FBI opened an inquiry into whether Trump was working on behalf of Russia

It’s incredible that they even felt they had to investigate this! I don’t think there has been anything like this in our history.

Of course, this does not mean they found anything. Since this was before Mueller was appointed, I assume he took over.

NEWS: the FBI opened an inquiry into whether Trump was secretly working on behalf of Russia ⁦@adamgoldmanNYT⁩ ⁦@nytmike⁩ ⁦@npfandos⁩ https://t.co/Tl24jU94gw

— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) January 12, 2019

Wittingly or not, @realDonaldTrump throughout the 2016 campaign echoed and amplified Russian disinformation when he repeatedly stated— despite being informed otherwise—that Putin was *not* attacking the US election. He aided the Russian coverup. That’s betrayal. https://t.co/VEKnHv51CO

— David Corn (@DavidCornDC) January 12, 2019

The FBI opened an investigation into whether the President of the United States was working on behalf of Vladimir Putin to undermine American interests.

That's the real national emergency, not the fake crisis Trump wants to distract us with at the border. https://t.co/09SrZCasRr

— Robert Reich (@RBReich) January 12, 2019

Trump’s obstruction of the Russia investigation was the “collusion,” writes @benjaminwittes, analyzing the new @nytimes bombshell that the FBI opened a counterintelligence investigation to determine if Trump worked to help Russia against our interests. https://t.co/DVUZKtCS31

— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) January 12, 2019

The FBI opened a counterintelligence investigation because it had good reason to believe that Trump was secretly working on behalf of Russia against our interests.

If you’re not alarmed by this news, you should be. Congress should conduct hearings and get to the bottom of this. https://t.co/1OXZ5LzaCJ

— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) January 12, 2019

Well, this doesn’t sound at all like utter panic. https://t.co/pQk0tzxPS8

— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) January 12, 2019

Reposting my analysis of Trump and #Russia given this new report. https://t.co/vFN9AenaC3 via @politicomag

— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) January 12, 2019

It was only after Trump twice tied his firing of Comey to his desire to end the Russia investigation that the FBI decided to launch an inquiry into "whether the president’s own actions constituted a possible threat to national security." https://t.co/gZv9P8uO6V

— Zach Basu (@zacharybasu) January 12, 2019

Stepping back for a minute: If no other reporting existed on Trump/Russia, the fact that the FBI started a CI investigation to determine whether or not the sitting president of the US was either comprised by or an agent of Russia, it would be the biggest political story…ever. https://t.co/RRenfxbgmH

— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) January 12, 2019

Manafort shared polling data with a Russian intelligence operative

update:

A spokesman for Manafort clarified the wording in the filing on Tuesday about the Madrid meeting. Jason Maloni, the spokesman, said Manafort’s meeting with Kilimnik in Madrid happened in January or February 2017, after the Trump was elected. https://t.co/cKloTCrld5

— Shimon Prokupecz (@ShimonPro) January 8, 2019

Why would a Russian want campaign data unless they were going to use it for their interference efforts? This sure looks like collusion to me.

BREAKING NEWS: This is the previously missing link in the Trump/Putin conspiracy. The secret polling data enabled Kremlin to help Trump win in exchange for Trump help to Putin vs Ukraine. All that’s missing is a ribbon to tie it together. THIS IS HUGE!!https://t.co/T37Ry01xwV

— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) January 8, 2019

.@maggieNYT tweeted this the day after the election

Today we learned that Manafort shared election polling data with a Kremlin-linked associate in Ukraine and for some reason felt the need to lie about it. https://t.co/3vaHpCugCB

— 🗽 (@Anthony) January 8, 2019

Why would Manafort share 2016 polling data with a Russian intelligence operative? One could draw the conclusion that the Kremlin had a stake in the outcome of the election or that Manafort sought aid to the campaign from the Kremlin. https://t.co/HuuVt4KuBV

— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) January 8, 2019

These failed redactions show Manafort had a meeting with Kilimnik in Madrid, gave him campaign polling data, and discussed a Ukrainian peace plan with him – then lied about all of it. Very normal contacts between a US presidential campaign manager & a Russian intelligence asset. https://t.co/9tt5sjdVVb

— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) January 8, 2019

Things we learned today from Manafort's lawyers' redaction errors: Manafort is alleged to have met in Madrid w/Kilimnik; shared polling data with him; and discussed a Ukraine peace plan w/him more than once. Is that the same peace plan that Cohen delivered to Flynn in Jan 2017?

— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) January 8, 2019

A Madrid meeting between Paul Manafort and Konstantin Kilimnik, a man the FBI believes to be Russian intelligence, during the 2016 campaign was not publicly known.
They have previously acknowledged they met in the US while Manafort was with the campaign.The Madrid meeting is new

— Shimon Prokupecz (@ShimonPro) January 8, 2019

Trump Campaign Chairman shared 2016 polling data with Russian connected with Russian Intelligence. https://t.co/gIFylJVRTI

— Joe Scarborough (@JoeNBC) January 8, 2019

Trump’s request for Russian help in finding Clinton’s emails was illegal

I say “Lock him up!”

Trump illegally asked Russia to help him win in 2016. He shouldn't get away with it. https://t.co/DCil5IlR1T

— Norm Eisen (@NormEisen) January 2, 2019

Cohen denied being in Prague but his phone was near there

This could validate more of the Steele dossier and is potentially very serious.

According to the dossier, Michael Cohen met with Russian agents in Prague to discuss election help. No one could verify this claim. Now, cell phone signals put Cohen in Prague around the time the alleged meeting took place. Plot = thicker https://t.co/4qokyupTbM

— Julia Ioffe (@juliaioffe) December 27, 2018

Whitaker disregarded a recommendation to recuse himself from the Russia investigation

Whitaker’s team wrongly claims no AG has ever recused to avoid an appearance of conflict. It’s actually happened at least 3 times:

1. Ashcroft in Valerie Plame leak investigation (h/t @nycsouthpaw)

2. Holder in John Edwards investigation.

3. Holder in AP leak investigation. https://t.co/4LwTSIwBBH

— Eric Columbus (@EricColumbus) December 20, 2018

Typical of Trumglodytes: ask a question of the relevant experts and follow their advice — unless you don’t like it. Remember when Trump said he’d abide by the 2016 election results — unless they said he lost. Heads I win, tails you lose. I fear for 2020.https://t.co/ZRB8L0V32C

— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) December 20, 2018

Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker will go against an ethics official's advice and will not be recusing himself from the Russia investigation. He will have final say over any of the inquiry's major developments. https://t.co/wagKEF8uAZ

— The New York Times (@nytimes) December 20, 2018

New information on Whitaker/ethics review:
– he never sought a formal recommendation on whether to recuse from Mueller, he did get guidance on the applicable rules
– ethics thought it was a close call on the *appearance* of a conflict, but found no actual legal conflict

— Laura Jarrett (@LauraAJarrett) December 20, 2018

This ethics opinion must be shared with Congress. Now.

DOJ officials must avoid not only actual impropriety but the appearance of impropriety.

Given Whitaker’s prejudicial comments about Mueller, the public can have no confidence in him. We will scrutinize his every action. https://t.co/0Jxbn1eJSP

— Adam Schiff (@RepAdamSchiff) December 20, 2018

This is turning into an enormous scandal. Ethics officials told Whitaker they would recommend recusal, so he set up a different group of officials (probably political appointees, but unclear) to make a different recommendation. What in the hell is going on at DOJ? https://t.co/gYBeY3RoGP

— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) December 20, 2018

It gets better. DOJ won't even disclose the identify of the team they assembled to countermand the ethics recommendation that Whitaker recuse: "The senior official who described the Whitaker discussions refused to identify the particular Justice Department employees involved." https://t.co/6wPqm0s6Ha

— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) December 20, 2018

The unwinding of the initial backward spin on this story is (finally) making it clear what happened.

WaPo headline here is long, but gets it:

"Ethics officials said Whitaker should recuse from the Mueller probe, but his advisers told him not to"https://t.co/2Vk4gKT8fA

— Rachel Maddow MSNBC (@maddow) December 20, 2018

If it’s a “close call,” in these circumstances, Whitaker should recuse. https://t.co/CLoL70LTf5

— Preet Bharara (@PreetBharara) December 20, 2018

Trump at war with Justice. Crony refuses to follow Ethics decision that he should recuse himself. https://t.co/QnjASMYbGt

— Joe Scarborough (@JoeNBC) December 20, 2018

This is about as outrageous as it gets. I cannot imagine any AG I have worked for or known disregarding ethics advice in this way. https://t.co/WbXE7wEUfx

— Ronald Klain (@RonaldKlain) December 20, 2018

Trump lied about the Moscow Trump Tower

We now know he signed a letter of intent for it. Liar!

Rudy Giuliani lied about it too. Why lie? What are they hiding?

Jun. 16, 2015
Trump launches presidential campaign.

Oct. 28, 2015
Date of Trump's signed letter of intent for Trump Tower Moscow.

Jun. 9, 2016
Jared Kushner, Don Jr., Paul Manafort meet Russian lawyer at Trump Tower NYC.

Jul. 27, 2016
Trump: "I have nothing to do with Russia." https://t.co/CTxgTrgxJY

— Keith Boykin (@keithboykin) December 19, 2018

“A newly obtained document shows President Donald Trump signed a letter of intent to move forward with negotiations to build a Trump Tower in Russia, despite his attorney Rudy Giuliani claiming on Sunday the document was never signed.” https://t.co/UdEf1vfqGQ

— andrew kaczynski (@KFILE) December 19, 2018

As @ChrisCuomo aptly points out, Giuliani's role in publicly weaving lies about the facts in the Russia case is not a legal strategy, it is a public relations strategy. Exhibit A: https://t.co/LPCmb9gEfs

— Abby D. Phillip (@abbydphillip) December 19, 2018

Appears @RudyGiuliani lied, again.

Also, if the attempted penthouse gift to Putin at Trump Tower Moscow is true, then @realDonaldTrump or his company may have violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, a felony. FCPA prevents bribery or attempted bribery of foreign officials. https://t.co/iHK7F6EMwk

— Ted Lieu (@tedlieu) December 19, 2018

CNN: Trump signed letter of intent to move forward on Trump Tower in Russia in 2015
https://t.co/csAK6bgYg5

— The Daily Beast (@thedailybeast) December 19, 2018

* Quid: Trump Tower Moscow
* Quo: "The Special Counsel’s Office is preparing court filings that are expected to detail Trump associates’ conversations about sanctions relief." https://t.co/VB2zWJvcyo via @thedailybeast

— Amy Siskind 🏳️‍🌈 (@Amy_Siskind) December 19, 2018

Rudy on Sunday: "It was a real estate project. There was a letter of intent to go forward, but no one signed it.” Turns out that Trump did sign the October 2015 letter for the Trump Tower Moscow project, according to a copy of it https://t.co/g9JBo7hF6E

— Manu Raju (@mkraju) December 19, 2018

Giuliani told @DanaBashCNN two days ago that for Trump Tower Moscow, "there was a letter of intent to go forward, but no one signed it." False. Don Jr. already told Congress his dad signed the deal. And today, @ChrisCuomo obtained the signed letter itself. https://t.co/YY2dcBMIgH pic.twitter.com/hScKgXAQ86

— Marshall Cohen (@MarshallCohen) December 19, 2018

Lock him up!

Flynn is a liar.

He was not ambushed by the FBI.

Judge Sullivan disagrees. https://t.co/aUxq8GeV2B

— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) December 18, 2018

Former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s sentencing is on hold after a dramatic rebuke from the judge, who stressed that prison time was not off the table — even though that’s what Flynn’s lawyers and Mueller's team agreed to in sentencing memos. https://t.co/9xlgIEX5kl pic.twitter.com/4nVmkz81yX

— The Lead CNN (@TheLeadCNN) December 18, 2018

A federal judge blasted Michael Flynn for lying to the FBI and questioned whether Robert Mueller’s prosecutors could have tried him for treasonhttps://t.co/2Mpi362GKz

— POLITICO (@politico) December 18, 2018

"[Flynn's] lawyers tried a sentencing strategy and it misfired really badly." – @JoyceWhiteVance w/ @NicolleDWallace pic.twitter.com/w0xaRzj62O

— Deadline White House (@DeadlineWH) December 18, 2018

New: Flynn's lawyers appear to have badly miscalculated in shifting at least part of the blame for Flynn's lies to the FBI—that is, unless they were playing for a pardon. “Maybe, on some level, this was an appeal to Trump and his base," says @Mimirocah1 https://t.co/EVN4oVcYKp

— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) December 18, 2018

SULLIVAN WARNS FLYNN OF A PRISON SENTENCE:

"You were an unregistered agent of a foreign country while serving as the National Security Adviser to the president!

"Arguably, this undermines everything this flag over here stands for! Arguably, you sold your country out!"

— Steven Portnoy (@stevenportnoy) December 18, 2018

Shorter Judge Sullivan: What’s all this BS on Fox News about you being trapped? Flynn: Nevermind.

— Ken Dilanian (@KenDilanianNBC) December 18, 2018

What I don't understand is *why* Flynn's team tried to falsely suggest wrongdoing where none existed. They had to know that deception was going nowhere with the judge. Perhaps Flynn wanted to set up his post-conviction speaking tour or political career. https://t.co/GtOJiTGz0Q

— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) December 18, 2018

Judge Emmett Sullivan said he would not hide his “disdain” and “disgust” of Flynn’s crimes and criticized the former national security adviser’s lawyer’s attempts to construe that the FBI had engaged in entrapment, writes @natashabertrand. https://t.co/1tfC263thu

— The Atlantic (@TheAtlantic) December 18, 2018

And I would add that hearsay is not allowed in court so the FBI needs witnesses to testify to relevant facts, because agents cannot. So even if they know the answer, they still need to admit the answer in court. https://t.co/ATXiDp7v0Y

— Daniel Goldman (@danielsgoldman) December 18, 2018

A remarkable turn within days: from Flynn lawyers claiming entrapment, to Flynn and lawyers admitting he repeatedly & willfully lied, to lawyers clearly concerned he may be facing jail time and asking for delay.

— Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) December 18, 2018

Why does anyone listen to Sarah Sanders?

Her boss lies.

She lies to promote his lies. Her rare press briefings are worthless. Today, she took the side of a criminal instead of the side of law enforcement.

“No,” Sarah Sanders says when asked if she would amend her statement that Flynn was “ambushed” by the FBI, even though Flynn and his attorneys said in court today he was not entrapped in his interview when he lied to the FBI and was aware he lied

— Manu Raju (@mkraju) December 18, 2018

"The FBI broke standard protocol in the way that they came in and ambushed General Flynn," @PressSec says after Flynn admitted today in court that he lied to FBI under oath.

— Philip Rucker (@PhilipRucker) December 18, 2018

It is so damn galling to hear the WH press secretary attacking the FBI for doing its job and catching a criminal in the act rather than being mad at the criminal who lied not just to the FBI, but supposedly also to people in the WH.

— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) December 18, 2018

Sarah Sanders said it's "perfectly acceptable" for the president to make positive comments about someone who has admitted to lying to agents of his own government and who worked, unregistered, on behalf of another government during his campaign.

— Kaitlan Collins (@kaitlancollins) December 18, 2018

Sarah Huckaby Sanders saying the FBI “ambushed” Mike Flynn is the most pathetic, disingenuous thing I’ve heard her say, and that takes in an awful lot.

— Joyce Alene (@JoyceWhiteVance) December 18, 2018

Sanders said today the WH is not looking for the taxpayers to pay for the wall while at the same time said the WH is looking to other agencies to find wall funding. Is @presssec aware that agencies of the federal government are funded by taxpayers?

— Jim Acosta (@Acosta) December 18, 2018

The catch-22: Sarah Sanders/White House says they need a government bill to consider signing and are disappointed they don't have one. Senate and House folks say they aren't sure what the president will support.

— Josh Dawsey (@jdawsey1) December 18, 2018

"The president has been clear that the USMCA deal would provide additional revenue through that deal that would show that Mexico is paying for the wall," Sarah Sanders tells ABC News' @TerryMoran when asked if American taxpayers will pay for the wall https://t.co/Pqd36RbV0f pic.twitter.com/OnBlTZCp8W

— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) December 18, 2018

Middle Eastern money and Trump

Corrupt

Prosecutors with Mueller and other offices have questioned whether money from Qatar, Saudi and the UAE made its way to the inaugural committee or the super pac backing Trump https://t.co/OjLfcolxQ4

— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) December 14, 2018

According to sources, while one part of Mueller's team has indicted Russian spies and troll-masters, another cadre has been spending its time focusing on how Middle Eastern countries pushed cash to Washington politicos in an attempt to sway policy https://t.co/cQGFuT51Up

— The Daily Beast (@thedailybeast) December 14, 2018

Federal prosecutors are scrutinizing whether Trump super PAC got foreign money from Qatar, Saudi Arabia & United Arab Emirates https://t.co/2dEbE0csaP

All three countries are on top 10 countries or top 10 foreign governments spending on U.S. influence & lobbyists in FARA data pic.twitter.com/bE46xn0sVd

— Anna Massoglia (@annalecta) December 14, 2018

ICYMI: Mueller’s team has already questioned several witnesses about donations to Trump’s inauguration committee from donors with connections to Russia, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar.#Maddow https://t.co/ej7BIzjJFR

— Polly Sigh (@dcpoll) December 14, 2018