Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts With Russian Intelligence

[TitanTiger 18,799]

 

Quote

 

Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts With Russian Intelligence

By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT, FEB. 14, 2017

 

 

President Trump spoke with Vladimir V. Putin on Jan. 28. His national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, right, resigned Monday. Jonathan Ernst/Reuters 

 

WASHINGTON — Phone records and intercepted calls show that members of Donald J. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and other Trump associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election, according to four current and former American officials.

American law enforcement and intelligence agencies intercepted the communications around the same time that they were discovering evidence that Russia was trying to disrupt the presidential election by hacking into the Democratic National Committee, three of the officials said. The intelligence agencies then sought to learn whether the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russians on the hacking or other efforts to influence the election.

The officials interviewed in recent weeks said that, so far, they had seen no evidence of such cooperation.

But the intercepts alarmed American intelligence and law enforcement agencies, in part because of the amount of contact that was occurring while Mr. Trump was speaking glowingly about the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin. At one point last summer, Mr. Trump said at a campaign event that he hoped Russian intelligence services had stolen Hillary Clinton’s emails and would make them public.

The officials said the intercepted communications were not limited to Trump campaign officials, and included other associates of Mr. Trump. On the Russian side, the contacts also included members of the Russian government outside of the intelligence services, the officials said. All of the current and former officials spoke on the condition of anonymity because the continuing investigation is classified.

The officials said that one of the advisers picked up on the calls was Paul Manafort, who was Mr. Trump’s campaign chairman for several months last year and had worked as a political consultant in Russia and Ukraine. The officials declined to identify the other Trump associates on the calls.

The call logs and intercepted communications are part of a larger trove of information that the F.B.I. is sifting through as it investigates the links between Mr. Trump’s associates and the Russian government, as well as the D.N.C. hack, according to federal law enforcement officials. As part of its inquiry, the F.B.I. has obtained banking and travel records and conducted interviews, the officials said.

Mr. Manafort, who has not been charged with any crimes, dismissed the accounts of the American officials in a telephone interview on Tuesday. “This is absurd,” he said. “I have no idea what this is referring to. I have never knowingly spoken to Russian intelligence officers, and I have never been involved with anything to do with the Russian government or the Putin administration or any other issues under investigation today.”

Mr. Manafort added, “It’s not like these people wear badges that say, ‘I’m a Russian intelligence officer.’”

Several of Mr. Trump’s associates, like Mr. Manafort, have done business in Russia, and it is not unusual for American businessmen to come in contact with foreign intelligence officials, sometimes unwittingly, in countries like Russia and Ukraine, where the spy services are deeply embedded in society. Law enforcement officials did not say to what extent the contacts may have been about business.

Officials would not disclose many details, including what was discussed on the calls, which Russian intelligence officials were on the calls, and how many of Mr. Trump’s advisers were talking to the Russians. It is also unclear whether the conversations had anything to do with Mr. Trump himself.

A published report from American intelligence agencies that was made public in January concluded that the Russian government had intervened in the election in part to help Mr. Trump, but did not address whether any members of the Trump campaign had participated in the effort.

The intercepted calls are different from the wiretapped conversations last year between Michael T. Flynn, President Trump’s former national security adviser, and Sergey I. Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the United States. During those calls, which led to Mr. Flynn’s resignation on Monday night, the two men discussed sanctions that the Obama administration imposed on Russia in December.

 

Paul D. Manafort, Mr. Trump’s former campaign chairman, at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland in July. Sam Hodgson for The New York Times 

 

But the cases are part of the routine electronic surveillance of communications of foreign officials by American intelligence and law enforcement agencies.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The F.B.I. declined to comment.

Two days after the election in November, Sergei A. Ryabkov, the deputy Russian foreign minister, said that “there were contacts” during the campaign between Russian officials and Mr. Trump’s team.

“Obviously, we know most of the people from his entourage,” Mr. Ryabkov said in an interview with the Russian Interfax news agency.

The Trump transition team denied Mr. Ryabkov’s statement. “This is not accurate,” Hope Hicks, a spokeswoman for Mr. Trump, said at the time.

The National Security Agency, which monitors the communications of foreign intelligence services, initially captured the communications between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russians as part of routine foreign surveillance. After that, the F.B.I. asked the N.S.A. to collect as much information as possible about the Russian operatives on the phone calls, and to search through troves of previous intercepted communications that had not been analyzed.

The F.B.I. has closely examined at least three other people close to Mr. Trump, although it is unclear if their calls were intercepted. They are Carter Page, a businessman and former foreign policy adviser to the campaign; Roger Stone, a longtime Republican operative; and Mr. Flynn.

All of the men have strongly denied they had any improper contacts with Russian officials.

As part of the inquiry, the F.B.I. is also trying to assess the credibility of information contained in a dossier that was given to the bureau last year by a former British intelligence operative. The dossier contained a raft of salacious allegations about connections between Mr. Trump, his associates and the Russian government. It also included unsubstantiated claims that the Russians had embarrassing videos that could be used to blackmail Mr. Trump.

The F.B.I. has spent several months investigating the leads in the dossier, but has yet to confirm any of its most explosive allegations.

Senior F.B.I. officials believe that the former British intelligence officer who compiled the dossier, Christopher Steele, has a credible track record, and he briefed F.B.I. investigators last year about how he obtained the information. One American law enforcement official said that F.B.I. agents had made contact with some of Mr. Steele’s sources.

The F.B.I.’s investigation into Mr. Manafort began last spring as an outgrowth of a criminal investigation into his work for a pro-Russian political party in Ukraine and for the country’s former president, Viktor F. Yanukovych. The investigation has focused on why he was in such close contact with Russian and Ukrainian intelligence officials.

The bureau did not have enough evidence to obtain a warrant for a wiretap of Mr. Manafort’s communications, but it had the N.S.A. closely scrutinize the communications of Ukrainian officials he had met.

The F.B.I. investigation is proceeding at the same time that separate investigations into Russian interference in the election are gaining momentum on Capitol Hill. Those investigations, by the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, are examining not only the Russian hacking but also any contacts that Mr. Trump’s team had with Russian officials during the campaign.

On Tuesday, top Republican lawmakers said that Mr. Flynn should be one focus of the investigation, and that he should be called to testify before Congress. Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said that the news surrounding Mr. Flynn in recent days underscored “how many questions still remain unanswered to the American people more than three months after Election Day, including who was aware of what, and when.”

Mr. Warner said that Mr. Flynn’s resignation would not stop the committee “from continuing to investigate General Flynn, or any other campaign official who may have had inappropriate and improper contacts with Russian officials prior to the election.”

Correction: February 14, 2017 

An earlier version of this article misstated the number of people (in addition to Paul Manafort) whom the F.B.I. has examined. It is at least three, not at least four.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/us/politics/russia-intelligence-communications-trump.html

 

 

What is the deal with these folks and their love affair with all things Russia?  Russia is not an ally.  

[AUUSN 823]

Just got to follow the money. 

[homersapien 10,918]

Well, that didn't take as long as I thought it would.

 

The Flynn Affair Could Bring Down Trump’s Presidency

Senate hearings on the subject, including testimony under oath, are likely.

 

.......Another way of putting it might be “What would we have to learn to conclude that Trump’s presidency could be brought down by this scandal?”

The leap from here to there isn’t as far as one might suppose. Although the hard facts aren’t yet there, the logical connections lead in that direction.

Start with the fact that although the vice president categorically denied that Flynn had discussed sanctions with the Russians, Trump never did. This could be because Trump has decided to stay discretely above the fray, but that’s not his style. If Trump believed Flynn was being tarred by fake news, he would have bleated about it on Twitter.

It seems more likely that Trump hasn’t denied it because he can’t. Do we really think that Flynn would have given a wink and a nod to the Russians about the Obama sanctions without Trump’s knowledge or approval? Isn’t it more likely that Trump instructed Flynn to have those conversations? Or, at the very least, that Flynn would have briefed him?

If so, it is likely to come out. John McCain, the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Armed Services and a Member of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, is no great friend of Trump or Flynn. He is determined to get to the bottom of the allegations that the Russians interfered with the 2016 presidential election. He is not alone in looking for those answers. Other investigations may be launched. Senate hearings on the subject, including testimony under oath, are likely.

If that happens, Flynn will be the prime witness. His conversations with the Russian ambassador took place before Trump was sworn in, and therefore before he was cloaked in executive privilege. And now that he has resigned, he has no shield against testifying under oath other than the 5th Amendment.

We don’t know how Flynn feels about Trump after being pushed out of his job, but watch out. Flynn might clam up, but if he talks he could bury Trump.

Suppose Flynn testifies that Trump actively directed his communications about the sanctions with the Russian ambassador. Or even that he knew about them. That would mean that Trump was complicit in highly improper, and possibly illegal, communications prior to his taking office. It would also mean that after he became president, he stood mute for weeks while his vice president, national security advisor, chief of staff, press secretary and communications director all made repeated public statements that he knew were untrue.

Bill Clinton was impeached for less. And that’s not the worst of it. What if it turns out that the discussions of sanctions were only part of a greater perfidy? What if it starts to look like Trump favored the Russians with a wink and a nod on sanctions to thank them for helping him win the election? Any evidence of a quid pro quo and Trump is toast....

Read the full article at 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-flynn-affair-could-bring-down-trumps-presidency_us_58a33429e4b0cd37efcfed84

[AURaptor 1,114]

Nothing improper has been discovered. I'm sensing s whole lot of fake news here. 

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/fbi-finds-nothing-amiss-flynn-russia-eavesdrop-official-n711226

[TitanTiger 18,799]

3 minutes ago, AURaptor said:

Nothing improper has been discovered. I'm sensing s whole lot of fake news here. 

Nothing has been asserted.  But it is suspicious.  Russia is not an ally.  It is suspect on its face for Trump aides to be speaking with Russian intelligence throughout the campaign.  It is, at the very least, worthy of investigation and this catchall phrase of "fake news" for things that Trumpers don't like is a tired canard.

[AURaptor 1,114]

36 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Nothing has been asserted.  But it is suspicious.  Russia is not an ally.  It is suspect on its face for Trump aides to be speaking with Russian intelligence throughout the campaign.  It is, at the very least, worthy of investigation and this catchall phrase of "fake news" for things that Trumpers don't like is a tired canard.

 Flynn lied to the vice President. That is the issue here. The FBI says there was nothing incriminating about what Flynn did.

[TitanTiger 18,799]

2 minutes ago, AURaptor said:

 Actually, the FBI has investigated and has found nothing. So don't claim that nothing has been asserted. FBI does not investigate without an assertion. 

No, the FBI investigates things whether any impropriety has actually been asserted or not.  If it looks like it could be improper, illegal or whatever, it may warrant an investigation.  Right now, they are simply looking into the matter.

And the FBI looked into Flynn's communications, but haven't necessarily cleared all of the communication from Trump's aides.

[AURaptor 1,114]

9 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

And the FBI looked into Flynn's communications, but haven't necessarily cleared all of the communication from Trump's aides.

 

  Last I heard, there were no actual communications or anything illegal done. Much this is uncited, uncorroborated, and flat out fake news. 

 Maxine Waters and Elijah Cummings have both openly spoken about a fake tweet, as they are hoping to do nothing but project this false narrative. This is 100% politically driven. 

[TitanTiger 18,799]

2 minutes ago, AURaptor said:

Last I heard, there were no actual communications or anything illegal done. Much this is uncited, uncorroborated, and flat out fake news. 

That is not what fake news is.  Just because someone isn't willing to take the risk of going on record and be named doesn't make it fake news.  Continued use of this catchall for stuff you wish to dismiss out of hand will be deleted.  If you're going to assert that the newspaper is making up the sources and the documentation they saw out of whole cloth, you'll need something more than you've shown so far.

Secondly, there were "actual communications."

Phone records and intercepted calls show that members of Donald J. Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and other Trump associates had repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials in the year before the election, according to four current and former American officials.

American law enforcement and intelligence agencies intercepted the communications around the same time that they were discovering evidence that Russia was trying to disrupt the presidential election by hacking into the Democratic National Committee, three of the officials said. The intelligence agencies then sought to learn whether the Trump campaign was colluding with the Russians on the hacking or other efforts to influence the election.

Whether anything illegal was done is what is still trying to be determined.

2 minutes ago, AURaptor said:

Maxine Waters and Elijah Cummings have both openly spoken about a fake tweet, as they are hoping to do nothing but project this false narrative. This is 100% politically driven. 

Some congresspeople falling for a fake tweet is not a counterargument.

[AURaptor 1,114]

 Titan – these are the reports, but there are no citations. This is where you and I seem to differ. Unnamed sources? So far, all we have is two papers that are dealing out leaked information and we don't even know what it's about and what is fiction. So don't tell me about this nonsense of "fake news" when we have already seen a deluge of it 

[TitanTiger 18,799]

29 minutes ago, AURaptor said:

 Titan – these are the reports, but there are no citations. This is where you and I seem to differ. Unnamed sources? So far, all we have is two papers that are dealing out leaked information and we don't even know what it's about and what is fiction. So don't tell me about this nonsense of "fake news" when we have already seen a deluge of it 

Yes, unnamed sources...something that, while not as reliable as named sources, are still a reasonable part of journalistic investigations and stories.  They are not "fake news" just because they are unnamed.  You know as well as I do that there are many times in situations like this where a person is putting their career and possibly even their life or their family's well being at risk by saying anything at all, much less going on the record.  Being unnamed is not equivalent to it being fake news.  So find a better counter.

[icanthearyou 4,398]

40 minutes ago, AURaptor said:

 Titan – these are the reports, but there are no citations. This is where you and I seem to differ. Unnamed sources? So far, all we have is two papers that are dealing out leaked information and we don't even know what it's about and what is fiction. So don't tell me about this nonsense of "fake news" when we have already seen a deluge of it 

Yep.  The media didn't even bother to cover the Bowling Green Massacre.

They wont even touch the widespread voter fraud that cost Trump the popular vote.

They never followed up on Obama's birth certificate.

They deliberately attempted to embarrass Trump by using fake crowd photos from the inauguration.  “This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration—period—both in person and around the globe.”

The media clearly misrepresented Judge Gorsuch's remarks about Trump's tweets,,,,even though Gorsuch's own people confirmed them.

 

I suppose too many people can not understand that liberals always lie and, conservatives never have, never will.

I think that some people do see is,,, an election in which the Russians attempted to insert themselves and now, after denials of that fundamental assessment by U.S. intel agencies and, an outright lie that there was no contract between any Trump people and the Russians, a need to investigate the matter further.

Do you have a problem with investigating the matter further?

 

 

[AURaptor 1,114]

Edited transcripts is all that's been released. In contrast, Project  Veritas posted FULL videos of their " edited " versions on their website & the media / Democrats still cried " highly edited ! " , wrongly implying they doctored them to change the content / context.

 

Release the FULL transcript, then get back to me. 

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

Trump may be putting the nails in his own coffin for attacking the IC on this issue. 

Says one senior IC member, "He will die in jail."

 

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/02/he-will-die-in-jail-intelligence-community-ready-to-go-nuclear-on-trump-senior-source-says/#.WKSHwgEPBIk.facebook

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

19 minutes ago, GiveEmElle said:

Trump may be putting the nails in his own coffin for attacking the IC on this issue. 

Says one senior IC member, "He will die in jail."

 

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/02/he-will-die-in-jail-intelligence-community-ready-to-go-nuclear-on-trump-senior-source-says/#.WKSHwgEPBIk.facebook

BS. Another "source"? Maybe it is the one making leaks. If Hillary escapes jail no senior political official will ever go.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

2 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

Yes, unnamed sources...something that, while not as reliable as named sources, are still a reasonable part of journalistic investigations and stories.  They are not "fake news" just because they are unnamed.  You know as well as I do that there are many times in situations like this where a person is putting their career and possibly even their life or their family's well being at risk by saying anything at all, much less going on the record.  Being unnamed is not equivalent to it being fake news.  So find a better counter.

Speaking as a guy with a degree in broadcast journalism, THIS ^^^^^^.

Also, for the vast majority of credible news outlets, you need two sources AT MINIMUM to corroborate a story before going to print.  Everything put out regarding this story so far has cited "multiple senior officials".  When we as Americans start attacking whistle-blowers in our government, then we are also asking for a less transparent government.  These types of sources are badly needed for an open society.

[icanthearyou 4,398]

29 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

Speaking as a guy with a degree in broadcast journalism, THIS ^^^^^^.

Also, for the vast majority of credible news outlets, you need two sources AT MINIMUM to corroborate a story before going to print.  Everything put out regarding this story so far has cited "multiple senior officials".  When we as Americans start attacking whistle-blowers in our government, then we are also asking for a less transparent government.  These types of sources are badly needed for an open society.

Whistle-blowers who expose criminal conduct should be held in the highest regard.  

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

1 hour ago, Proud Tiger said:

BS. Another "source"? Maybe it is the one making leaks. If Hillary escapes jail no senior political official will ever go.

A pivot to HRC is the rights "go to" when they can no longer defend their side. But since you brought it up I will point out that Hillary is completely irrelevant to the issue at hand which is that members of Trump's team were in constant contact with Russia. Seems strange that in the act of running a campaign they had to talk to Russia. Also will point out that Congress led seven investigation into HRC and found no crime. Oh, the FBI did too. 

Its also intersting to note that Trump blames fake news, the IC, and Hillary's campaign for all of this mess instead of addressing Flynn's lies and the concerns the public ( whom he serves btw) has about this contact with Russia. It's almost like his accusations are confessions.

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

Now other countries have intel on Trump's team. Or is Newsweek fake news too?

[SaltyTiger 7,314]

3 hours ago, GiveEmElle said:

Now other countries have intel on Trump's team. Or is Newsweek fake news too?

When do we get to hear real conversation and content about these calls and whatever? 

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

On 2/15/2017 at 5:54 AM, AUUSN said:

Just got to follow the money. 

Post from Wadinski was in reply to this by Dan Rather.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

3 hours ago, GiveEmElle said:

 

I'm no Trump supporter, but this has as much credibility as Alabama claiming 16 national titles.

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

1 minute ago, Brad_ATX said:

I'm no Trump supporter, but this has as much credibility as Alabama claiming 16 national titles.

I think there is enough evidence to support Trump ties to Russia. Past that, we wait and see. His refusal to release tax returns is sketchy.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

21 minutes ago, GiveEmElle said:

I think there is enough evidence to support Trump ties to Russia. Past that, we wait and see. His refusal to release tax returns is sketchy.

I think there are ties as well, but spreading uncorroborated social media crap like the above is no better than those who spread things like "Hillary supports child molestation pizzeria".  That post with Rosie really belongs in the smack talk forum.

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

33 minutes ago, Brad_ATX said:

I think there are ties as well, but spreading uncorroborated social media crap like the above is no better than those who spread things like "Hillary supports child molestation pizzeria".  That post with Rosie really belongs in the smack talk forum.

Rosie just tweeted it. The original was from  FB post. I just copied the tweet and pasted before I checked out the post on FB. Wadzinski links several articles on her FB page to Rosneft OC.  Like this one ....

 

https://www.google.com/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1582OH

Here's one on Tillerson...

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/12/12/world/europe/rex-tillersons-company-exxon-has-billions-at-stake-over-russia-sanctions.html