms that worked on a campaign called the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine. The campaign was led by Manafort and promoted Ukraine’s image in the West. According to Politico, which first reported the story, Podesta will be handing over full operational and financial control to the company’s CEO Kimberly Fritts.

PJ Media list five things to be aware of in this indictment. It’s well worth a read. Number five could point to Podesta as being next:

At least one of the charges on which Manafort was indicted should spark fear in some notable allies of Hillary Clinton. The charge of misleading FARA statements — lying on documents required by the Federal Agents Registration Act — might also apply to Tony Podesta, who co-founded the Podesta Group with Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign manager John Podesta, and who served as a Clinton bundler last year.

It should be noted that nothing in the indictment mentions the Trump campaign or his presidency. It should also be noted this investigation began during the Obama administration. The possibly illegal FISA warrants that allowed wiretapping in the Russia probe to derail Trump is the vehicle that led to the early morning raid on Manaforts residence and these indictments. These revelations bring up questions. Why wasn’t the FBI able to raid Manafort’s home earlier while Obama was president? Why have these charges been pursued rather than possible charges against Podesta…why hasn’t his home been raided? It seems his involvement crosses Manaforts…both were involved in talks with Ukrainians/Russians. While we’re at it, it should be noted that the judge in the Manafort case is an Obama appointee and Hillary Clinton donor and, all of the investigators working under Mueller are a Democrats.

Andrew McCarthy of National Review, “The Manafort Indictment: Not Much There, and a Boon for Trump,” concludes:

…there may be less to this indictment than meets the eye — it’s not so much a serious allegation of “conspiracy against the United States” as a dubious case of disclosure violations and money movement that would never have been brought had he not drawn attention to himself by temporarily joining the Trump campaign.

From President Trump’s perspective, the indictment is a boon from which he can claim that the special counsel has no actionable collusion case. It appears to reaffirm former FBI director James Comey’s multiple assurances that Trump is not a suspect. And, to the extent it looks like an attempt to play prosecutorial hardball with Manafort, the president can continue to portray himself as the victim of a witch hunt.

I doubt that Americans who have supported Republicans or President Trump will be happy that Manafort is the first to be indicted in this “probe” given the long list of evidence against others in the Democrat Party who seem always to escape prosecution, or the many ways that “collusion” appears to be the MO of Hillary Clinton and Co. Stay tuned….

This entry was posted in Constitution and Law. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to It’s Manafort – Podesta Next?

  1. Tina says:

    Sean Hannity just reported that Hillary Clinton met with Podesta over the weekend…

    Manafort’s plea: “Not guilty.”

  2. Tina says:

    Washington Times, “Nunes’ investigating digs up trove of Democrat connections to Russia dossier”

    On two fronts, Rep. Devin Nunes has shifted the Russia debate in Washington further away from President Trump and closer to Democrats.

    He exposed the practice of “unmasking” by Obama aides and flushed out the source of payments for the scandalous anti-Trump dossier that drove the Russia collusion narrative.

    The California Republican’s first tactic: He traveled to the Executive Office Building and viewed evidence that the Obama administration had “unmasked” the concealed names of Trump associates in highly classified intelligence reports during the election campaign.

    The chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence talked publicly about his discovery to much derision from Democrats and Washington’s press corps. The unmasking suggested that the Obama White House was spying on a political foe through its legal right to unmask the identities of people unintentionally swept up in surveillance operations.

    An advocacy group filed a complaint about his disclosure with the Office of Congressional Ethics. Mr. Nunes responded by removing himself as the overseer of the committee’s Russia probe.

    But his legacy lives on. Both the Senate and House intelligence committees have summoned former Obama aides as witnesses.

    Republicans need to step up their communications game to force these issues into media reporting. They are much too polite given the rhetoric of the left and left media!

  3. Tina says:

    PJ Media:

    This week’s bombshell — that the DNC and the Hillary Clinton campaign financed former British spy Christopher Steele’s salacious dossier allegedly connecting Donald Trump and Russia — may suggest something even more devious. The dossier was compiled by the notorious firm Fusion GPS, which also worked for Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, the very woman who met with Donald Trump Jr. in a meeting deemed pivotal to the case for Trump-Russia “collusion.”

    The Fusion GPS connection raises a supremely interesting question: Did the Clinton campaign actually orchestrate the meeting between Trump campaign officials and Veselnitskaya? Is the entire Trump-Russia collusion narrative the result of a Clinton set-up?

    After PJ Media’s Liz Sheld suggested the idea to this reporter, it seemed increasingly plausible. Not only does the timeline work out, but Clinton attacked Trump as Putin’s puppet and Clinton’s connections to Russia had been powerfully reported in 2015. What better way to distract from Clinton’s ties to Russia than proving “collusion” on Trump’s part? …

  4. J. Soden says:

    Have been watching the Demwit talking heads for the last couple of days and they just brush aside the do$$ier funding issue. And at the same time, they keep saying that Steele was working for the Republicans, which is a total crock since Steele didn’t start his Fusion GPS fantasies until he came on board in early Summer – when the $hrilLIARy campaign and the DNC were paying the bill.
    And today, those same talking heads were blowing it out their other ends by trying to link Manafort and Gates’ indictment to TheDonald – for something that his campaign had nothing to do with.
    David French, Jonathan Tobin and the ever-accurate Andrew McCarthy all have articles today (Monday) at
    that are worth reading and cut through the hot air and barnyard residue that seems to keep blasting forth from the Demwits and others on the LoonieLeft.

  5. Peggy says:

    What did Hillary know and when did she know it.

    Hillary Said She Knew Nothing of Dossier, But She Forgot to Erase Her Twitter Account:
    OCTOBER 28, 2017

    “Hillary Clinton has claimed that she had no knowledge of the infamous dossier that attempts to link President Donald Trump to Russian collusion, however her Twitter track record proves otherwise. She has been caught, yet again, in a number of lies.

    The dossier was published in January by BuzzFeed ahead of Trump’s inauguration. As soon as the document came out, Clinton and others rushed to put out statements that they were shocked by the contents, and wished they had known about it sooner.
    Woah… left field much? That came out of nowhere, but did it?

    Finally, on Oct. 31, Clinton realized the dossier was not going to be published like she wanted it to be, so instead she found whatever she could… a far-left Slate article that published an excerpt from the dossier… adding a caption that read, “It’s time for Trump to answer serious questions about his ties to Russia.”

    Hillary Clinton ✔ @HillaryClinton
    It’s time for Trump to answer serious questions about his ties to Russia.
    4:32 PM – Oct 31, 2016
    8,011 8,011 Replies 13,567 13,567 Retweets 15,966 15,966 likes
    Twitter Ads info and privacy

    Clinton’s desperate attempt to paint herself ignorant now that she is directly linked to the dossier just screams dishonest incompetence.”

  6. Peggy says:

    Pelosi compared the House tax cut/reform proposal and Ponzi scheme. Let me present a case for a real one. If you or I did this we’d be in a cell next to Bernie Madoff.

    Bernie Sanders had a huge following that donated, I believe, on average $45 dollars each. That money by DNC rules is turned over to the DNC general fund and distributed out to candidates.

    Hillary loaned the DNC money to bail it out of it’s financial hole on the condition she was in total control of all funds and had final approval of all hiring.

    Hillary spent a record $1.2 BILLION to lose the race.

    Millions came from the DNC, which means millions came from Bernie Sanders own supporters.

    Hillary, being in control of all fund distribution used Sander’s supporters’ money against him. I wonder how they’d feel if they knew they’d helped her and not him?

    Hillary did the same thing Ponzi and Madoff did and she’s still not in jail where she already should be for her other criminal acts including lying to Congress.

    The RNC is run the same way. If you make a donation to a candidate it’s turned over to the RNC’s general fund and distributed out by the chair. But not a candidate who has taken control of the chair’s duties.

    • Peggy says:

      Dang screwed up the very first sentence. Need more coffee or a younger brain. It should have said.

      Pelosi compared the House tax cut/reform proposal to a Ponzi scheme yesterday.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.